Click *H for Haydock Commentary. *Footnote for footnote etc.
Click any word in Latin Greek or Hebrew to activate the parser. Then click on the display to expand the parser.
*H Hear ye these things, O house of Jacob, you that are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Juda, you who swear by the name of the Lord, and make mention of the God of Israel, but not in truth, nor in justice.
Ver. 1. Waters; people, (Apoc. xvii. 15. H.) or from the stock of Juda. Prov. v. 15. C. — He claimed the sovereign power, but had not the fortitude or wisdom of Israel. W.
*H For they are called of the holy city, and are established upon the God of Israel: the Lord of hosts is his name.
Ver. 2. City: citizens of Jerusalem. Dan. iii. 28. Mat. iv. 5.
*H The former things of old, I have declared, and they went forth out of my mouth, and I have made them to be heard: I did them suddenly and they came to pass.
Ver. 3. Suddenly, when there was no human appearance of the event, as when I foretold the exploits of Cyrus and the ruin of Babylon so long before.
*H For I knew that thou art stubborn, and thy neck is as an iron sinew, and thy forehead as brass.
Ver. 4. Brass; unblushing. Jer. iii. 3. C. — Os tuum ferreum. Cic. c. Piso.
*H See now all the things which thou hast heard: but have you declared them? I have shewn thee new things from that time, and things are kept which thou knowest not:
Ver. 6. Them. Could you have believed them? — Knowest not. He upbraids their ignorance and indocility.
*H They are created now, and not of old: and before the day, when thou heardest them not, lest thou shouldst say: Behold I knew them.
Ver. 7. Knew. Therefore I did not speak of the liberation from Egypt, but from Babylon, which is represented as just taking place. C.
*H Thou hast neither heard, nor known, neither was thy ear opened of old. For I know that transgressing thou wilt transgress, and I have called thee a transgressor from the womb.
Ver. 8. Opened; docile, (Theod.) or acquainted with these things. Isaias first made known the captivity of Babylon, and its end; and he insists so much, that people may discern the truth of his predictions, and of religion. No atheist can, with a good conscience, hold out against his arguments. C. xl. &c.
*H For my name's sake I will remove my wrath far off: and for my praise I will bridle thee, lest thou shouldst perish.
Ver. 9. Bridle thee, like a headstrong beast, (C.) running to its own ruin. H. — God pardons freely, that people may be saved if they will. W.
* Summa
*S Part 3, Ques 91, Article 1
[II-II, Q. 91, Art. 1]
Whether God Should Be Praised with the Lips?
Objection 1: It would seem that God should not be praised with the lips. The Philosopher says (Ethic. 1, 12): "The best of men ere accorded not praise, but something greater." But God transcends the very best of all things. Therefore God ought to be given, not praise, but something greater than praise: wherefore He is said (Ecclus. 43:33) to be "above all praise."
Obj. 2: Further, divine praise is part of divine worship, for it is an act of religion. Now God is worshiped with the mind rather than with the lips: wherefore our Lord quoted against certain ones the words of Isa. 29:13, "This people . . . honors [Vulg.: 'glorifies'] Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me." Therefore the praise of God lies in the heart rather than on the lips.
Obj. 3: Further, men are praised with the lips that they may be encouraged to do better: since just as being praised makes the wicked proud, so does it incite the good to better things. Wherefore it is written (Prov. 27:21): "As silver is tried in the fining-pot . . . so a man is tried by the mouth of him that praiseth." But God is not incited to better things by man's words, both because He is unchangeable, and because He is supremely good, and it is not possible for Him to grow better. Therefore God should not be praised with the lips.
_On the contrary,_ It is written (Ps. 62:6): "My mouth shall praise Thee with joyful lips."
_I answer that,_ We use words, in speaking to God, for one reason, and in speaking to man, for another reason. For when speaking to man we use words in order to tell him our thoughts which are unknown to him. Wherefore we praise a man with our lips, in order that he or others may learn that we have a good opinion of him: so that in consequence we may incite him to yet better things; and that we may induce others, who hear him praised, to think well of him, to reverence him, and to imitate him. On the other hand we employ words, in speaking to God, not indeed to make known our thoughts to Him Who is the searcher of hearts, but that we may bring ourselves and our hearers to reverence Him.
Consequently we need to praise God with our lips, not indeed for His sake, but for our own sake; since by praising Him our devotion is aroused towards Him, according to Ps. 49:23: "The sacrifice of praise shall glorify Me, and there is the way by which I will show him the salvation of God." And forasmuch as man, by praising God, ascends in his affections to God, by so much is he withdrawn from things opposed to God, according to Isa. 48:9, "For My praise I will bridle thee lest thou shouldst perish." The praise of the lips is also profitable to others by inciting their affections towards God, wherefore it is written (Ps. 33:2): "His praise shall always be in my mouth," and farther on: "Let the meek hear and rejoice. O magnify the Lord with me."
Reply Obj. 1: We may speak of God in two ways. First, with regard to His essence; and thus, since He is incomprehensible and ineffable, He is above all praise. In this respect we owe Him reverence and the honor of latria; wherefore Ps. 64:2 is rendered by Jerome in his Psalter [*Translated from the Hebrew]: "Praise to Thee is speechless, O God," as regards the first, and as to the second, "A vow shall be paid to Thee." Secondly, we may speak of God as to His effects which are ordained for our good. In this respect we owe Him praise; wherefore it is written (Isa. 63:7): "I will remember the tender mercies of the Lord, the praise of the Lord for all the things that the Lord hath bestowed upon us." Again, Dionysius says (Div. Nom. 1): "Thou wilt find that all the sacred hymns," i.e. divine praises "of the sacred writers, are directed respectively to the Blessed Processions of the Thearchy," i.e. of the Godhead, "showing forth and praising the names of God."
Reply Obj. 2: It profits one nothing to praise with the lips if one praise not with the heart. For the heart speaks God's praises when it fervently recalls "the glorious things of His works" [*Cf. Ecclus. 17:7, 8]. Yet the outward praise of the lips avails to arouse the inward fervor of those who praise, and to incite others to praise God, as stated above.
Reply Obj. 3: We praise God, not for His benefit, but for ours as stated. _______________________
SECOND
*H Behold I have refined thee, but not as silver, I have chosen thee in the furnace of poverty.
Ver. 10. Poverty, at Babylon. I have not treated thee with the utmost rigour, nor attempted to render thee free from every imperfection. C. — Sept. "Lo, I have sold thee, but not for silver; I have snatched thee from the," &c. H.
* Footnotes
-
*
Apocalypse
1:8
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, saith the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.
-
*
Apocalypse
22:13
I am Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
*H Assemble yourselves together, all you, and hear: who among them hath declared these things? the Lord hath loved him, he will do his pleasure in Babylon, and his arm shall be on the Chaldeans.
Ver. 14. Things, as I have done respecting Cyrus? (S. Cyr. &c.) who was a figure of Christ. v. 15.
*H Come ye near unto me, and hear this: I have not spoken in secret from the beginning: from the time before it was done, I was there, and now the Lord God hath sent me, and his spirit.
Ver. 16. Spirit. The Fathers here find the three Persons of the blessed Trinity specified. Isaias was not from the beginning, though the text may also speak of him (C.) as he spoke long before the event, by divine inspiration. Chal. S. Jer.
* Summa
*S Part 1, Ques 43, Article 8
[I, Q. 43, Art. 8]
Whether a Divine Person Is Sent Only by the Person Whence He Proceeds Eternally?
Objection 1: It would seem that a divine person is sent only by the one whence He proceeds eternally. For as Augustine says (De Trin. iv), "The Father is sent by no one because He is from no one." Therefore if a divine person is sent by another, He must be from that other.
Obj. 2: Further, the sender has authority over the one sent. But there can be no authority as regards a divine person except from origin. Therefore the divine person sent must proceed from the one sending.
Obj. 3: Further, if a divine person can be sent by one whence He does not proceed, then the Holy Ghost may be given by a man, although He proceeds not from him; which is contrary to what Augustine says (De Trin. xv). Therefore the divine person is sent only by the one whence He proceeds.
_On the contrary,_ The Son is sent by the Holy Ghost, according to Isa. 48:16, "Now the Lord God hath sent Me and His Spirit." But the Son is not from the Holy Ghost. Therefore a divine person is sent by one from Whom He does not proceed.
_I answer that,_ There are different opinions on this point. Some say that the divine person is sent only by the one whence He proceeds eternally; and so, when it is said that the Son of God is sent by the Holy Ghost, this is to be explained as regards His human nature, by reason of which He was sent to preach by the Holy Ghost. Augustine, however, says (De Trin. ii, 5) that the Son is sent by Himself, and by the Holy Ghost; and the Holy Ghost is sent by Himself, and by the Son; so that to be sent in God does not apply to each person, but only to the person proceeding from another, whereas to send belongs to each person.
There is some truth in both of these opinions; because when a person is described as being sent, the person Himself existing from another is designated, with the visible or invisible effect, applicable to the mission of the divine person. Thus if the sender be designated as the principle of the person sent, in this sense not each person sends, but that person only Who is the principle of that person who is sent; and thus the Son is sent only by the Father; and the Holy Ghost by the Father and the Son. If, however, the person sending is understood as the principle of the effect implied in the mission, in that sense the whole Trinity sends the person sent. This reason does not prove that a man can send the Holy Ghost, forasmuch as man cannot cause the effect of grace.
The answers to the objections appear from the above. _______________________
TREATISE ON THE CREATION (QQ. 44-49) _______________________
*H And thy seed had been as the sand, and the offspring of thy bowels like the gravel thereof: his name should not have perished, nor have been destroyed from before my face.
Ver. 19. Name. The Jews were not forgotten, till they had rejected the Messias.
* Footnotes
-
*
Jeremias
51:6
Flee ye from the midst of Babylon, and let every one save his own life: be not silent upon her iniquity: for it is the time of revenge from the Lord, he will render unto her what she hath deserved.
-
*
Apocalypse
18:4
And I heard another voice from heaven, saying: Go out from her, my people; that you be not partakers of her sins and that you receive not of her plagues.
* Footnotes
-
*
Exodus
17:6
Behold I will stand there before thee, upon the rock Horeb, and thou shalt strike the rock, and water shall come out of it that the people may drink. Moses did so before the ancients of Israel:
-
*
Numbers
20:11
And when Moses bad lifted up his hand, and struck the rock twice with the rod, there came forth water in great abundance, so that the people and their cattle drank,
*H They thirsted not in the desert, when he led them out: he brought forth water out of the rock for them, and he clove the rock, and the waters gushed out.
Ver. 21. Out. Their return was facilitated. This may easily be applied (C.) to the conversion of the Gentiles. S. Jer.
*H There is no peace to the wicked, saith the Lord.
Ver. 22. Peace. Sept. "rejoicing," or prosperity for the Chaldees or wicked Jews. v. 18. C. — It is promised only to the penitent. W.
* Summa
*S Part 3, Ques 29, Article 1
[II-II, Q. 29, Art. 1]
Whether Peace Is the Same As Concord?
Objection 1: It would seem that peace is the same as concord. For Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xix, 13): "Peace among men is well ordered concord." Now we are speaking here of no other peace than that of men. Therefore peace is the same as concord.
Obj. 2: Further, concord is union of wills. Now the nature of peace consists in such like union, for Dionysius says (Div. Nom. xi) that peace unites all, and makes them of one mind. Therefore peace is the same as concord.
Obj. 3: Further, things whose opposites are identical are themselves identical. Now the one same thing is opposed to concord and peace, viz. dissension; hence it is written (1 Cor. 16:33): "God is not the God of dissension but of peace." Therefore peace is the same as concord.
_On the contrary,_ There can be concord in evil between wicked men. But "there is no peace to the wicked" (Isa. 48:22). Therefore peace is not the same as concord.
_I answer that,_ Peace includes concord and adds something thereto. Hence wherever peace is, there is concord, but there is not peace, wherever there is concord, if we give peace its proper meaning.
For concord, properly speaking, is between one man and another, in so far as the wills of various hearts agree together in consenting to the same thing. Now the heart of one man may happen to tend to diverse things, and this in two ways. First, in respect of the diverse appetitive powers: thus the sensitive appetite tends sometimes to that which is opposed to the rational appetite, according to Gal. 5:17: "The flesh lusteth against the spirit." Secondly, in so far as one and the same appetitive power tends to diverse objects of appetite, which it cannot obtain all at the same time: so that there must needs be a clashing of the movements of the appetite. Now the union of such movements is essential to peace, because man's heart is not at peace, so long as he has not what he wants, or if, having what he wants, there still remains something for him to want, and which he cannot have at the same time. On the other hand this union is not essential to concord: wherefore concord denotes union of appetites among various persons, while peace denotes, in addition to this union, the union of the appetites even in one man.
Reply Obj. 1: Augustine is speaking there of that peace which is between one man and another, and he says that this peace is concord, not indeed any kind of concord, but that which is well ordered, through one man agreeing with another in respect of something befitting to both of them. For if one man concord with another, not of his own accord, but through being forced, as it were, by the fear of some evil that besets him, such concord is not really peace, because the order of each concordant is not observed, but is disturbed by some fear-inspiring cause. For this reason he premises that "peace is tranquillity of order," which tranquillity consists in all the appetitive movements in one man being set at rest together.
Reply Obj. 2: If one man consent to the same thing together with another man, his consent is nevertheless not perfectly united to himself, unless at the same time all his appetitive movements be in agreement.
Reply Obj. 3: A twofold dissension is opposed to peace, namely dissension between a man and himself, and dissension between one man and another. The latter alone is opposed to concord. _______________________
SECOND