In Librum Primum Regum Variarum Expositionum Libri Sex

It cannot be taken from the mind that it does not see something unclean in some way, but it is led into a marvelous use of purity, so that, seeing unclean things, it is stained by no blemish of pleasure. Whoever, therefore, thus presides over the flesh, whoever thus rules the mind, for this reason presides, for this reason rules, because Amalek was able to demolish all things bravely. But now he sets forth subsequently what are all his possessions, saying: (Ver. 3.) Do not spare them, and do not covet anything of his; but kill from man even to woman, and the little one, and the suckling, and the ox, and the ass, and the sheep, and the camel.

Who is this who spares Amalek, except one who either in thought, or in speech, or in the flesh retains something of wantonness? For many do not practice works of shamefulness, but do not restrain the tongue from shameful speech. Many avoid luxury through deed, but do not avoid it through thought. Some do nothing shameful, but what they flee in action they desire in heart. Therefore he spares Amalek who holds the allurements of wantonness either in speech, or through intention, or through thought. And so he says: Do not spare him, because from so very wicked a vice nothing ought to be kindled in the mind, nothing ought to be permitted to burn in deed. Let him say therefore: Do not spare him, so that all lustful motions, all obscene speeches may be utterly destroyed in the body. Let him say therefore: Do not covet anything of his, so that it may be utterly rooted out from thought. For what is lust but fire? And what are the virtues sprung from flesh and mind but flowers?

What again are foul thoughts but stubble? And who does not know that fire in stubble is carelessly extinguished, and from a small spark that remains all the stubble is set ablaze? Therefore, whoever does not wish the flowers of the virtues on the mountain to be burned up must extinguish the fire of lust in such a way that it can never blaze up again through a slender spark. Let him also take away the stalks of fleshly thoughts, lest, while that natural heat which cannot be extinguished is kindled, the men of the virtues, who cannot be kindled by themselves, be burned up, as it were, through the stubble mixed in.

What then does it mean: Do not spare him, and you shall not desire anything of his, except that all luxury in the flesh must be perfectly subdued and radically uprooted from the mind? It can also be understood thus: Do not spare him, and you shall not desire anything from him, because both men and women, little children and infants are commanded to be killed. For women could be desired, and little children and infants could provoke pity. Therefore who are the men to be killed, who the women, who the little children, who the oxen, who the sheep, who the camels, who the asses, must be carefully considered. For who are the Amalekite men but the base impulses of shamefulness? For they are men because they violently suggest and pour the seeds of wickedness into corrupted minds. The women are the desires of the mind, which are subjected to the aforesaid impulses for impious offspring. But who are the little children and infants except those who are begotten from the union of the Amalekite men and women?

For if the motion of an evil suggestion is received in the mind as an adulterer, concupiscence is impregnated as a harlot. Therefore that same concupiscence, if it is allowed to pour forth an abominable offspring, generates the motions of lusts not only in the mind but even in the flesh. And when these are born they are little ones, because as yet they do not bring violence upon the flesh by stirring it. But they are infants at the breast when they are nourished by slight and negligent thought. For he who already with free thought refreshes shameful motions in the flesh does not give milk to little ones but food to adults. The milk, then, of the little ones of the Amalekites is the slight thought of impurity, because the shameful motion is not fed through thought, and so, as if milk were denied them, the little ones are killed. That milk the harlot mother truly offers, because when the ardor of concupiscence comes first upon the mind, it is stirred as if from the worst abundance of the heart, so that worse offspring of motions may be nourished in the flesh. But what is understood in the ox but a deceitful counsel, which by the example of the ancients suggests the pleasure of the flesh—of those who, amid the works of the flesh, pleased almighty God? For it is seen as if to cut the earth with the plowshare of discretion, but if it is received by tasting, they entangle the necks of the wretched mind in the yoke of shame, which yoke it bears through pretense.

By the name "sheep," however, the life of the innocent is signified. Hence the elect are called sheep by the voice of our Redeemer, when he says: "My sheep hear my voice" (John 10:27). What, then, is the sheep of Amalek, if not the simulation of innocence? For certain people, when they consider both the very form of the human body and the properties of either sex, and the pleasure implanted in the members, think that they can freely use this as a natural good. So, then, it is as if there is a sheep of the Amalekite, when that which is clearly proven not to be a true good is suggested to the continent as if it were a good. What also is signified in the camel? But it chews the cud and does not at all divide the hoof. What, then, is signified in the camel, if not a certain thought of lust, which as it were begins from reason, but is not brought to its end through discretion? For while it thinks, the camel as it were chews the cud within, but while what it thinks is not ordered through the truth, its hoof is not seen to be divided. For some who have professed continence, when they are overcome by the concupiscence of the flesh, trust that they can be saved in conjugal life. And certain ones, when they hear the apostle's permission: "Let each one have his own wife, and each woman her own husband" (1 Cor 7:2), assert that all are included in this precept without discretion of persons, and that men of sacred orders can use the conjugal union. For a sense of this kind is the camel of the Amalekite, because it as it were begins from reason, but drags down to an irrational life. What, then, is the ass understood to be, if not the open wickedness of fornication?

For the devil drives some into the open chaos of fornication, while he mocks others through deceits. The donkey, too, is accustomed to carry others' burdens. But when the teacher of the Gentiles taught that a man does not have power over his own body, but the woman does, and likewise that the woman does not have power over her own body, but the man does (Ibid., 4), what else did he command than that they carry others' burdens? By the name "donkey," then, the strength of the conjugal union is signified, because elect spouses bravely carry each other's burdens, lest through the weakness of the flesh they fall headlong into the abyss of fornication. The donkey, therefore, is to be killed, but by an Amalekite, because the conjugal union is to be strengthened in the honesty of the marriage bed, but is to be put to death in its shamefulness. Spouses ought indeed to render the debt to one another, but they ought not to come together shamefully. The donkey of Amalek, therefore, is killed when in good spouses the charity of an honest union is held fast, but all obscenity is avoided in base conjunction. All of Amalek, then, is commanded to be destroyed, because those who resolve to live chastely ought not to retain anything within themselves from the enticement of the flesh. They ought indeed to be in the flesh, so that they may do good through the flesh, but they ought so to depart from the pleasure of the flesh through the loftiness of the mind that they do not tolerate the insults of the flesh. Such, indeed, he wished them to be to whom the Apostle was speaking when he said: "But you are not in the flesh, but in the spirit" (Rom. 8:9).

But let us consider by what helpers he who is ordered to destroy Amalek may suffice for these things. For it follows: (Verse 4.) Saul commanded the people, and reviewed them like lambs.

By the name of lambs, men of great prudence are customarily designated. Whence it is said through John: I saw upon mount Sion the Lamb standing, and with him a hundred forty-four thousand having his name, and the name of his Father written on their foreheads (Apoc. 14:1). For those who had taken the name of the Lamb were called lambs. Expounding on these very ones, he says: These are they who were not defiled with women, for they are virgins. What is it, then, that when Amalek is ordered to be destroyed, the king's soldiers are reviewed like lambs, except that when we wish to destroy the spirit of fornication by preaching, we ought to bring forward the examples of the perfect? For as many as we show forth, distinguished by the glory of chastity, for the conversion of worldly people, we carry them as so many soldiers, as it were lambs reviewed, to the wars against Amalek. But by the name of these reviewed ones, the very ministers of divine preaching can be understood. They go, therefore, as lambs, because through the glory of perfect chastity they are now made like those virgins who rejoice with Christ in the kingdom.

By these words it is plainly shown that those who take up the ministry of preaching ought to be adorned with the surpassing splendor of chastity, because if they flow away through incontinence, they can by no means make others continent, and they are unable to provoke to the good of such great light those who do not have its rays in the splendor of their own conduct. Well, then, is it said: He reviewed them like lambs, because those who ought to put to flight the spirit of fornication through the power of the order they have received must be exceedingly chaste. Hence in the Gospel the Lord says to them: Let your loins be girded, and lamps burning in your hands (Luke 12:36), so that subjects may hear the word of preaching, and may be drawn to the good of chastity, which they hear, by the examples of a most radiant conduct. Hence they are well designated by a perfect number, when it is added: (Verse 3.) Two hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand men of Judah.

By the name "foot-soldiers" the elect are figured, not when they preach high things, but when through good examples they show others the straightness of the heavenly journey. Foot-soldiers indeed run with their steps, where they wish to bring forth arms. But what are examples of chastity, if not the footprints of heavenly soldiers impressed upon the earth? For in order that they may bear the vices of lusts in the weak, they hasten to the darkness of their hearts with the light of good examples, and as it were arriving by step, they slay the enemies, who, after they are known through works, draw the hearts of sinners to the good of chastity. When therefore through examples of chastity they destroy the darkness of impurities in the hearts of sinners, they are rightly named foot-soldiers. And because they are splendid not only under the pretext of bodily cleanliness, but also with the light of the heart, they are said to be two hundred thousand. For in the hundred and the thousand, the whole sum of the decalogue is concluded. Perfect men therefore are contained in the two hundred thousand, because through divine grace they have arrived at the highest citadel of chastity both by continence of the body and by integrity of mind. For they have perfection of intention both in body and in mind. Or because they serve God through chastity neither remissly nor negligently, they have the hundred of work, and because they do not cease to serve him, they have the thousand of multiplication. But they are strong and assiduous for continence of the body, perfect and instant for circumspection of the heart by the perfection of virtue.

Directing even the widow to be such, the Apostle says: That she may be holy in body and spirit (1 Cor. 7:34). She is indeed holy in body and spirit if, by the perfection of chastity with which she shines in the body, she shines also in the mind. But if widows are such, what are the virgins commanded to be? For of those many, under the description of one, it is said: The queen stood at your right hand in gilded clothing (Ps. 45:9). In the same psalm the same queen is also praised, when it is said: All the glory of the king's daughter is within, surrounded with golden fringes, adorned with varied colors. For what is gilded clothing but the beauty and honor of the virginal body? It is called clothing because it shines outwardly in the body, and golden because it excels in dignity. But every kind of metal is inferior to gold. So indeed no other modesty can be compared to virginal beauty. What then is meant by: All the glory of the king's daughter is within, if the glory of the golden clothing is declared to be outward? For if there is any great glory of the golden clothing outwardly, not all glory can be seen to be within. What then is meant by all glory being said to be within, except that even that glory which is outward is known to be within along with countless other things? For virginity is not golden if it is outward and not within.

Therefore, because it is both within and without—because the same glory shines in the body and gleams in the mind—it can fittingly be understood that all the glory of the king's daughter is within. All her glory is within, because what is alone without is not alone within. For since there are many brilliancies of virtues in the mind of the virgin, her virginal splendor is so asserted that all her glory is declared to be within. This is surely what follows: She is surrounded with variety in golden fringes. For the golden fringes are the brilliancies of the mind that never fail. Fringes are indeed the ends of a garment. They are praised in the beauty of the bride of Christ for this reason: that there is no glory of virtues if it ceases to shine before the completion of life. Therefore she is called queen in love, and virginity is proclaimed in her golden garment. But all her glory is asserted to be within, and in the golden fringes, and surrounded with variety, so that integrity joined to innumerable virtues may be understood to be carried through to the end. Rightly, then, against Amalek two hundred thousand foot soldiers are counted, because those are fit to wage war against unclean spirits through examples of chastity who have learned to hold it both in the light of action and in the splendor of circumspection.

ii. Again, because they are learned and perfect in the word of God, ten thousand men of Judah are shown by the number. For they are men in courage, but Judah in preaching. For Judah is interpreted as "confessing." But the number ten is designated by the denarius, because they have attained the perfection of doctrine through the grace of the Holy Spirit. Hence also to Moses are given the ten precepts of the law, which were written by the finger of God (Exod. 31). For what is the finger of God but the Holy Spirit? When he wrote the law, he surely brought it forth in ten precepts, because even if in it he uttered something outwardly in a carnal way, inwardly he signified this perfection of spiritual understanding. Therefore ten thousand men of Judah are to be brought forth against Amalek, so that the spirit of fornication may be overcome by fitting strength. For it licks by suggestion, because it advises light and flattering things, but the things it advises by licking it shows through the phantasies of thoughts. Therefore, so that the obscene mind may not see what has been shown to it by demons, the examples of the elect are to be revealed. And so that the unclean spirit cannot lick it with shameful suggestions, the tongue of preachers ought to be touched by the praise of chastity. Let the preacher lick this, so that the malignant spirit can by no means lick it. And let him delight it with words, lest the devil, through the delights of suggestions, tear apart one to whom heavenly things are lacking. Against the twofold war of the heart, therefore, because a twofold good of help is necessary, it is well said that both the foot soldiers and the men of Judah are prepared against Amalek.

But if someone wishes to understand some as foot-soldiers and others as men of Judah, the sense of open truth is clear, because the highest teachers have those who do not know how to teach by preaching, yet are able to profit by work. But now, having been enrolled for such great battles, let us hear by what skill those who follow fight. It follows: (Verse 5.) And when Saul had come to the city of Amalek, he set ambushes by the torrent.

What is this torrent, if not that of which it is said through the Psalmist: He drank from the torrent in the way (Psalm 109:7)? For the torrent designates the course of our mortality. Saul, therefore, sets ambushes by the torrent when the preacher of the Church inserts the consideration of our mortality into eternal rewards. For in order to capture slippery souls, as it were by deceit, he begins at one moment to speak of heavenly things, but suddenly turns to expounding the bitterness of eternal punishments, so that minds secure in the delight of the flesh may be terrified. For as it were by deceit he leads them out, by ambush he strikes them, while by speaking pleasant things he draws them to listen, and inserts the sorrows of death, so that the slippery may hear what they should dread. Saul, therefore, comes to the city of Amalek when the teacher draws hearts fortified by unlawful love to the sweetness of eternal joy. But he hides ambushes for them in the torrent, because he introduces the consideration of death, so that the sinner may see the soldier, as it were bursting forth from ambush, against himself, and while he considers that he will die swiftly, he may fear to stretch out the delay of sin any longer.

It follows: (Verse 6.) Saul said to the Kenite: Depart from Amalek, lest perhaps I involve you with him. For you showed mercy with all the children of Israel, when they came up from Egypt.

13. Who is the Kenite, who is found dwelling with Amalek, and who is also compelled to depart, lest he be involved together with him? But perhaps this is the one of whom the Apostle says: Let the husband render the debt to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband (1 Cor. 7:3). The name also suits him, because Kenite means "possessing." These, indeed, being married, because they are bound by marriage, are not compelled to leave all things. What is it, then, that is said to the Kenite: Depart from Amalek, except that by these words every shamefulness of obscenity in married persons is condemned? They are indeed joined with Amalek who are joined in the manner of a harlot. The teacher commands these to depart from Amalek when he strives to recall them to conjugal honesty. As if he should say: If you cannot contain yourselves from one another, let marriage be honorable for you, and the bed undefiled. To depart from Amalek, therefore, is for spouses to use themselves, not for the turpitude of harlot's obscenity, but for the temperance of chastity and for the fruit of offspring. Whence also the same excellent teacher says of the widow who, according to his counsel, cannot so remain: But if she does not contain herself, let her marry, only in the Lord (1 Cor. 7:39). Not in Amalek, but in the Lord; so that she who cannot abstain from marriage may avoid obscene gestures within the covenant of marriage.

To him it is also threatened, saying: Lest I involve you with him. To be involved with sinners is to be condemned to eternal punishment. Hence also the Lord says in the Gospel concerning the wicked servant: Bind his feet and hands, and cast him into the outer darkness (Matt. 22:13). Now, therefore, preachers do not involve reprobate hearers, because even if they despise the word, they can still return to repentance while they live, when they wish. Earnestly, then, conjugal honesty must be enjoined upon spouses, because with a strong penalty it is said: Depart, return without injury. Depart from Amalek, lest I involve you with him. Without injury, indeed, one departs now, but not then, because those who are made like to the shameful in all things will not be free from their injury. He is also said to have shown mercy with the children of Israel who came up from Egypt, because the weak children of holy Church, while they cannot keep the good of perpetual continence, are received by the mercy of marriage. They come up from Egypt, indeed, because they abandon the darkness of luxury and fornication. And they receive mercy from the Kenite, because they obtain the indulgence of marriage. Hence also the teacher of the Gentiles says: This I say by way of indulgence, not by way of command (1 Cor. 7:6). And because holy Church persuades the elect who are subject to her of the good things she sets forth by speaking, it follows: (Verse 6.) The Kenite departed from the midst of Amalek.

From the midst of Amalek the spouse departs, but from a part she cannot, because even if she avoids the gestures of shamefulness, she cannot avoid the affection of pleasure. For spouses can temper the fire by honesty. From the midst, therefore, they go out from Amalek, because even if they cannot be entirely free of carnal desires, they nevertheless moderate the very rule of the flesh under the precept of honesty by the bond of chastity. It follows: (Verse 7.) And Saul struck Amalek from Havilah until he came to Shur, which is over against Egypt.

Havilah is interpreted as "bringing forth," Shur as "distress," Egypt as "darkness." But concupiscence brings forth sin. Deservedly, therefore, concupiscence is designated by the name of "bringing forth." The prophet also, fearing to fall into the distresses of an impenitent heart, implores, saying: Let not the deep swallow me up, neither let the pit shut her mouth upon me (Ps. 68:16). The teacher, therefore, strikes Amalek from Havilah all the way to Shur, when in the hearts of his hearers he suppresses the vices of conceived delight, and the faith of deliberation. He strikes also at Shur, when he seems to draw to the love of chastity those minds which had resolved to end their life in the stench of luxury. For they are in distress who are already bound, caught in the snare of evil habit. And it must be noted that Shur is shown to be over against Egypt, because he who chooses to end his life in luxury is now shut up in inner darkness, by which he is led to outer darkness.

But let this book also be closed, so that through silence we may come to the consideration of what follows.

CHAPTER II.

i. King Saul, who had good beginnings, but by no means persevered in the good things he had begun, is shown through the text of sacred History, so that in him we may see what is to be imitated and what avoided. Thus, surely, we also pluck poorly cultivated crops, which rise up for harvest mixed with thorns. He indeed knows well how to gather them, who takes care so to pluck the ears of grain as to strive to avoid the thorns. Thus, when the care of the garden is neglected, along with the vegetable that restores, the vetch that pricks is born. For the Lord was, as it were, instructing his disciples to enter poorly cultivated fields cautiously, when he said: The scribes and Pharisees have sat upon the chair of Moses. Whatever they say to you, do; but what they do, do not do (Matt. 23:2). As if he were saying: Because the deeds and words of the reprobate are mixed together, they are to be used in such a way that from them is taken what gives life, and what kills is avoided. Hence again, foretelling, he says: They will come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves (Matt. 7:15). Up to this point, therefore, we willingly attend to King Saul vigorously carrying out the care of the kingdom; now let us carefully see in him, already a despiser of the Lord's command, what must be avoided and cast away. For it follows: (Vers. 8, 9.) He seized Agag the king of Amalek alive, but all the common people he killed with the edge of the sword.

And Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the flocks of sheep and of the herds, and the garments, and the rams, and all things that were beautiful, and they would not destroy them. But whatever was vile and reprobate, this they demolished.

i. The word of the Lord was: Now go, and strike Amalek, and destroy all of it. Do not spare him, and do not covet anything from them. Openly, therefore, he proved a transgressor through disobedience, because through pride he refused to fulfill the command of the Lord. The Lord indeed commanded the prophet, saying: Do not spare him, and do not covet anything from his possessions. But here he is shown both to have spared and to have coveted all his choice things: so that, while the measure of the transgression is shown, the guilt of disobedience may be shown to be how detestable it is.

But if we describe the wars of the flesh, we find that the falls of kings are great. Whence also the Lord says in the Gospel: If the salt has lost its savor, with what shall it be salted? (Matt. 5:13). But the kings of the Church are its preachers, as has already been shown above. Who, then, is Agag, king of Amalek, but the carnal sense? For since from the soul we have rationality and sensuality, rationality is ascribed to the mind, sensuality to the flesh; and through the former we are in accord with the angels, through the latter with brute animals. In the former, the more highly we are raised up, the closer we approach to the citizens on high. But through the latter, the more we slip away into the blandishments of the flesh, the more carnal, so to speak, we are found to be.

Hence also, when the daughters of men had been seen and desired, and the pleasures of lust had already been fulfilled, concerning those who by the merit of purity were called sons of God, the Lord threatens in Genesis, saying: My spirit shall not remain in man forever, because he is flesh (Gen. 6:3). For man becomes flesh when reason is subjected to the senses of the flesh. Therefore the king of Amalek is the power of carnal sense, which commands shameful motions, so as to drag captive reason toward the allurements of obscenity. And the name of the Amalekite king fits carnal sense well. For Agag is interpreted as "meditating" or "speaking." For to meditate is for him to gather the phantasms of lasciviousness by inward meditation. And to speak is for him to arouse the flesh to lust by shameful motions. For he has, as it were, a great cry of speech, because by striking the flesh he stirs it more ardently. For by meditating he gathers what he may set forth by speaking: because each one subject to carnal sense, the more freely he beholds within the images of lasciviousness, the stronger motions of shamefulness he feels without. He meditates, then, through an inward vision of shamefulness, but he speaks through the outward motion of delight. Therefore the king of Amalek is said to be "speaking" and "meditating," because he can arouse the slipping blandishments of the flesh in those whom he mocks through shameful thoughts, and whom he instructs through the experience of alluring motion.

But it must be noted that the more freely he meditates, the more freely he speaks; for he stirs the flesh the more strongly, the more he holds within himself, through thought, the causes of his own stirring. For it is like fire, which the more attentively it is blown upon, the more it is kindled; because if the breath of an unclean thought is absent, the heat of lustful stirring cannot be present. Therefore the king of Israel fights against the king of Amalek when the teacher of the Church disputes against fornication. He takes him conquered when he receives sinners converted to pardon, not only penitent but also confessing. As if, then, he already holds the king of Amalek bound, who sees the carnal sense, in converted sinners, through the love of chastity, already made subject to reason. But what is it that the bound man lives, except that there are some who are not moved by their own passions, but, having heard the obscenities of others, are moved? In fighting they are strong, but as victors they fall. For he who kept the conquered king alive, it is clear that in the triumph of that same war the person of the king he had captured pleased him.

But what else do those do who receive the confession of sins from others? For while they think on the things which those confessing have done, they are inflamed toward the crimes which they hear; for often, when they hear by what allurements others had overwhelmed themselves, they themselves begin to love the very things which those dying in them confess by their exhortation. So now Agag has been conquered and captured in his own city, but he is preserved by the victor, when what is detested by subjects is loved by prelates; because carnal sense begins to flourish in those in whom the vigor of iniquitous domination has perished. And because while the shepherds run to the precipice, the subjects accompany them, the king is said to have captured Agag alive, but the same king, and the people with that same king, are recorded to have spared even the choicest of Amalek. For to spare is the mark of an affected mind, out of love for him whom it spares. This certainly accords with the vice of lust: because as soon as it begins to please, it draws the mind into love of itself. For its power is also vehement, and it does not know how to have a fixed state: because it swiftly accomplishes its end, if the mind, waking quickly, does not expel it from itself. For while it invades the mind, it scatters itself through countless thoughts of shameful deeds. Hence it is well recorded that both Saul and the people spared the choicest flocks and herds.

Indeed, the thoughts of lusts are called flocks and herds, because they are both innumerable and are fed in the reprobate heart from the contemplation of uncleanness. They are even called "best," not by the test of goodness, but by the desire of the one choosing. For in the reprobate heart, because nothing is loved more dearly, those flocks are called "best" to which nothing else is compared. But they are called "best" on account of the blindness of the heart, and "herds" on account of the guilt of transgression. For to reprobate minds it is no great thing to think unclean things; but before God it is no small thing to store up unclean things in the temple of God, that is, in the regenerated spirit. He therefore spares not only the sheep but also the herds, because he who through the love of lust looks upon the uncleannesses of impurity as though they were small faults, spares them as it were in the manner of bread, but does not find the deserved punishments to be small. Moreover, by the name of sheep the lighter thoughts of luxury can be understood, but by "herds" the stronger and more troublesome ones. These indeed the king and the people spare, when the reprobate teacher and his subjects are subjected to the vexations of unclean thought, both light and strong. But what is it to spare the garments, if not for the already condemned mind to deliberate on unclean things? For if the golden garment is the glory of the virgin bride, what are the garments of Amalek but the foul defilements of luxury? But they are called garments because by their covering both the soul and the body are infected. For since the perpetration of luxury defiles both soul and body, they are named not a garment but garments.

But, as I said, to deliberate about sparing is to love through an unclean affection of the mind. The wretched soul, thus captured and thus ensnared, because by wondrous impulses it is driven to carry out deliberate wickedness, is rightly recorded to have spared the rams after the sheep, the herds, and the garments. For it is as if the horns of the rams are pleasing to itself for the gentle blows of lusts, when one strives to retain in himself that one thing by which he may be pierced through to the death of uncleanness. Therefore he spares the rams, who gladly receives the blows of headlong ruin. He is indeed pricked, so that he may serve the desires of his flesh; but what pricks him strongly delights him lightly. Again, because lust entices the mind through innumerable modes of obscenity, they are recorded to have spared not only the things named but all that were beautiful. All the things that the unclean soul is seen gladly to fashion for itself from the pleasure of luxury are called the beautiful things of Amalek. For it could by no means desire these, unless the appearance of them pleased it vehemently.

But because the fall of the victors is asserted, it is said: And they were unwilling to destroy them. As if he were saying: They could have destroyed them, if they had been willing. For nothing is easier than for lust to be conquered, if every unclean thought is avoided. Therefore it can be destroyed all the more easily, the more each person is able to think of other things than the delights of the flesh. For since we cannot imagine two things at once, while we are thinking of anything else whatsoever, we cannot think unclean things. Swift, then, and easy is the victory over lust: circumspection of thought—if, as often as carnal things meet us, we run back to something that is not a flattery of lust. I would readily say this to those standing firm, but not readily to the fallen, because one who by the perpetration of sin is made the senses of an unclean spirit can neither freely avoid the thoughts of the flesh nor quickly run back to other things. Therefore it is said of the victors: They were unwilling to destroy them—those who were able, because before the fall sins are easily avoided by the free; but if they are unwilling to avoid them when they can, afterward they cannot, even if they wish, because they cannot perfectly will. To such, indeed, the Truth says through itself: If the Son has set you free, you will truly be free (John 8:36). As if he were saying: Because you have ceased of your own will to be free, you no longer have in yourselves the power of acquiring liberty. But what is it that is said: But whatever was vile and reprobate, this they demolished, except that some, through the use of greater delights, come to loathe lesser ones?

Indeed, what is rejected and worthless in their eyes is what they despise by choosing things that please them more. Because they seek out more delicate sins, they reject certain ones; and because they approve more precious sins, they regard the lesser ones as worthless. Well, then, is it said: Whatever was worthless and rejected, this they destroyed. Because they choose the more delicate sins, and those that please less they reject as unfit and despise as worthless.

But all these things, understood morally, are the struggles and victories of lusts; yet according to the historical sense, they designate the swelling pride of the arrogant and disobedient. For the command had been given by the Lord to Saul, that he should so destroy Amalek as to spare none of them, and covet nothing. Therefore, since he is asserted to have spared both the king of Amalek and the best of each thing, he is openly shown to be proud and disobedient. But perhaps he despised the command because he heard it from the prophet, not from the Lord. Yet certainly he ought so to hear the prophet as to attend to the authority that he premised. For the prophet, about to command that he strike down the king of Amalek, premised, saying: Thus says the Lord: so that the command which he had heard through a man, he might not dare to despise as if it were a man's. And again, lest the king, elated, should despise his ministry, he likewise premised, saying: The Lord sent me to anoint you as king. As if he were saying: Through him the Lord commands you in the royal ministry, through whom he raised you to royal dignity. Therefore, by how much more clearly he recognized that this man was sent by God, by so much more humbly ought he to obey.

But when he despised the prophet who was sent, he equally despised the Lord who sent him. Hence it is added: (Verses 10, 11.) The word of the Lord came to Samuel, saying: It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king; because he hath forsaken me, and hath not fulfilled my words in deed.

He believed that he did not hear the words of the prophet, but the Lord complains that he was forsaken, while he shows that his words were not fulfilled in deed. Now the Lord speaks to the Church, saying: He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me (Luke 10:16). Those, therefore, who through disobedience depart from the word of the preachers forsake the Lord: because they depart from those through whose ministry the divine will is made present. Then they do not fulfill the words of the Lord in deed: because outwardly men speak, but inwardly God speaks in men. Therefore it is not they who speak, but the Holy Spirit (Matthew 10:20). In the preachers, then, the outward vileness of the flesh is not to be despised, whose mountains the sublimity of the Godhead so worthily inhabits. What is it, then, that the Lord is said to repent, when he is not believed to be changed in his affections? But because the highest immutability speaks to mutable things, after the manner of those to whom it speaks, while it is said to repent, the rashness of the proud is shown to be displeasing to him. For we are accustomed to repent when we attribute evils to those to whom we remember that we have bestowed honors or gifts.

Therefore, because almighty God, after our manner of speaking, complains of the lowliness of the proud king, he is said to have repented that he had conferred royal dignity upon him. This is certainly said of the proud to the increase of their great condemnation: because what they are, they are no longer for merit but for punishment, since they are not according to the will of God. Therefore God's repenting is his not having the will in the reprobate, when he calls to mind the honors bestowed by himself, but recognizes that those to whom he gave good things use the good things he gave badly. This repentance of his God indeed intimates to the Jews through the prophet Malachi in other words, saying: There is no will in you, and I will not accept a sacrifice from your hand (Mal. 1:10). Therefore we perceive how much the guilt of disobedience is to be avoided, if we attend to how strictly it is struck down by these words of the Lord.

But we have described in the war against Amalek the battle of fornication, which is commanded to be utterly blotted out for us by the sacred utterances. Deservedly, therefore, what the Lord complains of, saying, It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: because he hath forsaken me, and hath not fulfilled my words in deed, can be understood of teachers who have fallen in the war of the flesh. For his word is the precept given to preachers: Let your loins be girded, and lamps burning in your hands (Luke 12:35). Therefore he who has the word in preaching, and does not have it in the girding of chastity, is shown by speaking to be God's, but by not doing, is proved to forsake God.

Outwardly he carries out divine commands, but inwardly he is shown not to fulfill the words of the Lord in deed, while he is dissolved in the pleasures of the flesh. For he has forsaken the Lord by proposing evil; he does not fulfill his words by presuming what is forbidden. Well, then, is it said: It repenteth me that I have set up Saul as king—as if he were saying: Him whom I willed to be over others, I now will not; because him whom I set up as humble, I now see as proud and lifted up in transgression. This is certainly not said of any lapsed persons whatsoever, but of those whose fall is made evident, and whose repentance is by no means foreseen. For concerning the fall of the just it is written: Seven times a day the just man falls, and rises again (Prov. 24:10). Their falls are, to be sure, in a certain manner their standing: because they are sometimes permitted to fall, so that they may always be able to stand more strongly. They are permitted to rush into evils, lest they lose the highest goods of the virtues through elation. These, indeed, even if at times they do not fulfill the words of the Lord, do not depart from the Lord: because they are left for a time, so that they may be held eternally; and they are foolish for a little while, but after a little while they come to their senses. Since, therefore, Saul is reproved not only for not having fulfilled the works of the Lord, but for having forsaken the Lord himself, whom does he signify better than the lapsed and impenitent? Concerning these, indeed, it is said through the prophet: They have struck a covenant with death and with hell (Isa. 28:15). To strike a covenant with death is indeed to rush boldly into evils, and to promise oneself that they are always to be done.

For they do evil without ceasing, but by loving what they do, they promise, as it were, never to withdraw from friendship with death. For these, the more insensible they become in the covenant of death, the more sharply are the bowels of mother Church shaken with pity. Hence it is well added:

(1 Sam. 15:11) And Samuel was grieved, and he cried to the Lord all night.

Samuel is indeed grieved, because the chief preacher is afflicted over the perdition of a subject. And he cries to the Lord all night, because for the restoration of the fallen he beseeches divine mercy with devoted prayers. For to cry out belongs to the teacher: to seek the mercy of almighty God with great desires on behalf of the sins of subjects. He cries all night when through affection he takes upon himself the whole darkness of that sin, and for it, as for his own crime, makes satisfaction to God in repentance. Therefore to cry out all night belongs to the preacher: to take up the whole cause of the subject, and to strive to destroy all the darkness of his sin by the affection of devoted compunction. But what is it that he is said to have cried out, and the Lord did not answer, except that the darkness of the impenitent heart which I have mentioned is signified in that guilt of Saul for which he cries out? The Lord would indeed answer, if he heard the voice of the one crying out. It follows: (v. 12) And when Samuel had risen in the night to go to Saul in the morning, it was reported to Samuel that Saul had come to Carmel, and had set up for himself a triumphal arch.

What is the life of a sinner but night? And what is the light of the just but day? Whence also it is said through Paul to converted sinners: You were once darkness, but now light in the Lord (Eph. 5:8). But for the preacher to rise from the night is to lift up the affection of his mind from the taking on of another's guilt. For the teacher lies as it were in the night when he mourns the darkness of another's sin, because he is brought down from the high security of his own innocence, so that the fog of another's sins may be destroyed in the depth of his consideration. From the night, therefore, he rises when he lifts himself up from affliction; and he disposes himself to come to the guilty man in the morning, because secretly through compassion he laments, and openly through rebuke he strikes with zeal. By night, too, the teacher mourns, but in the morning he comes to reprove, because inwardly he loves the subject who sins, but openly he is in no way ashamed to reprove the one who errs. For he dawns as it were into morning when the teacher begins to lay bare the crime that lies hidden. What then is it that he is said to have come to Carmel and to have raised up a triumphal arch for himself, he to whom he came, except that the advance of the wicked man is plainly proclaimed? After the guilt of disobedience, indeed, to raise up a triumphal arch, or a structure, is to do evil things and to be proud over the perpetration of those same evils. For they set up triumphal standards as it were, when with a certain display they put forth those things in which they think themselves to excel others. Which certainly befits teachers as arrogant as they are slippery.

Those men, indeed, when they say great things, raise themselves up to a lofty estimate of themselves; and such as they see themselves to be within, they make known outwardly through boasting and display. And when they draw that very thing—that through them others make progress—to the favor of their own praise, what else do they seem to do but display a lofty sign of victory with a distinguished title? Some, however, both live shamefully and speak most honorably; they consider the honorableness of their words, yet do not reckon the shamefulness of their own life. Since, therefore, they desire to appear not by the substance of their deeds but by the splendor of their words, they are undoubtedly constructing a triumphal arch on which they exalt themselves as if victors. And because by the word of shameful men many other shameful men recover their senses, after Amalek has been fought, to come to Carmel is to erect a triumphal arch, to glory vainly before the simple concerning the lust extinguished in their subjects. For Carmel is interpreted as soft or tender. For who is understood under the name of this tender one but those who are untrained in holy conduct? Who also are called soft but those who are not yet solidified in the good they have begun, through the practice of virtue? On Carmel, therefore, they erect a sign of victory, because they show themselves to the untrained and weak, lest they be found out by the skilled and strong, such as they are in truth.

For these men seek the splendor of victory not in words but in deeds, because they judge trees not by the beauty of their leaves but test them by the taste of their fruit. Hence the Lord also, when teaching, says: By their fruits you will know them (Matt. 7:20). Therefore, because they desire to be praised vainly, because they flee the judgments of the most approved men, and lie to the simple and weak that they are something other than they are, Saul is said to have come to Carmel and to have set up for himself a triumphal arch. But what is it that he passes over to Gilgal, except that in the manner by which he shows himself to the simple and religious, he desires to become known among the religious and learned? For Gilgal, as I have already said many times, is named "wheel." But certain men within the holy Church are both learned in sacred Scripture and are not religious, because they do not have the virtue of Scripture, namely charity. When these men, speaking, hear eloquent and carnal men, they admire the words that they know. But they cannot examine their hidden things, which they do not know. Well, therefore, is Saul said to pass over to Gilgal, because those who seek favor from eloquent speech find what they desire not among the learned and religious, but among the simple and rude, or among the irreligious wise. But the greatest men, when the reprobate teach good things, fear more for the elect who are subject to them: lest those whom they edify with the tongue they pervert with the hand, that is, by their action. Therefore, because slippery teachers are not to be long tolerated in the ministry of preaching, there is aptly added: (Verse

12.) Therefore Samuel came to Saul, and Saul was offering a holocaust to the Lord, the firstfruits of the spoils which he had brought from Amalek.

For he came to Saul to bring down the proud man, whom He had raised up humble to the height of kingship. He found him such as he was, not such as he had shown himself to be by the heavenly signs. What is it, then, that he offers to the Lord a holocaust, the firstfruits of Amalek, except that some both live wickedly and think they please God through the advancement of others? And because they believe they please God not a little by what they offer, they are said to offer not a sacrifice or a victim, but a holocaust. But the firstfruits of the spoils are spoken of, so that in Samuel the vigilant zeal of the supreme and chosen high priest may be designated, by whom the beginnings of evils are swiftly crushed. As if he were saying: He runs to meet him most swiftly, and in his absence he could not have the beginning of holocausts freely. The firstfruits of the spoils can be understood as whatever is chosen from the spoils. These the slippery offer with open mouth, but struck by hidden blindness, when they believe they please God by that which they destroy in their hearers but allow to live in themselves. For as if reproving more openly the one offering indiscriminately, he might say: He was offering alive that which he would better offer slain. For if, according to the words of the Lord, he had destroyed every spoil in Amalek, he would have offered a holocaust altogether acceptable to almighty God.

Thus, undoubtedly, if the slippery teacher, if he rejected in will all the enticements of the flesh which he condemns in speech, he would burn a holocaust which could not be rejected. What is it, then, that is said—that he was offering the firstfruits of the spoils which he had brought from Amalek—except that the blind darkness of the heart is condemned, because it reckons concerning itself in such a way about what profits others that it neglects to see what harms itself? As if he were saying: As a victor he was rejoicing over that, as a victor in others, because he was bearing in himself a man even unconquered. And because they are often so madly insane that they even attempt to offer a pretext of virtue to the elect themselves and the highest preachers. It follows: (Verse 13.) And when Samuel had come to Saul, Saul said: Blessed are you by the Lord; I have fulfilled the word of the Lord.

The word of the Lord was that he should have destroyed Amalek. But what is it that he says—I have fulfilled the word of the Lord—except that the guilt of fornication, the more foul it is seen to be, the more diligently it is hidden by the reprobate? Because, therefore, those who are subject to the same vice of fornication always desire to lie hidden, in their type Saul disdained to destroy Amalek, and said to Samuel: I have fulfilled the word of the Lord. As if he were saying: Both in others I subdued lust, and in myself I destroyed its enticements. And because by flattering adulation he strives to bend the mind of the great man, he said beforehand: Blessed are you by the Lord. As if he were saying: This indeed I have done, but I could do it not by my own strength, but by your merits and intercessions.

But perfect men can hear their own praises, yet they cannot be bent from the rigor of justice. Therefore it is also added: (Verse 14.) And Samuel said: And what is this voice of the flocks, which resounds in my ears, and of the herds, which I hear?

The voice of the flocks and herds of Amalek is the report of shameful deeds. When someone is defamed for the lesser faults of luxury, the voice of the flocks is said to resound. When, however, he is accused of more criminal and more obscene deeds, it is the voice of the herds. As if he were laying bare what was hidden under the pretense of his false virtue, he says: You justify yourself with your own mouth; but the crowds of your impurities cry out through the mouths of all. But now let us see by what defenses the man who has begun to put forward excuses may escape the charge of the infamy laid against him. It follows: (Verse 15.) They brought them from Amalek. The people spared the better sheep and herds, to sacrifice to the Lord your God; the rest we have killed.

What is it that he says: "They brought them from Amalek," and did not say, "We brought them"? But when the reprobate are accused, they sometimes cover their faults by denying them, and sometimes transfer them to others. They deny them, indeed, when they can lie hidden; but when, as if caught in the open, they are held fast, what they cannot deny they ascribe to others. Saul, certainly, suggesting the ways of such people, says: "They brought them from Amalek. The people spared the better sheep and the herds." As if he were saying: the evil that is heard should be judged as coming from the weakness of the people, not from the virtue of the shepherd. The sins of subjects, indeed, are to be looked down upon in comparison with their prelates. He says therefore: "They brought them from Amalek." As if he were saying: this which resounds of shameful life is true, but nevertheless that same shamefulness flourished in the little ones, not in the great. Still further lightening that same fault, he says: "The people spared the better sheep and the herds, so that they might be sacrificed to the Lord your God." As if he were saying: truly the people sinned, but not unto death; because the sins of the deed, now, with me exhorting, they strive to blot out by the humility of confession. For the flocks of Amalek and the herds are sacrificed to the Lord when the wanton and incontinent come to confession, and what they wickedly did they busy themselves to blot out by repenting. He says therefore: "The people spared"; that is, indulged in sin. But "they brought them," so that they might be sacrificed; because in those things in which the people remembers that it fell, it now stings itself by confessing and repenting.

But the better flocks and herds, as above, designate the more choice sins of luxury. As if he were saying: Even if the people have gravely sinned, we are not to be blamed, because in proportion to the magnitude of the crime it has the lamentations of compunction. What is it that he says: "That they might be sacrificed to the Lord your God"? But by this the custom of deceivers is shown, who, while they desire to lie hidden from the greatest men, flatter them. For what is it that he asserts him to be his God in particular, except that he shows him to be a familiar friend of God? "To the Lord," he says, "your God"—not mine, but yours, because I am a sinner, you alone are holy. But by a wondrous practice of fraud the deceitful so cover themselves that they bring things forward, and so justify themselves that they accuse. They also temper the manner of their accusation so that by accusing they appear just, lest by excusing they become known. For while he calls him his God, he indeed extols him and diminishes himself. But while he asserts that what was brought from Amalek is to be sacrificed to the Lord, he silently brings forward not what he ought to be reproved for, but what he ought to be praised for. And still adding, he says: "But the rest we have killed." Sins that are forgiven are indeed killed. Sins are alive that either still reign in the mind through concupiscence, or that, having been despised through conversion, have not yet been cast off through penitence. The former indeed live for pleasure, the latter live for punishment; because even if we have already ceased to sin, unless we bewail what we have committed, we are held by the bond of our committed sins. But he assigns the greater to the lesser and the lighter to the greater.

For what is it that he says, "We have killed the rest," except that there are very small sins compared with greater ones, which are washed away by confession alone? These the teachers kill when they forgive them, to those humbly confessing, by apostolic authority. For to all these words, because the deceitful strive to cover themselves, not to expose themselves, there is added by what authority of the chosen preachers they are reproved: (Verse 16.) For Samuel said to Saul: Allow me to tell you what the Lord has spoken to me in the night.

What is it that he says, "Allow me, and I will tell you," except that while the deceitful persist in wordiness, they do not grant the prelates who examine them an opportunity to speak? As if he were saying: While you do not cease from wordiness, you do not permit me to speak the things which you ought to hear. By this word, too, the intention of the flatterer can be derided; who while he believes he pleases by the blandishment of praise, thinks that he, as it were, holds those whom he praises by the same praises. Such is this, therefore, as if the chosen prelate were to deride his praiser with honorable gravity, saying: You who praise me, I cannot speak harsh things to you. Allow, therefore, that is, permit me to speak, and understand the things which I am about to say. And because, as I said, flatterers believe that they please by praising, they by no means think that they will hear harsh things from those whom they praise. As if, therefore, about to hear joyful and prosperous things, Saul follows, saying: Speak. But chosen men, when they hear their own praises, are not softened from the rigor of justice amid the enticements of praise.

For those who despise the deeds of the reprobate can by no means receive their words. Therefore, because they cannot be bent by praises, they examine the wicked flatterers with subtle reasoning and pursue them with severe judgments. Hence it follows: (Verses 17-19.) And Samuel said: Was it not when you were little in your own eyes that you were made head over the tribes of Israel? And the Lord anointed you as king over Israel; and the Lord sent you on the way, and said: Go, kill the sinners of Amalek, and you shall fight against them until their destruction. Why then did you not obey the voice of the Lord, but turned to the plunder, and did evil in the eyes of the Lord?

By these words the disobedience of the proud king is subtly examined: for first he sets before him the gifts that were conferred; then he strikes at the boldness of his transgression by the investigation of that same fault. For it is a subtle examination when a cunning sinner is so thoroughly scrutinized that no excuse for his fault is left to him, so that the sentence of God holds him, as it were bound, unto the death of his crime, for whom no refuge of sin remains. Therefore, so that every path of escape may be blocked for the deceitful and proud, both the loftiness of his dignity and the measure of his office are recalled to him, when he says: Was it not when you were little in your own eyes that you were made head over the tribes of Israel? And the Lord said to you: Kill the sinners of Amalek?

And so that he may capture him now surrounded and besieged by arguments, he lays a hand of guilt upon him, saying: Why then did you not obey the voice of the Lord, but turned to plunder, and did evil before the eyes of the Lord? As if he were saying: Behold what you were, who have been made what you are; behold what you ought to have done; behold what you have done; behold how far you have withdrawn from what you ought to have carried out. Therefore, while he brings forward, saying: Why did you do evil in the eyes of the Lord? he comprehends him as a deceitful guilty man by surrounding him.

But in this place it must be noted that, while the proud king is being accused, the times of his election are recalled, so that it may be perceived that the swelling of his heart was not present in choosing him, but grew from the height of his pre-eminence. Indeed, he was chosen as good by the Lord, but while he grew from the height, he declined by elation. He says therefore: When you were little in your own eyes, you were made head in the tribes of Israel; now turned to plunder, you have done evil in the eyes of the Lord. As if he were saying: By the truth of humility you merited the kingdom, but now, under the pretense of being humble, swollen in truth, you lose the kingdom. For what are the eyes of the heart but the sight of reason? For he who has the unimpaired vision of reason is perfectly enlightened. Therefore he is humble in his own eyes who looks upon himself perfectly, and knows himself humble by perfect vision.

By these words, therefore, the past humility of the fallen king is commended, and not only that, but also the sharpness of his reason: for he was evidently so great in reason that he knew himself perfectly, and so great in virtue that, looking subtly into himself, he truly saw himself to be humble. Since, therefore, when he is reproved, his past is called to mind, what else is described but that he is deprived twice over of what he had? For none can be proud except those who have first lost the eyes of the heart. Concerning the lustful, indeed, it is far clearer: for they would never bury themselves in the abyss of fornication if they had not first been darkened from the light of intimate glory. And because they despise the high precepts of chastity, they are also convicted of swelling pride. He, therefore, who had come to depose the king set over them, says: When you were little in your own eyes, you were made head among the tribes of Israel; now you have done evil in the eyes of the Lord. As if he said: Justly are you now, proud and blind, deposed, who once, seeing and humble, merited to obtain a kingdom. For even the proud Pharisees are called blind by Truth itself, which said to the disciples: Let them alone; they are blind, and leaders of the blind (Matt. 15:14). And that blindness is especially ascribed to the lustful, because there are no vices that bring thicker darkness upon the mind than lust. But now you may see very many who stood as clerics, priests, and have made themselves... To whom certainly the command of Samuel is said by way of comparison: When you were little in your own eyes, you were made head among the tribes of Israel.

As if he were saying: When with your heart enlightened in a lower order you kept the precepts of chastity, now, having lost your eyes, you have fallen into the abyss of fornication. You have been turned toward plunder, because you broke the divine precepts by violent presumption. For since, with God forbidding and, as it were, armed with threats and standing in the way, they rush in to violate the sanctuary of chastity, they lead the chosen things of Amalek into the Lord's land as it were by the plunder of prey. And because, as far as they are able, the lustful are hidden from the preachers, Saul is reproved for having done evil in the sight of the Lord. For, as it were, the preacher, threatening and terrifying, says to one who has fallen into the pleasure of the flesh: The crime of impurity is indeed hidden from men, but it is not concealed from the one who sees all things. When the impenitent hear these things and things like them, they can by no means be terrified. Hence, even if they have already been caught by reasoning, like snakes they strive to slip away through the slippery ground from the hands of those holding them. They thrust out the tail and hide the head, because the outermost parts of their works are now seen, but the quality of those same actions is covered over. Hence it also follows: (Verse 20.) And Saul said to Samuel: Rather, I have heard the voice of the Lord, and I have walked in the way by which the Lord sent me, and I have brought Agag, the king of Amalek, and I have killed Amalek.

As if concealing hidden things and bringing forth what was uncovered in others, the slippery teacher commends himself by the success of his preaching, saying: I ought not to be reproved for the fault of my subjects, but praised, because by preaching I wiped it away in those who were sinning. I have struck Amalek, because the spirit of fornication has fallen in the hearts of my hearers by the sword of my tongue. Although the king still lives, he has been led away captive, because although the sensual appetite, as long as we are in the flesh, cannot be entirely destroyed, it has been captured, in that it could be captured because it cannot prevail against reason. Eager to show that the subjects themselves have been corrected and are confessing their sins, he added, saying: (Verse 21.) But the people took from the spoil sheep and oxen, the firstfruits of those things that were slain, to sacrifice to the Lord their God in Gilgal.

When by the violence of armed men something belonging to someone is taken away, it is called spoil. But the vices of the flesh and of the soul, because they are propagated at the devil's prompting, are, as it were, his own property. Whoever therefore, recently slack, now violently destroys vices, makes spoil, because he powerfully seizes what belongs to another. And it is to be noted that both slaughter and spoil are mentioned, so that it may be taught that some things were left dead and others were carried off alive. The enticements of lust are indeed slain when by the strength of a heavenly purpose they are driven away from the mind, and by contrition of spirit they are cut off from the body.

But the living are led down for sacrifice, because even if through the conduct of the sinner the delight of the flesh or of the mind is abandoned, the punishment of past delight is not utterly erased. Let vices therefore be cut down, and let not the firstfruits be kept alive at all for sacrifice, so that one who powerfully destroys the force of sin in contempt of pleasures may fear to keep alive for himself, for sacrifice, the punishment of delight. What, then, are the firstfruits of the slain, if not the pleasures of sins? These indeed he is said to offer who confesses before God to the priests. And they are sacrificed when offered, when their punishment is destroyed through penitence. For they are, as it were, offered slain in the firstfruits, and they live on through the later parts, when someone confesses his sins but does not strive to sacrifice them—that is, to slay them before God—by repenting. When, therefore, the firstfruits of the slain are said to be reserved for sacrifice, the error of certain people is confounded—those who abandon their sins but do not yet mourn them. Since, then, sins must not only be confessed but also wiped away by the austerity of penitence, while he feigns the type of Saul, the good teacher, he asserts that his subjects took the firstfruits of the slain to sacrifice. And because even by the reasoning of the Scriptures the measure of penitence is to be determined, the firstfruits are led down to be sacrificed at Gilgal. But not only oxen, but also sheep are kept for sacrifice, so that those who are solicitous about their own salvation may strive so to destroy great things by repenting that they do not omit to mourn the lesser ones.

Concerning the proud, however, it is manifest: because, since they always desire to appear great, they are ashamed to be marked as sinners. Even when caught, they resist, and in those very things which they do they desire to appear just. What is it, then, that he says: "Yea, I have heard the voice of the Lord"? But Samuel says: "Allow me, and I will tell you what the Lord spoke to me last night." And after a few words: "Why then did you turn against the command, and do evil before the eyes of the Lord?" It is clear, therefore, how wondrously he swells with pride, who then desires to justify himself, when he recognizes that the Lord is reproving him for sin.

But if he is believed to have answered thus for this reason, because he believed the words to be not the Lord's but the prophet's, we see still the imitators of Saul, who, while they trust in their own learning, both despise the commands which they hear as greater, and through pride, and believe they improve them by changing them. What is it, then, that he says: "Yea, I have heard the voice of the Lord, and I have brought Agag, king of Amalek"? But it is as if he were saying: "And what was commanded, I strove to fulfill, and what was lacking I supplied." It was to be done that Amalek be struck down: but because, with God's help, he is conquered, it was to be supplied that those things which were to be sacrificed in his sacrifice be preserved. This appears openly in the proud: because when they cannot conceal an open fault, they attempt to change it or diminish it. As if he were saying: "And even if you judge the open faults of the deed, the hidden simplicity of intention must be attended to.

It would indeed be a fault to bring anything from Amalek, unless the things brought were due to be sacrificed to God. This often happens in monasteries, when someone who is excessively religious presumes, as a subordinate, to add something to the commands of spiritual prelates; when he despises the common regular life and follows the judgment of his own will. For while he strives to improve his life by choosing rather than by obeying, what else is shown than that he colors open disobedience with the intention of virtue? This point certainly not only subordinates but also prelates ought to examine carefully. Subordinates ought to note carefully that Saul displeased God because he attempted to sacrifice contrary to the prophet's command. Prelates should note carefully that the prophet gave the king the command to destroy Amalek. For the teacher ought so to praise common practices as not to despise the particular practices of individuals. That common life is indeed praised which is joined by charity and is not darkened by intervening vices. The Apostle's judgment is: Each one has his own gift from God, one indeed in this way, another in that way (1 Cor. 7:7). Therefore those whose food and table are common ought to attend not only to the common good of refreshment but also to the particularity of their passion: so that they may eat together, but not strive together by equal abstinence against the goads of fornication. The flesh of that one is to be subdued with blows, for whom the stimulus of the flesh is more hostile.

So then, to stir up the common life is not the same where the sharing of a meal is attended to, but to fight against a singular battle is spoken of as fighting singularly. Nor does the teacher give good instruction if he does not instruct in the matter by which Amalek is struck down, but in the matter by which he lives. Let the teacher therefore instruct, but in such a way that the spirit of fornication is overcome. Let subjects shrink from disobedience, but not in the matter where the crime of pride is incurred, nor in the matter by which the abyss of death is avoided. For the disobedient, while with a swollen heart they do not carry out the commands of their superiors, when they strive to improve what is enjoined on them, while they desire to offer their works to God, they exalt themselves. For through other virtues we bestow our goods on him, but through obedience we present ourselves. Samuel therefore, adding, says: (Verse 22.) Does God desire burnt offerings and victims, and not rather that obedience be given to the voice of the Lord?

For what are the good works of chosen men but victims and burnt offerings? Since therefore the Lord had commanded by the law that burnt offerings and victims be offered, what is it that the Lord is said not to will burnt offerings and victims, but promises that he wills that obedience be given to him, except that the things which are done apart from obedience are not burnt offerings and victims? As if he were saying: Then are good works good, when they do not disagree with the conscience of those set over them. But if this is said in order that the virtue of obedience be commended, it is clear how sublime a good it is, which excels victims and sacrifices.

What then does the statement that the voice of the Lord is to be obeyed intend, except that all good works are to be set aside for those good things which are commanded? For when a superior rightly commands good things, the good things which a subject chooses by his own judgment are set aside for the commands of superiors. But those very works that are set aside are called holocausts and victims, so that not only may it be understood that small things are not to be preferred to the commands of greater men, but the greatest holocausts are indeed those of people who wish to withdraw themselves entirely from public work, so that, set apart for God and burned up by love, they may offer themselves in the secrecy of contemplation. Victims are those of people who do not separate themselves at all from the common public life, but act with singular virtue, so that by living more strictly they surpass the virtues of others. These things indeed, and things of this kind, when they are done with the permission of good rulers, are victims and holocausts which God approves; but when they are done in such a way that through them the commands of greater men are neglected, let those who offer them hear what the prophet, sent by the Lord to the disobedient king, says: Does God desire holocausts and victims, and not rather that the voice of the Lord be obeyed? As if to terrify those who despise the commands of the fathers as lesser things and present their own as greater, saying: Because you think this is a great thing to do, you despise what is small and lowly; but if you see clearly, you do not please the Lord by this. Well indeed, when the work of the proud is examined, the prophet sharply asks, saying: Does God desire holocausts and victims, and not rather that the voice of the Lord be obeyed?

He seeks, indeed, that the swelling of pride be struck down by pastoral authority. He says: Does God desire burnt offerings and victims? For those who choose to follow their own will think that they please God; but God does not at all approve their works, even when they are great and mighty. But now he has added with what praises obedience is to be proclaimed, and says: (Verse 22.) For obedience is better than victims, and to listen rather than to offer the fat of rams.

For since he said above: Does God desire burnt offerings and victims? Is he not subjecting both to the praises of obedience, in that, when he set down victims and the fat of rams, he understood the burnt offering in the fat? Whatever is better is surely better than a good thing. But those burnt offerings and victims, which God does not desire, are not good at all. What then is it that is said in praise of obedience, Obedience is better than victims, and to listen than to offer the fat of rams, except that obedience is then better, when the burnt offering and victim are not evil? As if, therefore, he would bring the proud and disobedient back to the consideration of so great a good, saying: Even if nothing were done by you through presumption, the virtue of obedience would be better than the works you choose. It is clear, then, at what height it is placed, which the prophet saw to be higher than divine offerings. But if, as above, we follow the spiritual sense, victims are to be referred to the austerity of a great manner of life, and burnt offerings to the compunction of a more hidden life.

For obedience is better than victims, and to listen is better than to offer the fat of rams. Because it is of far higher merit always to subject one's own will to the will of another than to wear down the body with great fastings, or to mortify oneself in a more secret sacrifice through compunction. For what is the fat of rams but the rich and inward devotion of the one who chooses? Therefore he offers the fat of rams who, in the zeal of a secret conversation, has the affection of devout prayer. Yet obedience is better than victims, and than to offer the fat of rams. Because he who has learned perfectly to fulfill the will of his preceptor excels in the heavenly kingdom both those who fast and those who weep. This, certainly, because he is speaking against the proud man who openly despises the Lord's commands, he does not compare the good that he did with the good that he despised; but he destroys the pretense of good by showing the truth of a better good. As if he were saying: And if you were seeking an excellent good for the more excellent glory of virtues, you ought rather to have chosen the good of obedience, which excels even the more excellent things. Thus indeed, by speaking, he destroys the pretense of good by argument; but by adding, he openly confounds the evil of disobedience in the one who disobeys, saying: (Verse 23.) For to rebel is as the sin of divination; and to be unwilling to acquiesce is as the crime of idolatry.

What is it that those who resist and refuse to comply are likened by the prophet to soothsayers and idolaters, if not that soothsayers strove to know divine things and to divine hidden things, while idolaters sink down by venerating figments? But those who resist the commands of their prelates resist for this reason above all, that they judge themselves to know the divine will better. Therefore to resist is, as it were, the sin of soothsaying: because, as if despising the divine altar, they receive answers at the altars of demons, when they trust in the cunning and proud inventions of their own heart, and by thinking contrary things they oppose the wholesome counsels of their prelates. But to refuse to comply is said to be like the crime of idolatry: because undoubtedly no one would persist in the obstinacy of his disobedience, if he did not carry in his heart the figment of his own purpose as an idol. For he conceives in his heart what is to be done, as it were making an idol, and while he deliberates that the purpose conceived in his mind is to be carried out, he bows himself as it were to adore a likeness. Therefore to refuse to comply is, as it were, the crime of idolatry: because whoever is obstinate in his own deliberation is for this reason lifted up outwardly in contempt of his elders, because inwardly he is bowed down to the idols of his own purpose which he has established by devising them.

But it must be asked very earnestly why to resist is compared to the sin of soothsaying, and to be unwilling to comply to the crime of idolatry. For a crime is called a great sin, while even a light offense is called a sin; but if soothsayers were so called from the altar, because they were accustomed to receive responses by consulting, the sin of idolatry in comparison with it was a crime, because it was more senseless to adore stones than, under the appearance of divination, to receive false responses about living well. Why, then, is to resist said to be a sin by comparison, but to be unwilling to comply a crime? But to resist is to dissent from the will of the one commanding. Many, however, seem to resist for a time, when they do not immediately receive the commands of those set over them, yet afterward comply with those same commands. But what is it to be unwilling to comply, if not both to resist the obedience enjoined and to persist in the obstinacy of that resistance? For they do not comply who in the purpose of their heart are stubborn against it, and who by no one's authority abandon what they have decided to do. Deservedly, therefore, in comparison with resisting, to be unwilling to comply is called a crime, because it seems to be a much greater and more horrible sin for the sinner. Therefore, because those of this kind are not overcome by reasoning, the prophet added by what punishment they are to be restrained, saying: (Verse 23.) Because you have cast off the word of the Lord, the Lord has cast you off, that you may not be king.

For what is it that Saul is cast off, except that he is judged incorrigible? As if he were saying: Because you reject all counsels of salvation, for the guilt of your stubbornness you ought no longer to be corrected by words, but condemned by the punishment of being cast off. How greatly, therefore, the guilt of disobedience is to be feared is shown, if this is considered with assent, that on account of it even kings are deposed. What is it that he says: Because you have cast away the word of the Lord, the Lord has cast away you? But the word is cast away when it is not reverently kept in its sublimity; for to cast away is sometimes to slip from the hand to the ground, or to let it fall negligently, or to hurl it violently. But the word of the Lord, because it speaks wholesome things, is heavenly or sublime; it is thrown to the ground negligently when through sloth it is not fulfilled. Through contempt, however, it is cast away when the proud and disobedient repel it with a swollen heart, and disdain to observe it by the hand of action. But that it is reproved not as throwing away but as casting off the word, this is the meaning: that while the proud follow their own will, they become far from the Lord. For to cast off is to drive something far away. For those who worthily receive the guidance of others are not only near to God through obedience, but they also make those near who through vices and crimes are far from him. Such is it, therefore, as if he were saying: You are driven far from the order of dignity, because you were unwilling to be present by the merit of that same dignity.

For the merit of dignity is the observance of the divine word. When this is cast aside, because the merit of dignity is lost, the dignity itself is also removed. It is fitting, then, to consider how much the proud lose through disobedience, and how much the humble gain. Those, while they rejoice to fulfill the judgment of their own will, render great labors of works to God, and have no rewards of labors; these, while they forsake themselves, while they follow the judgment of another's will, merit the glory of eternal sublimity; whence also through the most blessed Mary, the mother of our Lord and Redeemer, it is said: He has put down the mighty from their seat, and has exalted the humble (Luke 1:52). The Lord indeed puts down the mighty from their seat when he casts off the disobedient proud, and exalts the humble; he glorifies the obedient with eternal glory, but the proud his words do not correct, but only, while they tremble to lose honors, they simulate the humility they do not have, lest they lose the summit of glory: whence also it is added: (Verse) And Saul said to Samuel: I have sinned, because I have transgressed the words of the Lord and your words.

What is it that Saul is reproached by the prophet for not having heard the voice of the Lord and for having done evil in his eyes, and yet he does not at all admit that he sinned; but when he sees himself cast off from the kingdom, he confesses that he sinned and transgressed the word of the Lord and his words? Is it not because the proud are bold to despise the words of the humble, but after the manner of the elect they cannot despise the honors they seek after? They are indeed bold to despise the commands of their betters, but they are not prepared to abandon high things. The humble, by contrast, are prompt to obey the commands of their betters and untroubled about casting away high things. For because they desire not earthly but heavenly things, they despise the heights of earthly eminence and strive to labor for heavenly things; they willingly submit, they shrink from being preferred. Saul, then, shrinking from obeying God and fearing to lose the kingdom, what else does he set before us but the ways of the proud, who, when they prevail, avoid appearing small or sinful; when they are compelled, they feign the virtue of humility. But when compelled to confess, they diminish by their speaking the sin they acknowledge. For although he stated that he sinned by transgressing the word of the Lord, he recalled that he had incurred that same transgression rather by dispensation than by will, saying: Fearing the people, and obeying their voice. As if he were to say: The sin which I am reproached for having committed ought to be visited with a lighter punishment, inasmuch as it is established that it was committed not through malice but through weakness.

To sin by zeal and will is a great transgression; but to sin by weakness is tolerable in proportion as the one who is subject to sin is unequal to the strength of that same sin. And because by the same cunning of their heart they think they prevail over the humility of simple teachers, he has, as it were, already added his own, saying: (Verse 25.) But now, I pray, bear my sin, and return with me, that I may adore the Lord.

Correctable sins are indeed borne, because after they depart from the will of the one who commits them, they can be healthfully purged by satisfaction. But the sins of those in whose minds they have been implanted through impenitence are not borne. Hence John also says: There is a sin unto death; do not pray for it (1 John 5:16). For that is a sin unto death which is committed by one who can never repent. And this sin is plainly not borne by those in authority, because it is not blotted out by the prayers or offerings of priests. But Saul, designating in every respect the proud and the obstinate, both does not cease to swell and beseeches that his sin be borne; he heaps up an unbearable burden, and asks that it be borne as though light. This is indeed done in the Church as often as those who willingly commit great crimes do not attend to their magnitude. They gather up unbearable things, and reckon these to be light and of no weight. They hide their sins from those in authority over them, and so that they can scarcely be found out and reproved, they...

then they can, they smooth over the same sins, so that those who are set over them may not attend to their magnitude. They are even strong for sin, but weak for bewailing sins; they are willing indeed to be dissolved by the delights of sin, but they do not wish to be cleansed by the bitterness of penitence. What is it, then, that he says, Lay bare my sin, except that they both receive the sweetness of sin in themselves, but wish to burden their prelates with the burden of those same sins? Some even come to confession spontaneously, but for the things of which they accuse themselves, they do not themselves mourn, but beg others to do penance; they judge that they are saved by faith alone, and do not care to turn back from what has been cast off through penitence. Hence Saul also adds, saying: And return with me, that I may adore the Lord. For the preacher is, as it were, departing when he casts off the shameless; he says therefore: Return with me, that I may adore the Lord. He thinks that he is not divided from the communion of the elect with him to the extent that he preserves the common faith; or certainly, to adore the Lord is to be subject to the religion of faith, and to the keeping of good works. But because Saul insinuates the hypocrites as such, it follows: (Ver. 26.) Samuel said to Saul: I will not return with you, because you have rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord has rejected you, that you may not be king.

What then is the meaning of the prophet's refusal to bear the sin of the penitent king, except that he did not see him as truly penitent? To him he had earlier answered with words of abasement, because he did not at all recognize that he was to be changed. By the constancy of this prophet, certain priests of our time who are excessively lenient are rebuked—men who are weak in conduct but bold in rashness. They scarcely sustain themselves, yet they dare to undertake to bear the burdens of others; they do not carry their own light loads, and they subject themselves to unbearable ones. Behold, the strong prophet shrinks from undertaking the burden of a king's sin, so that the priest of the Church may fear and dread to undergo the weight of unbearable sins. But for the most part he should so take up the sins of others that, nevertheless, he permits the one by whom they were committed to weep for those things which he undertakes to expiate. Hence Samuel did not at all promise to bear the king's sin, and yet he mourned as abject the one whom he had reported. For concerning him it is written a little later: Samuel was mourning for Saul, because the Lord repented that he had established him as king over Israel. Indeed, he did not promise to bear the king's sin for him, so that the king might strive to weep for it. But nevertheless he wept for the one whom he had reported, so as to make the Lord propitious to him. Literally, however, while the prophet repeats the sentence, he shows the irrevocable sentence of divine equity, by which the sinner is so cast off that he is never permitted to return to the hand of divine mercy. It can also be understood otherwise, that he asks the prophet to return with him, to adore the Lord.

For holy men, who do not forsake the Lord by sinning, have no need to return to him by repenting. For to return belongs to one who has departed. This surely applies to sinners who depart from the Lord through sin; it does not apply to the righteous, who remain. What then is the meaning of the request that the just Samuel return with the sinning Saul, except that the chosen preachers are afflicted as if penitent on behalf of their fallen subjects, and come as if returning, while they accompany their fallen subjects with fatherly affliction? They return with them, then, when both the subjects who sinned and the prelates who stood fast alike bewail the sins of the subjects. It is therefore as if he were saying: I have now recognized by the rebuke of preaching that you cling to me with fatherly affection, you whom you did not allow to sin any longer. Since, then, at your reproof I have repented, I ask you to return with me, because by my own strength I am by no means sufficient to wipe out the magnitude of such great wickedness. But the prayers of such a feeling ought to be received if they proceeded from the truth of the heart; therefore the reply is aptly given to the hypocrite: I will not return with you. As if he were saying: I do not know how to sacrifice to God on your behalf, for I do not perceive you to be subject to God in the truth of humility; and repeating what came before, he says: Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, the Lord has rejected you, that you be not king; and because such men are to be shunned, cast off, and abandoned, it follows: (Verse 27.) And Samuel turned away, to depart.

In the passing of elders, hypocrites fear the loss of temporal honor more than that of the eternal inheritance. Hence even when abandoned they cannot be at rest, but what they dare not do themselves they strive to obtain through the intervention of others. Well, then, is it added: (Verse 27.) But he caught the hem of his cloak, which was torn.

What are the garments of a teacher but to teach the qualities of the subjects who cling to him? Concerning these garments, indeed, it is promised to the great shepherd through the prophet: As the Lord lives, you are clothed with all these as with a garment (Isa. 49:18). And through the Psalmist it is sung: The Lord has reigned, he has put on beauty, the Lord has put on strength (Ps. 93:1). For he has put on beauty who has joined to himself the shining minds of the faithful as garments. Saul, then, caught the cloak of Samuel when any proud and abject man seeks the honor of high rank to be conferred on him by eminent men through those dear and familiar to him who cling to him; and because no one intercedes on behalf of the reprobate before the perfect hearers, he is said to have caught not the cloak but the hem of the cloak, that is, its extremity. But that extremity is torn, because he who suggests useless things is rejected. For when the lesser man asking indiscreetly is repelled, the hem of the garment is, as it were, said to be torn.

For as it were a piece of the prophet's cloak was torn, when he answered Peter, who was giving bad counsel, saying: Get behind me, Satan; for you do not savor the things that are of God, but the things that are of men (Matt. 16:23). Hence again he commands, saying: If your hand or your foot scandalizes you, cut it off and cast it from you; likewise, if your eye scandalizes you, pluck it out and cast it from you (Matt. 5:30). By these words, surely, not only the top of the cloak but also its middle parts are designated as to be cut away, because when they give bad counsel, even the perfect hearers are to be rejected. Hence it is that the sons of Zebedee, together with their mother, ask that one sit at the Redeemer's right and the other at his left; but as though ignorant of a good petition, they are repelled (Matt. 20). For as it were the Lord tore a part of the cloak, when by rebuking he confuted those members that were causing scandal. And it is to be noted that not the whole cloak but a part of the cloak is torn, because when a good man gives bad counsel, he must be repelled in that wherein he gives bad counsel, and in that wherein he is otherwise good, he is to be retained out of love.

By the garment, moreover, the conduct of the ruler is signified, as the Psalmist testifies, who says: Let your priests be clothed with righteousness (Ps. 131:8). The top of the cloak, therefore, is grasped when a leader is praised for great holiness, when that is said in his praise which he shows to be comely outwardly. But because the good things of the righteous are many which lie hidden, only the top of the cloak can be grasped: because little is what is discerned of the righteousness of the chosen teacher, but much is what is concealed. Yet that very little which is known, when it is grasped, is torn: because the righteous are not held by their own praises. For because they despise them in a moment, they cannot be held, as it were, by the tear of the cloak. Indeed the torn part of the garment is held, the prophet is not held: because what is said in praise of the righteous is true, and yet the righteous, while they despise what they hear, leave, as it were, the tear in the hands of the one holding it. Of the greater, therefore, because certain things can be known, as it were a part is grasped. But when the whole of what will be done is known by the little ones, if it is praised, it must nonetheless be cast away; because nothing of good works is to be held through vanity. Hence it is that when John, still a young man, follows the Lord already seized, he is both held by the cloak and is described as having fled naked, the cloak having been left behind (Mark 14). For by the garment the young man is caught, when he is praised from the beginning of a good conduct; but he flees, the linen cloth having been left behind, who despises the praises which he hears.

For to flee naked is to have a praiseworthy life but to despise the praise of the chosen life. For he flees, as it were, naked who ascribes nothing of the adornment of virtues to himself through vainglory. He can also be understood to have fled naked for this reason, that he who is said to have been caught by parts of the linen cloth is reported to have left the linen cloth behind; because it often happens in the conscience of the elect that, through the very fact that they are praised in part, they suspect that not a part of their merits but the whole merit of a good life has been lost. Samuel's cloak, therefore, is torn, because the elect teachers despise their own praises. And because they are not swayed by praises, he repeats the severity of the earlier sentence, saying: (Verse 18.) The Lord has torn the kingdom of Israel from your hand today.

For perfect men, because they are softened by no praise from the rigor of justice, are such before as they are after the testimony of their praise, and what they had said before, they confirm after by repeating the same. But it must be asked what this means, that it is said: Today. For if the life of the reprobate is night, what is it that the kingdom of Saul is torn apart in the day? But if the life of the reprobate shepherd is night, when his kingdom is torn apart, he makes it day. For day does not come to be unless night recedes. He says, therefore, Today, because the darkness of the disobedient one is said to be condemned. Hence also, when Judas went out, the Lord said: Now is the Son of man glorified (John 13:31); because he saw the night of that man's life depart, and the pure light of justice remain in the other disciples.

It is also said: "Today," because with the proud one removed, the kingdom was being handed over to a humble king. Hence it is added to him: (Verse 23) And he has delivered it to your neighbor, better than you.

When, therefore, it is called "today," it is not something bright belonging to the rejected king that is discerned, but the glory of the one put in his place that is proclaimed, who from the summit of the kingdom ought to shine with the splendor of great virtue. And asserting the unchangeability of the divine sentence, he adds, saying: (Verse 23) Moreover the Triumphator in Israel will not spare, and will not be turned by repentance.

For by the name of this Triumphator, who else is to be understood but the Creator of the human race? For whoever overcomes hidden adversaries, he conquers by the power of him who grants him the grace of overcoming temptation. What is it that the Triumphator is said not to spare, when Samuel is asked? Because when preachers are angry with their subjects who sin, when they strike the proud or the lustful with the divine sentence, they carry out the judgment of the divine will, not the impulse of their own fury. As if he were certainly saying: I indeed have brought forth not my own sentence, but his, who cannot be recalled in what he brings forth by decreeing. Therefore he does not spare, and is not turned by repentance; but for those who can neither cease from their sins nor repent of the sins they love; and giving the reason, he says: (Verse 29) For he is not a man, that he should repent.

As if he were saying: And it is again [his] to be, for whom there is no mutability. The perfection of the substituted king can also be designated by the name of the triumphator, who was both going to have the glory of many triumphs and would not dare to spare anyone against the will of the Creator. Hence also in this same book it is written concerning him: And David struck the whole land, and did not leave alive man or woman (1 Kings 27:9). Concerning him it is also said: For he is not a man, that he should repent. For what is meant here by "man," except one subject to carnal passions? As if he were still biting at the proud one, saying: You now repent of your sins, when you perceive the sentence of your audacity; but he will not repent, who, as a man, is not subject to disobedience and to swelling pride. And he still confesses in his mouth, saying: (Verse 30) I have sinned.

But he shows the quality of that confession, because he added, saying: (Verse 30) But now honor me before the elders of my people, and before Israel.

It is clear what repentance he bears who still desires to be honored. For if he truly repented of his sin, he would have desired to be dishonored rather than honored. It is fitting, then, to marvel at the hardness of a cast-off heart. So the man of God, following the command of the Creator, says: The Lord has cast you off, that you be not king; but on the contrary, he who receives the sentence of rejection, through the desire of elation, seeks honors. What is it, then, that he says: I have sinned? Confession of sin ought indeed to be followed not by honor or glory, but by usefulness and contempt. For what does it profit to confess crimes, if the voice of confession is not followed by the affliction of penitence? For three things must be considered in each one who truly repents, namely, conversion of mind, confession of mouth, and punishment of sin. For he who is not converted in heart, what does it profit him if he confesses his sins? A sin that is loved is by no means deleted by confessing it. There are indeed some who by confessing their sins lay them open, but by not converting they by no means detest them. These assuredly accomplish nothing by confessing, because what they cast out by speaking, they bring in by loving. Hence Scripture also suggests to those who wish to confess profitably, saying: With the heart one believes unto justice, but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation (Rom. 10:10). What is it to believe with the heart unto justice, except to direct the will to faith, which works through love?

When, therefore, anyone directs the intention of his heart toward righteousness through love, by the beginning of good will he has the fruit of good conversion. Such a person certainly now confesses unto salvation, because by speaking he casts out more of the wound than he pierced himself with by conversion. The third kind, then, that is, punishment, is, as it were, a necessary medicine, so that the abscess of guilt, which is pierced by conversion, may be purged by confession and healed by the medicine of affliction. Therefore, he who does not believe in his heart unto righteousness by no means makes confession unto salvation, because he shows, as it were, the leaves of a bad tree, whose deep roots he fixes in his heart. The sign, then, of true confession is not in the confession of the mouth, but in the affliction of penitence. For then we see a sinner well converted, when he strives to erase by the worthy austerity of affliction what he confesses by speaking. Hence John the Baptist, rebuking the badly converted Jews who were flocking to him, said: "Brood of vipers, who has shown you to flee from the wrath to come? Produce therefore fruits worthy of repentance" (Matt. 3:7). In the fruit, therefore, and not in the leaves or branches, is penitence to be recognized. Good will is, as it were, a tree. What else, then, are the words of confession but leaves? Therefore the leaves are not to be sought by us for their own sake, but for the sake of the fruit, because every confession of sins is received for this reason, that the fruit of penitence may follow. Hence also the Lord cursed the tree adorned with leaves but barren of fruit (Mark

XI); because he does not receive the adornment of confession without the fruit of affliction. What, then, does Saul—who confesses and wishes to be honored, not to be afflicted and humbled—designate, except those who have a barren confession and bear no fruit; who put forward the beauty of confession with humble words, but pursue the greenness of words, not the humility of penitence?

But why do we look to the ancients, when we now see so great a multitude of fallen kings? For now they rush into sin in troops, not only weak subjects, but also negligent prelates and priests. Those who by the order of their ministry have been appointed to the heavenly sacraments act in slippery ways by sinning. But many of them, when they return in some manner to their heart, confess that they have erred. Yet they wish so to bring forth their sins against themselves that they may still wish to be honored for the office of sacred order; they put themselves forward as shameful in secret, but outwardly, apart from the loftiness of their order, they blush to appear humble. What, then, are these but men who see themselves as cast down, and yet dare to wish to be honored? Often, moreover, they do not come of their own accord, but are taken unwillingly; they receive the commands of their own abasement, and yet they ask to be honored. They wish, indeed, to do unclean things, but they dare to cling to the sacred altars. Behold how many Sauls we observe, how many fallen kings we contemplate from the height of holy Church.

To each of these it must surely be said: Because you have cast off the word of the Lord, the Lord has cast you off, that you may not be king—so that those whom earthly defilements never cease to stain may not perform the heavenly ministry. But this, indeed, we can say; yet we cannot persuade wanton ministers. For Saul both heard that he was cast off and yet reigned; because the unclean know that priests have been cast down from the priestly height through the defilements of luxury, and yet they do not cease to handle the sacred mysteries against God's will. But a king reigning against the Lord's will was not a king but a tyrant; because an unworthy priest, who is cast off by the merit of his own defilement, when he presumes to minister, ascends to the height of such great glory only to be condemned. Whence that great senator of heaven, wishing to describe tyrants on earth, says: Whoever eats the bread and drinks the blood of the Lord unworthily, eats and drinks judgment to himself (1 Cor. 11:27). Often, moreover, it is brought about by immediate confession that those who confess are believed also concerning the conduct of their heart. Sometimes the reprobate's false humility is accepted by cast-off preachers, so that through their example others may be led to salvation. For they recognize two things in hypocrites: one within, the other outside. Within, indeed, pure evil; outside, a simulated good. They detest both, but often the pretext of good is simulated in them, so that those who see the good outside and do not know the evil within may follow the examples of the good they behold. Well, therefore, is it added: (Verse.

31.) Samuel therefore returned and followed Saul, and Saul worshiped the Lord.

For by the evil that lay hidden within, he deserved to hear: The Lord has cast you off, that you may not be king. But so that under the pretext of good he might draw others to the truth of that same good, Samuel was willing to follow Saul, and he saw him worship the Lord. Sometimes even the evils of kings and of the great men of the earth must be tolerated, lest, provoked to anger, they slip into worse things. For the children of Israel often worshiped the gods of the nations. Hence it was also said above concerning those converted by Samuel: The children of Israel took away from among them Baalim and Astaroth (1 Kings 7:4). And perhaps if the rejected king had not seen the prophet returning with him to worship the Lord, he would have worshiped the idols of demons. And so he is cast off, and yet he returns with him; because in the powerful of this world iniquity is so to be condemned that, when provoked, they may not lose the good they possess. For often they are evil in secret, and others imitate more devoutly the good that is seen. Certainly the evils of the powerful of this world are great evils for them; but the good things they bring forth profit as an example to the faithful more than as good things for others. Well, then, does Samuel return with the rejected king; because the chosen preachers both strike the powerful of the world for their iniquity and, for the sake of example, allow them to do certain good things. Hence it also follows: (Verse 32.) And Samuel said: Bring Agag, the king of Amalek. And Agag, very fat, trembling, was brought to him.

Kings worship the Lord when the proud and the contemptuous humble themselves to carry out the Lord's commands. The lustful worship when they are subjected to God through the obedience of chastity. But sometimes they pretend to worship, because some have a pretext of humility or chastity, yet while they are believed truly to possess the good, others lose the use of good works through the very good they believe in. Therefore they hand over Agag the king to Samuel, because by confessing they bring forth the vigor of their sensuality. For when they confess the sins of lust, which they have committed through the vigor of the flesh, what else do they do but offer the king of Amalek to the prophets to be killed? But what is it that Agag is called very fat, yet the vigor of sensuality is fat in some and lean in others? What is it, then, that the fat one is offered, except that the reprobate was being led by the subjects of the king? For often subjects are negligent; while they behold the examples of their chosen ruler, they groan amid the evils they do. Through the frailty of the flesh they fall into impurities, but struck by the examples of their betters, they can by no means rejoice amid the delights of impurity. In whom, therefore, is Agag very fat, except in those of whom it is said: They rejoice when they have done evil, and exult in the worst of things? (Prov. 2:14). For the subjects of a lascivious teacher sin all the more boldly the fewer examples of their betters they have set before them to see.

But they rush headlong into utter folly when in their pastors they do not see the good they should follow, and see the evil by whose example they perish. For in these Agag grows fat: because the vigor of the flesh is wantonly, securely, and freely distended in the pleasure of luxury, which by the use of enticement, with nothing standing in the way, is drained. Therefore the fattest is offered to be slain, when those are overthrown who have greatly rejoiced in the pleasure of luxury: for the king is, as it were, handed over when the carnal sense, which was commanding the mind, is revealed to Christ's priests through confession. Fat also is wont to feed the fire. Rightly, then, is it ascribed to the king of the Amalekites: because while the spirit of fornication possesses the mind, the more sweetly and frequently it is fed there through shameful thoughts, the richer fuel is supplied to it for increasing the fire of concupiscence. But he is called trembling, because the carnal sense, when it is handed over to spiritual men through confession, is weakened. The trembling man therefore gives a sign, because he has no strength of members. When, then, the vigor of sensuality begins to be weakened, what else is this but that the king of the Amalekites is said to tremble, or to be trembling, because many, when they begin to be converted, are terrified at the rigor of penance. And because all carnal men cannot abandon the customary delights of the flesh without sorrow, it follows: (Verse 32.) And he said: Is bitter death thus separating?

To say this to carnal sense is to strike the mind with the turning of sorrow for the loss of accustomed pleasure. For because the newly converted suffer the great darts of bitterness, the flesh, as it were, complains of the death of the king whom it had served: because in them carnal desire is by no means put to death without great tribulation. To ask, then, about the separation of death is, for carnal sense, still to strike the converted mind with sorrow over the loss of past delight. But the manner of the separation is also sought out, when it says: "Is it so?" For as if, having seen the harsh measures by which it must be subdued, its own sensuality were saying to the mind: "Do you spurn joyful things for such sad ones?" Samuel certainly hears this voice: because the chosen preacher recognizes the heart of the subject as having been tested by certain snares. But what does it profit to recognize it, if he himself says nothing against what rages within the heart of the subject? There follows, then: (Verse 33.) And Samuel said: As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women.

What is the mother of carnal sense but original guilt? For because before the sin of the first man no lust was present in the members, the king of Amalek did not exist. There was indeed a sense of the flesh, but it was not shameful and lustful; but as soon as it fell into guilt, it felt the itching of the members, because it could not have an obedient motion of the flesh when man himself was disobedient to God. Therefore original guilt is rightly understood as the mother of the shameful sense of the flesh, because by being born from it comes forth what began to exist from it. Hence also the Apostle, shrinking from the law of carnal sense as from a most savage tyrant, shows not only the king himself but also the mother, saying: So now it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells in me (Rom. 7:20). For the sin which he declared he does not do he understood as the motion of the flesh; but the sin dwelling in him, as original guilt. Therefore, since the sin of the motion of the flesh comes from original guilt, when we consider the carnal sense as king, we rightly name the first guilt as its mother. But the children of this mother are all concupiscences, sins, and vices. The mother is certainly made childless when every guilt seems now to remain neither from the flesh nor from the mind. For then she is without children, because even if there is no shameful deed now from the flesh, if no concupiscence now reigns in the mind, that guilt nevertheless remaining in us cannot now be destroyed by the power of the teacher.

For what is it that the Apostle says: "Now it is no longer I that work it, but sin that dwells in me"? From that guilt indeed, which we contract from the corrupt root of our nature, we have it that we are able to be corrupted by the passions of vices. Therefore, when the disordered law of the members moves the members against our will, we do not work this, but sin that dwells in us. To will is indeed present in us then, but to be able we do not yet find; since we would wish that, against our will, nothing in us could be moved. And perhaps these are the conceptions of the most wicked mother, with which that guilt is made pregnant, if they are allowed to be poured out into shameful and obscene acts, they are said, as it were, to be born. The motions, therefore, are sons, which are not only naturally within, but which are made manifest in shameful and obscene works. The mother of Agag, therefore, is made childless, when original guilt is so restrained that it is permitted to bring forth no acts or motions. Or perhaps she is made childless because she had children. When, therefore, sinners are converted and cease to be shameful both in act and in the gestures of luxury, the guilt that dwells in them, as a mother, is bereaved of her sons.

And it must be noted that she is said to be made a mother without sons by comparison. As, he says, your sword has made women without children, so your mother will be without children. The virtues of the mind, from which good works proceed, are mothers; but the sword of Agag is called the weapon of lust, which indeed makes women without children, because lust kills all good works. Or else the women are understood as the minds of the faithful, and the sons are the good thoughts, virtues, and good works of holy minds. But the sword of Agag has made mothers without children, because the delight of lust, if it is allowed to be drawn forth like a sword, kills in them all good thoughts, all virtues, and good works. For the sharp plague of this delight, if it is received into the mind, while it pleases one to gaze more intently on the unclean, can think nothing clean and holy; and while it drags one ardently to the completion of a shameful deed, it permits one to do nothing of any virtue. And because through its burning all things perish, not only the sons of Agag but all the sons of the women are slaughtered. Therefore it makes mothers without children, because the delight of lust, while like a sword it strikes the fruits of minds, by no means allows the thoughts of virtue or the good of work to live. Just as, therefore, it made mothers without children, so also its mother is made without children, when the sinner is so converted that, besides the guilt innate to us by nature, nothing of shameful works or motions seems to remain in the converted.

Hence it is also fittingly added: (Verse 33.) And Samuel cut Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal.

For what is cut in pieces is divided by small parts when dead. Agag is indeed killed when the vigor of the flesh is so crushed by fastings, vigils, and spiritual meditations that nothing lascivious, nothing lustful is felt to stir. For to kill him is for the flesh not to be able to stir shamefully. But the corpse of the slain is whole when its motion remains. Lust does not remain when it weighs down the mind only by its mere weight; that is, when a simple and natural motion of the flesh resides in the members, but it has nothing of lustful ardor. But this very thing, because the minds of the elect bear it heavily, they carry it as it were the whole corpse of a dead king. But what is it that he is cut in pieces, except that they do not wish to leave vigor even to the natural motion itself? He is therefore cut in pieces, because as often as it knocks, it is put to death. Therefore, while the alternations of motions are not allowed to come together, Agag is cut in pieces as it were by a hammer. Or perhaps this Agag is such that he cannot die unless cut in pieces. For, as I said above, lust is kindled after the manner of fire; and, if it is extinguished negligently, the adjacent stubble is quickly set ablaze. A great fire too, when dispersed, can often be extinguished better. For when many coals come together into one, they make a huge mass of embers.

Therefore, lest it be burned up by being extinguished all at once, the mass of coals is wisely scattered beforehand, so that it may be quickly extinguished through the separate pieces of each coal. For what are the thoughts of lust, what are the movements of the libidinous body, if not coals of fire? These, surely, if they come together in the heart or in the flesh, can quickly burn and can never easily be extinguished. Let the fire, then, be scattered, let Agag be cut into pieces, and let the mind be guarded, so that it disperses unclean thoughts and does not permit one to cling to another. For since it cannot bring about that it never thinks anything harmful, let it do what it can—that it immediately cast out the thought that enters the mind carelessly. Thus, surely, it divides the greatest fire, as it were, into individual coals and extinguishes it swiftly, if it so separates all the flames of its thoughts that it allows them to be joined in the mind neither through negligence nor through desire. Thus, surely, it also represses the vigor of the mind from the movement of the body, when it does not permit them to come together at all. For that alluring movement of the flesh, if it is not fed at all through thought, does not seem to come together with the other. For the glue of alluring movements is unclean thought, because he who willingly looks upon unclean things immediately moves the flesh violently by desiring what is loved; and the more quickly and the more lingeringly he thinks, he binds foul movements to fouler ones, as it were coals to coals.

Therefore let him who wishes powerfully to scatter the movements of the flesh maintain a strong guard of the mind. For within, beforehand, Agag is divided, so that outside he may likewise be cut into pieces; because for him who does not allow evil thoughts to come together, surely the shameful movements of the flesh are, as it were, cut into pieces. Thus indeed the fattest Agag is killed, if he is cut into pieces; because we then powerfully extinguish the sense of the flesh with its unclean movements, both in the body and in the soul, if we watch against each of its snares with singular intent. Hence that wise man also diligently admonishes, saying: With all watchfulness guard your heart, because from it life proceeds, and from neglect death comes forth (Proverbs 4:23). For life proceeds when the heart is guarded, because, while every uncleanness is driven back, the spirit of the converted is stirred toward the virtues. Therefore Agag is cut into pieces by the prophet when, through the counsel of teachers, the individual particles of uncleanness are destroyed both in the body and in the mind of the hearers. And well is it said that he is cut in pieces both before the Lord and in Gilgal; because those can powerfully divide the minutiae of alluring thoughts and shameful movements who know how to think wisely both about almighty God and about the holy Scriptures. But, as I said, teachers often endure the feigned goods of the wicked not for their own sake but for the sake of others; because what they do feignedly profits not the pretenders but those who see.

Often indeed the elect see the counterfeit goods of the wicked; but because they do not know their hearts, they imitate the good that appears to shine outwardly. Saul asked Samuel to return with him to adore the Lord; but he, having returned, cut Agag in pieces, because the elect teachers, through the works that the reprobate do, turn the elect to the zeal of seeing well. But because they do this by dispensation, that is, for the sake of something else, when the necessity of the dispensation passes, they abandon the reprobate themselves, whom they follow as if toward good works, once they have slipped into the impenitence of a reprobate heart. Well, therefore, is it added: (Vers. 4, 35.) But Samuel went away to Ramah, and Saul went up to his house in Gibeah, and Samuel saw him no more until the day of his death.

What is the house of the transgressor but the habit of evil work? For whoever is mocked in a perverse habit dwells, as it were, in a house. Saul therefore went up into his house when any reprobate, after the rebuke of the teachers, returns to the use of evil work. For he descends, as it were, to level ground when he feigns humility so as to learn the commands of the prelates. But what is it that Samuel is said to go away before Saul goes up into his house? But, as I said, when there is no necessity of others, the elect preacher cannot remain with the crafty man; and because in the absence of the teacher the pretender profits, Saul did not go into the house, but went up. For to go up is, for the reprobate, to advance from evil to worse.

For in the same way he is said to descend and is reported to ascend. For the proud man's ascending into his own house is his exalting himself by pride up to the measure at which he must be condemned. For the proud man's house is the measure of his wickedness. For while they are permitted through the prosperity of this world to exercise tyranny, to disturb the earth, to oppress the good, to afflict the innocent, what else do they appear to do but ascend? But because it has been foreordained by God how much they may harm, how much they may rage, how much they may exalt themselves through tyranny, they are permitted to ascend up to their own house. For their house is the measure of their wickedness, in which they will always be, because when they have come to full outrages, they are snatched away by death and punished by eternal torments. For he dwells, as it were, in his house who can never go out from the punishments of his own conduct. This can fittingly be understood not only of the proud but also of the luxurious and of all the reprobate. For in their ascent they were not yet in the house, of whom it is said: The sins of the Amorites are not yet fulfilled (Gen. 15:16). Hence also the blessed apostle Paul says: That they may fulfill their sins (1 Thess. 2:16). Therefore they ascend to the house when by progress in evil they advance to more wicked deeds, for which they will endure eternal torments.

But Samuel is said to depart into Ramatha. For the teachers who are separated from the reprobate do not go with them, but depart from them. For they go, when they abandon those who must be corrected, because those whom they dismiss as if in anger, they later return to when invited by their good amendment. Therefore the departure of the teacher is to abandon the impenitent wicked with perpetual punishment. For thus they abandon sins unto death, worked through impenitence, that they are no longer compelled to return to them. Well, therefore, did he say: Saul did not see Samuel any more until the day of his death. And because they perceive that this must be done in the contemplation of the highest truth, he is recorded to have departed into Ramatha. For consummate vision is the perfect reason of intimate truth. Therefore, lest the strictness of preachers be judged excessive by carnal men, when they separate the reprobate from the communion of the Church forever, let them hear that after Samuel came into Ramatha, he did not see Saul any more; because the teacher eternally divides off him whom he does not know to belong to the number of the elect. But this is believed with confidence, if in the form of Samuel the strict affection of holy charity of the Church is seen in the preachers. For the zeal of strictness is shown, because he is recorded not to have seen Saul until the day of his death. But concerning the affection of charity it is added: (Verse 35.) Nevertheless Samuel mourned for Saul, because the Lord repented that he had appointed Saul king over Israel.

For what is it that he mourns one whom he deigns not to look upon, unless it is that the holy teachers, even with the zeal of righteousness, possess the affection of great charity, and the very greatness of that charity is shown, because he is said to lament the king who has been cast off? With what affection, then, do they mourn the sins of their chosen subjects, who have learned so affectionately to mourn for the reprobate who have been cast off? For the earnestness of his grief is shown, because there is added:

CHAPTER III

(1 Kings 16:1) The Lord said to Samuel: How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, whom I have cast off, that he should not reign over Israel?

i. For to whom it is said, "How long dost thou mourn?" he is declared to mourn earnestly. Great, then, is the affection of the saints, even when they outwardly display the severity of vengeance. For outwardly they rage, but inwardly they melt with love. After the manner of mothers they beat their little ones, but with affection they groan together with the little ones whom they chastise. But what is it that the Lord says: "How long wilt thou mourn for Saul?" Can a mother look upon her son who is dying, and by no rending of her inmost being weep at all? She endures without mourning one who is dead, but she is sickened when he is dying. What is it that he says: "How long wilt thou mourn for Saul?" unless it is that the utterly lost are not to be mourned overmuch? For often a teacher is vehemently afflicted at the perdition of a subject, but is consoled by regard for the supreme justice. What, then, is this saying of God to the prophet, unless to relieve the mind of the preacher from affliction through inward consolation?

And because when prelates have fallen, the chosen are substituted by divine mercy, the Lord adds, saying: (Verse 1.) Fill your horn with oil, and come: I will send you to Jesse the Bethlehemite. For I have provided a king among his sons.

For as if consoling one who mourns, he says: Why is the person of the rejected one lamented, when a better one is substituted? Hence Saul too is shown not to have been provided for, but David is shown to have been provided. Therefore let it be weighed by swift consideration how great and of what sort he was who is appointed by the judgment and election of God almighty. But what is it that God provides, and the prophet is sent to anoint: unless that the spiritual customs of the holy Church are described, which is seen to appoint nothing except what it beholds God to have pre-chosen and pre-ordained? Come, he says, I will send you to Jesse the Bethlehemite. For I have provided a king among his sons. As if he should say: Presume nothing of yourself, but follow in ordaining the one whom I have foreseen. Hence also a little later he adds, saying: And you shall anoint the one whom I shall show you. What is this, unless that they ought to be prophets who wish to ordain others on the height of the Church? For they can know one foreseen by God, if to find the person of the bishop to be chosen they consult the sacred Scriptures. For as if God were speaking, it is shown when such a shepherd is chosen as is commended through the sacred eloquence. But according to the letter, Samuel is said to come from the Lord, that he may be recalled from compassion for the reprobate and rejected king.

But if he was seeking the restoration of the fallen one with unceasing grief, for him to come was to rest from such an intention. And he filled his horn with oil, because he tempered pastoral loftiness in anointing the king with the splendor of praise. For he attacked Saul with a harsh horn, because he struck down the sinner as with a great assault, saying: Because you have cast off the word of the Lord, the Lord has cast you off, that you may not be king. What then is it that the horn is commanded to be filled with oil, except that the justice of the king to be anointed is commended? As if he were saying: The king who is now anointed will not be to be struck with reproach, but to be proclaimed with the favor of wondrous praise; he does not need to be attacked, but to be favored. He is sent to Jesse the Bethlehemite, so that the king who is chosen may be taught that he will be permanent. For through the patriarch Jacob long before, the enduring state of the kingdom was shown, because he said: The scepter shall not fail from Judah, nor a leader from his thighs, until he comes who is to be sent. In the sons, therefore, of Jesse the king is declared to have been foreseen, so that the king who is commanded to be anointed may be taught to be not like Saul, about to withdraw, but enduring. As if he were rousing the prophet wasting away in the distress of the rejected one, saying: Why is the rejected one lamented for his guilt, when one to be praised is being substituted?

We have touched on these things according to the letter; now let us look, beneath the letter's narrative, at the election of our prelates. What is it that he is commanded to fill the horn with oil, unless it is that such a pastor is to be chosen in the holy Church who ought not to be rebuked as a transgressor, but to be commended with wondrous praises as an example to others? For a horn is the weapon of animals. But what are the authority and rebuke of the high priest, if not weapons? For they strike with the horn when the sharp points of reproof are joined to sinners. For to strike with the horn is to rebuke sinners sharply. The horn is filled with oil when the preacher's loftiness has not the harshness of threats but the soothing of favors. Or the horn is filled with oil when to the chosen pastor are given at once both the loftiness of the summit and the power of anointing, when one ascends to a high rank, but he who is raised on high is filled with an abundance of merits. Priests, therefore, are anointed with a full horn who arrive at the highest rank with a fullness of graces. But because fire is kindled by oil, the oil of the teacher is the love of the heart. In it fire is kindled, because in the richness of the mouth the virtue and grace of the Holy Spirit burn. Since, then, a teacher ought to have the richness of great charity, the king who is commanded to be anointed is ordered to be anointed with a full horn. The fullness of the horn is also spoken of for the perseverance of graces; for those who fail before the end do not deserve to be anointed with the fullness of the horn.

There is still more to be said about the fullness of the horn, because the command is given for this reason: that the one who ought to fill others from his own fullness needs a great anointing. Hence Moses too is said to have been so full that the Lord is shown to have taken from his spirit and given to others (Num 11). The horn of the prophet is filled when the pontifical sublimity is prepared to teach more perfect things. For when the princes of the Church are ordained, the things they ought to do are not to be proclaimed to them in half-measure. The pontiffs therefore fill the horn when they bring forth full and perfect virtues for the elect princes of the Church to imitate. But because those who anoint ought themselves to be spiritual, they are commanded to fill the horn. The horn is indeed of flesh, but it is not enclosed in flesh. The horn, then, is the spiritual conduct of the teacher. The horn pours out oil when the one who proclaims lofty things demonstrates them by a lofty manner of life. To fill the horn with oil, then, is to undertake the preaching of great virtues in a lofty manner of life. And he pours it on the head when he impresses it on the mind of the one who newly comes to the highest order. When the elect are promoted, therefore, they are anointed with a full horn, because they advance to the height of the order by the virtue of perfection.

But the prophet is sent to the Bethlehemite, and a king is provided from among his sons, because he is chosen as shepherd who has been instructed in ecclesiastical religion. Bethlehem, then, which is called the house of bread, what else does it designate but each one's gift of religion? For by the name of bread the teaching of perfection is shown, as Paul attests, who, rousing the weak to conversion, says: I gave you milk to drink, not solid food. For you were not yet able, but neither are you able now. For if milk is for little ones, bread is for none but the perfect. Hence also of the strength of the perfect man it is said: He shall dwell on high, the height of rocks is his stronghold, bread has been given to him. In the house of bread, therefore, a king is sought for anointing, because those are profitably advanced who are nourished in the order of a perfect manner of life. For he can make others strong who has not been nourished by a slack and negligent manner of life. In the house of bread, then, he is sought, because in advancing a prelate, the strength of his manner of life must be sought. Indeed, from a weak congregation a person of virtue is almost never received. Hence it is well said among the sons of Isaiah, who is called the salvation of the Lord, or certainly salvation absolutely. Salvation is rightly said of a prelate. For what are sins and vices but the sicknesses of souls? But the chosen preacher, through the integrity of sound doctrine, through the solidity of innocence, through the splendor of a chosen life, is rightly called the salvation of the Lord.

There are indeed other teachers whose speech creeps like gangrene. For from the household of these, no king is taken, because it does not lead sick minds to salvation but kills them. And it should be noted that Isai is called by another name, Jesse. He has a twofold name because a good teacher is not always in peace. In time of peace he is called the salvation of the Lord, so that he may be taught to heal the gifts of wars, as it were, within the secure vestibules of the house. In war, however, he has the name Jesse, because he both fortifies himself bravely and powerfully protects others. Jesse, indeed, is said to mean the relief of an island. But what is understood by the name of island, if not minds hedged about by the waves of temptations? They are islands indeed, because even if they endure great conflicts, they are not moved. Whence also the Psalmist, foretelling the victory of the elect, says: The Lord has reigned, let the earth exult, let many islands be glad (Ps. 97:1). The Lord indeed reigns when no turmoil of enemies disturbs his seat, namely the chosen minds; but the earth rejoices, because the solid hearts of teachers are gladdened. The islands are glad, because when temptations overcome his grace, the hearers of the greater ones rejoice. The earth indeed is the strong mind, and the firm tongue of the teacher. But the island is called the strong heart of the subject, which is still assailed by temptations, and yet is not moved. What is it, then, that Jesse is called the relief of the island, if not that through the strength of teachers the hearts of the lesser ones are lifted up?

For amid so many enticements of the tempter they would have fallen into one ruin, if their hearts were not lifted up to the desire of the lofty life by a greater strength. In Ibai, therefore, and in the sons of Jesse a king is described as lying hidden, because those come usefully to the height of the Church who have learned, by the teaching of the elect, both to keep and to order peace, or to keep silent about spiritual wars. Well, then, is it said: For I have foreseen for myself a king among his sons. For in these and not in others is a king foreseen, because by divine grace none attain to the height of the Church who do not follow the teaching of the elect through the appointed orders of time. It follows: (Vers. 2, 3.) And Samuel said: How shall I go? For Saul will hear, and will kill me. And the Lord said: You shall take a calf from the herd in your hand, and you shall say: I have come to sacrifice to the Lord. And you shall call Isai to the victim, and I will show you what you shall do.

What is shown by these words, except that the cunning and savagery of tyrants is sometimes to be eluded by pious deceit? For by the command of the Lord a calf is taken from the herd, the sacrifice is feigned, and one arrives at the royal anointing, because while tyrants desire to do harm, certain things are to be set before them which they may believe, so that they find no approach for doing harm. Thus tyrants are to be eluded, yet so that the guilt of lying is guarded against. This is then well accomplished, when that which is asserted is done, but what is done is so stated as to conceal it, because it is stated in part, and in part kept silent.

For the prophet Samuel is instructed to go to anoint a king, and to say that he is going to sacrifice to the Lord, not to anoint a king; so that by sacrificing he may speak the truth, and by concealing the anointing, while speaking the truth, he may soften the tyrant's savagery. For that he went away to sacrifice, he plainly explains a little later, where he says: "So Isai sanctified, and his sons, and called them to the feast."

But now it will be better done if we see what these things spiritually signify. What is it, then, that the prophet takes a calf in his hand, and so comes to anoint the king? But what is the calf, except the splendor of the image of the Redeemer? For since he strives to make the one whom he chooses conformed to the Redeemer, when he proclaims that very form of the Redeemer, he carries, as it were, a calf in his hand. And because he shows in the strength of action the splendor of the Lord's manner of life, which he preaches, he leads by the hand the calf which he receives from the herd. For to take a calf in the hand is to keep the preaching of the Lord's manner of life in the strength of action. Thus, surely, the valiant man is not slain; otherwise he would be slain, because he who says and does not do is condemned by the sword of his own mouth. What is it that he is commanded to say: "I have come to sacrifice to the Lord"? What is it likewise, that he does what he says, when he comes and sacrifices, except that such great efficacy ought to be in one who promotes others, that he not only says good things, but persuades them? Indeed, the victim of the sacrifice, which is seen in the prophet's hand, is recognized on the altar.

For what is the heart of the chosen hearer, if not the altar of God? For when a good teacher speaks with his mouth and shows it by his deed, the calf is in his hand. But when he persuades his hearers both by what he says and by what he does, the victim is on the altar. He then slays the sacrifice when chosen hearts receive through love what shines forth in the word and example of the teacher, by imitation of the Redeemer. It follows: And you shall call Isai to the sacrifice. Perhaps this passage suggests that subjects are not to be promoted without the knowledge of their prelates. Isai is first called to the sacrifice, so that the good which the subject is seen to undertake may be founded in the mind of his teacher. Well is it added: And I will show you what you shall do. Expressing this same thing, he also says: (Verse 3.) And you shall anoint whom I shall show you.

For unless Isai is first called, what is to be done is not revealed to him, because nothing concerning the person of a subject is to be done without the will of the teacher. Therefore, once he is called, what is to be done is shown, because with the will of a religious teacher, the humility of a subject is raised to the height of prelacy. But what is meant by "You shall anoint whom I shall show you," except that not all chosen pastors are equal disciples? For there are among them some who are, as it were, soldiers for obeying; others both obey humbly and have learned to command with discretion. He says therefore: You shall anoint whom I shall show you: so that, when a person is sought for the summit of the priesthood, he may be sought with great care.

By these words, certainly, nothing of their own is left to the ordainers of Churches in the election of others. Whom, he says, I shall have shown to you, him you shall anoint. Who are those who anoint whom God does not show, except those who, led by carnal affection, bring men to be ordained to the summit of Churches, who do not discern merits but accept persons? These indeed anoint kings, but not those who are shown by God. What is their own, they do; what is God's, they take away. For to show the person is God's part; to provide the anointing is the ordainer's. Therefore, while they themselves show to themselves whom they should anoint, they are unwilling to have God as their cooperator. Whence also through the prophet Hosea the Lord complains concerning such men's election, saying: They themselves have reigned, not from me; princes have come forth, and I did not know (Hosea 8:4). It is said, then, to the elect, what the reprobate cannot hear: You shall anoint whom I shall have shown to you: so that no one may be promoted unless he who is worthy of so great an order is determined by the praise of the Holy Scriptures. For in them the Lord speaks; there it is recorded what kind and how great a teacher of the Church ought to be. Therefore he is chosen as shown by the Lord who is commended through the sacred word. These things indeed the wicked rulers despise; the good do them. Concerning the obedience of the good, then, it is rightly added: (Verse 4.) Therefore Samuel did what the Lord spoke to him. He came to Bethlehem, and the elders of the city marveled, running to meet him.

The elders are astonished at the history, because the prophet was not accustomed to come there. In this place it is perhaps signified that chosen teachers ought scarcely ever to be seen in public, but to be frequent in secret, empty of civil affairs, full of spiritual ones. A miracle, then, is made for the people, when the person of the shepherd is seen in public. They marvel that he goes out, whom they knew to be a cultivator of secrecy. And because he is lifted up in great veneration of the people, the elders of the city, both marveling and having run to meet him, are reported. But because it is not the people but the elders who marvel, the perfect virtue of teachers is shown, which is preached not by the little and simple, but by the great and learned. They also inquire concerning the peaceful entrance of the prophet. As if, then, he were threatening a not peaceful entrance, who said: What do you wish, that I come to you in a rod, or in the spirit of gentleness? What is it, then, that is said: Your entrance is peaceful?

Unless it is that the elect faithful, when they consider well the deeds of spiritual teachers, weigh in them surely the divine will. For since they knew that Samuel was a prophet, they knew certainly that he had come to know the secrets of the divine dispensation. When, therefore, they ask about a peaceful entrance, what else do they do by asking than wish to know the secret of the divine counsel? Would that we too, as often as we behold holy men, would strive to inquire about the security of our peace, and diligently to learn from them what sort we are judged to be by God, who do not have the eyes of our knowledge. Therefore the entrance of teachers is peaceful when those come to them who are not to be struck down for guilt, but to be preached for righteousness. He therefore who had come as an advanced righteous man answered, saying: (Verse 5.) Peaceful, I have come to sacrifice to the Lord. Sanctify yourselves, and come with me, that we may sacrifice.

They go with the teachers to sacrifice who direct their intention to things above. And the prophet sacrifices before those who go, when the teacher binds by love in the hearts of those present that which he pronounces by word. But that we may attend a little to the history, it must be carefully examined what is said: Sanctify yourselves and come with me. For if they do not dare to be present at those who sacrifice unless they have been sanctified, what is to be thought concerning those who sacrifice? For to sanctify is to purify. How pure, then, ought the priests to be, when the people, invited to the sacrifice, are to be admitted only if sanctified?

For the sanctification of the body is chastity, the sanctification of the mind is charity and humility. Let him therefore be sanctified when invited to the sacrifice, but rather is that one compelled, by whom he is invited. Let priests take note of what they say to those invited: Come with me. For those who have been sanctified come with him, if pure priests approach the service of God together with pure peoples. For to go with him is for the pure to approach with the pure. For if the peoples are pure but the priests are not pure, they do not come with him, because they do not approach in an equal order of purity. Let such men hear what another prophet admonishes, saying: Be cleansed, you who bear the vessels of the Lord. Let them hear likewise what he says: Wash yourselves, be clean. Therefore, because the peoples are to be cleansed, he says: Be sanctified. And because likewise the highest men ought always to remain in the continual state of their own purity, and to draw others to the model of their purity, he adds: And come with me. But because the elders are invited to the victim, what do they show by this figure, except that for choosing a high priest, or for anointing and consecrating him, many wise and religious men are to be called? And these indeed are sanctified and come, if they resolve that in that election they will follow nothing carnal. For to be sanctified for them is to bring a spiritual and holy intention to the bestowal of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Well, moreover, in the figure of the elect, both concerning Isaiah and his sons it is said: (Verse.

5.) Therefore Isai sanctified himself and his sons, and called them to the sacrifice.

And since we have shown by the sacred words that the Lord makes known those to be chosen as priests, let us now see, as the mysteries of this sacred history speak, what sort of men he makes known and what sort he rejects. It follows: (Vers. 6–7.) And when they had entered, I saw Eliab, and he said: Is his Christ before the Lord? And the Lord said to Samuel: Do not look upon his countenance, nor upon the height of his stature, for I have rejected him, nor do I judge according to the sight of men. For man sees the things that appear, but the Lord will look upon the heart.

For what is it for the wise to enter, except to enter into the subtle sanctuary of discernment? But he saw Eliab in the entrance: because the shepherd of the holy Church recognizes that man to be worthy of preference who has both the strength of good work and the knowledge of truth. But what is it that the Lord commands him not to look upon his stature nor his countenance, except that in the holy Church neither work nor knowledge is preached without humility? For what is anyone's countenance, except his outward conduct, by which he is known? And what is his stature, except the height of knowledge, by which he is raised to higher things? Whom, then, does Eliab signify more rightly than those who do good and are learned, but are arrogant? Whence also Eliab is interpreted, My God is father. For this is his name, which they dare to presume.

For what is it that he is called "my father God," except that when they do good courageously and understand spiritual things wisely, they glory that through singular merit they have passed into the number of the sons of God? For they would say "our father," not "my father," to the almighty Lord, if through humility they saw themselves in common with the other elect in the order of the heavenly generation. Deservedly, then, he is rejected, because on the spiritual height none but the humble are preferred. Subtly, therefore, the prophet inquires about the person to be anointed, saying: Is his Christ before the Lord? This is done now, when the chief teacher knows both the life and the understanding of the one to be chosen, but still inquires about the virtue of humility. But he sees his countenance and his abject stature, when he recognizes in him whatever is beautiful in his work, whatever is lofty in his learning, without the virtue of humility. Deservedly, therefore, the Lord says: I have cast him off, nor do I judge according to the sight of man: because man sees in the face, but God will look into the heart. As if he should say: Men are accustomed to praise great works and words of knowledge; but I praise neither words nor works which I do not see founded in true humility. For those who are of this sort would shudder at the repulse of their unworthiness, if they wished to hear attentively what the Lord says to the prophet: Do not look upon his countenance nor upon the height of his stature, because I have cast him off.

For they consider it a great thing, what arrogant men do; but behold, the Lord says it is so vile that it is judged not even worthy of regard. But with this one set aside, what follows is shown: (Verse 8) And Jesse called Aminadab, and brought him before Samuel. Who said: Neither has the Lord chosen this one.

Aminadab is interpreted as "urbane" or "well-mannered." Therefore, by the Lord's counsel, merit is rejected: because the holy Church, for the governance of souls, does not choose one who is vigorous in secular affairs, but one adorned with spiritual conduct. For "urbane" men are those who, having set aside their intention toward heavenly things, try to show themselves vigorous in outward pursuits. Therefore the Lord did not choose this one either, because by the zeal of a pious pastor, heavenly things, not earthly, must be provided for the flocks of the faithful—not weak and failing things, but sublime and eternal.

(Verse 9) But Sama brought him, of whom he also said: Even this one the Lord has not chosen.

Sama is interpreted as "hearing." What then does Sama designate, if not the obedient and simple? For to hear is, for them, to accomplish by obedience the things commanded by their elders. Hence also concerning the obedience of the Gentile people it is said through the Psalmist: The people whom I did not know served me; with the hearing of the ear they obeyed me (Psalm 17:45). But what is it that they are said not to be chosen by the Lord, except that at the summit of the Church are placed not the unlearned humble, but the humble wise—those who both know how to do what is commanded, and wisely command what ought to be done? For he ought both to do and to teach.

Therefore let him act with humility, let him teach with wisdom. Since, then, those who know how to act through humility but do not know how to command through instruction are not to be taken up into royal dignity, Sama is said not to be chosen by the Lord for the kingdom. Hence, then, hence let the simple and the disobedient gather how punitively they thrust themselves forward to preside, if almighty God does not receive for rule even him who is called obedient through the humility of obedience. And because holy Church has many such men, both simple and well-living, and humble and wise, it follows: (Verse 10) And so Jesse brought all his sons before Samuel. And Samuel said: The Lord has not chosen from these.

That perfection is customarily designated by the number seven, the prophet Isaiah testifies, who, declaring the gifts of the Holy Spirit that remain in our Redeemer, says: And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and fortitude, the spirit of knowledge and piety, and the spirit of the fear of the Lord shall fill him (Isa. 11:2). What is it, then, that these who are driven back from the office of preaching are designated by the number seven, since that same number designates perfection, which no one has except from the infusion of the Holy Spirit? But this is fittingly asserted: because to many the grace of the Holy Spirit is given for living well, but is not given for teaching. And because they are many, and perfect in good action, they are aptly contained in the number seven.

Likewise, because they do robust things but do not understand subtle things, they are driven back from the governance of the kingdom. And so there are seven sons, and one of them is not taken up for the rule of souls: because even if by living well they know how to rule themselves with strength, they are in no way able to guard others with strength through teaching. Never should the ordainer of the Church rush himself so much in ordaining, because even if he has many who are not fit to undertake the care of souls, those who can preside over them cannot be lacking to him. Therefore let the teacher seek earnestly, let him not cease to seek, until he can find those who lie hidden. Indeed, the great virtues of the elect are, as it were, treasures of God Almighty, almost always hidden. For Almighty God acts after the manner of fearful rich men: because, lest he lose the treasures of virtues, he both places them in the minds of the elect and conceals them as mountains through secrecy. Therefore let him seek—whoever desires to ordain, or rather adorn, the head of the Church—the hidden treasures. He longs to adorn the bride of Christ; but he cannot, unless he brings forth the hidden treasures of the bridegroom for her adornment, and does not desist until he finds those who lie hidden. But what is it for good pastors to seek, when unless God brings forth their eyes [it seems one should read: the hidden ones], they cannot find them? For what else is it: I will show you the anointing? Nevertheless they are to be sought, because, unless they have been sought for a long time, they are shown only with the greatest difficulty. For the Lord also promises that he will show himself, and yet the prophet strives to seek, so that he may deserve to find.