Search
Section XIV 1:352Pascal's Pensées[158] P. 110, l. 16. _For Port-Royal._--The letters, A. P. R., occur in several places, and are generally thought to indicate what will be afterwards treated in lectures or conferences at Port-Royal, the famous Cistercian abbey, situated about eighteen miles from Paris. Founded early in the thirteenth century, it acquired its greatest fame in its closing years. Louis XIV was induced to believe it heretical; and the monastery was finally demolished in 1711. Its downfall was no doubt brought about by the Jesuits.Section XIV 1:568Pascal's Pensées[365] P. 262, l. 18. _The Fronde._--The party which rose against Mazarin and the Court during the minority of Louis XIV. They led to civil war.Orthodoxy 6:28OrthodoxySo it is also, of course, with the contradictory charges of the anti-Christians about submission and slaughter. It IS true that the Church told some men to fight and others not to fight; and it IS true that those who fought were like thunderbolts and those who did not fight were like statues. All this simply means that the Church preferred to use its Supermen and to use its Tolstoyans. There must be SOME good in the life of battle, for so many good men have enjoyed being soldiers. There must be SOME good in the idea of non-resistance, for so many good men seem to enjoy being Quakers. All that the Church did (so far as that goes) was to prevent either of these good things from ousting the other. They existed side by side. The Tolstoyans, having all the scruples of monks, simply became monks. The Quakers became a club instead of becoming a sect. Monks said all that Tolstoy says; they poured out lucid lamentations about the cruelty of battles and the vanity of revenge. But the Tolstoyans are not quite right enough to run the whole world; and in the ages of faith they were not allowed to run it. The world did not lose the last charge of Sir James Douglas or the banner of Joan the Maid. And sometimes this pure gentleness and this pure fierceness met and justified their juncture; the paradox of all the prophets was fulfilled, and, in the soul of St. Louis, the lion lay down with the lamb. But remember that this text is too lightly interpreted. It is constantly assured, especially in our Tolstoyan tendencies, that when the lion lies down with the lamb the lion becomes lamb-like. But that is brutal annexation and imperialism on the part of the lamb. That is simply the lamb absorbing the lion instead of the lion eating the lamb. The real problem is--Can the lion lie down with the lamb and still retain his royal ferocity? THAT is the problem the Church attempted; THAT is the miracle she achieved.Orthodoxy 7:26OrthodoxyWe have remarked that one reason offered for being a progressive is that things naturally tend to grow better. But the only real reason for being a progressive is that things naturally tend to grow worse. The corruption in things is not only the best argument for being progressive; it is also the only argument against being conservative. The conservative theory would really be quite sweeping and unanswerable if it were not for this one fact. But all conservatism is based upon the idea that if you leave things alone you leave them as they are. But you do not. If you leave a thing alone you leave it to a torrent of change. If you leave a white post alone it will soon be a black post. If you particularly want it to be white you must be always painting it again; that is, you must be always having a revolution. Briefly, if you want the old white post you must have a new white post. But this which is true even of inanimate things is in a quite special and terrible sense true of all human things. An almost unnatural vigilance is really required of the citizen because of the horrible rapidity with which human institutions grow old. It is the custom in passing romance and journalism to talk of men suffering under old tyrannies. But, as a fact, men have almost always suffered under new tyrannies; under tyrannies that had been public liberties hardly twenty years before. Thus England went mad with joy over the patriotic monarchy of Elizabeth; and then (almost immediately afterwards) went mad with rage in the trap of the tyranny of Charles the First. So, again, in France the monarchy became intolerable, not just after it had been tolerated, but just after it had been adored. The son of Louis the well-beloved was Louis the guillotined. So in the same way in England in the nineteenth century the Radical manufacturer was entirely trusted as a mere tribune of the people, until suddenly we heard the cry of the Socialist that he was a tyrant eating the people like bread. So again, we have almost up to the last instant trusted the newspapers as organs of public opinion. Just recently some of us have seen (not slowly, but with a start) that they are obviously nothing of the kind. They are, by the nature of the case, the hobbies of a few rich men. We have not any need to rebel against antiquity; we have to rebel against novelty. It is the new rulers, the capitalist or the editor, who really hold up the modern world. There is no fear that a modern king will attempt to override the constitution; it is more likely that he will ignore the constitution and work behind its back; he will take no advantage of his kingly power; it is more likely that he will take advantage of his kingly powerlessness, of the fact that he is free from criticism and publicity. For the king is the most private person of our time. It will not be necessary for any one to fight again against the proposal of a censorship of the press. We do not need a censorship of the press. We have a censorship by the press.Concerning the Place Names in Sacred Scripture · Introduction 12:40Eusebius of CaesareaIn 1965 Dr. Wolf accepted an invitation to become the Director of the Lutheran Institute for Religious Studies (LIFRS), a new continuing education program for clergy and laity at Texas Lutheran College (now Texas Lutheran University), Seguin, Texas. The program covered the area of three Lutheran synods which served Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and New Mexico. Many of the programs were ecumenical seminars and weekend conferences for opening dialogues between the many racial, ethnic, and social groups of the four states. Some of these meetings became very confrontational. He was a member of the Board of the Hispanic American Institute. From 1972-1974 Dr. Wolf was active in the Texas Conference of Churches on Aging.On the Acts of the Apostles · Homily 16 1:7John ChrysostomNow these things I have spoken, that we should not make enjoyment every way our object. How then does Paul say, "Rejoice alway?" He does not say simply, "Rejoice," but he adds, "in the Lord." (Phil. iv. 4.) This is the greatest joy, such as the Apostles rejoiced withal; the joy of which prisons, and scourges, and persecutions, and evil report, and all painful things, are the source, and the root, and the occasion; whence also it comes to a happy issue. But that of the world, on the contrary, begins with sweets and ends in bitters. Neither do I forbid to rejoice in the Lord, nay, I earnestly exhort to this. The Apostles were scourged, and they rejoiced: were bound, and they gave thanks: were stoned, and they preached. This is the joy I also would have: from nothing bodily has it its origin, but from spiritual things. It is not possible for him who joys after the fashion of the world, to rejoice also after a godly sort: for every one who joys after the world's fashion, has his joy in riches, in luxury, in honor, in power, in arrogance: but he who rejoices after the mind of God, has his joy in dishonor for God's sake, in poverty, in want, in fasting, in humbleness of mind. Seest thou, how opposite are the grounds (of joy)? To go without joy here, is to be without grief also: and to be without grief here, is to go without pleasure too. And in truth these are the things which produce real joy, since the others have the name only of joy, but they altogether consist of pain. What misery the arrogant man. endures! How is he cut short ( diakoptetai ) in the midst of his arrogance, bespeaking for himself numberless insults, much hatred, great enmity, exceeding spite, and many an evil eye! Whether it be that he is insulted by greater men, he grieves: or that he cannot make his stand against everybody, he is mortified. Whereas the humble man lives in much enjoyment: expecting honor from none, if he receive honor, he is pleased, but if not, he is not grieved. He takes it contentedly that he is honored; but above all, none dishonors him. Now not to seek honor, and yet to be honored-great must be the enjoyment of this. But in the other, it is just the reverse: he seeks honor, and is not honored. And the pleasure that the honor gives is not the same to him who seeks it, as it is to him who seeks it not. The one, however much he receives, thinks he has received nothing: the other, though you give him ever so little, takes it as though he had received all. Then again, he who lives in affluence and luxury has numberless affairs of business, and let his revenues flow in to him ever so easily, and, as it were, from full fountains, yet he fears the evils arising from luxurious living, and the uncertainty of the future: but the other is always in a state of security and enjoyment, having accustomed himself to scantiness of diet. For he does not so bemoan himself at not partaking of a sumptuous board, as he luxuriates in not fearing the uncertainty of the future. But the evils arising from luxurious living, how many and great they are, none can be ignorant: it is necessary, however, to mention them now. Twofold the war, in the body, and in the soul: twofold the storm: twofold the diseases; not only in this respect, but because they are both incurable, and bring with them great calamities. Not so, frugality: but here is twofold health, twofold the benefits. "Sleep of health," we read, "is in moderate eating." (Ecclus. xxxi. 20.) For everywhere, that which keeps measure is pleasant, that which is beyond measure, ceases to please. For say now: on a little spark put a great pile of fagots, and you will no longer see the fire shining, but much disagreeable smoke. On a very strong and large man lay a burden which exceeds his strength, and you will see him with his burden lying prostrate on the ground. Embark too large a freight in your vessel, and you have ensured a grievous shipwreck. Just so it is here. For just as in overladen ships, great is the tumult of the sailors, the pilot, the man at the prow, and the passengers, while they cast into the sea the things above deck, and things below; so here too, with their vomitings upwards, and their purgings downwards, they mar their constitutions, and destroy themselves. And what is the most shameful of all, the mouth is made to do the office of the nether parts, and that becomes the more shameful member. But if to the mouth the disgrace be such, think what must it be in the soul! For indeed there it is all mist, all storm, all darkness, great the uproar of the thoughts, at being so thronged and crushed, the soul itself crying out at the abuse done to it: all (the parts and faculties) complaining of one another, beseeching, entreating, that the filth may be discharged somewhere. And after it is flung out, still the turmoil is not at an end; but then comes fever and diseases. "And how comes it," say you, "that one may see these luxurious livers, in goodly plight, riding on horseback? What idle talk is this," say you, "to tell us of diseases? It is I that am diseased, I that am racked, I that am disgusting, while I have nothing to eat." Ah me! for one may well lament at such words. But the sufferers with the gout, the men that are carried on litters, the men that are swathed with bandages, from what class of people, I ask you, shall we see these? And indeed, were it not that they would deem it an insult, and think my words opprobrious, I would before now have addressed them even by name. "But there are some of them, who are in good health as well." Because they give themselves not merely to luxurious living, but also to labors. Else show me a man, who does nothing whatever but fatten himself, free from pain as he lies there, without an anxious thought. For though a host of physicians without number came together, they would not be able to rescue him from his diseases. It is not in the nature of things. For I will hold you a medical discourse. Of the matters sent down into the belly, not all becomes nourishment; since even in the food itself, not all is nutritive, but part of it in the process of digestion passes into stool, part is turned into nourishment. If then in the process of digestion the operation is perfect, this is the result, and each finds its proper place; the wholesome and useful part betakes itself to its appropriate place, while that which is superfluous and useless, withdraws itself, and passes off. But if it be in too great quantity, then even the nutritive part of it becomes hurtful. And, to speak by way of example, in order that my meaning may be clearer to you: in wheat part is fine flour, part meal, part bran: now if the mill be able to grind (what is put in), it separates all these: but if you put in too much, all becomes mixed up together. Wine again, if it go through its proper process of formation, and under due influence of the seasons, then, whereas at first all is mixed together, anon part settles into lees, part rises into scum, part remains for enjoyment to those that use it, and this is the good part, and will not. readily undergo any change. But what they call "nourishment," is neither wine, nor lees, while all are mixed up together.-The same may be seen in the river, when its waters make a whirling flood. As at such time we see the fishes floating at top, dead, their eves first blinded by the muddy slime: so is it with us. For when gormandizing, like a flood of rain, has drenched the inward parts, it puts all in a whirl, and makes that the faculties ( loUismoi ), healthy till then and living in a pure element, drift lifeless on the surface. Since then by all these examples we have shown how great the mischief is, let us cease to count these men happy for that, for which we ought to think them wretched, and to bemoan ourselves for that, for which we ought to count ourselves happy, and let us welcome sufficiency with a contented mind. Or do you not hear even what physicians tell you, that "want is the mother of health?" But what I say is, that want is mother, not of bodily health, but also of that of the soul. These things Paul also, that physician indeed, cries aloud; when he says, "Having food and raiment, let us therewith be content." (1 Tim. vi. 8.) Let us therefore do as he bids us, that so, being in sound health, we may perform the work that we ought to do, in Christ Jesus our Lord, with Whom to the Father and the Holy Ghost together be glory, dominion, honor, now and ever, world without end. Amen.The 30 Canons 5:23Council of Chalcedon of 451We learn from this canon, there were cases in which an ambitious prelate, "by making application to the government" ("secular powers") had obtained what are called "pragmatic letters," and employed them for the purpose of "dividing one province into two," and exalting himself as a metropolitan. The name of a "pragmatic sanction" is more familiar in regard to medieval and modern history; it recalls the name of St. Louis, and, still more, that of the Emperor Charles VI. the father of Maria Theresa. Properly a "pragmatic" was a deliberate order promulgated by the Emperor after full hearing of advice, on some public affair. We find "pragmatici nostri statuta" in a law of a.d. 431. (Cod. Theod., xi. 1, 36); and pragmatici prioris,""sub hac pragmatica jussione," in ordinances in Append. to Cod. Theod., pp. 95, 162; and the empress Pulcheria, about a year before the Council, had informed Leo that her husband Marcian had recalled some exiled orthodox bishops "robore pragmatici sui" (Leon., Epist. lxxvij.). Justinian speaks of "pragmaticas nostras formas" and "pragmaticum typum" (Novel., 7, 9, etc.). The phrase was adopted from his legislation by Louis the Pious and his colleague-son Lothar (compare Novel. 7, 2 with Pertz, Mon. Germ, Hist. Leg., i., 254), and hence it came to be used both by later German emperors (see, e.g. , Bryce's Holy Roman Empire, p. 212), and by the French kings (Kitchin, Hist. France, i. 343, 544). Augustine explains it by "praeceptum imperatoris" (Brev. Collat. cum Donatist. iii., 2), and Balsamon in his comment uses an equivalent phrase; and so in the record of the fourth session of Chalcedon we have qei=a gra/mmata ("divine" being practically, equivalent to "imperial") explained by pragmatikou\j tu/pouj (Mansi, vii., 89). We must observe that the imperial order, in the cases contemplated by the canon, had only conferred the title of "metropolis" on the city, and had not professed to divide the province for civil, much less for ecclesiastical, purposes. Valens, indeed, had divided the province of Cappadocia, when in 371 he made Tyana a metropolis: and therefore Anthimus, bishop of Tyana, when he claimed the position of a metropolitan, with authority over suffragans, was making a not unnatural inference in regard to ecclesiastical limits from political rearrangements of territory, as Gregory of Nazianzus says ( Orat. xliii., 58), whereas Basil "held to the old custom," i.e., to the traditional unity of his provincial church, although after a while he submitted to what he could not hinder (see Tillemont, ix., 175, 182, 670). But in the case of Eustathius of Berytus, which was clearly in the Council's mind, the Phoenician province had not been divided; it was in reliance on a mere title bestowed upon his city, and also on an alleged synodical ordinance which issued in fact from the so-called "Home Synod" that he declared himself independent of his metropolitan, Photius of Tyre, and brought six bishoprics under his assumed jurisdiction. Thus while the province remained politically one, he had de facto divided it ecclesiastically into two. Photius petitioned Marcian, who referred the case to the Council of Chalcedon, and it was taken up in the fourth session. The imperial commissioners announced that it was to be settled not according to "pragmatic forms," but according to those which had been enacted by the Fathers (Mansi, vii., 89). This encouraged the Council to say, "A pragmatic can have no force against the canons." The commissioners asked whether it was lawful for bishops, on the ground of a pragmatic, to steal away the rights of other churches? The answer was explicit: "No, it is against the canon." The Council proceeded to cancel the resolution of the Home Synod in favour of the elevation of Berytus, ordered the 4th Nicene canon to be read, and upheld the metropolitical rights of Tyre. The commissioners alsopronounced against Eustathius. Cecropius, bishop of Sebastopolis, requested them to put an end to the issue of pragmatics made to the detriment of the canons; the Council echoed this request; and the commissioners granted it by declaring that the canons should everywhere stand good (Mansi, vii., 89-97). We may connect with this incident a law of Martian dated in 454, by which "all pragmatic sanctions, obtained by means of favour or ambition in opposition to the canon of the Church, are declared to be deprived of effect" (Cod. Justin, i., 2, 12).Introduction 15:22Sidonius Apollinaris278. In many ways Sidonius recalls the Seigneur de Balzac (Jean-Louis de Guez, b. 1594, d. 1654), just as much as Voiture. The following passage from Balzac's letter to Corneille acknowledging a copy of 'Cinna' will illustrate the affinity: Votre Cinna guérit les malades; il fait qtie les paralytiques battent des mains; il rend la parole à un muet . . . S'il était vrai qu'en quelqu'une de ses parties vous eussiez senti quelque faiblesse, ce serait un secret entre vos Muses et vous, car je vous assure que Personne ne l'a reconnue.The Ruin of Britain · Introduction 2:2Gildas the WiseAthravaeth Gristnogavl (from the unique copy belonging to the late Prince Louis Lucien Bonaparte, originally printed at Milan, A. D. 1568). 1 part, 2 s. 6d.Commentary on the Psalms 22:4Thomas Aquinas[87261] Above, the Psalmist invited the nations to joy and thanksgiving for the benefits given to the people of God; here, however, he admonishes them to trust in God. And concerning this he does two things. First, he arouses attention. Second, he pursues his purpose. The title is not new. According to the title, however, a person is rendered attentive in two ways. In one way someone is said to be rendered attentive on the part of the hearers; in another way on the part of the things to be said, when he promises to say certain great things. Prov. 8: "Hear me, for I will speak of great things." And in this manner he speaks here. First, therefore, he renders them attentive on the part of those to whom he was speaking. Second, on the part of the things to be said, at "My mouth." He says, therefore, that the things he is about to say pertain to every rank of men and to all. And he touches on four differences among men. One from the diversity of peoples, because the people of the Jews was one, and that of the Gentiles another. Another on the part of places. Another on the part of origin. For some were noble and distinguished, others were not. Another on the part of fortune, because some were rich, others were not. He sets forth the first when he says, "Hear these things, all you nations," not only of the Jews, because these things pertain to all to hear; and this is necessary. Prov. 1: "The wise man hearing," etc. He sets forth the second when he says, "Give ear, all you inhabitants of the world," that is, from whatever part of the world. And he says "give ear," because one must both hear and perceive. Mt. 13: "He who has ears to hear, let him hear," that is, let him attend. Jerome has, "inhabitants of the west." As though it were a certain prophecy, because the faith of Christ flourishes especially among the people of the west, since in the north there are still many pagans, and in the east there are many schismatics and unbelievers. Or, "hear these things, all you nations" refers to the wicked; "you inhabitants of the world," to the good who have dominion over the earth. He sets forth the third when he says, "all you who are earth-born," that is, the ignoble, "and sons of men," that is, the noble. Jerome has, "both sons of Adam and sons of individuals," because some have nothing distinguished from their parents. Mystically, the "earth-born" are called sinners, who cling to the earth through affection; hence they are compared to the serpent. Is. 65: "For the serpent" (that is, for the earthly), "dust shall be his bread." "Sons of men" are called the good, who bear the image of God and of Christ, who is the Son of Man. He sets forth the fourth when he says, "rich and poor together as one"; as if to say: let all of you hear these teachings, because they are useful for all. And what are they? Mt. 5: "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Sir. 31: "Blessed is the rich man who is found without blemish," etc. Yet someone may be rich in fact but not in affection, and such a person can be holy, like Abraham and King Louis of France. Another is rich both in fact and in affection, and such a person is not holy. Of this it is said, Mt. 19: "It is easier for a camel to enter," etc., because just as it is against nature for a camel to enter through the eye of a needle, so for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven is against divine justice. And such people are earth-born; but the former are sons of men.TREATISE ON THE CONSERVATION AND GOVERNMENT OF CREATURES · Question 111 2:20Thomas AquinasOn the contrary, The angels who overturned Sodom, "struck the people of Sodom with blindness or , so that they could not find the door" ( Gn. 19:11 ). [*It is worth noting that these are the only two passages in the Greek version where the word appears. It expresses, in fact, the effect produced on the people of Sodom---namely, dazzling (French version, "eblouissement"), which the Latin "caecitas" (blindness) does not necessarily imply.] The same is recorded of the Syrians whom Eliseus led into Samaria (4 Kings 6:18).SERMONS ON OUR LADY · Our Lady of the Snow 1617 1:19Francis de SalesFirst I remark the whiteness of the snow; secondly, its obedience; thirdly, its fecundity. I will pass over its many other properties; it might be said that it never falls on the sea, at least not on the high seas, and I could add that in the same manner, the sacred and special inspiration to give oneself to God without reserve never falls on souls who sail on the high seas of this miserable world and who are there raised to its highest dignities. I know well that there are some, as for example, St. Magdalene, St. Matthew and others, as also a St. Louis and a St. Elizabeth, but all these are rare. Therefore, we can certainly say that if this blessed inspiration falls there, it is only rarely.SERMONS ON OUR LADY · The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary 1602 3:22Francis de SalesAlas, glorious Virgin, pray for the Church of your Son. Assist with your favors all superiors, the Holy Father, prelates and bishops, and particularly those of your city of Paris. Be propitious to the king. Your ancestor David, mindful of the services and offices of Jonathan, was good to Jonathan's son [2 Sam. 9:7]. This king is the descendent of one of your most faithful and devoted servants, the blessed St. Louis. We pray you to grant him your protection in the name of that holy king. May the queen, who has the honor of bearing your name, ever be under the shelter of your holy patronage. O heavenly Lily, stir up the lilies of France with your holy benedictions, that they may always remain white and pure in the unity of true faith and religion. You are a sea. Let the waves of your graces fall on this young dauphin. You are the Star of the Sea. Oh, be propitious to the ship of Paris, that it may arrive at the holy harbor of glory, there to praise the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit forever and ever. Amen.The Brethren of the Lord 1:17JB Lightfoot(i) The identity of Alphaeus and Clopas . These two words, it is said, are different renderings of the same Aramaic name yplx or [Aramaic] (Chalphai), the form Clopas being peculiar to St. John, the more completely grecized Alphaeus taking its place in the other Evangelists. The Aramaic guttural Cheth , when the name was reproduced in Greek, might either be omitted as in Alphaeus, or replaced by a k (or c) as in Clopas. Just in the same way Aloysius and Ludovicus are recognized Latin representatives of the Frankish name Clovis (Clodovicus, Hludovicus, Hlouis).Berakhot 1:68Talmud YerushalmiRebbi Ḥalaphta ben Shaül [An Amora of the first generation in Israel who occasionally is quoted as a Tanna. His opinion is the only one given here, to the effect that one has to bow down at modim. The Babli (Berakhot 34b) quotes that Rava, Rav Naḥman and Rav Sheshet actually fell down on their knees for modim; the Talmud quotes a baraita which explicitly forbids falling down on one’s knees. Louis Ginzberg assumes that in Israel, falling on one’s knees was always strictly forbidden since their synagogues were built of stone with stone floors and falling on one’s knees on a stone floor outside the Temple is forbidden. In Babylonia, where synagogues were brick with hardened dirt floors, falling on one’s knees was permitted.] stated: Everybody bows down with the cantor for the benediction of thanksgiving. Rebbi Zeïra said: But only for the word modim. Rebbi Zeïra was attentive to the Qeroba [Qeroba is the cantor, the שליח ציבור, who presents his own poetic offering of the prayer, the qerovut, קרובות or קרובץ, to the congregation for the repetition of the Amidah, as noted by L. Ginzberg. סבר here seems to mean “to be attentive”, as in the exclamation before the qiddush סברי “please pay attention”. It seems that Rebbi Zeïra timed his thanksgiving, one of the longer texts given here, so he could end his benediction in unison with the cantor.] to bow his head at the beginning and at the end. Rebbi Yose when he came up here [“Coming up” means making aliyah from Babylonia to Israel. The Babli (Soṭa 40a) also reports very short texts by Rav, Samuel, Rebbi Simai (also of the generation between Tannaïm and Amoraïm) and a slightly longer one by Rav Aḥa bar Jacob (a student of Rav Huna, the student of Rav). Most of these texts are so short that they do not lead to the congregation whispering for any length of time.] saw them bowing down and whispering. He said to them: What is this whispering? He had not heard what Rebbi Ḥelbo, Rebbi Simeon said in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan, in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah [A Tanna of the last generation, student of R. Yehudah ben Batyra.] , Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Miasha [One of the first Tannaïm with the title of “Rebbi”, from the last times of the Second Temple.] , Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Simai, and some say, the colleagues [The collective of scholars in the Yeshivah.] in the name of Rebbi Simai: We thank You, Master of all creatures, God of praises, eternal Rock, Life of the Universe, Creator, Who resurrects the dead, that You have made us alive, kept us, gave us merit, supported us, and brought us near to give thanks to Your name; praised be You, o Eternal, God of thanksgiving. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda [An Israeli Amora who received his training in the Babylonian academy of Rav.] in the name of Rav: We thank You since we are obliged to give thanks; may my lips sing, for I shall sing to You with my soul that You have redeemed; praised are You, o Eternal, God of thanksgiving. Rebbi Samuel bar Inia [A student of Rebbi Aḥa, Israeli Amora of the fourth generation. The name of his father cannot be determined with certainty; the form given here is from the Rome manuscript. In the Venice print it appears as Mina, at other places in the Yerushalmi it appears as Ina, ldi, Bina, Yonah, Yanna, Yannai. The fourth generation of Galilean Amoraïm saw the Roman empire become Christian and lived through the first persecutions that finally forced the following generation to abandon the work on the Jerusalem Talmud.] in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: Thanksgiving and praise to Your name, Yours is greatness, Yours is strength, Yours is glory! May it please You, o Eternal, our God and God of our fathers, that You may support us in our fall, straighten us up from our bent state, because You support the falling and straighten up the bent ones, You are full of mercy and nothing exists except You; praised are You, o Eternal, God of thanksgiving. Bar Qappara [A contemporary of Rebbi who also made his own compilation of Mishnayot. His full name was R. Eleazar, son of R. Eleazar the Qappar. Since his name is identical to that of his father it is clear that he was a posthumous child; cf. E. and H. Guggenheimer, Jewish Family Names and Their Origins, Ktav 1992, Etymologisches Lexikon der jüdischen Familiennamen, München 1996, both p. xviii. While the previous texts were quoted in historical order, the text of Bar Qappara should have been the first. The reason may be his extensive use of Biblical verses that were a matter of controversy, see below (and in all Yerushalmi versions this is a formal benediction.)] said: For You we fall down, for You we bend down, for You we prostrate ourselves, for You we kneel, to You every knee should fall down and every tongue swears. (1Chr. 29:11–13): Yours, o Eternal, is greatness, strength, glory, victory, and majesty, truly all that is in heaven and on earth; Yours, o Eternal, is the kingdom, and You lift Yourself over all as head. Riches and honor are before You, You rule over all; in Your hand is power and strength, it is in Your hand to make great and strengthen everything. And now, our God, we thank You and praise Your glorious name; with all our heart and soul we prostrate ourselves before You. (Ps. 35:10) My entire self shall say: O Eternal, who is like You, Who saves the destitute from one who is stronger than he is, the destitute and poor from the one who robs him. Praised are You, o Eternal, God of thanksgiving. Rebbi Yudan said: the rabbis used to say all of these [Statement of Rav Papa in Babli Soṭa 40a. It appears from here that Rav Papa (fifth generation in Babylonia) had good precedent for his ruling from Rebbi Yudan (fourth generation in Israel). The method of Rebbi Yudan/Rav Papa is more adequate to a collection of short statements as given in the Babli than to the very long pieces quoted here in the Yerushalmi.] . But some say, either one or the other.Avodah Zarah 5:48Talmud YerushalmiAn ox which was stoned. From the meaning of what was said, the ox shall be stoned [Which killed a human, Ex. 21:28.] would I not know that it cannot be eaten? Why does the verse say, it shall not be eaten? From here that it is forbidden for usufruct [This is a very short reference to a text in `Orlah 3:1 (Notes 26–28, Pesaḥim 2:1 28c), which is part of a lengthy discussion under which conditions a prohibition as food implies a prohibition of usufruct (`Orlah 3:1, Notes 10–44; Pesaḥim 2:1; Babli Pesaḥim 21b, Qiddušin 56b, Bava qamma 41a, Ḥulin 114b) Since the mention of the prohibition as food is unnecessary, the ox qualifies as a case where the prohibition as food means prohibition of usufruct. In the Babylonian sources (Bava qamma 41a, Mekhilta dR. Ismael Mišpatim 10) it is agreed that it is obvious that a stoned animal was not ritually slaughtered and therefore is forbidden as meat but it is noted that the prohibition as food is necessary anyhow to show that if the ox was ritually slaughtered after conviction by the court, the slaughter is ineffective and does not permit the carcass to be eaten. Everybody agrees that if the ox was correctly slaughtered before a trial could be held the meat is kosher. The Babli has to find the prohibition of usufruct in another part of the verse which makes the prohibition one of rabbinic interpretation rather than biblical. Louis Ginzberg in his Yerushalmi Fragments from the Genizah (New York 1909) p. 280 has published a leaf of selections from the entire tractate. The passage referring to the paragraph under discussion reads there (vocalization added): וְשׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל. סָקֹ֨ל יִסָּקֵ֜ל הַשּׁ֗וֹר וג׳ מִמַּשְׁמַע שנ׳ סָקוֹל יִסָּקֵל וְכִי אֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין לֹא יֵאָכֵל. מַה תַלְמוּד לוֹמַר לֹא יֵֽאָכֵל֙. אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא אָסוּר בַּאֲכִילָה וְאַסוּר בַּהֲנָייָה. ר׳ אַבָּ׳ בְשֶׁם ר׳ יוֹחָנָן כָּל־מָקוֹם שנ׳ לֹא יֵאָכֵל לֹא תֹאכְלוּ … אִסוּר And an ox which was stoned. The ox should certainly be stoned. From the meaning of what was said, shall certainly be stoned would we not know that it cannot be eaten? Why does the verse say, it shall not be eaten? But that it is forbidden for eating and forbidden for usufruct. Rebbi Abba[hu] in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Any place where it says shall not be eaten, you shall not eat [it is forbidden for eating and forbidden for usufruct.] The addition to the text is from `Orlah 3:1 (Note 10) or Pesaḥim 2:1 l. 15. In these and all Babli sources (quoted above) the statement is attributed to R. Eleazar, not R. Joḥanan (R. Eleazar’s teacher). The addition has to be considered a commentary. ] .Autobiography 8:57The Autobiography of St. IgnatiusIn Rome in 1584, the twenty colleges attending classes in the Roman College numbered 2108 students, in Poland there were 10,000 young men chiefly of the nobility, at Rome 2000, at La Fleche 1700. In the seventeenth century at the College of Louis le Grand, in Paris, the number varied between 2000 and 3000. In 1627 the Province of Paris had in fourteen colleges 13,195 students.Grammar of Assent 3:21An Essay in Aid of a Grammar of AssentAnd quite as difficult is it to create or to apprehend by description images of mental facts, of which we have no direct experience. I may indeed, as I have already said, bring home to my mind so complex a fact as an historical character, by composition out of my experiences about character generally; Tiberius, James the First, Louis the Eleventh, or Napoleon; but who is able to infuse into me, or how shall I imbibe, a sense of the peculiarities of the style of Cicero or Virgil, if I have not read their writings? or how shall I gain a shadow of a perception of the wit or the grace ascribed to the conversation of the French salons, being myself an untravelled John Bull? And so again, as regards the affections and passions of our nature, they are sui generis respectively, and incommensurable, and must be severally experienced in order to be apprehended really. I can understand the rabbia of a native of Southern Europe, if I am of a passionate temper myself; and the taste for speculation or betting found in great traders or on the turf, if I am fond of enterprise or games of chance; but on the other hand, not all the possible descriptions of headlong love will make me comprehend the delirium, if I have never had a fit of it; nor will ever so many sermons about the inward satisfaction of strict conscientiousness create in my mind the image of a virtuous action and its attendant sentiments, if I have been brought up to lie, thieve and indulge my appetites. Thus we meet with men of the world who cannot enter into the very idea of devotion, and think, for instance, that, from the nature of the case, a life of religious seclusion must be either one of unutterable dreariness or abandoned sensuality, because they know of no exercise of the affections but what is merely human; and with others again, who, living in the home of their own selfishness, ridicule as something fanatical and pitiable the self-sacrifices of generous high-mindedness and chivalrous honour. They cannot create images of these things, any more than children can on the contrary of vice, when they ask whereabouts and who the bad men are; for they have no personal memories, and have to content themselves with notions drawn from books or from what others tell them.Grammar of Assent 4:68An Essay in Aid of a Grammar of Assent2. Again:--twenty years ago, the Duke of Wellington wrote his celebrated letter on the subject of the national defences. His authority gave it an immediate circulation among all classes of the community; none questioned what he said, nor as if taking his words on faith merely, but as intellectually recognizing their truth; yet few could be said to see or feel that truth. His letter lay, so to say, upon the pure intellect of the national mind, and nothing for a time came of it. But eleven years afterwards, after his death, the anger of the French colonels with us, after the attempt upon Louis Napoleon's life, transferred its facts to the charge of the imagination. Then forthwith the national assent became in various ways an operative principle, especially in its promotion of the volunteer movement. The Duke, having a special eye for military matters, had realized the state of things from the first; but it took a course of years to impress upon the public mind an assent to his warning deeper and more energetic than the reception it is accustomed to give to a clever article in a newspaper or a review.Purgatorio 20:8The Divine ComedyBut if Douay and Ghent, and Lille and Bruges
Had power, soon vengeance would be taken on it;
And this I pray of Him who judges all.
Hugh Capet was I called upon the earth;
From me were born the Louises and Philips,
By whom in later days has France been governed.
I was the son of a Parisian butcher,
What time the ancient kings had perished all,
Excepting one, contrite in cloth of gray.The Everlasting Man 11:3The Everlasting ManI was once sitting on a summer day in a meadow in Kent under the shadow of a little village church, with a rather curious companion with whom I had just been walking through the woods. He was one of a group of eccentrics I had come across in my wanderings who had a new religion called Higher Thought; in which I had been so far initiated as to realise a general atmosphere of loftiness or height, and was hoping at some later and more esoteric stage to discover the beginnings of thought. My companion was the most amusing of them, for however he may have stood towards thought, he was at least very much their superior in experience, having travelled beyond the tropics while they were meditating in the suburbs; though he had been charged with excess in telling travellers’ tales. In spite of anything said against him, I preferred him to his companions and willingly went with him through the wood; where I could not but feel that his sunburnt face and fierce tufted eyebrows and pointed beard gave him something of the look of Pan. Then we sat down in the meadow and gazed idly at the treetops and the spire of the village church; while the warm afternoon began to mellow into early evening and the song of a speck of a bird was faint far up in the sky and no more than a whisper of breeze soothed rather than stirred the ancient orchards of the garden of England. Then my companion said to me: “Do you know why the spire of that church goes up like that?” I expressed a respectable agnosticism, and he answered in an offhand way, “Oh, the same as the obelisks; the phallic worship of antiquity.” Then I looked across at him suddenly as he lay there leering above his goatlike beard; and for the moment I thought he was not Pan but the Devil. No mortal words can express the immense, the insane incongruity and unnatural perversion of thought involved in saying such a thing at such a moment and in such a place. For one moment I was in the mood in which men burned witches; and then a sense of absurdity equally enormous seemed to open about me like a dawn. “Why, of course,” I said after a moment’s reflection, “if it hadn’t been for phallic worship, they would have built the spire pointing downwards and standing on its own apex.” I could have sat in that field and laughed for an hour. My friend did not seem offended, for indeed he was never thin-skinned about his scientific discoveries. I had only met him by chance and I never met him again, and I believe he is now dead; but though it has nothing to do with the argument, it may be worth while to mention the name of this adherent of Higher Thought and interpreter of primitive religious origins; or at any rate the name by which he was known. It was Louis de Rougemont.The Everlasting Man 11:4The Everlasting ManThat insane image of the Kentish church standing on the point of its spire, as in some old rustic topsy-turvy tale, always comes back into my imagination when I hear these things said about pagan origins; and calls to my aid the laughter of the giants. Then I feel as genially and charitably to all other scientific investigators, higher critics, and authorities on ancient and modern religion, as I do to poor Louis de Rougemont. But the memory of that immense absurdity remains as a sort of measure and check by which to keep sane, not only on the subject of Christian churches, but also on the subject of heathen temples. Now a great many people have talked about heathen origins as the distinguished traveller talked about Christian origins. Indeed a great many modern heathens have been very hard on heathenism. A great many modern humanitarians have been very hard on the real religion of humanity. They have represented it as being everywhere and from the first rooted only in these repulsive arcana; and carrying the character of something utterly shameless and anarchical. Now I do not believe this for a moment. I should never dream of thinking about the whole worship of Apollo what De Rougemont could think about the worship of Christ. I would never admit that there was such an atmosphere in a Greek city as that madman was able to smell in a Kentish village. On the contrary, it is the whole point, even of this final chapter upon the final decay of paganism, to insist once more that the worst sort of paganism had already been defeated by the best sort. It was the best sort of paganism that conquered the gold of Carthage. It was the best sort of paganism that wore the laurels of Rome. It was the best thing the world had yet seen, all things considered and on any large scale, that ruled from the wall of the Grampians to the garden of the Euphrates. It was the best that conquered; it was the best that ruled; and it was the best that began to decay.January 31:10The Roman MartyrologyAt Rome, likewise, the blessed widow Louisa Albertoni, (in the year 1530,) of the 3rd Order of St. Francis, illustrious for her graces.August 25:2The Roman MartyrologyAt Paris, [in the year 1270,] the holy Confessor Louis, King of France, famous for the holiness of his life and for the glory of his miracles.August 19:7The Roman MartyrologyAt the Brignoles, in Provence, [in the year 1297,] holy Louis, of the Order of Friars Minors, Bishop of Toulouse, famous for the holiness of his life and his miracles. His body was carried thence to Marseilles, and is honourably buried there in the church of the Friars Minors.October 9:8The Roman MartyrologyAt Valencia, in Spain, holy Louis Bertrand, of the Order of Friars Preachers, who was filled with the spirit of the Apostolate, and confirmed by innocency of life and many signs the Gospel which he preached to the Americans.