This page copyright © 2002 Blackmask Online.
http://www.blackmask.com
(BY THE REV. S. THELWALL.)
The Spirit of God, and the Word of God, and the Reason of
God—Word of Reason, and Reason and Spirit of Word—Jesus Christ our
Lord, namely, who is both the one and the other,[2]—has determined for
us, the disciples of the New Testament, a new form of prayer; for in
this particular also it was needful that new wine should be laid up in
new skins, and a new breadth be sewn to a new garment.[3] Besides,
whatever had been in bygone days, has either been quite changed, as
circumcision; or else supplemented, as the rest of the Law; or else
fulfilled, as Prophecy; or else perfected, as faith itself. For the new
grace of God has renewed all things from carnal unto spiritual, by
superinducing the Gospel, the obliterator of the whole ancient bygone
system; in which our Lord Jesus Christ has been approved as the Spirit
of God, and the Word of God, and the Reason of God: the Spirit, by
which He was mighty; the Word, by which He taught; the Reason, by which
He came.[4] So the prayer composed by Christ has been composed of three
parts. In speech,[5] by which prayer is enunciated, in spirit, by which
alone it prevails, even John had taught his disciples to pray,[6] but
all John's doings were laid as groundwork for Christ, until, when "He
had increased "—just as the same John used to fore-announce "that it
was needful" that "He should increase and himself decrease"[7]—the
whole work of the forerunner passed over, together with his spirit
itself, unto the Lord. Therefore, after what form of words John taught
to pray is not extant, because earthly things have given place to
heavenly. "He who is from the earth," says John, "speaketh earthly
things; and He who is here from the heavens speaketh those things which
He hath seen."[8] And what is the Lord Christ's—as this method of
praying is—that is not heavenly? And so, blessed brethren, let us
consider His heavenly wisdom: first, touching the precept of praying
secretly, whereby He exacted man's faith, that he should be confident
that the sight and hearing of Almighty God are present beneath roofs,
and extend even into the secret place; and required modesty in faith,
that it should offer its religious homage to Him alone, whom it
believed to see and to hear everywhere. Further, since wisdom succeeded
in the following precept, let it in like manner appertain unto faith,
and the modesty of faith, that we think not that the Lord must be
approached with a train of words, who, we are certain, takes
unsolicited foresight for His own. And yet that very brevity—and let
this make for the third grade of wisdom—is supported on the substance
of a great and blessed interpretation, and is as diffuse in meaning as
it is compressed in words. For it has embraced not only the special
duties of prayer, be it veneration of God or petition for man, but
almost every discourse of the Lord, every record of His Discipline; so
that, in fact, in the Prayer is comprised an epitome of the whole
Gospel. 682
The prayer begins with a testimony to God, and with the reward of
faith, when we say, "Our Father who art in the heavens;" for (in so
saying), we at once pray to God, and commend faith, whose reward this
appellation is. It is written, "To them who believed on Him He gave
power to be called sons of God."[1] However, our Lord very frequently
proclaimed God as a Father to us; nay, even gave a precept "that we
call no one on earth father, but the Father whom we have in the
heavens:[2] and so, in thus praying, we are likewise obeying the
precept. Happy they who recognize their Father ! This is the reproach
that is brought against Israel, to which the Spirit attests heaven and
earth, saying, "I have begotten sons, and they have not recognized
me."[3] Moreover, in saying "Father," we also call Him "God." That
appellation is one both of filial duty and of power. Again, in the
Father the Son is invoked; "for I," saith He, "and the Father are
One."[4] Nor is even our mother the Church passed by, if, that is, in
the Father and the Son is recognized the mother, from whom arises the
name both of Father and of Son. In one general term, then, or word, we
both honour God, together with His own,[5] and are mindful of the
precept, and set a mark on such as have forgotten their Father.
The name of "God the Father" had been published to none. Even
Moses, who had interrogated Him on that very point, had heard a
different name.[6] To us it has been revealed in the Son, for the Son
is now the Father's new name. "I am come," saith He, "in the Father's
name;"[7] and again, "Father, glorify Thy name;"[8] and more openly, "I
have manifested Thy name to men." [9] That name, therefore, we pray may
"be hallowed." Not that it is becoming for men to wish God well, as if
there were any other[10] by whom He may be wished well, or as if He
would suffer unless we do so wish. Plainly, it is universally becoming
for God to be blessed" in every place and time, on account of the
memory of His benefits ever due from every man. But this petition also
serves the turn of a blessing. Otherwise, when is the name of God not
"holy," and "hallowed" through Himself, seeing that of Himself He
sanctifies all others—He to whom that surrounding circle of angels
cease not to say, "Holy, holy, holy?"[12] In like wise, therefore, we
too, candidates for angelhood, if we succeed in deserving it, begin
even here on earth to learn by heart that strain hereafter to be raised
unto God, and the function of future glory. So far, for the glory of
God. On the other hand, for our own petition, when we say, "Hallowed be
Thy name," we pray this; that it may be hallowed in us who are in Him,
as well in all others for whom the grace of God is still waiting;[13]
that we may obey this precept, too, in "praying for all,"[14] even for
our personal enemies.[15] And therefore with suspended utterance, not
saying, "Hallowed be it in us, "we say,—"in all."
According to this model,[16] we subjoin, "Thy will be done in the
heavens and on the earth;"[17] not that there is some power
withstanding [18] to prevent God's will being done, and we pray for Him
the successful achievement of His will; but we pray for His will to be
done in all. For, by figurative interpretation of flesh and spirit, we
are "heaven" and "earth;" albeit, even if it is to be understood
simply, still the sense of the petition is the same, that in us God's
will be done on earth, to make it possible, namely, for it to be done
also in the heavens. What, moreover, does God will, but that we should
walk according to His Discipline? We make petition, then, that He
supply us with the substance of His will, and the capacity to do it,
that we may be saved both in the heavens and on earth; because the sum
of His will is the salvation of them whom He has adopted. There is,
too, that will of God which the Lord accomplished in preaching, in
working, in enduring: for if He Himself proclaimed that He did not His
own, but the Father's will, without doubt those things which He used to
do were the Father's will;[19] unto which things, as unto exemplars, we
are now provoked;[10] to preach, to work, to endure even unto death.
And we need the will of God, that we may be able to fulfil these
duties. Again, in saying, "Thy will be done," we are even wishing well
to ourselves, in so far that there is nothing of evil in the will of
God; even if, proportionably to each one's deserts, somewhat other [1]
is imposed on us. So by this expression we premonish our own selves
unto patience. The Lord also, when He had wished to demonstrate to us,
even in His own flesh, the flesh's infirmity, by the reality of
suffering, said, "Father, remove this Thy cup;" and remembering
Himself, added, "save that not my will, but Thine be done."[2] Himself
was the Will and the Power of the Father: and yet, for the
demonstration of the patience which was due, He gave Himself up to the
Father's Will.
"Thy kingdom come" has also reference to that whereto "Thy will
be done" refers—in us, that is. For when does God not reign, in whose
hand is the heart of all kings ?[3] But whatever we wish for ourselves
we augur for Him, and to Him we attribute what from Him we expect. And
so, if the manifestation of the Lord's kingdom pertains unto the will
of God and unto our anxious expectation, how do some pray for some
protraction of the age,[4] when the kingdom of God, which we pray may
arrive, tends unto the consummation of the age?[5] Our wish is, that
our reign be hastened, not our servitude protracted. Even if it had not
been prescribed in the Prayer that we should ask for the advent of the
kingdom, we should, unbidden, have sent forth that cry, hastening
toward the realization of our hope. The souls of the martyrs beneath
the altar [6] cry in jealousy unto the Lord "How long, Lord, dost Thou
not avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth ?"[7] for, of
course, their avenging is regulated by[8] the end of the age. Nay,
Lord, Thy kingdom come with all speed,—the prayer of Christians the
confusion of the heathen,[9] the exultation of angels, for the sake of
which we suffer, nay, rather, for the sake of which we pray!
But how gracefully has the Divine Wisdom arranged the order of
the prayer; so that after things heavenly—that is, after the "Name" of
God, the "Will" of God, and the "Kingdom" of God—it should give
earthly necessities also room for a petition ! For the Lord had[10]
withal issued His edict, "Seek ye first the kingdom, and then even
these shall be added:"[11] albeit we may rather understand, "Give us
this day our daily bread," spiritually. For Christ is our Bread;
because Christ is Life, and bread is life. "I am," saith He, "the Bread
of Life;"[12]and, a little above, "The Bread is the Word of the living
God, who came down from the heavens."[13] Then we find, too, that His
body is reckoned in bread: "This is my body.''[14] And so, in
petitioning for "daily bread," we ask for perpetuity in Christ, and
indivisibility from His body. But, because that word is admissible in a
carnal sense too, it cannot be so used without the religious
remembrance withal of spiritual Discipline; for (the Lord) commands
that bread be prayed for, which is the only food necessary for
believers; for "all other things the nations seek after."[15] The like
lesson He both inculcates by examples, and repeatedly handles in
parables, when He says, "Doth a father take away bread from his
children, and hand it to dogs ?"[16] and again, "Doth a father give his
son a stone when he asks for bread?"[17] For He thus shows what it is
that sons expect from their father. Nay, even that nocturnal knocker
knocked for "bread."[18] Moreover, He Justly added, "Give us this day,"
seeing He had previously said, "Take no careful thought about the
morrow, what ye are to eat."[19] To which subject He also adapted the
parable of the man who pondered on an enlargement of his barns for his
forthcoming fruits, and on seasons of prolonged security; but that very
night he dies.[20]
It was suitable that, after contemplating the liberality of
God,[21] we should likewise address His clemency. For what will
aliments[22] 684
profit us, if we are really consigned to them, as it were a bull destined for a victim?[1] The Lord knew Himself to be the only guiltless One, and so He teaches that we beg "to have our debts remitted us." A petition for pardon is a full confession; because he who begs for pardon fully admits his guilt. Thus, too, penitence is demonstrated acceptable to God who desires it rather than the death of the sinner.[2] Moreover, debt is, in the Scriptures, a figure of guilt; because it is equally due to the sentence of judgment, and is exacted by it: nor does it evade the justice of exaction, unless the exaction be remitted, just as the lord remitted to that slave in the parable his debt;[3] for hither does the scope of the whole parable tend. For the fact withal, that the same servant, after liberated by his lord, does not equally spare his own debtor; and, being on that account impeached before his lord, is made over to the tormentor to pay the uttermost farthing—that is, every guilt, however small: corresponds with our profession that "we also remit to our debtors;" indeed elsewhere, too, in conformity with this Form of Prayer, He saith, "Remit, and it shall be remitted you."[4] And when Peter had put the question whether remission were to be granted to a brother seven times, "Nay," saith He, "seventy-seven times;"[5] in order to remould the Law for the better; because in Genesis vengeance was assigned "seven times" in the case of Cain, but in that of Lamech "seventy-seven times."[6]
For the completeness of so brief a prayer He added—in order that
we should supplicate not touching the remitting merely, but touching
the entire averting, of acts of guilt" Lead us not into temptation:"
that is, suffer us not to be led into it, by him (of course) who
tempts; but far be the thought that the Lord should seem to tempt,[7]
as if He either were ignorant of the faith of any, or else were eager
to overthrow it. Infirmity[8] and malice' are characteristics of the
devil. For God had commanded even Abraham to make a sacrifice of his
son, for the sake not of tempting, but proving, his faith; in order
through him to make an example for that precept of His, whereby He was,
by and by, to enjoin that he should hold no pledges of affection dearer
than God.[10] He Himself, when tempted by the devil, demonstrated who
it is that presides over and is the originator of temptation." This
passage He confirms by subsequent ones, saying, "Pray that ye be not
tempted;"[12] yet they were tempted, (as they showed) by de-setting
their Lord, because they had given way rather to sleep than prayer.[13]
The final clause, therefore, is consonant, and interprets the sense of
"Lead us not into temptation;" for this sense is, "But convey us away
from the Evil One."
In summaries of so few words, how many utterances of the
prophets, the Gospels, the apostles—how many discourses, examples,
parables of the Lord, are touched on! How many duties are
simultaneously discharged! The honour of God in the "Father;" the
testimony of faith in the "Name;" the offering of obedience in the
"Will;" the commemoration of hope in the "Kingdom;" the petition for
life in the "Bread;" the full acknowledgment of debts in the prayer for
their "Forgiveness;" the anxious dread of temptation in the request for
"Protection." What wonder? God alone could teach how he wished Himself
prayed to. The religious rite of prayer therefore, ordained by Himself,
and animated, even at the moment when it was issuing out of the Divine
mouth, by His own Spirit, ascends, by its own prerogative, into heaven,
commending to the Father what the Son has taught.
Since, however, the Lord, the Foreseer of human necessities,[15]
said separately, after delivering His Rule of Prayer, "Ask, and ye
shall receive;"[16] and since there are petitions which are made
according to the circumstances of each individual; our additional wants
have the right—after beginning with the legitimate and customary
prayers as a foundation, as it were—of rearing an outer superstructure
of petitions, yet with remembrance of the Master's precepts.
That we may not be as far from the ears of God as we are from His
precepts,[1] the memory of His precepts paves for our prayers a way
unto heaven; of which precepts the chief is, that we go not up unto
God's altar[2] before we compose whatever of discord or offence we have
contracted with our brethren.[3] For what sort of deed is it to
approach the peace of God[4] without peace? the remission of debts s
while you retain them? How will he appease his Father who is angry with
his brother, when from the beginning "all anger" is forbidden us?[6]
For even Joseph, when dismissing his brethren for the purpose of
fetching their father, said, "And be not angry in the way."[7] He
warned us, to be sure, at that time (for elsewhere our Discipline is
called "the Way"[8]), that when, set in "the way" of prayer, we go not
unto "the Father" with anger. After that, the Lord, "amplifying the
Law,"[9] openly adds the prohibition of anger against a brother to that
of murder.[10] Not even by an evil word does He permit it to be
vented.[11] Ever if we must be angry, our anger must not be maintained
beyond sunset, as the apostle admonishes.[12] But how rash is it either
to pass a day without prayer, while you refuse to make satisfaction to
your brother; or else, by perseverance in anger, to lose your prayer?
Nor merely from anger, but altogether from all perturbation of
mind, ought the exercise of prayer to be free, uttered from a spirit
such as the Spirit unto whom it is sent. For a defiled spirit cannot be
acknowledged by a holy Spirit,[13] nor a sad by a joyful,[14] nor a
lettered by a free.[15] No one grants reception to his adversary: no
one grants admittance except to his compeer.
But what reason is there in going to prayer with hands indeed washed, but the spirit foul?—inasmuch as to our hands themselves spiritual purities are necessary, that they may be "lifted up pure"[16] from falsehood, from murder, from cruelty, from poisonings,[17] from idolatry, and all the other blemishes which, conceived by the spirit, are effected by the operation of the hands. These are the true purities;[18] not those which most are superstitiously careful about, taking water at every prayer, even when they are coming from a bath of the whole body. When I was scrupulously making a thorough investigation of this practice, and searching into the reason of it, I ascertained it to be a commemorative act, bearing on the surrender[19] of our Lord. We, howsoever, pray to the Lord: we do not surrender Him; nay, we ought even to set ourselves in opposition to the example of His surrenderer, and not, on that account, wash our hands. Unless any defilement contracted in human intercourse be a conscientious cause for washing them, they are otherwise clean enough, which together with our whole body we once washed in Christ.[20]
Albeit Israel washed daily all his limbs over, yet is he never
clean. His hands, at all events, are ever unclean, eternally dyed with
the blood of the prophets, and of the Lord Himself; and on that
account, as being hereditary culprits from their privity to their
fathers' crimes,[21] they do not dare even to raise them unto the
Lord,[22] for fear some Isaiah should cry out,[23] for fear Christ
should utterly shudder. We, however, not only raise, but even expand
them; and, taking our model from the Lord's passion? even in prayer we
confess[25] to Christ.
But since we have touched on one special point of empty
observance,[26] it will not be irksome to set our brand likewise on the
other points against which the reproach of vanity may deservedly be
laid; if, that is, they are observed without the authority of any
precept either of the Lord, or else of the apostles. For matters of
this kind belong not to religion, but to superstition, being studied,
and forced, and of curious rather than rational ceremony;[1] deserving
of restraint, at all events, even on this ground, that they put us on a
level with Gentiles.[2] As, e.g., it is the custom of some to make
prayer with cloaks doffed, for so do the nations approach their idols;
which practice, of course, were its observance becoming, the apostles,
who teach concerning the garb of prayer.[3] would have comprehended in
their instructions, unless any think that is was in prayer that Paul
had left his cloak with Carpus![4] God, forsooth, would not hear
cloaked suppliants, who plainly heard the three saints in the
Babylonian king's furnace praying in their trousers and turbans.[5]
Again, for the custom which some have of sitting when prayer is
ended, I perceive no reason, except that which children give.[6] For
what if that Hermas,[7] whose writing is generally inscribed with the
title The Shepherd, had, after finishing his prayer, not sat down on
his bed, but done some other thing: should we maintain that also as a
matter for observance? Of course not. Why, even as it is the sentence,
"When I had prayed, and had sat down on my bed," is simply put with a
view to the order of the narration, not as a model of discipline. Else
we shall have to pray nowhere except where there is a bed! Nay, whoever
sits in a chair or on a bench, will act contrary to that writing.
Further: inasmuch as the nations do the like, in sitting down after
adoring their petty images; even on this account the practice deserves
to be censured in us, because it is observed in the worship of idols.
To this is further added the charge of irreverence,—intelligible even
to the nations themselves, if they had any sense. If, on the one hand,
it is irreverent to sit under the eye, and over against the eye, of him
whom you most of all revere and venerate; how much more, on the other
hand, is that deed most irreligious under the eye of the living God,
while the angel Of prayer is still standing by[8] unless we are
upbraiding God that prayer has wearied us!
But we more commend our prayers to God when we pray with modesty
and humility, with not even our hands too loftily elevated, but
elevated temperately and becomingly; and not even our countenance
over-boldly uplifted. For that publican who prayed with humility and
dejection not merely in his supplication, but in his countenance too,
went his way "more justified" than the shameless Pharisee.[9] The
sounds of our voice, likewise, should be subdued; else, if we are to be
heard for our noise, how large windpipes should we need! But God is the
hearer not of the voice, but of the heart, just as He is its inspector.
The demon of the Pythian oracle says: "And I do understand the mute,
and plainly hear the speechless one."[10]
Do the ears of God wait for sound? How, then, could Jonah's
prayer find way out unto heaven from the depth of the whale's belly,
through the entrails of so huge a beast; from the very abysses, through
so huge a mass of sea? What superior advantage will they who pray too
loudly gain, except that they annoy their neighbours? Nay, by making
their petitions audible, what less error do they commit than if they
were to pray in public?[11]
Another custom has now become prevalent. Such as are fasting
withhold the kiss of peace, which is the seal of prayer, after prayer
made with brethren. But when is peace more to be concluded with
brethren than when, at the time of some religious observance,[12] our
prayer ascends with more acceptability; that they may themselves
participate in our observance, and thereby be mollified for transacting
with their brother touching. their own peace? What prayer is complete
if divorced from the "holy kiss?"[23] Whom does peace impede when
rendering service to his Lord? What kind of sacrifice is that from
which men depart without peace? Whatever our prayer be, it will not be
better than the observance of the precept by which we are bidden to
conceal our fasts;[14] for now, by abstinence from the kiss, we are
known to be fasting. But even if there be some reason far this
practice, still, lest you offend against this precept, you may perhaps
defer your "peace "at home, where it is not possible for your fast to
be en- 687
tirely kept secret. But wherever else you can conceal your observance, you ought to remember the precept: thus you may satisfy the requirements of Discipline abroad and of custom at home. So, too, on the day of the passover,[1] when the religious observance of a fast is general, and as it were public, we justly forego the kiss, caring nothing to conceal anything which we do in common with all.
Similarly, too, touching the days of Stations,[2] most think that
they must not be present at the sacrificial prayers, on the ground that
the Station must be dissolved by reception of the Lord's Body. Does,
then, the Eucharist cancel a service devoted to God, or bind it more to
God? Will not your Station be more solemn if you have withal stood at
God's altar?[3] When the Lord's Body has been received and reserved?
each point is secured, both the participation of the sacrifice and the
discharge of duty. If the "Station" has received its name from the
example of military life—for we withal are God's military[5]—of
course no gladness or sadness chanting to the camp abolishes the
"stations" of the soldiers: for gladness will carry out discipline more
willingly, sadness more carefully.
So far, however, as regards the dress of women, the variety of
observance compels us—men of no consideration whatever—to treat,
presumptuously indeed, after the most holy apostle,[6] except in so far
as it will not be presumptuously if we treat the subject in accordance
with the apostle. Touching modesty of dress and ornamentation, indeed,
the prescription of Peter[7] likewise is plain, checking as he does
with the same mouth, because with the same Spirit, as Paul, the glory
of garments, and the pride of gold, and the meretricious elaboration of
the hair.
But that point which is promiscuously observed throughout the
churches, whether virgins ought to be veiled or no, must be treated of.
For they who allow to virgins immunity from head-covering, appear to
rest on this; that the apostle has not defined "virgins" by name, but
"women,"[8] as "to be veiled;" nor the sex generally, so as to say
"females," but a class of the sex, by saying "women:" for if he had
named the sex by saying "females," he would have made his limit
absolute for every woman; but while he names one class of the sex, he
separates another class by being silent. For, they say, he might either
have named "virgins" specially; or generally, by a compendious term,
"females."
They who make this concession[9] ought to reflect on the nature
of the word itself—what is the meaning of "woman" from the very first
records of the sacred writings. Here they find it to be the name of the
sex, not a class of the sex: if, that is, God gave to Eve, when she had
not yet known a man, the surname "woman" and "female"[10]—("female,"
whereby the sex generally; "woman," hereby a class of the sex, is
marked).[11] So, since at that time the as yet unwedded Eve was called
by the word "woman," that word has been made common even to a
virgin.[12] Nor is it wonderful that the apostle—guided, of course, by
the same Spirit by whom, as all the divine Scripture, so that book
Genesis, was drawn up—has used the selfsame word in writing "women,"
which, by the example of Eve unwedded, is applicable too to a "virgin."
In fact, all the other passages are in consonance herewith. For even by
this very fact, that he has not named "virgins" (as he does in another
place[13] where he is teaching touching marrying), he sufficiently
predicates that his remark is made touching every woman, and touching
the whole sex; and that there is no distinction made between a "virgin"
and any other, while he does not name her at all. For he who
elsewhere—namely, where the difference requires—remembers to make the
distinction, (moreover, he makes it by designating each species by
their appropriate names,) wishes, where he makes no distinction (while
he does not name each), no difference to be understood. What of the
fact that in the Greek speech, in which the apostle wrote his letters,
it is usual to say, "women" rather than "females;" that is, gunaikas
(gunaikas) rather than qhleias (theleias)? Therefore if that
word,[1] which by interpretation represents what "female" (femina)
represents,[2] is frequently used instead of the name of the sex? he
has named the sex in saying gunaika ; but in the sex even the virgin
is embraced. But, withal, the declaration is plain: "Every woman,"
saith he, "praying and prophesying with head uncovered,[4] dishonoureth
her own head."[5] What is "every woman, but woman of every age, of
every rank, of every condition? By saying" every" he excepts nought of
womanhood, just as he excepts nought of manhood either from not being
covered; for just so he says, "Every man."[6] As, then, in the
masculine sex, under the name of" man" even the" youth" is forbidden to
be veiled; so, too, in the feminine, under the name of "woman," even
the "virgin" is bidden to be veiled. Equally in each sex let the
younger age follow the discipline of the elder; or else let the male
"virgins,"[7] too, be veiled, if the female virgins withal are not
veiled, because they are not mentioned by name. Let "man" and "youth"
be different, if "woman" and "virgin" are different. For indeed it is
"on account of the angels"[8] that he saith women must be veiled,
because on account of "the daughters of men" angels revolted from
God.[9] Who then, would contend that "women" alone—that is,[10] such
as were already wedded ant had lost their virginity—were the objects
of angelic concupiscence, unless "virgins" are incapable of excelling
in beauty and finding lovers? Nay, let us see whether it were not
virgins alone whom they lusted after; since Scriptures saith "the
daughters of men;"[11] inasmuch as it might have named "wives of men,"
or "females," indifferently.[12] Likewise, in that it saith, "And they
took them to themselves for wives,"[13] it does so on this ground,
that, of course, such are "received for wives" as are devoid of that
title. But it would have expressed itself differently concerning such
as were not thus devoid. And so (they who are named) are devoid as much
of widowhood as of virginity. So completely has Paul by naming the sex
generally, mingled "daughters" and species together in the genus.
Again, while he says that "nature herself,"[14] which has assigned hair
as a tegument and ornament to women, "teaches that veiling is the duty
of females," has not the same tegument and the same honour of the head
been assigned also to virgins? If "it is shameful" for a woman to be
shorn it is similarly so to a virgin too. From them, then, to whom is
assigned one and the same law of the head,[15] one and the same
discipline[16] of the head is exacted,—(which extends) even unto those
virgins whom their childhood defends,[17] for from the first[18] a
virgin was named "female." This custom,[19] in short, even Israel
observes; but if Israel did not observe it, our Law,[20] amplified and
supplemented, would vindicate the addition for itself; let it be
excused for imposing the veil on virgins also. Under our dispensation,
let that age which is ignorant of its sex[21] retain the privilege of
simplicity. For both Eve and Adam, when it befell them to be
"wise,"[22] forthwith veiled what they had learnt to know? [23] At all
events, with regard to those in whom girlhood has changed (into
maturity), their age ought to remember its duties as to nature, so
also, to discipline; for they are being transferred to the rank of
"women" both in their persons and in their functions. No one is a
"virgin" from the time when she is capable of marriage; seeing that, in
her, age has by that time been wedded to its own husband, that is, to
time.[24] "But some particular virgin has devoted herself to God. From
that very moment she both changes the fashion of her hair, and converts
all her garb into that of a 'woman.'" Let her, then, maintain the
character wholly, and perform the whole function of a "virgin:" what
she conceals[25] for the sake of God, let her cover quite over.[26] It
is our business to entrust to the knowledge of God alone that which the
grace of God effects in us, test we receive from man the reward we hope
for from God.[27] Why do you denude before God[28] what you cover
before men?[1] Will you be more modest in public than in the church? If
your self-devotion is a grace of God, and you have received it, "why do
you boast," saith he, "as if you have not received it? "[2] Why, by
your ostentation of yourself, do you judge others? Is it that, by your
boasting, you invite others unto good? Nay, but even you yourself run
the risk of losing, if you boast; and you drive others unto the same
perils What is assumed from love of boasting is easily destroyed. Be
veiled, virgin, if virgin you are; for you ought to blush. If you are a
virgin, shrink from (the gaze of) many eyes. Let no one wonder at your
face; let no one perceive your falsehood.[3] You do well in falsely
assuming the married character, if you veil your head; nay, you do not
seem to assume it falsely, for you are wedded to Christ: to Him you
have surrendered your body; act as becomes your Husband's discipline.
If He bids the brides of others to be veiled, His own, of course, much
more. "But each individual man[4] is not to think that the institution
of his predecessor is to be overturned." Many yield up their own
judgment, and its consistency, to the custom of others. Granted that
virgins be not compelled to be veiled, at all events such as
voluntarily are so should not be prohibited; who, likewise, cannot
deny themselves to be virgins,[5] content, in the security of a good
conscience before God, to damage their own fame.[6] Touching such,
however, as are betrothed, I can with constancy "above my small
measure"[7] pronounce and attest that they are to be veiled from that
day forth on which they shuddered at the first bodily touch of a man by
kiss and hand. For in them everything has been forewedded: their age,
through maturity; their flesh, through age; their spirit, through
consciousness; their modesty, through the experience of the kiss their
hope, through expectation; their mind through volition. And Rebecca is
example enough for us, who, when her betrothed had been pointed out,
veiled herself for marriage merely on recognition of him.[8]
In the mattter of kneeling also prayer is subject to diversity of
observance, through the act of some few who abstain from kneeling on
the Sabbath; and since this dissension is particularly on its trial
before the churches, the Lord will give His grace that the dissentients
may either yield, or else indulge their opinion without offence to
others. We, however (just as we have received), only on the day of the
Lord's Resurrection ought to guard not only against kneeling, but every
posture and office of solicitude; deferring even our businesses lest we
give any place to the devil.[9] Similarly, too, in the period of
Pentecost; which period we distinguish by the same solemnity of
exultation.[10] But who would hesitate every day to prostrate himself
before God, at least in the first prayer with which we enter on the
daylight? At fasts, moreover, and Stations, no prayer should be made
without kneeling, and the remaining customary marks of humility; for
(then)[11] we are not only praying, but deprecating, and making
satisfaction to God our Lord.[12] Touching times of prayer nothing at
all has been prescribed, except clearly "to pray at every time and
every place."[13]
But how" in every place," since we are prohibited[14] (from
praying) in public? In every place, he means, which opportunity or even
necessity, may have rendered suitable: for that which was done by the
apostles[15] (who, in gaol, in the audience of the prisoners, "began
praying and singing to God") is not considered to have been done
contrary to the precept; nor yet that which was done by Paul,[16] who
in the ship, in presence of all, "made thanksgiving to God."[17]
Touching the time, however, the extrinsic[18] observance of
certain hours will not be unprofitable—those common hours, I mean,
which mark the intervals of the day—the third, the sixth, the
ninth—which we may find in the Scriptures to have been more solemn
than the rest. The first infusion of the Holy Spirit into the
congregated disciples took place at "the third hour."[1] Peter, on the
day on which he experienced the vision of Universal Community,[2]
(exhibited) in that small vessel,[3] had ascended into the more lofty
parts of the house, for prayer's sake "at the sixth hour."[4] The same
(apostle) was going into the temple, with John, at the ninth hour,"[5]
when he restored the paralytic to his health. Albeit these practices
stand simply without any precept for their observance, still it may be
granted a good thing to establish some definite presumption, which may
both add stringency to the admonition to, pray, and may, as it were by
a law, tear us out from our businesses unto such a duty; so that—what
we read to have been observed by Daniel also,[6] in accordance (of
course) with Israel's discipline—we pray at least not less than thrice
in the day, debtors as we are to Three—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit:
of course, in addition to our regular prayers which are due, without
any admonition, on the entrance of light and of night. But, withal, it
becomes believers not to take food, and not to go to the bath, before
interposing a prayer; for the refreshments and nourishments of the
spirit are to be held prior to those of the flesh, and things heavenly
prior to things earthly.
You will not dismiss a brother who has entered your house without
prayer.—" Have you seen," says Scripture, "a brother? you have seen
your Lord;"[7]—especially "a stranger," lest perhaps he be "an angel."
But again, when received yourself by brethren, you will not make[8]
earthly refreshments prior to heavenly, for your faith will forthwith
be judged. Or else how will you—according to the precept[9]—say,
"Peace to this house," unless you exchange mutual peace with them who
are in the house?
The more diligent in prayer are wont to subjoin in their prayers
the "Hallelujah,"[10] and such kind of psalms, in the closes of which
the company respond. And, of course, every institution is excellent
which, for the extolling and honouring of God, aims unitedly to bring
Him enriched prayer as a choice victim.[11]
For this is the spiritual victim[12] which has abolished the
pristine sacrifices. "To what purpose," saith He, "(bring ye) me the
multitude of your sacrifices? I am full of holocausts of rams, and I
desire not the fat of rams, and the blood of bulls and of goats. For
who hath required these from your hands?"[13] What, then, God has
required the Gospel teaches. "An hour will come," saith He, "when the
true adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and truth. For God is a
Spirit, and accordingly requires His adorers to be such."[14] We are
the true adorers and the true priests,[15] who, praying in spirit,[16]
sacrifice, in spirit, prayer,—a victim proper and acceptable to God,
which assuredly He has required, which He has looked forward to[17] for
Himself ! This victim, devoted from the whole heart, fed on faith,
tended by truth, entire in innocence, pure in chastity, garlanded with
love,[18] we ought to escort with the pomp[19] of good works, amid
psalms and hymns, unto God's altar,[20] to obtain for us all things
from God.
For what has God, who exacts it ever denied[21] to prayer coming
from "spirit and truth?" How mighty specimens of its efficacy do we
read, and hear, and believe! Old-world prayer, indeed, used to free
from fires,[22] and from beasts,[23] and from famine;[24] and yet it
had not (then) received its form from Christ. But how far more amply
operative is Christian prayer ! It does not station the angel of dew in
mid-fires,[1] nor muzzle lions, nor transfer to the hungry the rustics'
bread;[2] it has no delegated grace to avert any sense of suffering;[3]
but it supplies the suffering, and the feeling, and the grieving, with
endurance: it amplifies grace by virtue, that faith may know what she
obtains from the Lord, understanding what—for God's name's sake—she
suffers. But in days gone by, withal prayer used to call down[4]
plagues, scatter the armies of foes, withhold the wholesome influences
of the showers. Now, however, the prayer of righteousness avers all
God's anger, keeps bivouac on behalf of personal enemies, makes
supplication on behalf of persecutors. Is it wonder if it knows how to
extort the rains of heaven[5]—(prayer) which was ante able to procure
its fires?[6] Prayer is alone that which vanquishes[7] God. But Christ
has willed that it be operative for no evil: He had conferred on it all
its virtue in the cause of good. And so it knows nothing save how to
recall the souls of the departed from the very path of death, to
transform the weak, to restore the sick, to purge the possessed, to
open prison-bars, to loose the bonds of the innocent. Likewise it
washes away faults, repels temptations, extinguishes persecutions,
consoles the faint-spirited, cheers the high-spirited, escorts
travellers, appeases waves, makes robbers stand aghast, nourishes the
poor, governs the rich, upraises the fallen, arrests the falling,
confirms the standing. Prayer is the wall of faith: her arms and
missiles[8] against the foe who keeps watch over us on all sides. And,
so never walk we unarmed. By day, be we mindful of Station; by night,
of vigil. Under the arms of prayer guard we the standard of our
General; await we in prayer the angel's trump.[9] The angels, likewise,
all pray; every creature prays; cattle and wild beasts pray and bend
their knees; and when they issue from their layers and lairs,[10] they
look up heavenward with no idle mouth, making their breath vibrate[11]
after their own manner. Nay, the birds too, rising out of the nest,
upraise themselves heavenward, and, instead of hands, expand the cross
of their wings, and say somewhat to seem like prayer.[12] What more
then, touching the office of prayer? Even the Lord Himself prayed; to
whom be honour and virtue unto the ages of the ages !