And God seeing that the wickedness of men was great on the earth, and that all the thought of their heart was bent upon evil at all times, t repented him that he had made man on the earth. And being touched inwardly with sorrow of heart,
Haydock comment on Genesis 6 has these comments:
Ver. 5. At all times. Hebrew: only evil continually. They had no relish for any thing else: as we may say of a glutton, he thinks of nothing but his belly. Yet some good thoughts would occur occasionally, and we may grant that they did some things which were not sinful. M. --- If we follow corrupt nature, and live among sinners, we find a law within us warring against the spirit; and a very powerful grace is necessary to rescue us from such a dangerous situation. C. --- Though the expressions in this place seem general, they must be understood with some limitations. W.
Ver. 6. It repented him, &c. God, who is unchangeable, is not capable of repentance, grief, or any other passion. But these expressions are used to declare the enormity of the sins of men, which was so provoking as to determine their Creator to destroy these his creatures, whom before he had so much favoured. Ch. --- God acted outwardly as a man would do who repented. H.
No one of the commenters here was a Church Father, M = Menochius, C = ?, W, Witham, Ch. = Challoner, H. = Haydock.
What about Postilla in libros geneseos?
Videns autem Deus, quod multa malitia hominum et cetera. Posuit hominum culpam poena dignam. Hic ponit justam Dei indignationem, et puniendi dispositionem. Dicitur igitur, videns, etc. videns siquidem non tantum exteriora mala opera, sed interiores cogitationes et internos motus animorum. Unde sequitur, et quod cuncta cogitatio hominis intenta esset ad malum. Videt autem ista visione intelligentiae simplicis, non approbationis. Unde ex hoc incutit nobis timorem, qui non possumus effugere Dei cognitionem. Poenituit eum, quod hominem fecisset. More humano loquitur. Et est quaedam figura, quae anthropospathos dicitur, quando passiones hominum Deo attribuuntur. Mos autem hominum est, quod quando unum opus destruunt, faciunt ex cordis displicentia. Cum etiam aliquid fecerint, et quando putant, quod aliquod malum potest contingere, praeveniendo occurrunt et destruunt, et impediunt, et praetimentes in futurum timore peccata vitant. Tactus dolore cordis intrinsecus. In nobis enim actum detestationis sequitur passio doloris. Et isto modo hic loquitur more humano. Unde vult dicere, quod habuit displicentiam. Et accipit vel significat causam per effectum. Delebo hominem, quem creavi, a facie terrae, ab homine usque ad animantia. Sed quare delevit animantia? Dic, quod in signum detestationis eorum, pro quibus erant facta, et ut ostenderetur, quod non sunt, nec conservantur, nisi propter hominem.
|
|
I think "ignoti autoris" is wrong, and the older attributtion to St. Thomas is right, but that he wrote it when young, in Italy, before coming to Paris, probably already when he was still among Benedictines.
For the moment, I am not translating, just noting that he did not bring up what came to my mind. It can be noted, though, that he says, like one Church Father, that beasts were destroyed along with men, because they were created for men.
6:6 And the Lord God, having seen that the wicked actions of men were multiplied upon the earth, and that every one in his heart was intently brooding over evil continually, 7 then God laid it to heart that he had made man upon the earth, and he pondered it deeply. 8 And God said, I will blot out man whom I have made from the face of the earth, even man with cattle, and reptiles with flying creatures of the sky, for I am grieved that I have made them. 9 But Noah found grace before the Lord God.
THEODORET OF CYRUS. Why was the bulk of the human race wiped out by the flood? His intention was to annihilate Cain’s line, but since the tribe of the virtuous had intermarried with Cain’s line, it was also involved in the punishment. Wanting to make a beginning of a new way of life, he preserved Noah and his sons along with their wives, for Noah was good and righteous, one who had come from the line of the virtuous men and shunned intercourse with lawlessness. [Theodoret of Cyrus, Question 50 on Genesis]
DIDYMUS OF ALEXANDRIA. Even though the brute beasts did not act with free will, it was logical that they should perish along with the human being, for whom they were made to meet his needs, only an ember surviving from them along with Noah. [Didymus of Alexandria, Commentary on Genesis]
JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTIANOPLE. I am grieved that I have made them. Not that God regrets; perish the thought; rather, Sacred Scripture recounts it to us in human fashion so as to teach us that the excess of their sins aroused the loving God to such anger. “The Lord God reconsidered what he had done in creating the human being on the earth”- in other words, Surely by doing this I have not been responsible for making him fall into such disaster and become guilty of his own ruin? By doing this I placed him in a position of such dignity right from the very outset and showed such concern for him so that he might choose virtue and be saved from ruin. But since he did not cooperate with my loving kindness, it then proved better to put an end to his evil designs. [John Chrysostom, Homily 22 on Genesis]
AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. What in some Latin codices appears written thus: “and repented”. And God said: I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the earth, in Greek, who, rather than “repented,” may mean “reconsidered.” Also some Latin codices present this term. [Augustine of Hippo, Locutiones de Genesi. 14]
|
|
No, they not either ... in a sense perhaps later on Chrysostom on verses 10 to 14 (9 to 13 in the ordinary verse division):
And see how Scripture does not consider mankind worthy of more than unimportant memory, but calls them by the name of earth, at once indicating the gravity of their sins and the wrath of God. Now the earth was corrupt, it says, before God: that is, they did everything differently from how God had instructed them, trampling on His commandments, losing the inborn judge of human nature through idleness. Did you see, beloved, how evil sin is, how it brings it about that men are not worthy to be called by their own name? Again, hear what follows: And the Lord God saw the earth, and it was corrupt. See again how it calls them earth. And afterwards, having called them earth once, and again, and a third time, so that no one might suppose He speaks of the physical earth, it says: For all flesh had corrupted its way upon the earth. Nor here does it honor them with the name of man, but calls them flesh: by which it wishes to teach us that it speaks not of this earth, but of men clothed in flesh and devoting themselves completely to earthly works. [John Chrysostom, Homily 22 on Genesis]
Earth may be repeated, not because of being the basest element of the four, as Chrysostom knew them, but because of some kind of globalism. And flesh because of some point involving biology.
This brings us to my point, which no Church Father has directly denied : a man having all his thoughts on evil at all times need not involve his being himself evil, he could be forced by some globalism to
think of an evil.
What are masks in the streets supposed to "remind" us of? Well, Covid is an evil. No one pretends it is a good. But could part of the evil of our situation be to be reminded of it "at all times"?
Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Mary Magdalene
22.VII.2021
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire