soliloquiumanimae - Tumblr blog

soliloquiumanimae · 5 years ago

Text

“THE PARABLE OF THE RICH MAN AND THE POOR MAN (2 SAMUEL 12:1-6)

OVERVIEW: Nathan’s shrewd manner of confronting David with his own words and then by open rebuke is an effective strategy for taking the powerful of this world to task (GREGORY THE GREAT). David’s harsh verdict against Nathan’s figurative rich man is met with his immediate and pointed indictment, yet David’s prompt confession of guilt is met with assurance of the Lord’s forgiveness and the repeal of his self-condemning sentence (CHRYSOSTOM). David’s lust was a one-time sinful fall rather than a habit as suggested in the metaphor of the guest. Nathan used the sharp scalpel of David’s own words to remove the diseased tissue of his heart (AUGUSTINE).

12:1-6 Nathan’s Story and David’s Judgment

CHALLENGING THE POWERFUL. GREGORY THE GREAT: But at times, in taking to task the powerful of this world, they are first to be dealt with by drawing diverse comparisons in a case ostensibly concerning someone else. Then, when they give a right judgment on what apparently is another’s case, they are to be taken to task regarding their own guilt by a suitable procedure. Thus a mind puffed up with temporal power cannot possibly lift itself up against the reprover, for by its own judgment it has trodden on the neck of pride; and it cannot argue to defend itself, as it stands convicted by the sentence out of its own mouth.

Thus it was that Nathan the prophet, coming to chide the king, to all appearance asked his judgment in the case of a poor man against a rich man. The king first was to deliver judgment and then to hear that he was the culprit. Thus he was completely unable to deny the just sentence which he had personally delivered against himself. Therefore, the holy man, considering both the sinner and the king, aimed in that wonderful manner at convicting a bold culprit first by his own admission and then cut him by his rebuke. For a short while he concealed the person whom he was aiming at and then at once struck him when he had convicted him. His stroke would, perhaps, have had less force if he had chosen to castigate the sin directly the moment he began to speak. But by beginning with a similitude, he sharpened the rebuke which he was concealing. He came like a physician to a sick man, saw that his wound had to be incised, but was in doubt about the endurance of the patient. He, therefore, concealed the surgeon’s knife under his coat, but drawing it out suddenly, pierced the wound, that the sick man might feel the knife before he saw it, for if he had first seen it, he might have refused to feel it. PASTORAL CARE 3.2.1

THE GOOD OF A PROMPT CONFESSION. CHRYSOSTOM: Therefore, Nathan went to David and wove a dramatic act for judgment. And what did he say? “My king, I want your judgment. There was a certain rich man and a certain poor one. The “rich person possessed herds of cattle and many other flocks; and the poor one had one ewe that drank from his glass, ate from his table and slept in his embrace.” Here Nathan revealed the genuine bond between a husband and wife. “When a certain stranger arrived, the rich man desired to keep his own animals, and he took the poor man’s ewe and slaughtered her.” Here, do you see how Nathan wove the dramatic act, mysteriously concealing the weapon in the glands of David’s throat? Then what did the king say? Thinking that he had to pass judgment against someone else, he decided most severely. For such are human beings. When it concerns other people, they gladly and abruptly render decisions and publicize them. And what did David say? “As the Lord lives, the man who did this thing is worthy of death. And he shall restore the lamb fourfold.” Therefore, what did Nathan reply? He did not allow the wound to be relieved for many hours; rather, he quickly stripped it naked and sharply embedded the knife deeply into it, so as not to rob it of the painful sensation. “You are the man, my king.” What did the king say? “I have sinned against the Lord.” He did not say, “Who are you who censures me? Who sent you to speak with such boldness? With what daring did you prevail?” He did not say anything of the sort; rather, he perceived the sin. And what did he say? “I have sinned against the Lord.” Therefore, what did Nathan say to him? “And the Lord remitted “your sin.” You condemned yourself; I [God] remit your sentence. You confessed prudently; you annulled the sin. You appropriated a condemnatory decision against yourself; I repealed the sentence. Can you see that what is written in Scripture was fulfilled: “Be the first one to tell of your transgression so you may be justified”2 How toilsome is it to be the first one to declare the sin? HOMILIES ON REPENTANCE AND ALMSGIVING 2.2.9.3

THE FLEETING CHARACTER OF DAVID’S SIN. AUGUSTINE: And with what moderation and self-restraint those men used their wives appears chiefly in this, that when this same king, carried away by the heat of passion and by temporal prosperity, had taken unlawful possession of one woman, whose husband also he ordered to be put to death, he was accused of his crime by a prophet, who, when he had come to show him his sin, set before him the parable of the poor man who had but one ewe lamb, and whose neighbor, though he had many, yet when a guest came to him, refused to take of his own flock but set his poor neighbor’s one lamb before his guest to eat. And David’s anger kindled against the man, he commanded that he should be put to death and the lamb restored fourfold to the poor man; thus unwittingly condemning the sin he had wittingly committed. And when he had been shown this, and God’s punishment had been announced against him, he wiped out his sin in deep penitence. But yet in this parable it was the adultery only that was indicated by the poor man’s ewe lamb. About the killing of the woman’s husband—that is, about the murder of the poor man himself who had the one ewe lamb—nothing is said in the parable, so that the sentence of condemnation is pronounced against the adultery alone. And hence we may understand with what temperance he possessed a number of wives when he was forced to punish himself for transgressing in regard to one woman. But in his case the immoderate desire did not take up its abode with him but was only a passing guest. On this account the unlawful appetite is called even by the accusing prophet, a guest. For he did not say that he took the poor man’s ewe lamb to make a feast for his king, but for his guest. In the case of his son Solomon, however, this lust did not come and pass away like a guest but reigned as a king. And about him Scripture is not silent but accuses him of being a lover of strange women; for in the beginning of his reign he was inflamed with a desire for wisdom, but after he had attained it through spiritual love, he lost it through carnal lust.4 CHRISTIAN INSTRUCTION 3.21.5

DISEASED TISSUE IN DAVID’S HEART. AUGUSTINE: For I admit my wrongdoing, and my offense confronts me all the time.6 “I have not thrust my deed behind my back; I do not look askance at others while forgetting myself; I do not presume to extract a speck of straw from my brother’s eye while there is a timber in my own;7 my sin is in front of me, not behind my back. It was behind me until the prophet was sent to me and put to me the parable of the poor man’s sheep.” What the prophet Nathan said to David was this: There was a certain rich man who had a large flock of sheep. His neighbor was a poor man who had only one little ewe lamb; she rested in his arms and was fed from his own dish. Then a guest arrived at the rich man’s house. The rich man took nothing from his flock; what he wanted was the little ewe lamb that belonged to his neighbor, so he slaughtered that for his guest. What does he deserve? Angrily David pronounced sentence. Obviously the king was unaware of the trap into which he had fallen, and he decreed that the rich man deserved to die and must make fourfold restitution for the sheep. It was a very severe view, and entirely just. But his own sin was not yet before his eyes; what he had done was still behind his back. He did not yet admit his own iniquity and hence would not remit another’s. But the prophet had been sent to him for this purpose. He brought the sin out from behind David’s back and held it before his eyes, so that he might see that the severe sentence had been passed on himself. To cut away diseased tissue in David’s heart and heal the wound there, Nathan used David’s tongue as a knife.

EXPLANATIONS OF THE PSALMS 50.8

NATHAN CONFRONTS DAVID (2 SAMUEL 12:7-12)

OVERVIEW: Nathan’s foretelling of the evils to befall David on account of his adultery and murder illustrate one of the three classes of prophecy, namely that which refers to the earthly Jerusalem as distinguished from the heavenly Jerusalem and from both the heavenly and earthly Jerusalem (AUGUSTINE). That God sees and judges actions committed in secret is proven by the exposure of David’s grave sins, thereby warning sinners of impending punishment (SALVIAN). Although a virtuous man through whom Christ would descend, David was punished for his adultery, even though he was repentant and was declared forgiven (ISAAC OF NINEVEH).

12:10-12 Nathan Pronounces the Lord’s Judgment

CLASSES OF PROPHECY. AUGUSTINE: Thus, the prophets’ sayings are of three classes: one class refers to the earthly, a second to the heavenly Jerusalem, and a third to both simultaneously. It will be best to support this assertion with illustration. The prophet Nathan was sent to accuse King David of a grave sin and to foretell what evils were to befall him on this account. Now no one can fail to see that this prophecy refers to the earthly city. There are others like it, sometimes addressed to the people at large for their profit and well-being, and sometimes to an individual who merited a word from God to foreknow some event for the guidance of his temporal life. CITY OF GOD 17.3.1

GOD SEES AND JUDGES SECRET ACTIONS. SALVIAN THE PRESBYTER: But that you may clearly know that his censure and sacred considerations deal more with actions than with persons themselves, hear how God, the judge, who many times gave sentences favorable to his servant David, often gave decisions unfavorable to him. This happened in a transaction which did not involve many men, or perhaps, what would have aroused God more, in a transaction involving holy men. It happened in the instance of one man, a foreigner, where the action rather than the person demanded punishment.

When Uriah the Hittite, a member of a wicked race and of an unfriendly nation, had been killed, the divine Word was immediately passed to David, “You have killed Uriah, the Hittite, with the sword and have taken his wife to be your wife, and have slain him with the sword of the children of Ammon. Therefore the sword shall never depart from your house. Thus said the Lord, ‘Behold, I will raise up evil against you out of your own house; and I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor. For you did it secretly: but I will do this thing in the sight of all Israel and in the sight of the sun.’

What do you say to this, you who believe that God does not judge our actions and who believe that he has no concern whatsoever for us? Do you “not see that the eyes of God were never absent even from that secret sin through which David fell once? Learn from this that you are always seen by Christ, understand and know that you will be punished, and perhaps very soon, you, who, perhaps in consolation for your sins, think that our acts are not seen by God. You see that the holy David was unable to hide his sin in the secrecy of his inmost rooms; neither was he able to claim exemption from immediate punishment through the privilege of great deeds. What did the Lord say to him? “I will take your wives before your eyes, and the sword shall never depart from your house.” THE GOVERNANCE OF GOD 2.4.2

TEMPORAL PUNISHMENT REMAINED. ISAAC OF NINEVEH: And David, who was a man after God’s own heart, who because of his virtues was found worthy to generate from his seed the promise of the Fathers, and to have Christ shine forth from himself for the salvation of all the world, was he not punished because of adultery with a woman, when he held her beauty with his eyes and was pierced in his soul by that arrow? “For it was because of this that God raised up a war against him from within his own household, and he who came forth from his loins pursued him. These things befell him even after he had repented with many tears, such that he moistened his couch with his weeping, and after God had said to him “through the prophet, “The Lord hath forgiven thy sin.”3 ASCETICAL HOMILIES 10.4

DAVID CONFESSES HIS SIN (2 SAMUEL 12:13-14)

OVERVIEW: That, as king, David frankly confessed his sin and humbly repented in sackcloth and ashes admonishes the private person to offer no less of an expression of remorse (CYRIL OF JERUSALEM). While Matthew presents Christ’s kingly descent through Solomon, Luke presents his priestly ascent through Nathan, because it was through Nathan the prophet that David obtained the annulment of his sin (AUGUSTINE). Those who are rightly accused of a great sin may take heart that they will be forgiven if they admit their guilt as David did (AMBROSE). While the reward of David’s great penitence for his misdeed was the avoidance of eternal punishment, he did not merit full pardon: the child died because of David’s sin (SALVIAN). That God responded differently to the similar confessions of David and Saul reveals the dissimilarity of their hearts. For the baptized who have deserted or violated the faith, forgiveness may be obtained through the heartfelt repentance exhibited in uttering a confession of sin, doing genuine penance and living good lives afterwards (AUGUSTINE). While we should be ashamed to sin, we should not be ashamed to repent, as this is the means of deliverance and healing (PACIAN OF BARCELONA). Confession alone is not sufficient for the penitent, but must be accompanied by correction and humility, as David exemplifies (PAULINUS OF MILAN).

12:13-14 Nathan Responds to David’s Admission of Guilt

AN EXAMPLE OF REPENTANCE. CYRIL OF JERUSALEM: If you like, however, I will give you further examples relating to our condition. Come then to the blessed David, and take him for your example of repentance. Great as he was, he suffered a fall. It was in the afternoon, after his siesta, that he took a turn on the housetop and saw by chance what stirred his human passion. He fulfilled the sinful deed, but his nobility, when it came to confessing the lapse, had not perished with the doing of the deed. Nathan the prophet came, swift to convict, but now as a healer for his wound, saying, “The Lord was angry, and you have sinned.” So spoke a simple subject to his reigning sovereign. But David, though king and robed in purple, did not take it amiss, for he had regard not to the rank of the speaker but to the majesty of him who sent him. He was not puffed up by the fact that guardsmen were drawn up all around him, for the angelic host of the Lord came to his mind and he was in “terror “as seeing him who is invisible. 1 So he answered and said to the “man that came to him, or rather, in his person, to the God whose messenger he was, “I have sinned against the Lord.” You see this royal humility and the making of confession. Surely no one had been convicting him, nor were there many who knew what he had done. Swiftly the deed was done and immediately the prophet appeared as accuser. Lo! The sinner confesses his wicked deed, and as it was full and frank confession, he had the swiftest healing. For the prophet Nathan first threatened him, but then said immediately, “And the Lord has put away your sin.” And see how quickly lovingkindness changes the face of God! Except that he first declares, “you have given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme” as though he said “you have many that are your foes because of your righteousness, from whom nevertheless, you were kept safe by your upright living. But as you have thrown away this best of armors, you have now, standing ready to strike, these foes that are risen up against you.”

So then the prophet comforted David as we have seen, but that blessed man, though he received most gladly the assurance, “The Lord has put away your sin,” did not, king as he was, draw back from penitence. Indeed he put on sackcloth in place of his purple robe, and the king sat in ashes on the bare earth instead of on his gilded throne. And in ashes he did not merely sit, but took them for eating, as he himself says, “I have eaten ashes as it were bread, and mingled my drink with weeping.”2 His lustful eye he wasted away with tears; as he says, “every night I wash my bed and water my couch with my tears.”3 And when his courtiers exhorted him to eat food, he would not, but prolonged his fast for seven whole days. CATECHETICAL LECTURES 2.11-12.4

THE ANNULMENT OF HIS SIN. AUGUSTINE: But just as Matthew, presenting Christ the king as if descending for the assumption of our sins, thus descends from David through Solomon, because Solomon was born of her with whom David had sinned, so Luke, presenting Christ the priest as if ascending after the destroying of sins, ascends through Nathan to David, because Nathan the prophet had been sent, and by his reproof the penitent “David obtained the annulling of his sin. ON EIGHTY-THREE VARIED QUESTIONS 61.5

ON ADMITTING ONE’S GUILT. AMBROSE: Are you ashamed, sir,6 to do as David did—David, the king and the prophet, the ancestor of Christ according to the flesh? He was told of the rich man who had a great number of flocks and yet, when a guest arrived, took the poor man’s one ewe lamb and killed it; and when he recognized that he was himself condemned by the story, he said, “I have sinned against the Lord.” Therefore do not take it ill, sir, if what was said to King David is said to you, “You are the man.” For if you listen with attention and say, “I have sinned against the Lord,” if you say, in the words of the royal prophet, “O come, let us worship and fall down, and weep before the Lord our Maker,”7 then it will be said to you also, “Because you repented, the Lord has put away your sin; you shall not die.” LETTER 51.7.8

ETERNAL PUNISHMENT AVERTED. SALVIAN THE PRESBYTER: You see what instant judgment so great a man suffered for one sin. Immediate condemnation followed the fault, a condemnation immediately punishing and without reservation, stopping the guilty one then and there and not deferring the case to a later date. Thus he did not say, “because you have done this, know that the judgment of God will come and “you will be tormented in the fire of hell.” Rather, he said, “You shall suffer immediate punishment and shall have the sword of divine severity at your throat.”

And what followed? The guilty man acknowledged his sin, was humbled, filled with remorse, confessed and wept. He repented and asked for pardon, gave up his royal jewels, laid aside his robes of gold cloth, put aside the purple, resigned his crown. He was changed in body and appearance. He cast aside all his kingship with its ornaments. He put on the externals of a fugitive penitent, so that his squalor was his defense. He was wasted by fasting, dried up by thirst, worn from weeping and imprisoned in his own loneliness. Yet this king, bearing such a great name, greater in his holiness than in temporal power, surpassing all by the prerogative of his antecedent merits, did not escape punishment though he sought pardon so earnestly.

The reward of this great penitence was such that he was not condemned to eternal punishment. Yet, he did not merit full pardon in this world. What did the prophet say to the penitent? “Because you have given occasion to the enemies of the “Lord to blaspheme, the son that is born to you shall die.” Besides the pain of the bitter loss of his son, God wished that there be added to the very loving father an understanding of this greatest punishment, namely, that the father who mourned should him self bring death to his beloved son, when the son, born of his father’s crime, was killed for the very crime that had begotten him. THE GOVERNANCE OF GOD 2.4.9

GOD INSPECTS HEARTS. AUGUSTINE: Similarity of words, dissimilarity of hearts. We may hear the similarity of the words with our ears, but we can only know the dissimilarity of hearts by the angel’s declaration. David sinned, and when he was rebuked by the prophet, he said, “I have sinned,” and was immediately told, “Your sin has been forgiven you.” Saul sinned, and when he was rebuked by the prophet, he said, “I have sinned,” and his sin was not forgiven, but the wrath of God remained upon him. What can this mean but similarity of words, dissimilarity of hearts? Human beings can hear words, God inspects hearts. SERMON 291.5.10

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THREE SYLLABLES. AUGUSTINE: Baptized people, though, who are deserters and violators of such a great sacrament, if they repent from the bottom of their hearts, if they repent where God can see, as he saw David’s heart, when on being rebuked by the prophet, and very sternly rebuked, he cried out after hearing God’s fearsome threats and said, “I have sinned,” and shortly afterward heard, “God has taken away your sin.” Such is the effectiveness of three syllables. “I have sinned” is just three syllables; and yet in these three syllables the flames of the heart’s sacrifice rose up to heaven. So those who have done genuine penance, and have been absolved from the constraints by which they were bound and cut off from the body of Christ, and have lived good lives after their penance, such as they ought to have lived before penance, and in due course have passed away after being reconciled, why, they too go to God, go to their rest, will not be deprived of the kingdom, will be set apart from the people of the devil. SERMON 393.1.11

NO SHAME IN REPENTANCE. PACIAN OF BARCELONA: May we by all means be filled with revulsion for sin but not for repentance. May we be ashamed to put ourselves at risk but not to be delivered. Who will snatch away the wooden plank from the shipwrecked so that he may not escape? Who will begrudge the curing of wounds? Does David not say, “Every single night I will bathe my bed, I will “bathe my bed, I will drench my couch in my tears.”12 And again, “I acknowledge my sin, and my iniquity I have not concealed”13 And further, “I said, ‘I will reveal against myself my sin to my God,’ and you forgave the wickedness of my “heart”14 Did not the prophet answer [David] as follows when, after the guilt of murder and adultery for the sake of Bathsheba, he was penitent? “The Lord has taken away from you your sin.” LETTER 1.5.3.15

CONFESSION AND CORRECTION. PAULINUS OF MILAN: Indeed, to the penitent himself confession alone does not suffice, unless correction of the deed follows, with the result that the penitent does not continue to do deeds which demand repentance. He should even humble his soul just as holy David, who, when he heard from the prophet: “Your sin is pardoned,” became more humble in the correction of his sin, so that “he did eat ashes like bread and mingled his drink with weeping.”16 THE LIFE OF ST. AMBROSE 9.39.17

THE CHILD DIES DESPITE DAVID’S FASTING (2 SAMUEL 12:15-19)

OVERVIEW: David’s repentance and fasting, offered not for his sin’s sake but for his child’s, does not atone for sin but encourages abstinence from all evil (CHRYSOSTOM). That David’s prayerful and humble repentance did not move the Lord to spare his child’s life shows that no crime deserves greater guilt than those that give others cause for blasphemy (SALVIAN). “12:15-17 David Pleads to God for the Child’s Life

ABSTAINING FROM ALL EVIL. CHRYSOSTOM: And I do not say this to overturn fasting (God forbid!) but to exhort you that with fasting you do that which is better than fasting, the abstaining from all evil. David also sinned. Let us see then how he too repented. Three days he sat on ashes. But this he did not for the sin’s sake but for the child’s, being as yet stupefied with that affliction. But he wiped away the sin by other means, by humbleness, contrition of heart, compunction of soul, by falling into this sin no more, by remembering it always, by bearing thankfully every thing that befalls him, by sparing those that grieve him, by forbearing to requite those who conspire against him; yes, even preventing those who desire to do this. HOMILIES ON 2 CORINTHIANS 4.6.1

CAUSING OTHERS TO BLASPHEME. SALVIAN THE PRESBYTER: How particularly difficult it is to atone for the evil deed of handing over the name of the Lord to the blasphemy of the heathen, we are instructed by the example of the most blessed David who, because of the intercession of his acts of justice, deserved to evade eternal punishment for his offenses through one confession only. Yet he, with penance as his protector, was unable to obtain full pardon for his sin. When Nathan the prophet had said to David, who was confessing his own sins to him, “The Lord has taken away your sin, you shall not die,” he added immediately, “nevertheless, because you have given occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, for this word, the child that is born to you, shall die.”

And what happened next? Having laid aside his crown and put away his jewels, all splendor of royal dignity being removed, he was relieved of the purple. For all his sins he shut himself up alone, weeping, filthy in sackcloth, soaked in tears and soiled with ashes, and sought the life of his little child with the voice of many lamentations and beat upon the Most Holy God with great fervor or prayer. Thus asking and imploring, he believed he could in this manner obtain what he sought from God. Yet he was unable to obtain his request through what is the most forceful aid to those who ask.

From this it can be understood that there is no crime deserving of greater guilt than to give to the heathen a reason for blaspheming. For, whoever has erred gravely without giving cause for blasphemy to others brings damnation to himself only, but he who makes others blaspheme drags many to death with himself, he will, of necessity, be guilty of as many as he shall have drawn into guilt. Not only this, whatever sinner so sins that he does not cause others to blaspheme by his sin, his sin is injurious only to him who sins, but does not insult the holy name of God with the sacrilegious curse of those who blaspheme. But he who, by his sin, causes others to blaspheme, his sin is, of necessity, beyond the measure of human crime, because he has done unthinkable harm to God through the curses of many. THE GOVERNANCE OF GOD 4.18.2”

Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1-2 Samuel

4 notes · View notes

soliloquiumanimae · 5 years ago

Text

Primeira Leitura (1Sm 15,16-23)

Naqueles dias, Samuel disse a Saul: “Basta! Deixa-me dizer-te o que o Senhor me revelou esta noite”. Saul disse: “Fala!” Então Samuel começou: “Por menor que sejas aos teus próprios olhos, acaso não és o chefe das tribos de Israel? O Senhor ungiu-te rei sobre Israel e te enviou em expedição, com a ordem de eliminar os amalecitas, esses malfeitores, combatendo até que fossem exterminados. Por que não ouviste a voz do Senhor, e te precipitaste sobre os despojos e fizeste o que desagrada ao Senhor?” Saul respondeu a Samuel: “Mas eu obedeci ao Senhor! Realizei a expedição a que ele me enviou. Trouxe Agag, rei de Amalec, para cá, e exterminei os amalecitas. Quanto aos despojos, o povo reteve, das ovelhas e dos bois, o melhor do que devia ser eliminado para sacrificar ao Senhor teu Deus em Guilgal”. Mas Samuel replicou: “O Senhor quer holocaustos e sacrifícios, ou quer a obediência à sua palavra? A obediência vale mais que o sacrifício, a docilidade mais que oferecer gordura de carneiros. A rebelião é um verdadeiro pecado de magia, um crime de idolatria, uma obstinação. Assim, porque rejeitaste a palavra do Senhor, ele te rejeitou: tu não és mais rei”.

1 note · View note

soliloquiumanimae · 5 years ago

Text

ORIGEN (ca. 185-254)

First prayer. He starts out for the most part in a personal manner in prayer by introducing himself. He is childlike before God, in the same way that he is humble in the presence of people he admires. And he prays:

“Father, I come before you, your Son, and your Spirit, as I do every day. As always, it is with the request for knowledge and for help. You know that I do not pray in order to give my work more glory, in order to increase the fame that surrounds me. My request is part of my worship. I desire to glorify you. I desire to serve you. And the more time passes, and the more I think I have grasped something of your mysteries, the more profoundly and strongly I know that your mysteries become greater with every approach and that everything I think I have understood always remains nothing more than a beginning. Nevertheless, I desire to persist, for I know that this beginning is necessary and that you yourself desire this beginning. Often, because I take so much delight in this beginning, in this work, because I feel myself so enriched by everything I am permitted to do for you, I become afraid that I do too much by my own means and leave too little of the choice to you. However, Lord, I know no other way to do your will in a serious manner than to ask you: Show it to me, and have me do it. Then I see again that my fears are idle, because the beginning is always in any event a beginning in you. But, Father, this beginning drives me toward the center, and in this center I take up for myself too great a place, with my own insights and my pleasure in work. And it is always too late before I come to see it. I am unable to come back, and I cannot move ahead: If I break things off, then your task is not carried out; and if I move ahead in the knowledge that I was seeking myself too much then there is a disagreeable interruption, a break; the thought process is, so to speak, cut short—in the hope that your own may come back! Just as you stood at the beginning, so should you stand every time at the end; it is only the center that has trouble holding you, because I myself am in this center. And not only I, with my ideas, but the ideas themselves, and the people who are working on the same thing or who have an opinion on it.

Lord, if I knew the way to allow you to be both beginning and end and to allow this center, which I myself am—I and the imperfect Church, I and “the imperfect people that surround me—to disappear, then I would be greatly in your debt. For I know that you truly are the beginning and end in all things, and I do not want to remove my activity from all these things. Father, accompany my work today and allow it to have a genuine beginning and end. Allow me to disappear; do it out of love for your Son, who teaches us what it means to disappear. Have mercy on all my sins, on all my imperfection, both my sluggishness and my impulsiveness, and allow what is mine to become yours. I ask you in the name of your eternal life; for your eternal life is you, your Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.”

“Second prayer. Father, you know that today I want to speak about you, together with the Son and the Spirit, to speak about your triune light. I have announced it, and everyone expects it. And it is indeed also the logical continuation of what I have begun. Father, it was admittedly a lack of respect, but I thought that I possessed the power and the insight to grasp your triune essence in such a way that I would also be able to describe it. And above all also that I would be able to awaken a need for this knowledge in your community. And now I see that my longing for you is indeed too small and that my longing for knowledge is too intellectual, too problem-oriented. Not simple and not pure enough. Father, you see that the intention was good, and now I do not know how to carry it out. Now everything I have to say sounds hollow to me. The reason is that I myself stand in the way, because too much of what I have used for my research and understanding came from myself. Father, you must help me, I beg you: Do this just this once for me so that your community does not grow angry with me, so that they do not believe that everything is so small, so limited, as I see things now, but that they instead understand that each of your truths is infinitely greater than my impoverished conception, interpretation, and preaching. Father, I promise you from now on to put myself more and better at the disposal of your Trinity, to be less and less occupied with myself and my comfort, and to try to serve you, the Son, and the Spirit. But guide me, Father, and turn everything to the Good that threatens to turn bad through my own fault and carelessness. Amen.”

— Adrienne von Speyr, Book of All Saints

0 notes

soliloquiumanimae · 5 years ago

Text

ORIGEN (ca. 185-254)

His work. He is very dependent upon his circumstances when he works. He makes no progress for days and extended periods of time. Then suddenly it bursts through. The things that shoot up are intellectually very rich, but the things that are won slowly and through hard work have a better foundation. He ought to test the work that shoots up during the time that passes more slowly. But this is not something he likes to do. Despite the sharp differences in the modes of working, he is absolutely even-keeled in prayer. It is a consistency in endurance, in intensity, in the will to pray, which is extraordinary. Prayer soaks through him in a constant flow. He also prays a lot for clarity and for his work. But he often does not have the time to test the work he has accomplished within the mind-set he has in prayer.—In work he mostly leans on himself. To be sure, he has read a lot; he is abreast of all the current ideas, is very educated. But things acquire value for him only when he has digested and assimilated them. Thus, for example, he is not able to criticize a thinker right away. He first has to take him into himself, and this is how he takes a position. He is not polemical by nature; he is also not able to attack others from the outside. He has to appropriate what is alien and then to see what value it has. The things he receives from outside are at bottom stimulations for his own reflection, on the basis of which he then comes to a reaction. The polemical thinker counters claims with other claims, truths with other truths. But Origen discusses everything within the one common truth, of which every true claim is a reflection.

The personal. Whether he is in a productive phase or he is working at a slow pace, his days are filled, filled to the utmost. He tackles a host of things all at the same time; but in his own estimation there are always a lot of things in his work that are left unfinished. If he writes ten sentences about a particular thing, then perhaps two of them would be complete, while a few others would be flashes of insight in need of revision. But if a person were to go “after him and attack him for the unfinished sentences in need of a reworking, then he becomes merciless. But he is driven to do this, not out of anxiety, but rather out of a certain humor. He is not one to hold a grudge and has no problem with ressentiment. If he shuts a door, then he knows it will no doubt open up again at some point. But contradiction bothers him. And he knows: if a quarter of what he has said were not true, that still means that three-fourths of it is true. With this persistence, he has a peculiar feeling for his own worth. Things he simply jotted down begin to become interesting for him once they are attacked. He is now able to get excited about them and defend them, not without wit. And then, in his zeal, he comes up with such glorious and witty arguments that he himself becomes convinced of how right he must be. Even his strayings occasion genuine insights in him or, in any event, interesting intellectual positions. If he had had a single true friend with whom he could relax, then he would have taken back many of his stray ideas. For though the defense of these things often struck him as so amusing, he would nevertheless have been willing to retract them in love. If only he had known in relation to whom. Somehow, he is a child. If someone had spoken to him in love, he would have understood most of it and given preference to the greater service of God. For in his prayer, he offers up everything he has, and if there is anything lacking in his offer, it is perhaps only because he does not understand it all. If a person wanted to study him seriously, he would come across the most beautiful truths at every turn, which were neglected in the periods of time that followed.

His fellowmen. When he looks on them during his preaching and addresses them, then he is full of love for them. “When he succeeds in abstracting from the real human beings, such as they are, he thinks: “Here before me is a community of seekers”, and he is then inspired to reach the loftiest tones. But when he then looks at them individually—the way they sit there and fail to understand anything—he feels sick. The same is true at the workplace; where he works, the relationships between the teachers and students are very much regulated. If he looks only at these relationships, then they appear to him as something holy, divine, liturgical. But if he then considers the concrete situation, the men themselves, it drives him up a wall. That does not prevent him from maintaining contact with many significant people. In relation to a man whom he recognizes as significant—and this adjective is very important to him; it is a standard for him—he can be very warm and genuinely humble. He appreciates people without ulterior motives. But with insignificant people, he is only very kind when they represent for him the anonymous masses. “If they stand before him as petty individuals, then he becomes enraged. He hates all things petty. But he knows his faults and ultimately does penance for his failures in the constancy of love.

Hell. He once had an experience of hell, which is reflected in his prayer. On the one hand, he would like to remove the fear of hell from people, but, on the other hand, he would like to increase the objective truth of hell so much “that no living human being could have in fact any place in it anymore. Precisely because he does not see anyone in it, hell is for him a much greater and more important reality than it is for those who fill it so full of people. He sees it as something so horrible that it surpasses any creature’s capacity to bear it. Man has room in grace, although this too also infinitely surpasses him; but he has no room in hell. Origen sees it as the inelimnable remainder of God’s wrath. And he cannot avoid seeing something good in every human being, some sort of good impulse or deed at some moment in his life. And he transposes this way of seeing, multiplied to an infinite degree, onto God. He has the feeling that, if we are able to find a tiny hint of goodness in what is evil, then God will be even more able to do so. “Trinitarian unity. He never gets tired of trying to sketch out images of the Trinity, to distinguish the Persons in such a way that it is accessible to the intuition. He sees the Son’s mediation, his reconciliation, his life in the world as a totality, a huge sum, of personal paths of suffering, purgatories, because he has left the Father’s “heaven”. The Son bears our sins and, in doing so, has a perfect understanding of them because he is pure. And each one of us who is purified in the purgatorial fires of the world receives a share in the understanding of his own sins, just as the Son possesses it. Origen is admittedly unable to carry his schema any farther. He made the attempt conceptually to join together the Holy Spirit and hell, but that is something that cannot be carried farther.

He always tries to hierarchize things. He hierarchizes the Trinity, purgatory and its path of purification, the Lord’s life in the world, and even the lives of individual Christians. And at the same time he relates the things to one another: for example, the Father with youth, the Son “with middle age, and the Spirit with old age, and so forth. The levels are banisters or scaffolding upon which he can try to come to a rest, because the upswings of his thinking are so overwhelming that he otherwise would get lost. He is absolutely not the inventor of “systematic progress”. Many of his insights were discovered in the moments of “outburst”. But because much of this was too risky, he later weakened it and settled it down in moments of peace. It is often as if his spirit carried him so far forward that his own strength no longer sufficed to call back what was said. He prefers to think in trilogies. The part that stands in the light concerns the Son. But he knows that this is only a third of a trilogy, and this is something he has not brought to completion. He also lacked the support of the tradition in this regard.

He sees God’s “ever-more” character as an advance, not strictly speaking as a leap or even a reversal, a turning around. It is the constantly developing, the continual opening of new perspectives, which he would like to follow out to the “end as far as possible. But at the same time he knows that this cannot happen. He knows this with a sort of frustration. If he is “in good shape”, like an acrobat, then “he’ll accomplish the trick.” If he is not, then it seems to him to be “too dangerous”. He hopes at some point to reach the divine limits. He learns God in the way a person learns grammar. He still cannot manage to master it, but if only a person could make the right effort. . . ! This attitude is somewhat childlike; it belongs to the Church’s first years. He is very much attached to the idea that God is the grown-up, who has the full knowledge, while man is the one who must learn, the child, the image, the one who strives more and more to correspond to the original.

0 notes

soliloquiumanimae · 5 years ago

Text

JESUS HEALS AT SIMON’S HOUSE AND DEPARTS FROM CAPERNAUM, HEALING A LEPER — MARK 1:29-45

OVERVIEW: Believers are in a position analogous to that of Simon’s mother-in-law: They pray for the Lord to grasp their hands and lift them up. Since Jesus stands in their midst, beckoning them to health, offering himself immediately to them, it is absurd that they would remain in bed in his presence (JEROME). Scripture constantly attests Jesus as a man of prayer (ORIGEN). To the pure in heart, whose hearts are made pure by faith, nothing is impure (CHRYSOSTOM). The momentary concealing of the truth of revelation was commanded temporarily but not permanently (BEDE). The variable order of presentation of events in the Gospel narratives is not to be considered a deficit in the memory of the Holy Spirit (AUGUSTINE).

1:30 Now Simon’s Mother-in-Law Lay Sick with a Fever

THE ROTTEN ODOR OF SIN BECOMES THE PERFUME OF REPENTANCE. JEROME: Can you imagine Jesus standing before your bed and you continue sleeping? It is absurd that you would remain in bed in his presence. Where is Jesus? He is already here offering himself to us. “In the middle,” he says, “among you he stands, whom you do not recognize.”1 “The kingdom of God is in your midst.”2 Faith beholds Jesus among us. If we are unable to seize his hand, let us prostrate ourselves at his feet. If we are unable to reach his head, let us wash his feet with our tears.3 Our repentance is the perfume of the Savior. See how costly is the compassion of the Savior. Our sins give off a terrible odor; they are rottenness. Nevertheless, if we repent of our sins, they will be transformed into perfume by the Lord. Therefore, let us ask the Lord to grasp our hand. “And at once,” he says, “the fever left her.”4 Immediately as her hand is grasped, the fever flees. TRACTATE ON MARK’S GOSPEL 2.5

1:35 He Went Out to a Lonely Place, and There He Prayed

THE HABIT OF PRAYER. ORIGEN: Jesus prayed and did not pray in vain, since he received what he asked for in prayer when he might have done so without prayer. If so, who among us would neglect to pray? Mark says that “in the morning, a great while before day, he rose and went out to a lonely place, and there he prayed.”6 And Luke says, “He was praying in a certain place, and when he ceased, one of his disciples said to him, ‘Lord, teach us to pray,’”7 and elsewhere, “And all night he continued in prayer to God.”8 And John records his prayer, saying, “When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven and said, ‘Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you.’”9 The same Evangelist writes that the Lord said that he knew “you hear me always.”10 All this shows that the one who prays always is always heard. ON PRAYER 13.1.11

1:41 He Touched Him

WHY DID HE TOUCH THE LEPER? ORIGEN: And why did he touch him, since the law forbade the touching of a leper? He touched him to show that “all things are clean to the clean.”14 Because the filth that is in one person does not adhere to others, nor does external uncleanness defile the clean of heart. So he touches him in his untouchability, that he might instruct us in humility; that he might teach us that we should despise no one, or abhor them, or regard them as pitiable, because of some wound of their body or some blemish for which they might be called to render an account. . . . So, stretching forth his hand to touch, the leprosy immediately departs. The hand of the Lord is found to have touched not a leper, but a body made clean! Let us consider here, beloved, if there be anyone here that has the taint of leprosy in his soul, or the contamination of guilt in his heart? If he has, instantly adoring God, let him say: “Lord, if you will, you can make me clean.” FRAGMENTS ON MATTHEW 2.2-315

THE SIGN OF TOUCHING. CHRYSOSTOM: He did not simply say, “I will, be cleansed,” but he also “extended his hand, and touched him”—an act we do well to analyze. If he cleansed him merely by willing it and by speaking it, why did he also add the touch of his hand? For no other reason, it seems to me, than that he might signify by this that he is not under the hand of the law, but the law is in his hands. Hence to the pure in heart, from now on, nothing is impure.16 . . . He touched the leper to signify that he heals not as servant but as Lord. For the leprosy did not defile his hand, but his holy hand cleansed the leprous body. THE GOSPEL OF ST. MATTHEW, HOMILY 25.2.17

1:43 Show Yourself to the Priest

THE LAW AND THE LEPER. EPHREM THE SYRIAN: “‘If you are willing, you can cleanse me.’ So he stretched out his hand.”18 In this stretching out of his hand he seemed to be abrogating the law. For [it is written] in the law that whoever approaches a leper becomes impure. . . . He showed that nature was good in that he repaired its defect. Because he sent him to the priests, he thereby upheld the priesthood. He also ordered him to make an offering for his cleansing.19 Did he not thus uphold the law, as Moses had commanded? There were many prescriptions concerning leprosy. But they were unable to procure any benefit. Then the Messiah came, and, with his word, bestowed healing and abolished these many precepts which the law had reckoned should exist for leprosy. COMMENTARY ON TATIAN’S DIATESSARON.20

1:44 See That You Say Nothing to Anyone

UNSPOKEN BENEFITS. BEDE: In the performance of this miracle Jesus requested silence.21 Yet it did not remain concealed in silence for long. So it is with the called people of God—while following his precepts and example, they may prefer their responsible actions to remain unspoken, yet for the benefit of others providence may allow them to become known contrary to their own wishes. EXPOSITION ON THE GOSPEL OF MARK 1.1.45.22

0 notes

soliloquiumanimae · 5 years ago

Text

HANNAH’S GRIEF — 1 SAMUEL 1:3-8

OVERVIEW: The highest values may be learned from witnessing Hannah’s patience while enduring suffering as she waited for God’s timing (CHRYSOSTOM). “Rivalry” has several meanings (VERECUNDUS). Weeping and fasting for want of a child, Hannah is an example of watchfulness in prayer serves as a model for Christians (CHRYSOSTOM). Her fast, which demonstrates reverential awe, is the means by which she obtained a son (TERTULLIAN)

1:5 The Lord Had Closed Her Womb

GOD’S PURPOSE FOR SUFFERING. CHRYSOSTOM: Let us not take this with a grain of salt; instead let us learn also from this the highest values, and when we fall foul of some disaster, even if we are suffering grief and pain, even if the trouble seems insupportable to us, let us not be anxious or beside ourselves but wait on God’s providence. He is well aware, after all, when is the time for what is causing us depression to be removed—which is what happened in her case as well. It was not out of hatred, in fact, or of revulsion that he closed her womb, but to open to us the doors on the values the woman possessed and for us to espy the riches of her faith and realize that he rendered her more conspicuous on that account. . . . “Extreme the pain, great the length of grief—not two or three days, not twenty or a hundred, not a thousand or twice as much; instead, “for a long time,” it says, for many years the woman was grieving and distressed, the meaning of “for a long time.” Yet she showed no impatience, nor did the length of time undermine her values, nor the reproaches and abuse of her rival; instead, “she was unremitting in prayer and supplication, and what was most remarkable of all, showing in particular her love for God, was the fact that she was not simply anxious to have this very child for herself but to dedicate the fruit of her womb to God, offer the first fruits of her own womb and receive the reward for this fine promise. HOMILIES ON HANNAH 1

1:6 Her Rival Provoked Her

ENVY. VERECUNDUS: The word rival [aemulare] has a threefold meaning.2 First, it means to emulate [imitari], as in “Seek after the greater gifts.”3 We also read, “It is good that you always be emulated for the good.”4 Second, it is to envy [invidere], even one’s enemy, as was said through Samuel to Saul: “God has taken the kingdom from you and has given it to your rival [aemulo].”5 Peninnah, moreover, who played the role of the synagogue, was envied by Hannah because Hannah had not begotten a child in her barrenness. “Hannah’s rival [aemula] afflicted and agitated her severely.” The term rival here indicates enmity or envy. But “agitated” signifies “oppressed” [obprimebat], a metaphorical expression drawn from the act of choking on a piece of meat that one has suddenly regurgitated. Third, aemulare means “to anger,” as was demonstrated when the apostle said, “Shall we be angered [aemulamur] by the Lord? Are we stronger than he?”6 In other words, it means to provoke a temper. COMMENTARY ON THE CANTICLE OF DEUTERONOMY 22.8.7

1:7-8 Hannah Wept and Would Not Eat

WATCHFULNESS IN PRAYER. CHRYSOSTOM: Would you like to understand what watchfulness in prayer is? Go to Hannah, listen to her very words, “Adonai Eloi Sabaoth.”8 No, rather, hear what preceded those words; “they all rose up,”9 says the history, “from the table,” and she did not give herself right away to sleep or to repose. She appears to me even when she was sitting at the table to have partaken lightly and not to have been made heavy with food. Otherwise she could never have shed so many tears. When we are fasting and foodless, we hardly pray in such a manner, or rather never pray in this way. “Much more Hannah would not ever have prayed in this fashion after a meal, unless even at the meal she had been like those that do not eat. Let men be ashamed at the example of this woman. Let those be ashamed who are suing and grasping for a kingdom, at her, praying and weeping for a little child. HOMILIES ON EPHESIANS 24.10

THE POWER OF FASTING. TERTULLIAN: Thus a Godward fast is a work of reverential awe. By its means also Hannah the wife of Elkanah making suit, barren as she had been beforetime, easily obtained from God the filling of her belly, empty of food, with a son, indeed, and a prophet. ON FASTING 7.11

0 notes

soliloquiumanimae · 5 years ago

Text

Thus, as before he had spoken of the punishment, so here he points out the Judge likewise, and introduces the eternal vengeance. For He will burn the chaff, says he, with UNQUENCHABLE FIRE. You see that He is Lord of all things, and that He is Himself the Husbandman; albeit in another place He calls His Father the same. For My Father, says He, is the Husbandman. John 15:1 Thus, inasmuch as He had spoken of an axe, lest you should suppose that the thing needed labor, and the separation was hard to make; by another comparison he suggests the easiness of it, implying that all the world is His; since He could not punish those who were not His own. For the present, it is true, all are mingled together (for though the wheat appears gleaming through, yet it lies with the chaff, as on a threshing floor, not as in a garner), but then, great will be the separation.

Where now are they by whom hell-fire is disbelieved? Since surely here are two points laid down, one, that He will baptize with the Holy Ghost, the other, that He will burn up the disobedient. If then that is credible, so is this too, assuredly. Yea, this is why the two predictions are put by him in immediate connection, that by that which has taken place already, he might accredit the other, as yet unaccomplished. For Christ too Himself in many places does so, often of the same things, and often of opposites, setting down two prophecies; the one of which He performs here, the other He promises in the future; that such as are too contentious may, from the one which has already come to pass, believe the other also, which is not yet accomplished. For instance, to them that strip themselves of all that they have for His sake He promised to give an hundred fold in the present world, and life eternal in that which is to come; by the things already given making the future also credible. Which, as we see, John likewise has done in this place; laying down two things, that He shall both baptize with the Holy Ghost, and burn up with unquenchable fire. Now then, if He had not baptized with the Spirit the apostles, and all every day who are willing, you might have doubts concerning those other things too; but if that which seems to be greater and more difficult, and which transcends all reason, has been done, and is done every day; how do you deny that to be true, which is easy, and comes to pass according to reason? Thus having said, He shall baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire, and having thence promised great blessings; lest you, released wholly from the former things, grow supine, he has added the fan, and the judgment thereby declared. Thus, think not at all, says he, that your baptism suffices, if you become ordinary persons hereafter: for we need both virtue, and plenty of that known self-restraint. Therefore as by the axe he urges them unto grace, and unto the font, so after grace he terrifies them by the fan, and the unquenchable fire. And of the one sort, those yet unbaptized, he makes no distinction, but says in general, Every tree that brings not forth good fruit is hewn down, Matthew 3:10 punishing all the unbelievers. Whereas after baptism He works out a kind of division, because many of them that believed would exhibit a life unworthy of their faith.

Let no man then become chaff, let no one be tossed to and fro, nor lie exposed to wicked desires, blown about by them easily every way. For if you continue wheat, though temptation be brought on you, you will suffer nothing dreadful; nay, for in the threshing floor, the wheels of the car, that are like saws, do not cut in pieces the wheat; but if you fall away into the weakness of chaff, you will both here suffer incurable ills, being smitten of all men, and there you will undergo the eternal punishment. For all such persons both before that furnace become food for the irrational passions here, as chaff is for the brute animal: and there again they are material and food for the flame.

...Therefore, knowing these things, let us use great diligence, while we are in the threshing floor; for it is possible while we are here, to change even out of chaff into wheat, even as on the other hand many from wheat have become chaff. Let us not then be supine, nor be carried about with every wind; neither let us separate ourselves from our brethren, though they seem to be small and mean; forasmuch as the wheat also compared with the chaff is less in measure, but better in nature. Look not therefore to the forms of outward pomp, for they are prepared for the fire, but to this godly humility, so firm and indissoluble, and which cannot be cut, neither is burnt by the fire. It being for their sake that He bears long with the very chaff, that by their intercourse with them they may become better. Therefore judgment is not yet, that we may be all crowned together, that from wickedness many may be converted unto virtue.

Let us tremble then at hearing this parable. For indeed that fire is unquenchable. And how, it may be said, is it unquenchable? Do you see not this sun ever burning, and never quenched? Did you not behold the bush burning, and not consumed? If then you also desire to escape the flame, lay up alms beforehand, and so you will not even taste of that fire. For if, while here, you will believe what is told you, you shall not so much as see this furnace, after your departure into that region; but if you disbelieve it now, you shall know it there full well by experience, when no sort of escape is possible. Since in truth no entreaty shall avert the punishment from them who have not shown forth an upright life. For believing surely is not enough, since even the devils tremble at God, but for all that they will be punished.

Wherefore our care of our conduct has need to be great. Why, this is the very reason of our continually assembling you here; not simply that you should enter in, but that you should also reap some fruit from your continuance here. But if you come indeed constantly, but go away again reaping no fruit from thence, you will have no advantage from your entering in and attendance in this place.”

0 notes