|
18. Those things, again, whether only sayings or whether actual
deeds, which appear to the inexperienced to be sinful, and which are
ascribed to God, or to men whose holiness is put before us as an
example, are wholly figurative, and the hidden kernel of meaning they
contain is to be picked out as food for the nourishment of charity.
Now, whoever uses transitory objects less freely than is the custom of
those among whom he lives, is either temperate or superstitious;
whoever, on the other hand, uses them so as to transgress the bounds
of the custom of the good men about him, either has a further meaning
in what he does, or is sinful. In all such matters it is not the use
of the objects, but the lust of the user, that is to blame. Nobody
in his sober senses would believe, for example, that when our Lord's
feet were anointed by the woman with precious ointment, it was for the
same purpose for which luxurious and profligate men are accustomed to
have theirs anointed in those banquets which we abhor. For the sweet
odor means the good report which is earned by a life of good works; and
the man who wins this, while following in the footsteps of Christ,
anoints His feet (so to speak) with the most precious ointment. And
so that which in the case of other persons is often a sin, becomes,
when ascribed to God or a prophet, the sign of some great truth.
Keeping company with a harlot, for example, is one thing when it is
the result of abandoned manners, another thing when done in the course
of his prophecy by the prophet Hosea. Because it is a shamefully
wicked thing to strip the body naked at a banquet among the drunken and
licentious, it does not follow that it is a sin to be naked in the
baths.
19. We must, therefore, consider carefully what is suitable to
times and places and persons, and not rashly charge men with sins.
For it is possible that a wise man may use the daintiest food without
any sin of epicurism or gluttony, while a fool will crave for the
vilest food with a most disgusting eagerness of appetite. And any sane
man would prefer eating fish after the manner of our Lord, to eating
lentiles after the manner of Esau, or barley after the manner of
oxen. For there are several beasts that feed on commoner kinds of
food, but it does not follow that they are more temperate than we are.
For in all matters of this kind it is not the nature Of the things we
use, but our reason for using them, and our manner of seeking them,
that make what we do either praiseworthy or blameable.
20. Now the saints of ancient times were, under the form of an
earthly kingdom, fore-shadowing and foretelling the kingdom of
heaven. And on account of the necessity for a numerous offspring, the
custom of one man having several wives was at that time blameless: and
for the same reason it was not proper for one woman to have several
husbands, because a woman does not in that way become more fruitful,
but, on the contrary, it is base harlotry to seek either gain or
offspring by promiscuous intercourse. In regard to matters of this
sort, whatever the holy men of those times did without lust,
Scripture passes over without blame, although they did things which
could not be done at the present time, except through lust. And
everything of this nature that is there narrated we are to take not only
in its historical and literal, but also in its figurative and
prophetical sense, and to interpret as bearing ultimately upon the end
of love towards God or our neighbor, or both. For as it was
disgraceful among the ancient Romans to wear tunics reaching to the
heels, and furnished with sleeves, but now it is disgraceful for men
honorably born not to wear tunics of that description: so we must take
heed in regard to other things also, that lust do not mix with our use
of them; for lust not only abuses to wicked ends the customs of those
among whom we live, but frequently also transgressing the bounds of
custom, betrays, in a disgraceful outbreak, its own hideousness,
which was concealed under the cover of prevailing fashions.
|
|