The Second Apology of David

Section 1

A history has been set before us which contains adultery and murder. For thus we find it written in the Book of Kings; that David the king, while he was walking in his house, saw the wife of Uriah bathing, and loved her at once, and ordered her to be brought to him. Then he ordered her innocent husband, as Scripture presents it, to be exposed to the fiercest fighters, that he might be overwhelmed by the enemy's force. These things were done, nor are they denied: how then are they defended? The Gospel reading rightly reminds us that even when a sin appears manifest, there ought nevertheless to be a judge's judgment: and each one ought to be mindful of his own condition and merit. For often even in judging, the sin of the judgment is greater than the sin of the one who is being judged.

For if it has been prescribed by certain sages of the world that in judging one should take care lest the penalty be greater than the fault, and this is observed: how much more ought it to be observed, that each one, about to judge another, should first judge himself, and not condemn lesser faults in another when he himself has committed graver ones? Who then are you, to judge holy David? I speak to the Gentile, I speak to the Jew, I speak to the Christian; and therefore the treatise seems to me to be divided into three parts, one against the Gentiles, another against the Jews, the third among Christians.

What then? Do we deny the deed, or do we repudiate the master? Neither of these. But let him who objects the particular case consider the common condition. The particular case is of the deed; the common condition is of nature. It is no wonder, then, if within the general there is the particular. For I acknowledge that David was a man, and this is no wonder: I acknowledge the common lot, that man should sin. For it is no new infirmity of the human condition, and it seems more wondrous if a man should lack sin than if he should incur some sin. Therefore holy David sinned—I will not hold you in any ambiguity—he committed adultery, he devised murder, and he devised and carried it out. He sinned, as kings are wont to do; but he did penance and wept, which kings are not wont to do.

He asked pardon, not arrogating power to himself, but conscious of his own weakness; prostrate on the ground he covered himself with sackcloth, forgetful of his empire, and mindful of his guilt.

Section 1

Where would you find me a man of this sort, who, being established in power, would not rather love his own sins, proclaim his guilt, defend his crimes; who would think that what is not fitting for him is not permitted to him: who would bind himself by his own laws; and would acknowledge that what is not permitted by justice is not permitted by power either? For power does not release justice, but justice releases power; nor is the king freed from the laws, but by his own example he releases the laws. Or can it be, that he who judges others should himself be free from his own judgment, and should take upon himself what he binds upon others?

Section 2

Good, then, is David, and far more admirable in that he conquered power than that he conquered love. For chastity is sometimes ascribed to the body, frequently to error; power is subject to God; and one may more easily restrain himself in love than moderate himself in power. You do not, then, forgive what is less, in which you marvel at greater things. For slippery in all men, and prone, is nature to sin; slippery too, even in good morals, is the license of power, and the offering of opportunity. For the wrath of a king does not differ from the wrath of a lion; but he who provokes it and mixes with it, sins against his own soul. Let each man beware, then, lest anyone provoke power, lest his soul, entangled in bodily snares, be unable to strip off its vice. It is no wonder, then, if even David fell under the appearance of power; but it is much more to be admired that he was recalled by the contemplation of faith.

Section 3

You see, then, that this secular power often profits nothing, and mostly harms; for often the outcome of guilt lies in the authority of power. Do not, then, whoever you are, king, presume upon power and resources; for the heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord. Do not flatter yourself upon the subjection of peoples; for the king shall not be saved by the multitude of his strength, nor shall the giant be saved by the multitude of his strength. For it is not in the lofty pinnacles of tabernacles, nor in the precious summit of roofs, but upon those who fear him that the Lord is well pleased, and upon those who hope in his mercy.

Section 4

We see, then, power to be slippery toward vices, and yet not always bent, I would say; since we read that David, exalted with royal power, increased the divine worship, and Solomon consecrated a temple to God.

Section 5

Now let us assert that which we have touched on: that the faculty of ruling is an incentive to sinning, and let us pursue it according to the sequence of the history. David would not have committed adultery against another's marriage right, and the pacts of a covenanted union, had he not seen a woman naked and bathing from within his own house. And therefore it is well written: Gaze not upon the beauty of a woman: and desire not a woman. Elsewhere it is said: Beware of every irreverent eye. Presume nothing upon the virtue of your own continence. For the fornication of a woman shall be known by the haughtiness of her eyes, and by her eyelids; and therefore flee first the cause of sin. For no one is strong for long.

And it is said not only to the weak, but to every man: Let not the desire of beauty overcome thee; if you do not wish to be conquered, do not engage with sins, lest vices be crowned by you; be not captured by the eyes, nor carried away by the eyelids. A woman seems cheap to you as to price, but strong for vice; because a woman ensnares the precious souls of men.

Section 6

It is difficult, then, for anyone entangled in the allurements of lust to escape unscathed. Nor is this judged difficult by my opinion alone: but it is judged impossible even in the Proverbs of holy Solomon, who, led by his own example, says: Shall a man bind fire in his bosom, and his garments not be burnt? Or shall he walk upon coals of fire, and his feet not be burnt? Beware, then, you too, lest within the bosom of your mind you kindle the fire of lust and love; lest the bodily garment be consumed by that fire of the soul, and you lose the perpetuity of the resurrection: or at least let the footprint of your mind be burnt, if you have thought you must walk by the torches of lust. For he who is burnt in heart is burned in body.

Section 7

In every way, then, the encounter of a wanton woman is to be avoided. And therefore, acquire for yourself prudence as a disciple, he says, that she may guard you from a strange and harlot woman; lest she hold you bound with the snares of her lips, and entangle you with the little cords of error. And so the prophet has taught you whence you ought to beware of the harlot, that you should beware of her entrance by the window. For she enters through the window of her house. Her window is the eye: and therefore beware of every irreverent eye, lest love enter through the window, lest lust penetrate. For indeed the harlot woman entices the lover by sight; and unless you restrain the wantonness of your mind and soul by your gaze, death enters through the window. It is no idle wantonness of the harlot, no leisurely lasciviousness, that makes the hearts of young men fly; so that they cannot hold the constancy of their own mind, and are swept here and there by fervid love.

Beware, then, of such a woman, who does not rest her feet, who wanders abroad, who lies in wait at the corners, binds with her eyes, entices with words, weaves her bed with tapestries and coverlets spread from Egypt; for she takes her adornment not from divine thought, but from worldly allurement: she who deservedly calls her husband absent, since no adulteress can have Christ present.

Section 8

You see, then, by what things even the hearts of the holy may be captured; and therefore do not marvel if even holy David was captured. A great man indeed, and one who conquered by faith the Philistine, monstrous in body and bristling too with weapons of war—but would that he had conquered himself, would that, just as he laid low that outward adversary, so he could have laid low and overcome his own inward adversary! Harder is the battle of him who fights within than of him who fights without.

Section 9

But why do I speak of David alone? Let us call up others also to a treatment of this sort, lest we suppose the weakness of David to be that of one man alone, rather than the infirmity of the bodily condition. Samson, strong and mighty, strangled a lion, but could not strangle his own love: he loosed the bonds of enemies, but did not loose the bonds of his own desires: he burned the harvests of others, and himself, kindled by the little flame of one woman, lost the harvest of his own strength. Solomon built a temple for God, but would that he himself had kept the temple of his own body! But let the discourse return to him from whom it departed. David triumphed over ten thousand: but he erred concerning twenty thousand and more: and because he erred, he recognized himself to be a man, confessed his guilt, begged pardon, saying to the Lord: O Lord, rebuke me not in thy indignation, nor chasten me in thy wrath.

Have mercy on me, O Lord, for I am weak. If David is weak, are you strong? If Solomon fell, are you unmovable? If Paul was first among sinners, can you be first among saints? Therefore if the just have erred, they erred as men, but they acknowledged their sin as the just. If the just have received the sentence of a harsher penalty, how do you propose for yourself the hope of impunity, when Scripture says: If the just man scarcely be saved, where shall the sinner and the ungodly appear?

Section 10

You observe, then, my children, how often even a good resolve is undermined by an occasion of adultery; and therefore you ought first to flee and avoid the very causes. Do you not wish to be captured by love? Do not gaze upon the beauty of a woman; acquire for yourself prudence, he says, as a friend. For your eyes, when they have seen a strange woman, your mouth will speak perverse things, and you will lie as it were in the heart of the sea, and as a helmsman in a great whirlwind. For the multitude of desires makes a great tempest, which, as it were in some strait, tosses the one sailing through the body's waters hither and thither, so that his own mind cannot be its own helmsman, ignorant of day and night in the darkness of love.

Section 11

Lust, therefore, is aroused by the eyes, but is kindled by drunkenness. For every drunkard and fornicator shall become poor. And do not flatter yourself on your power of drinking. Noah was made drunk, and he who was not made drunk by the flood, was made drunk by wine. But he did not know the nature of wine, for he had not drunk before; you have learned in his case what you ought to beware. Lot was deceived in his sleep, and you, if you do not wish to be deceived, shake off the sleep of your mind, lest a drunken man be mocked by his sleeping son or daughter. There, not piety but drunkenness is repaid; nor is a father there, but a sleeping man is cheated. Do you wish not to be burned? Do not go near the fire. Do you wish not to be cast down headlong? Flee tottering things, beware of precipices, avoid what is falling and slipping.

Section 12

You see, then, in those who deserved to be just, that there was not a different nature, but a different discipline. After the fall of the first man, and the just sentence, since in one man appetite of the flesh was condemned, the condition drew vice, guilt infected nature; but faith tempered the very vice of nature, and the intention of devotion mitigated the offense.

Section 13

Turn, then, to the Lord, O nations, know that the Lord is God: he made us, and not we ourselves. Know that we are flesh and dust. Let us therefore leave behind what we have made, and let us venerate him as the author of ourselves, who gave life, who forgave sins, who alone can say: I am, I am he who blots out your iniquities, and I will remember them no more (Isaiah 43:25). Truly great and merciful is God, who confers a benefit, and does not reproach the gift of the benefit. Do you marvel that he made David king, and victor over many nations? Thus he is accustomed to raise up his little servants. He is not stingy of gifts, nor sparing of benefit, nor narrow and frugal of grace; but rich in generosity, he increases in reward those whom he has redeemed from sin. This against the gentiles.

Section 1

But since we promised a threefold division of this treatise, one against the gentiles, another against the Jews, a third for the Church; now it seems we must treat against the Jews. Let us then review what has been proposed for us. The title, it says, of the psalm of David, of understanding, when Nathan the prophet came to him: when he went in unto Bathsheba. Surely this history presents David both as adulterer and murderer, and do you, Jews, say that this man is the Son of God? But God is of virtues, not of crimes. And of him God the Father says: His throne shall be as the days of heaven; shall he who has committed deceit not have overcome sins? And how is it written: No one is without sin, but God alone? If, then, he who is the Son of God cannot fail to be God, then indeed the Son of God is the arbiter of justice, not liable to guilt.

Section 2

But by what opinion do you judge either David to be the Son of God, or think Solomon to be? Is it because it is written: O God, give your judgment to the king, and your justice to the king's son; and because the title of Psalm says the psalm was composed concerning Solomon? But observe of what Solomon it speaks. For Solomon means "peaceful," this is what the interpretation holds. The psalm is said to be concerning him whom we truly know to be the author of peace. But how is Solomon "peaceful"? Does not the blood of Joab show otherwise, whom he ordered slain between the altars of the temple; does not the punishment of Adonijah, whom he struck down as guilty of royal kinship, and was not recalled from his indignation even by his mother's entreaty?

How, moreover, do you think it fits Solomon the son of David, what is written, that he shall endure with the sun and before the moon, forever and ever; when he, having obtained the use of a brief life, passed through his span of living within narrow limits? How again is it said of him: He shall have dominion from sea to sea; when he, established within Syria, that is, within the province of a single region, had the bounds of his empire circumscribed. But Christ alone has extended his empire even to the ends of the whole world? For he alone is the one of whom the sequence of the psalm well prophesied, that the kings of Arabia and Sheba shall bring gifts, and all the kings of the earth shall adore him: all nations shall serve him. For we know that he commands all peoples and nations, with an empire without limit, with power without end. Therefore Solomon is not the Son of God.

Section 3

But for what reason have you supposed him to be the Son of God? Is it because he was wise? But this man asked for wisdom, that he might receive what he did not have: Christ himself is wisdom, having it naturally in its entirety, what Solomon received in human affairs by grace. Moreover, what is received in time is possessed in time. For Solomon neither had wisdom at his beginning, nor possessed it at his end. For he did not believe he had what he asked for; and afterward, turned away from the worship of God, he fell, not as a wise man, but as a foolish one, so as to give offense. He gave offense to such an extent that he even lost what he had merited. Why then have you believed this man to be the Son of God? Is it because he built a temple for God?

But from this you ought to have believed that he is not Lord and God, because it is written: Unless the Lord builds the house, they labor in vain who build it. He labored in vain who built that temple which subsequent fire burned up. Is it because it was said to David his father: You shall not build me a house; but when you have slept, I will raise up your seed after you; and he shall build a house to my name (2 Samuel 7:12-13)? But there too a temple is promised, not bodily, not material, for God does not dwell in things made by hand, but the temple is the holy Church, which indeed is founded not by human, but by heavenly power.

Section 4

For if we admire works of a more excellent, yet still human, virtue, we find many of this sort, whom we can compare with David and Solomon. And therefore where there is equality of work, there is no excellence of power. Nor can we call many the sons of God, since we have read of one Son of God; but injury must not be done to the Son of God on account of the benefits which he conferred upon our forebears. For there are many illustrious men: but through one Joshua the son of Nun, it says (Joshua 10:13), the sun stood still against Gibeon. You see that he proceeded beyond the virtue of King David; for David commanded earthly things, not the stars. You see too that the sun is a servant, not a lord, since it even obeyed a human voice. Yet it stood still, because in Joshua it recognized both the type and the name of the one to come.

For it was not by his own power that Joshua the son of Nun, but by the mystery of Christ, commanded the heavenly lights; for it was signified that the Son of God was to come into this world, who would, by divine power, delay the setting of the worldly light as it declined and was already inclining into darkness, would restore light, would bring in brightness. Enoch also was caught up to heaven: but yet he was caught up, this one returned. He was caught up, lest malice change his heart; this one abolished the very malice of this age. Elijah ascended to heaven by chariot and horses; but Christ descended from heaven, not by chariot and horses, as that one ascended, because that one could not otherwise have done it; but this one returned by his own power. Elisha commanded the leper to wash in the Jordan, that he might be cleansed from all contagion; this one washed the whole world in the Jordan.

Moses himself, to whom the peoples of the Jews were entrusted, divided the water; and indeed he divided the elements, because he did not divide the power of the Trinity; he separated the masses of waters, because he did not separate the Father from the Son.

Section 5

You see how many men, and of what kind, have left behind the record of their works. How then, when you recognize those whom you know to be equal in virtue to King David or Solomon, do you judge them unequal in condition, so that you suppose Solomon the son of David sits at the right hand of God? Especially since David himself clearly expressed of whom this was said; for he would not have said of his own son: The Lord said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand. For how would he call his own son "Lord"? The law forbids, religion resists, faith recoils, that you should place a mortal man at the right hand of Almighty God.

Other is he who sits at the right hand, who took on a body, not who began from a body; who was begotten before the daystar, that is, before the brightness of all lights; since he himself created the dignities of the various lights: for Solomon indeed is after the daystar. Solomon was not a priest; and therefore it could not be said to him by the Lord Almighty: From the womb, before the daystar, I have begotten you; it could not be said to him: You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek; especially since at that time in which Solomon lived, the priests were according to the order of Aaron, not according to the order of Melchizedek. For up until then the priests offered the blood of goats and bulls for the sins and errors of the people: but after Christ came, who offered himself for the salvation of the world (that those whom the blood of bulls could not wash, the blood of Christ might cleanse), priests began to offer themselves as sacrifices.

Section 6

Thus by one question our Lord Jesus Christ has sealed the mouths of all heretics, and shut them up in sacrilege. For not only the Jews, but also the Photinians, and the Arians, and the Sabellians, he refutes by this question: and therefore, since we now perceive that the Jews have fallen away, and that their execrable perfidy has been diminished, we must now touch briefly, in the treatment of this question, upon the Arians, who do not differ much from the Jews, and upon the Photinians and Sabellians. Let Photinus, then, be silent, who says that Christ is the son of David, not of God; and let him be silent, condemned by the heavenly voice. For how does he say that Christ is the son of David, when David himself has said in the book of Psalms: The Lord said to my Lord: sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool? If, he says, David calls him Lord, how is he his son?

Therefore Christ is not the son of David, but the Son of God. Let the Sabellian too be silent; and when he reads that the Lord said to the Lord, let him understand that the one who speaks and the one to whom it is spoken are not one and the same: for the Father did not say to himself, Sit at my right hand; nor did he say to himself, I will make your enemies. And let all at some point understand that he who sits at the right hand is the Son. And let them keep this distinction between the Father and the Son, that there be a distinction of Father and Son, in that one is the Father, another is the Son, because they enjoy one seat, one majesty, and sit, not for a distinction of dignity, nor for an order of power, but for a bond of love: let them understand the power of Father and Son to be one, in which let Arius too fall silent, who presses tracks of error contrary to Sabellius.

Let him hear the Lord say to the Lord, let him hear that the Son sits at the right hand of the Father; and let him cease to make a question for divinity out of the speech and order of men. Nor let him argue here, that because the Father says, "sit"; for we read elsewhere too, even without the Father's word, that the Son sits, as it is written: And he sits at the right hand of God. And elsewhere: Henceforth you shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of God (Matthew 26:64). For he to whom it is said, "sit," is the very one who is named Son of man: he hears as man, he sits as the Son of God. What can be spoken of more excellent than this power, which placed even the flesh of man at the right hand of God; and joined that weak thing of human condition, after the Word was made flesh, to the eternal divinity?

Section 7

But what is this? After Photinus has been silenced, Arius has fallen mute, Sabellius has lost his voice; still I see other mouths stirring up heresy against the Church in various ways. For behold the Manichaean and the Valentinian, and every offshoot of the Manichaeans, relies on that very weapon by which others have been destroyed; and he strives to prejudice the faith by testimony of the faith itself. For this detestable heresy says: Behold, Christ denied that he was the son of David; and therefore, it says, we must believe that he did not take on flesh. To these the Scripture answers most clearly at the very beginning of the Gospel, when it says: The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, son of David (Matthew 1:1). Why then is he in one place called the son of David, and in another place denied to be the son of David; unless that you may understand that it is one thing to be Son according to the divine substance, another according to the assumption of flesh?

For according to the divine substance, he is the Son of God; according to the flesh, the son of David. Thus, where the generation of the Savior according to the flesh is described, he is named the son of David: but where the fullness of confession is required, when the generation of the Savior is designated, he does not wish to be named the son of David, but of God; for the designation of his majesty interprets his nature. But now that the interpretations of the cruel have been refuted, our discourse must be turned to the Church.

Section 1

But that we so often repeat the title of the fiftieth psalm is an example not of presumption, but of infirmity. For in one day, whether through the narrowness of my talent, or the frailty of my voice, I cannot complete the whole sequence of the treatment. And therefore, since on the previous day our discourse was directed against the Jews, whom indeed the proofs of the faith have so far subdued that Christ is set upon the heavenly throne—which certainly cannot apply to a mere man. For it is not credible that anyone other than the Son of God sits at the right hand of God. No other than the Son of God, all ambiguity removed, is to be reckoned as sitting at the right hand of the Father.

Again, since Scripture has: "Of the fruit of thy womb will I set upon thy throne", that same Son of God must certainly be believed to have taken flesh from Mary, in whom is the prophetic fruit of the womb: so that you may truly recognize the succession of origin, and not doubt that that Son of God, made afterward the son of man through the taking of flesh, sits on the Father's heavenly throne. For Christ did not have any royal throne in this world, that you should think another throne like David's was promised; especially since the Lord himself said: "My kingdom is not of this world".

Section 2

Being thus enclosed on every side, they divert the attempts of their faithlessness to this point, that they assert it to be incredible that God should have taken on flesh: but for what reason he could not have taken it, they cannot explain. For I ask whether they think it was impossible, or a matter of injury, that flesh could not be taken on by God? If impossibility, then something is impossible for God: for there is nothing that he wished to do and could not do. It remains, then, that it be shown either that he willed it or did not will it. But what greater indication of will is there than that he himself said: "I appeared openly to them that sought me not; I stretched out my hands to a people that did not believe, and contradicted me"? If then he willed it and was able, are we to think he did not will it for fear of injury? And what injury does his divinity feel?

For it is free of insult, nor is it subject to our passions; for flesh could bring neither loss nor increase to divinity.

Section 3

Yet who are they who object that the Son of God could not have taken on flesh? Is it the Gentiles, who testify that their gods (since they cannot deny that they were men) were seen in human form? Or could their king, whom they set before all their gods, take on monstrous forms for the sake of love: and could Christ not take on the flesh of man, whom he made in his own image, and take up that most excellent work of his for the salvation of the world? And does the assumption of the form of flesh seem to them more beautiful for the sake of adultery with another's bed, than for the redemption of all mankind? But if it is the Jew who objects this, how does he read: "Behold, a virgin shall conceive in the womb, and shall bring forth a son; and his name shall be called Emmanuel", which is interpreted, God with us? How does he read: "Behold, I who spoke am present"?

How, moreover, does he claim it is written: "Behold, as a panther; and as a bear robbed of her whelps, will I meet them"? Could the Son of God, then, not take on flesh for the redemption of all, when they themselves cannot deny that, for the punishment of our sins, God assumed a certain disposition of bestial cruelty; so that he who by nature is kind and merciful, yet moved by the atrocity of our crimes, assumes toward us a certain savagery of beasts?

Section 4

But now, since I think enough answer has been given to the Jews both on the previous day and today, an account of the prophetic deed must be rendered to you, dearest brethren. For indeed, when this title of the psalm was first read, that Nathan came to David when he had gone in to Bathsheba, we said that very many are confounded by the sequence of this history: and therefore we undertook a threefold treatment of it; and we thought the division of the treatment should be made in this way, that among the Gentiles the fall of our condition would not be denied, and the correction of error would be established; but among the Jews we would teach that holy David fell for this reason, that the faithlessness of the Jews might no longer stumble, and that they might cease to believe him to be the Son of God, whom they saw to have been subject to sin by common condition; while Christians might be able to perceive the mysteries of the rising Church.

A threefold division, then, has been made, one according to nature, another according to faith, a third according to grace; nor does infirmity exclude from pardon, and faith excuses from guilt, and the grace long since promised is now reconciled by the sacraments.

Section 1

David sinned that the whole world might not err; he sinned for himself, that he might amend for all of us; finally he sinned against his own body (for he who fornicates sins against his own body)—he sinned against his own body, that he might be redeemed in the body of Christ: behold, him whom we thought scarcely to be defended, we now perceive is to be praised. For who is there who would not rather have divine gifts than human works praised in himself? For we believe, according to the Apostle, that man is justified by faith, without the works of the Law: let David, then, be justified by faith, who through the Law recognized his sin, but believed the pardon of sin through faith; let David be justified, because in his hidden sin the mysteries of the Church shone forth.

Section 2

Someone says: for what reason did the founder of the Lord's lineage, chosen by God, commit both adultery and homicide? I answer this: such a founder had to be chosen for the Lord's body. For what is the incarnation, but the remission of sins? And therefore he could not be free from sin, so that he might set forth divine grace both by example and by report. Accordingly, by this arrangement Bathsheba and Tamar are counted among the founders of the Lord's lineage: of whom one committed adultery, the other committed incest. By this arrangement also Ahab and Jechoniah, as the Evangelist Matthew has written, are numbered among the ancestors of Christ, so that he who was to redeem all men might begin the benefit with his own ancestors; and at the same time that he who subjected himself even to the suffering of the body might not seem to have sought after the nobility of an immaculate origin.

For it is the boasting of men to seek another's glory, not their own; and yet among men themselves the grace of virtue is greater than that of nobility. At the same time an example had to be set forth, that all might understand that the disgraces of ancestors cannot be a dishonor to their descendants; that each one can, by the merit of his own virtue, wipe away the stain of his lineage. Do you see how many, and how gravely criminal, the line of the Lord's generation includes, from whose origin, for your sake, Christ did not blush to be born? If you believe in this, the gifts of divine mercy are for you, and this is the mark of heavenly power. For sin abounded, that grace might more abound. David, therefore, was not exempt from guilt, so that he might be chosen for grace.

Section 3

But now let us review the mysteries of the history itself, and draw from the very fountains of the Scriptures; and, that we may be able to look into the whole sequence of the mysteries, let us repeat the text of the history itself. For thus we recall it is stated in the book of Kings, that David, when he had seen Bathsheba the wife of Uriah bathing, fell in love with her; then ordered her to come to his house, when her husband was absent; not long after her husband returned, a messenger of war, indeed a religious and devoted man, who did not think he should enter his house at a time of war, when he saw his companions intent on war, keeping watch not in domestic dwellings but in war-tents: afterward, by David's order, he was recalled to the war, under the instruction that he should be exposed to the enemy warriors, so that by the man's death he might have free opportunity to possess the woman.

And here there is some shame of sin, and modesty of guilt, in that he sought a hiding-place for his wrongdoing; and he did not assume for himself, by right of royal power, the authority of an unjust killing, but avoided ill-will. He confesses guilt, but more tolerable is that which is suppressed by shame, than that which is proclaimed with insolence. Uriah, then, died, exposed to the warriors, but afterward the very men who had killed him were themselves slain by David's order, when the city was captured. This is the sequence of the history, in which one may behold profound mysteries.

Section 1

And since we undertake not to defend David—for he does not need my help—but to excuse him, or rather to praise him; lest in so great a depth of mysteries I should waver, it is right that I use his own voice, whose history I use. I will use, then, the prophetic response, saying: "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit in my inward parts". For no one, without the infusion of the Holy Spirit, can behold such great mysteries of the divine recess. For indeed, if that so great prophet asks for the gift of the Holy Spirit to be infused in himself, what ought a weak man to do; especially since even the holy Apostle thinks himself helped also by the prayers of the people, that a door might be opened to him for speaking the mystery of the word. Oh, if only Christ would deign to open that door for me!

Yet let us knock; for he is wont to hear those who knock, since he himself said: "Knock, and it shall be opened to you". Oh, if only he himself would unlock it for me, since Christ is the door: he within, he without, he the way that leads, he the life which we strive to reach.

Section 2

Come, then, Lord Jesus, and open to us your fountains, that we may drink of the water, which whoever drinks shall not thirst forever. Or if we cannot yet draw from your fountain, deign to grant that we may at least draw from the well, from which you promise a drink to that Samaritan woman still in doubt. And you indeed promise from the fountain to all, but to those who doubt, as to that Samaritan woman, your fountain is still a deep well. Let us also drink the water of heavenly secrets. And since we have merited to reach your fountain, let it be permitted to us at least to see the image of the heavenly mysteries.

Section 3

Thus, unless I am mistaken, by the Prophet we understand the Holy Spirit; but by the adulteress we may reckon the various fornications of the Synagogue. And so we perceive it revealed long beforehand by the Holy Spirit, and from the family of the Jews (whose fathers, and from whom Christ according to the flesh) the Lord Jesus was to be born, who indeed was born, as it were a Jew, from an adulterous family, but, as it were immaculate, from a Virgin. He was under the Law, the family of the Jews was as it were under a husband; the observance of the Law had to be abolished, that truth and grace might be substituted.

Section 4

We have one mystery: receive also another; yet so that you remember that from the first conception of Bathsheba there was born a little child who died, and afterward Solomon was born: that little one from a stolen conception; but this Solomon now from the profession of marriage. It is clear, therefore, that by David is understood the prophet, by the Prophet the prophetic people, from whom, and from the Synagogue, that first one who was born (since the people of the Jews had degenerated from their ancestors, formed through crimes and compacted through vices) could not attain to the eternity of the resurrection, nor grow up into a perfect man; but failed in a small littleness of senses, and a certain infancy of virtue. But indeed that one who was afterward conceived from the lawful union, the Christian people, that wise and peaceable one—for this is disclosed by the interpretation of Solomon—attains to the hoary age of a long-lived resurrection, and to that heavenly kingdom.

But through that former people the Law was dissolved, through this latter grace was reformed.

Section 5

Receive also a third mystery. What the Hebrews call David as "exalted," the Latins interpret as "humbled." But who is truly humbled, save he who did not think it robbery to be equal with God, but taking the form of a servant humbled himself, made obedient unto death? This, then, is he who is signified by David: exalted by nature, but humbled by mercy; sublime in divinity, but meek in body. And so, where he is humbled, there he is obedient. For obedience is born from the same source as humility, and ends in the same. For when he is said to have been made obedient unto death (and death was not of divinity, but of the body), that obedience was certainly not the obedience of divinity, but of the body; nor was that humility the humility of majesty, but of the flesh.

Thus, as far as regards the assumption of the body, the apostolic reading has declared in what Christ's humility consisted; but as far as regards the nature of divinity, it has been unfolded by the reading of the Gospel, which you followed with pious assent, when you heard it read, the Son of God saying: I and the Father are one. For the Father and the Son are one in divinity; but the sacrament of the body and the eternity of divinity are not one. Nor was it the Apostle alone who said the Lord was humbled, but he himself also recalled that he was humble, saying: Take my yoke, for it is easy; for I am meek and humble of heart. And yet it is signified not by interpretation alone, but also by his very name; for it is written: I have found David my servant, I have anointed him with my holy oil. And below he says: Thou art my Father; and I will say to him, Thou art my Son.

Therefore David, whom we were seeking, we have found: a servant in appearance, but Lord in truth.

Section 1

This David, then, walked within his own house. And what house is this, but that of Christ, of which he says: For in my Father's house there are many mansions? In that royal dwelling, then, he saw the human condition lying naked, and pitying it, loved it. For it was still bare of virtues, since through the wiles of the serpent it had been stripped of the native covering of its own nature. For it does not seem plausible that a woman should be stripped naked before the house of the king, that a woman should wash herself before the king's house, as though there could be no other place fit for washing. It does not fit, it does not agree, it does not accord with faith; it is far from the truth, it is repugnant to good sense. Could a king have loathed, rather than loved, such a woman, so wanton, so shameless? Could she, if she could not have been modest before a husband, not at least have feared the sight of royalty?

Or could not even his servants have kept her from view, before the king himself saw her?

Section 2

Therefore if this cannot be reconciled with faith, let us ask who this naked woman is—namely, the human condition, stripped of all the garments of nature, lacking the mantle of immortality, and despoiled of the veil of innocence. For he is naked who is stripped bare by sin and guilt. Indeed, that first sinner of our race—and would that he had been the only one—before he sinned, did not perceive himself to be naked; after he sinned, he saw that he was naked; and therefore he thought he must cover himself with leaves, because he recognized that he was naked. He became, then, naked to himself, after he became guilty of sin. In him the whole human condition was made naked, through the succession of nature, liable not only to guilt but also to affliction. He, then, felt and saw himself naked; hence such is our whole condition, that whoever thinks himself naked both sees and feels himself naked. Indeed, he who covets riches is naked; he who despises them is rich.

So much is one's own perception a burden, and one's own virtue is free of injury. Therefore Christ first claimed the human condition for himself in marriage through the Law, which he afterward repudiated. Whence also he says: Where is the bill of divorce of your mother, with which I put her away? In this way, then, Christ saw his household naked, and loved it; for Christ loves a holy soul. So too Jesus loved Lazarus and Mary; Christ loved his Church, though naked, though not yet clothed with any adornment of virtue.

Section 3

Furthermore, that we may know that the sequence of the Scriptures agrees with the argument set forth, let us learn of the Church, clean, seeking, hastening, and washing herself before the house of Christ, when John was baptizing in the Jordan, saying: I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance; but he who comes after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry; he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit. Therefore, when the people were being baptized unto repentance, the Church was already seeking Christ, near now to his house, that she might arrive at grace. The Church, therefore, sought Christ from John, saying: Tell me whom my soul has loved; recalling that he himself was the cause of her desire, he himself the cause of her washing, as you have it: I am black and beautiful, O daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon. You have the reason why she was eager to wash herself, because she recalls that she is black.

For as it were in answer to John asking why the great crowd running together was eager to be washed, she replied: I am black and beautiful, O daughter of Jerusalem. Because she is black, she desires to be washed; because she is beautiful, she does not fear to be seen naked. Look not upon me, she says, because I am darkened, because the sun has not looked upon me. We are darkened, then, when we are not seen by Christ; but when we are seen, we grow white. He saw her, then, to whom all things are naked, and to whom the hidden things of the heart cannot be concealed; for he is the searcher of the heart and reins: nothing is covered to him, nothing wrapped up. He saw his Church naked, and seeing her, loved her. He saw the beloved naked, and, as it were, a son of charity, he loved her.

Section 4

See how he sees, see how he calls. Here are not reproaches of adultery, but mysteries of chastity. Thou art all fair, he says, my love, my neighbour, and there is no reproach in thee. Come hither from Lebanon, my spouse, come hither from Lebanon, thou shalt pass over and go through from the beginning of faith. And rightly, "from the beginning of faith." For where you have faith, you ought not to fear adultery; for faith is of marriage, deceit of adultery. But that she might be able to come from Lebanon, he first sent word beforehand, saying: Arise, come, my neighbour, my fair one, my dove, my perfect one. "Neighbour," of course, by desire of faith; "fair one," by the comeliness of virtue; "dove," by spiritual grace. For the silvered wings of the dove signify that eternal power; and the dove's flight has declared the presence of the Holy Spirit.

Christ, therefore, calls her to himself, that she may come; since, endowed now with spiritual gifts, she was coming: For behold, he says, the winter is past, the rain is over and gone, the flowers have appeared on the earth. See how the holy Church is invited. The winter, he says, is departed from her, lest, being naked, she should fear winter—not the winter of the season, but of weakness, which strips the field of the soul bare of every flower. For there is a winter not of the earthly sun; there is a winter of the mind, when cold steals over the soul, when the warmth of the spirit vanishes, when the vigor of feeling is dissolved, when excessive moisture overflows and weighs down the mind, when inward darkness clouds the sight. And therefore the Lord says: See that your flight be not in the winter, or on the sabbath.

For it is good that the day of judgment or of death should come when the gentle mildness of the soul is flourishing, when the heavenly mystery shines with serene light, when our heart burns within us. For then Christ is present, as Emmaus and Cleophas testify in the Gospel, saying: Was not our heart burning within us in the way, while he opened to us the Scriptures? Now the soul flourishes when even a flower is seen upon the earth. Who is this flower of good odor, but he who said: I am the flower of the field, and the lily of the valleys? Of whom it is also written in Isaiah: And a rod shall come forth out of the root of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots, and a flower shall come forth from the branch.

The root, indeed, is the family of the Jews; the branch, Mary; the flower of Mary, Christ, who, when he shines forth in our land, and gives fragrance in the field of the soul, or blossoms in his Church, we need fear neither cold nor rain, but await the day of judgment.

Section 5

And therefore the Church, that she might see this flower, hastened with all zeal, as she herself testifies, saying: In my bed, by night, I sought him whom my soul loves; I sought him, and I found him not; I called him, and he did not answer me. I will rise, therefore, and go about the city, in the streets and the broad ways, and I will seek him whom my soul loves I sought him, and found him not: The watchmen that go about the city found me, they struck me, and took away my veil from me. See how she seeks him whom she desires to find, so that she does not fear to be wounded. But these wounds are not to be feared, but desired; for they are the wounds of charity, as she herself says: I am wounded with love. Good are the wounds of love. Indeed, the wounds of a friend are more profitable than the willing kisses of an enemy.

Section 1

Rightly, then, is she naked, because she lost her veil: or perhaps she is naked because it is sometimes a mark of virtue not to have the breast covered, not to have the heart veiled. Indeed, that veiled woman, that is, the Synagogue, who had a veil in the reading of the Old Testament, which is now revealed, since it is made void in Christ—that veiled Synagogue, I say, Christ despised and rejected; hence even today a veil is placed over the heart of the Jews. But she who is turned with her whole mind to the Lord is naked and transparent. For when anyone shall be turned to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away, that we may be able, beholding, to see the glory of God. Indeed, elsewhere too, to be naked is a mark of virtue, for it is written: I have put off my garment, how shall I put it on? I have washed my feet, how shall I defile them?

Section 2

Let us, then, if we can, disclose from the Scriptures what garment it was that she put off, and could not find how to put on again. For there is a certain bodily garment, and there are certain woven veils of desires; and therefore it is sometimes better to be naked in body than veiled in heart. Whence also Paul admonishes us that it is much better to be stripped than to be overclothed, saying elsewhere also: Having stripped off the old man with his deeds, put on the new man, who is renewed unto knowledge, according to the image of him who created him. She, therefore, who is stripped, and has her feet washed; and therefore she who has washed does not know how they could be defiled. For through grace she forgets what she had drawn in through nature. Great, then, is this righteous love of the woman washing herself before the palace of David.

Section 3

But she not only washed, but also called, as we find in the same book, the holy Church saying: Come, my brother, let us go forth into the field, let us abide in the villages, let us get up early to the vineyards, let us see if the vine has flourished. Not only, then, does she wash, but she also entices and invites Christ to come to her, saying: I will give thee my breasts. And she promises not only her own gifts, but also things new and old, as you have it: New and old, my brother, have I kept for thee. And as though impatient of love, she seeks the help of someone by whom Christ may be asked to come. See her burning, see her longing: Who, she says, will give thee to me, my brother, sucking the breasts of my mother?

And with what reason she seeks him, and with what grace she invites him, and how she is able to hold him, she shows; how she awaits him tarrying outside, she reveals; and that he may enter her house, she implores, saying: Finding thee outside, I will kiss thee, I will take thee, and bring thee into the house of my mother, and into the secret chamber of her who conceived me. You see how naked she is, who can have no hidden covering—the secret of a nature indeed inviolate, the secret of inmost conscience, marked by no rashness of vices. For the holy Church is an enclosed garden, and immaculate virginity, which therefore deserves this grace from Christ, because she sought, desired, and found the Word of God, watching before the doors of wisdom, as she herself says: Blessed is the man who hears me, and the man who keeps my ways, watching daily at my doors, keeping the posts of my entrance. My outgoings are the outgoings of life.

Section 4

Thus Christ desired the beauty of his Church, and prepared to take her to himself as a wife. But because she was under the Law (for Peter, John, and the other apostolic men were under the Law), he thought that we must first be released from the bonds of bodily observance. For although the Law was religious, the Law was just, as is shown by the person of Uriah, who was so religious and chaste that, returning from war, he did not recognize his wife, nor go in to her; yet because Uriah, in David, that is, in the humble man, recognized the union of the Church, departing from the connection with the Synagogue, he prepared a place for the future marriage. Whence also John received the type of the Law, who, although he was of the Fathers, announced that the ways of the Lord were being prepared, and prophesied the union with the Church; and therefore he is represented as slain, that he might show the failure of legal observance.

For the Law and the prophets were until John. Therefore now Uriah was slain in the type of the Law, that the Synagogue might be released from the snares of the Law, since the woman who is under a husband is bound by the law while her husband lives; but if her husband is dead, she is freed from the law of her husband. Therefore, while her husband lives, she will be called an adulteress if she is joined to another man; but if her husband is dead, she is freed from the law of her husband, so that she is not an adulteress if she is with another man. Therefore human nature is not adulterous, which, although it was under the Law, yet, the observance of the Law being in a certain manner abolished, has been claimed for grace.

Section 5

But Christ did not abolish the observance of the Law. Whence also David did not kill Uriah himself, but allowed him to be killed by the warriors: that is, Christ allowed the rite of observance coming from the Law to be profaned through the incursion of the barbarians and the captivity of the Jews. Then again, Uriah is called “my light.” But what is the light of Christ but the Law and the Gospel? For if you believed Moses, you would believe me also; for he wrote of me. Because the light of Christ preceded in the Law, with which afterward, in the grace of the Gospel, as if with a sevenfold-wicked spirit, he filled the whole of this world. Hence therefore he took away flesh from the Law, or the Church, and joined it to himself: the light of which Law the hostile people diminished, when they violated the holy things of the Law.

Therefore the light of God was diminished among the people of the Jews; because blindness in part has happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles should enter, and thus all Israel might be saved.

Section 1

There remains still a fourth mystery, which, I ask, may you receive with calm ears, and weigh our meaning, not our words; for the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power. An adultery was committed, and a murder was committed. This is what was said to the Prophet: Take for yourself a walnut staff. And elsewhere we read of a walnut rod, by which we understand a certain right and sum of prophecy, which, after the manner of a walnut, is bitter outwardly in the husk, hard in the middle shell, tender within and fruitful. If therefore you hear things more bitter in the history, you recognize hard things in the type; yet hope for fruitful things in the mystery. An adultery, I say, was made into a type of salvation; for not every adultery is to be condemned. Then again, it was said to the Prophet: Go, take to yourself a wife of fornication (Hosea 1:2).

The Lord commands this, that there be a marriage with her who had been a fornicator: of which marriage, as we said above, the offspring is Christ. For to the son who was born of fornication, the name Jezreel was given by the Lord, which means "the divine generation." If therefore that fornicating union was pious, then this union of an adulterous society is certainly also pious. But that concerns the Jews. But concerning divine things I do not dare, although it is pious, to name adultery, lest even the sound of the word offend someone, although the sense of reverence is at hand; which nevertheless can be said more cautiously, though not more expressly: out of unequal unions a pious cohabitation was made, when the Word was made flesh. For the unions of divinity and flesh are not lawful; nor do they meet by a certain covenant of nature, as flesh does with soul and soul with flesh, so also divinity and the flesh of the righteous one observe in a manner the law of the marriage-bed.

God took on flesh, assumed a soul, and through an unusual and not lawful incarnation made the union to be lawful, that God might be all in all.

Section 2

Finally, that you may know this to be a mystery, interpret the names. For you take David as a type of Christ; Bathsheba is called "daughter of the Sabbath," or "full daughter," or "well of the oath." What then is more express than that the flesh of Christ is the daughter of the Sabbath; because God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the Law? The same is "full," because in his passion is the fullness of the Law, or because she is full of the grace of the Holy Spirit. For Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan. The same also is "well of the oath," that is, of religion and faith. And rightly a well, because rivers of living water shall flow from her belly. This one, then, God the Word, taking to himself, made the union to be lawful; which mystery those nuptials designated which are in the Song of Songs, in which the Church is wed to Christ, and the flesh to the spirit.

And therefore the Word of God ran about and sought everywhere, because the wounded, because the naked, because the flesh, adulterous in all things (though immaculate in Christ), sought a redeemer, wretched as it was.

Section 3

This one Christ joined to himself, that he might render her immaculate; this one he united to himself, that he might take away adultery. And because she was under the Law, it was necessary that she die, so that she might be freed from the Law, so that through that death a certain marriage of the Law and the flesh might be dissolved. Therefore the flesh died in Christ, so that we, put to death to the Law through the body of Christ, as the Apostle said, might belong to another, who rose from the dead, and that the passions and desires of the flesh, and the thoughts of sins which were in our members through the Law, might die in that death; but that we, released from the law of death, as by a new union with Christ, might rise again in newness of the spirit.

Section 4

And yet those who dissolved the Law in the flesh of Christ, and thought that it should be violated, were all slain by the warriors at David's command. By which indication it is shown that what later events taught was thereby signified: that none of those who killed Christ escaped; and this is most clearly revealed, that those whom Jesus had taken up before his death, like the Jews, perished as infants and unformed; but those whom he received after his death into the number of sons were preserved for the kingdom. Whence, according to this mystery, it fits that among the Jews the first offspring was weak, so that afterward among Christians there might be an eternal fruit.

Section 1

But now let us pass on to the message. For in the previous days we had a discussion about that odious adultery and murder of David the prophet, and, having gone through the mysteries, we found not only nothing to be condemned, but even something to be praised. Now the discussion begins to concern the message, which the title of the psalm we have already often repeated shows. For it reads thus: A psalm of David, of understanding, when Nathan the prophet came to him, after he had gone in to Bathsheba.

Section 2

So this part of the history also must be unfolded, which is as follows. There were, it says, a rich man and a poor man in one city. The rich man had many herds, many flocks; the poor man had one ewe lamb, which he fed with the poor man's bread and wine, and which lay in his bosom. A guest came to the rich man; the rich man took nothing from his own herd or from his own flocks, but killed the one ewe lamb of the poor man. When David learned this, he said: That man shall die, and he shall restore fourfold. Nathan answered him: You are the man.

Then he opened to him the heavenly command, saying that the Lord had commanded, that he had bestowed on him many good things, that is, royal riches, having removed him from the number of shepherds, and that he had poured out his mercy upon him; and therefore, since by sin he had provoked the Lord, all his goods would be carried off, seized by enemies, and his house laid waste. Then he said: I have sinned. And Nathan answered: Since you confess that you have sinned, the Lord will forgive you your sin; but the son who was born to you of Bathsheba shall die. When this son fell ill, David wept, lay on the ground, covered himself with sackcloth, fasted; but when he learned that the child was dead, he arose, washed, dined, and consoled others.

Section 3

See how many things there are. First of all, that God is kind and merciful, and that whatever adversities befall us, we receive as the price of our error. We have learned, therefore, that captivity is the price of sin; for this punishment is decreed for the crime. Then we notice this: that the fall of kings is the punishment of peoples. For just as we are preserved by their virtue, so also we are endangered by their error. Wherefore we ought to wish that we might be able to have a glorious and perfect king. Do we, then, who wish to have a perfect king, not wish to have a perfect Lord? Or can those who do not wish God to be perfect really wish man to be perfect? This too the text of the history briefly accomplishes: that we notice how quickly the hope of pardon followed. Not a small matter, moreover, is that Nathan announced this to him, that is, a lesser prophet.

For it is a grave shame and disgrace of the offense, to be reproved by an inferior. You see that guilt diminishes grace. Nathan knew what David did not know: so much was his mind darkened, overshadowed by a cloud of vices. Then, this is the same Nathan who earlier had prophesied that David was accepted by the Lord; so that he might grieve, rebuked for sin by the same one by whose prophecy his merit had earlier been proclaimed.

Section 4

But now let us seek out the mystery. Two men, it says, were in one city, one rich, and the other poor. Who is this rich man or poor man, unless perhaps the one is the people of the Jews, and the other the Christian people? That one is rich in the Law, rich in the oracles of God entrusted to it, rich in prophecies, rich in oracles; but this one is poor. But do not flee from this poverty, which is followed by the kingdom of heaven. For it is written: Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Good is the poverty which does not lose what it has had. Good is the poverty which, if it does not have treasures of money, yet has treasures of knowledge and wisdom. Do not, my children, despise poverty as something vile. This poor man cried, and the Lord heard him. Do not envy great riches: The rich have wanted and hungered.

But if you wish to have good things, seek the Lord: for those who seek the Lord shall not lack any good thing. Therefore do not reject every poor man. Peter was poor, and had not a coin to give; but he gave a salvation more precious than all money. That Lazarus in the Gospel was poor; but he who before lay rich in purple and fine linen, after the end of his life wished to be refreshed by a drop from the finger of the poor man. Although that man, proud in royal purple and purple garments, a fastidious rich man, had shuddered at the wounds of the poor man, yet, placed in the underworld, he wished to have been in that place where Lazarus was. In this passage the reading does not seem to describe the rich and poor man in terms of money, but that poor man who, for faith and devotion, has not shuddered at wounds of the body, and has endured hunger and fasting.

Section 5

Since, then, the people of the Jews had in their flocks very many supplies of victims, yet he seized the one little ewe which that poor people had, gloriously subjecting her to the passion. Do you wish to know what sheep this is? As a sheep he was led to the sacrifice (Isaiah 53:7), who was fed by the bread of the poor man, and used the drink of the poor man, and slept in the bosom of the poor man. For he used our nourishments, he rested in the bosom of our breast. For he recorded that he could not rest in the bosom of the Jews, saying: The Son of man has nowhere to lay his head.

Section 6

And there came a guest, it says, to that rich man. Who is this guest, but wretched sin? For guilt entered into this world like a guest, alien to our nature and a stranger to it. And so he did not offer a victim from his own flocks; but he took the little ewe of the poor man, and killed her. Whose passion, though it profited some for a salutary sacrifice, yet seems to have been to others the fuel of their own fury, and the food of guilt, and the incitement of sin. Then again, Judas received bread from Christ, and then was more filled with the devil; because he who was preparing betrayal for so hospitable a Lord did not receive it in faith.

Section 7

And David was angry against that man. We have said that through the Prophet the people of the Jews is declared, and therefore under this figure he condemns himself. That man who did this is worthy of death, and he shall restore the ewe fourfold, that is, the people of the Jews who are to perish, but the Christian people who are to enjoy manifold good things; because a more excellent state is owed by the resurrection than the present condition.

Section 8

It was my purpose, as you deign to remember, to make some sort of reply against those who think that the homicide and adultery of holy David ought to be censured: and so, through the favor of your unanimity, the course of our discourse turned out in such a way that he whom we thought could not be defended came to seem worthy to be praised by the mouths of all. But since the holy man does not need our help, let him now speak for himself before you, and let his own words defend his deed.

Section 1

Have mercy on me, O Lord, he says, according to thy great mercy. This is a new joining of words, unless I am mistaken, dearest brethren, that it should be called "great mercy." I do not recall having easily read it elsewhere: and therefore it is not easy for us to say what "great mercy" is. Yet we read of the "great power" of God. And so, by considering what great power is, we shall be able to conjecture what great mercy he wished to designate. For we read in holy Jeremiah: Who art thou, O Lord? Thou hast made heaven and earth by thy great power, and by thy outstretched arm. Great power, therefore, made heaven. Whose is this great power? The Father's, or the Son's? Certainly it is the great power of the Father; for he made heaven and earth through the Son, as you have it: In the beginning God made heaven and earth. But yet the Son too is great power.

For when you read that the Son is the power of the Father, as you have it, "Christ the wisdom and power of God," since surely the Son is the power of the Father, the Son is great power. How then is he who we confess to be the great power of God denied to be omnipotent? This great power, then, made heaven; because the Son too made heaven, as you have it: All things were made through him. Therefore if both the Father made it and the Son made it, surely the unity of the operation indicates a unity of the doers. The operation of the Father and the Son, then, does not differ. But if the operation is one, surely the power of the operation is one, and the majesty of what is made is one. This concerning the Father and the Son.

Section 2

Why then are we silent concerning the Spirit, especially since the divine Scripture does not allow us to be silent? For this passage gives a most opportune testimony for proving the unity of the Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son, so that we cannot dissociate his operation either from the work of the Father and the Son. For we read that it is the great power of the Father that he made heaven; that the Son too is great power, since he made heaven: and not only made it, but also established it: for By the word of the Lord the heavens were established. Therefore if both to have made and to have established the heaven belongs to great power, we cannot separate the Holy Spirit either from the majesty of great power; because it is written: And all their power by the spirit of his mouth. For when heaven and earth were made, the Spirit was borne over; concerning whom the prophet David says elsewhere: Send forth thy Spirit, and they shall be created.

Concerning whom he also said elsewhere: For I will behold thy heavens, the works of thy fingers. For God did not make heaven and earth with corporeal fingers; but by the grace of the sevenfold Spirit, namely by that finger of which you have in the Gospel: But if I cast out devils by the finger of God. For this finger he elsewhere called the Spirit, as you have it: But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God. If therefore the finger is the Spirit of God, since the arm of God is the Son, surely the Spirit, cooperating with the Father and the Son through the unity of operation, made heaven and earth. For this reason he called him a finger of the Son, that he might express the unity of the divinity as of one body. And so if great power founded heaven, surely great wisdom founded heaven; because it is written: Thou hast made all things in wisdom.

Section 3

We have learned, then, what great power is; let us now gather what great mercy is. If great power made the heavens, then great mercy must also be from heaven, and great justice must also be from heaven; for justice looked forth from heaven, and mercy came from heaven. Great mercy, then, was made, because the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us. Great power, then, made the heavens, great power bowed the heavens, as we read: And he bowed the heavens and came down. By this it is shown that the Son of God was never without his own divinity, not even when he dwelt among men; because although he took up what he was not, he did not cease to be what he was. And so when it is said, And he bowed the heavens, and came down, he does not seem so much to have descended from heaven, as to have descended with heaven itself.

For when the Father addressed the Son situated on earth, and Angels ministered, the Son of God does not seem so much to have changed his seat as to have transferred it. We have learned, then, that mercy is great.

Section 4

And so, if it is great mercy to have descended from heaven, we ought to distinguish and understand what the multitude of mercies is. For it follows: And according to the multitude of thy mercies, blot out my iniquity. For each verse does not signify the same thing; but the former refers to the Incarnation, while the latter that follows seems to be referred to the injuries which the Son of God took on in the flesh, since he fasted, since he hungered, since he wept, since he was scourged, since he was crucified, since he died, since he was buried. For these are marks of the flesh, not of the divinity. And it was necessary that a multitude of mercies should drive away a multitude of hardships, to be for our profit through the struggle of the Lord's passion.

Section 5

For he was not blotting out his own sins, because he had committed no sin; but because he was made sin, it was our sins that had to be blotted out, as David said: Blot out my iniquity. What does "blot out" mean? Let us look at this word; for it is not idle. Indeed, elsewhere too he says: I am he who blots out thy iniquities, and I will remember them no more. Certain wounds of sins are indeed deeply impressed on our conscience, and certain stripes on our minds and souls, which are covered over by the sores of our errors. Guilt, therefore, has its own characters and marks, by which it is betrayed: which we do not attribute by our own invention, but mark by prophetic authority. It is written, then; and see where it is written: On the tablet, he says, of thy heart. That is, the series of guilt is written there, where also the form of virtue is; not on tablets of stone, but on fleshly tablets of the heart.

But good things are not written with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God: whereas vicious things are written with an iron stylus and a diamond nail. Such, more or less, is the writing, as is the punishment of sin. The former is written with an iron stylus, the latter is restrained with an iron rod, as it is written: Thou shalt rule them with a rod of iron. Different is that upright rod, the rod of thy kingdom: this one restrains the guilty with punishment, that one governs the guiltless with rule. Guilt, then, is written: let us see where. Not outside, but within, in your heart and in your breast. For as the word is near, in your mouth and in your heart: so in the unfaithful, the figure of sin and the image of error is impressed in the very heart. Guilt, then, is within; virtue too is within.

And therefore the Lord says: I perceive that power has gone out from me: to show that good things proceed from within, and, on the contrary, that evil things arise along the way. For not what enters, he says, into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth. For from your heart proceed thoughts; and therefore beware lest evil thoughts proceed from your heart, which may afterward accuse and charge you. For God does not need testimonies or arguments to convict you: your own guilt accuses and betrays you of itself.

Section 6

Then David well says in this psalm: And my sin is ever before me. Woe is me, that I desire to hide, and cannot hide! For how shall I hide, who bear inscribed on my breast the marks of my own sins? On that day of judgment the breast of each one will be laid bare, his own conscience bearing witness to all, thoughts accusing one another, or even defending, on the day when the Lord will judge the hidden things of men. What shame there will be, when what we thought hidden begins to be betrayed to all; when the image of each one's sin begins to reveal itself, so that each is convicted by the record of his own crime! What shame, when you see that man exalted whom in this world you judged contemptible; that servant of yours, whom according to the cunning of this world you thought inept and unfit, you recognize honored by the riches of his simplicity? Therefore, while we live, let us flee to him who can blot out sin.

And do not fear what has been written with an iron stylus and a diamond nail; for he has broken the iron gates and the adamantine bars, and do not fear to confess your guilt.

Section 7

David confessed, he acknowledged his iniquity, he acknowledged his error; and therefore he says: For I acknowledge my iniquity. David acknowledges, and do you not acknowledge? David confesses, and do you deny? Paul cries that he is guilty, and do you assert that you are innocent? There is, then, no great occasion for blushing, when the fellowship of sin is shared by so many; provided, however, that we pursue the zeal of correcting ourselves. Nor again should you fear that the confession of guilt is held to punishment. For the good and merciful God is accustomed not only to forgive the guilty who confess, but also to bestow rewards on those who correct themselves; provided, however, that each one asks to be granted what he understands not to be hidden. Declare, then, your iniquities, that you may be justified. This is the voice of God who wishes to forgive: this is the voice of God who promises that he wants to blot out your sin.

Section 8

Against thee only have I sinned, David says, and have done evil before thee. That is, although men do not see, thou seest; although men cannot judge me, because they are sharers in sins; thou nonetheless art the judge of each, because thou art without fault. However much noxious thoughts lie hidden in the innermost heart, they are nonetheless before thee, who canst say: Why do you think evil in your hearts? Surely it is Christ who says this. He, then, who knows what is written in the heart, can blot out whatever is written in the heart. To him our David confesses that he sinned not only in himself, but also in the first man, when the divine commandments were violated.

Section 9

From this it may be observed, most beloved brethren, how all heresies, while they attack themselves, run back upon themselves. And so the Arians, while they separate the power of the Father and the Son, rush headlong into that furious outcome of argument, that their assertion comes to agree with the Manichaeans; for these say that the God of the Old Testament is one, and of the New another. Which profane assertion the holy Church condemns, which reads of one God; because there is one God the Father, from whom are all things, and we unto him: and one Lord Jesus, through whom are all things, and we through him. Surely the omnipotent power of both the Father and the Son is declared to be one; so that we neither separate the Father from the grace of the New Testament, nor again separate the Son from the founding of the world.

Section 10

Let us, then, finally consider whether the same God is the founder of both Testaments. Surely we all sinned in the first man, and through the succession of nature, the succession of guilt too has been transferred from one to all. Against whom, then, did I sin, against the Father, or against the Son? Surely against him who entrusted to me that in which, by not keeping it, I sinned. It was commanded to man that he might taste of all things that were in paradise, but not touch the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Adam, then, is in each one of us. For in him the human condition sinned, because through one man sin passed through into all. I see the sum entrusted to me; I see what debt of transgression I have contracted, while I taste forbidden and prohibited things. From this I owe the interest of the entrusted lot; because unblemished faith could not preserve the loan of the heavenly commandments.

Section 11

We have acknowledged the one to whom the debt is owed; let us also acknowledge the creditor. Indeed it is the right of the creditor to demand and to release; and therefore the same one releases who has the right of demanding. When therefore Christ said to me in the Gospel: Thy sins are forgiven thee; do I not understand him to be the same Lord of the debt whom I recognize as the judge of pardon? Or if the Father lent, and the Son released, not through unity, as we say, but, as the Arians assert, through a distance of power: then one God lent, another released? Whence they fall into a position from which they cannot escape the perfidy of the Manichæans. Then, in saying that there is one good God, let them observe into what snares of their madness they fall. If he who lent is good, how is he who released not good? Therefore the Arians share a part with those, into whose assertion they come.

Nor is it strange if one who has once begun to depart from the truth entangles himself in the toils of another's error.

Section 12

And therefore there is one judgment which destroys the contrivances of all heretics, that we should believe the Trinity to be of one power, majesty, and virtue; and therefore we should not separate the Father from what the Son has done, nor separate the Son from what the Father has commanded. For thus it will come about that we do not introduce one God of the Old Testament and another of the New; but through unity of power both the Son is understood in the Father, and the Father in the Son; and the Son lends in the Father, and the Father releases in the Son. For the Father also forgives sin: that the Son has forgiven we have already said.

Section 13

Receive that the Father also forgives. Forgive us, he says, our debts, as we also forgive our debtors. Certainly it is in our person that the Son says this to the Father. Nor does he say it as though he himself could not forgive; but he says it so that you may understand the unity of power.

Section 14

Finally, if you seek authority in the Son: Now, he says, you are clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. He forgives by word, he forgives by command: but he forgives with reason, saying: Go, and from now on see that you sin no more. You have authority, because he has forgiven past things: you have judgment, because he has foretold things to come.