Thomas Aquinas
Medieval · AD 800–1500 · 361 passages across 23 books
Commentary
Lamentations 5:6
We have given the hand to the Egyptians, and to the Assyrians, to be satisfied with bread.
Now, the people's slavery is personal and voluntary, because impelled by no means, people sell themselves to others in slavery. Or, at least for a time, as Verse 6 states: "We have given the hand to Egypt,and to Assyria, to get bread enough." That is, subjugating themselves to them. As I Samuel 2:5 claims: "Those who were full have hired themselves out for bread, but those who were hungry have ceased to hunger."
Again: Verse 6: "We have given the hand to Egypt, and to Assyria, to get bread enough". That is, by demanding aid. As Jeremiah 2:18 says: "And now what do you gain by going to Egypt, to drink the waters of the Nile? Or what do you gain by going to Assyria to drin~c the waters of the Euphrates?"
Again: Verse 6: "We have given the hand to Egypt, and to Assyria, to get bread enough". That is, by demanding aid. As Jeremiah 2:18 says: "And now what do you gain by going to Egypt, to drink the waters of the Nile? Or what do you gain by going to Assyria to drin~c the waters of the Euphrates?"
Lamentations 5:7
Our fathers have sinned, and are not; and we have borne their iniquities.
Here the people's slavery is exaggerated. So, first are viewed the conditions of those enslaved, as they are being punished for the sins of others. As said: "Our fathers sinned, and are no more, and we bear their iniquities." Since our fathers have died: "we bear their iniquities", while sustaining their punishments.
On the contrary, the prophet Ezekiel claims: "The word of the Lord came to me again: 'What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel,"The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge"? (Ezek 18:1-2). Solutions can then be declared. As in Exodus 20:5: "for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation." And Deuteronomy 32:41 asserts: "I will take vengeance on my adversaries, and will requite those who hate me."
On the contrary, the prophet Ezekiel claims: "The word of the Lord came to me again: 'What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel,"The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge"? (Ezek 18:1-2). Solutions can then be declared. As in Exodus 20:5: "for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation." And Deuteronomy 32:41 asserts: "I will take vengeance on my adversaries, and will requite those who hate me."
Lamentations 5:8
Servants have ruled over us: there is none that doth deliver us out of their hand.
The people's slavery is also exaggerated by the conditions of those enslaving, or dominating. As Verse 8 says: "Slaves rule over us; there is none to deliver us from their hand." Namely, just as the Moabites and the Idumaeans, and other neighbors, by whom they were first dominated.
As Proverbs reminds us: "Under three things the earth trembles; under four it can not bear up: A slave when he becomes king, and a fool when he is filled with food; an unloved woman when she gets a husband, and a maid when she succeeds her mistress." (Prov: 30:21-22-23).
As Proverbs reminds us: "Under three things the earth trembles; under four it can not bear up: A slave when he becomes king, and a fool when he is filled with food; an unloved woman when she gets a husband, and a maid when she succeeds her mistress." (Prov: 30:21-22-23).
Lamentations 5:9
We gat our bread with the peril of our lives because of the sword of the wilderness.
Here is viewed the affliction of hunger. First is shown the people's want; "at the peril of our lives", That is, at a danger to our soul, to our very life. Also, while fleeing into the desert from the face of the sword of Babylon. Or, because, due to loading themselves with foods, they exposed themselves to dangers. As a result, their enemies pursuing them into the desert, would make them flee. As Isaiah 21:14 records: "to the thirsty bring water, meet the fugitive with bread, O inhabitants of the land of Tema."
Lamentations 5:10
Our skin was black like an oven because of the terrible famine.
Then is considered in Verse 10 the effects of famine. As stated: "our skin is hot as an oven." That is, dried up by hunger. And: "with the burning heat of famine." As if being obsessed, and fleeing the famine, the people suffered a long time. Like the prophet Hosea 7:6 says: "For like an oven their hearts burn with intrigue." And Job: 19:20: "My bones cleave to my skin and to my flesh, and I have escaped by the skin of my teeth.
Lamentations 5:11
They ravished the women in Zion, and the maids in the cities of Judah.
Here special persons are viewed. For instance, women ravished in Zion by men corrupting women. As Deuteronomy 28:30 records: "You shall betroth a wife, and another man shall lie with her." And further on: '"Your sons and your daughters shall be given to another people, while your eyes look on and fail with longing for them all the day." (Deuteronomy 28:32).
Lamentations 5:13
They took the young men to grind, and the children fell under the wood.
Thirdly, as to the youth: "Young men are compelled to grind at the mill; and boys stagger under loads of wood." The prophet Joel 3:3 declares: "And have cast lots for my people, and have given a boy for a harlot, and have sold a girl for wine, and have drunk it."
Lamentations 5:14
The elders have ceased from the gate, the young men from their musick.
Here misery is considered in relation to the people's lost possessions. First, as persons' offices as stated: "The old men have quit the city gate." Namely, exercising their office at the city gate.
Then: "the young men their music": That is, as exercising their office as leaders in chorusing. As I Maccabees 2:9 refers: Her babes have been killed in her streets, her youths by the sword of the foe."
Then: "the young men their music": That is, as exercising their office as leaders in chorusing. As I Maccabees 2:9 refers: Her babes have been killed in her streets, her youths by the sword of the foe."
Lamentations 5:15
The joy of our heart is ceased; our dance is turned into mourning.
Here reference is made to the exercise of joy: "The joy of our hearts has ceased, our dincing has been turned to mourning." As the propher Amos states: "I will turn your feasts into mourning, and all your songs into lamentations." (Amos: 8:10).
Lamentations 5:16
The crown is fallen from our head: woe unto us, that we have sinned!
Here is indicated the glory of di~nities. First, the glory of a king. As stated: "The crown has fallen from our head; woe to us, for we have sinned!" As Job 19:9 records: "He has stripped from me my glory, and taken the crown from my head."
Second, is the glory of the temple. Here sadness is placed upon it.
Second, is the glory of the temple. Here sadness is placed upon it.
Lamentations 5:18
Because of the mountain of Zion, which is desolate, the foxes walk upon it.
Here is indeed cause for sadness: "For Mount Zion which lies desolate; jackals prowl over it." That is, where the temple is. And: "jackals prowl over it." As if they were residing in remote desert places. Thus, the prophet Micah reports: "Therefore because of you Zion shall be plowed as a field; Jerusalem shall become a heap of ruins, and the mountain of the house a wooded height." (Micah: 3:12).
Lamentations 5:19
Thou, O LORD, remainest for ever; thy throne from generation to generation.
Here a person is inclined to beseech the Lord. First is acknowledged the eternity of the divine being, or substance. As said: "But thou, O Lord, dost reign forever." Then is expressed the duration of the divine royal glory: "thy throne endures to all generations." Thus, Psalm 102(101):12 states: "But thou, O Lord, art enthroned forever; thy name endures to all generations."
Lamentations 5:20
Wherefore dost thou forget us for ever, and forsake us so long time?
Then, there is a wondered indigration. As said: "Why dost thou forget us forever, why dost thou so long forsake us?" Just as the prophet Isaiah 49:15 exclains: "Can a woman forget her suckling child, that she should have no compassion on the son of her womb?"
Lamentations 5:21
Turn thou us unto thee, O LORD, and we shall be turned; renew our days as of old.
Thirdly, a prayer is prolonged. As stated: "Restore us to thyself, O Lord, that we may be restored! Renew our days as of old!" And as the prophet Jeremiah elsewhere proclaims: "bring me back that I may be restored, for thou art the Lord my God." (Jer: 31:18).
On the contrary, the prophet Zechariah 1:3 proclaims: "Therefore say to them, Thus says the Lord of hosts: Return to me, says the Lord of hosts, and I will return to you."
Yet, it must be said that each proclamation is true, due to the fact that a preparation of one's will is demanded for deeds of merits, and for an infusion of divine grace.
Then: "Renew our days as of old!" Thus Job 29:2 exclaims: "Oh, that I were as in the months of old, as in the days when God watched over me."
On the contrary, the prophet Zechariah 1:3 proclaims: "Therefore say to them, Thus says the Lord of hosts: Return to me, says the Lord of hosts, and I will return to you."
Yet, it must be said that each proclamation is true, due to the fact that a preparation of one's will is demanded for deeds of merits, and for an infusion of divine grace.
Then: "Renew our days as of old!" Thus Job 29:2 exclaims: "Oh, that I were as in the months of old, as in the days when God watched over me."
Lamentations 5:22
But thou hast utterly rejected us; thou art very wroth against us.
Finally, is considered the need for praying. As stated: "Or hast thou utterly rejected us? Art thou exceedingly angry with us?" And as Jeremiah elsewhere states: "Hast thou utterly rejected Judah? Does thy soul loath Zion? Why hast thou smitten us so that there is no healing for us?" (Jer: l4;l9).
Luke 1:34
Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
Article 4. Whether the Mother of God took a vow of virginity? Objection 1. It would seem that the Mother of God did not take a vow of virginity. For it is written (Deuteronomy 7:14): "No one shall be barren among you of either sex." But sterility is a consequence of virginity. Therefore the keeping of virginity was contrary to the commandment of the Old Law. But before Christ was born the old law was still in force. Therefore at that time the Blessed Virgin could not lawfully take a vow of virginity. Objection 2. Further, the Apostle says (1 Corinthians 7:25): "Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord; but I give counsel." But the perfection of the counsels was to take its beginning from Christ, who is the "end of the Law," as the Apostle says (Romans 10:4). It was not therefore becoming that the Virgin should take a vow of virginity. Objection 3. Further, the gloss of Jerome says on 1 Timothy 5:12, that "for those who are vowed to virginity, it is reprehensible not only to marry, but also to desire to be married." But the Mother of Christ committed no sin for which sh…
Article 4. Whether the Mother of God took a vow of virginity?
Objection 1. It would seem that the Mother of God did not take a vow of virginity. For it is written (Deuteronomy 7:14): "No one shall be barren among you of either sex." But sterility is a consequence of virginity. Therefore the keeping of virginity was contrary to the commandment of the Old Law. But before Christ was born the old law was still in force. Therefore at that time the Blessed Virgin could not lawfully take a vow of virginity.
Objection 2. Further, the Apostle says (1 Corinthians 7:25): "Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord; but I give counsel." But the perfection of the counsels was to take its beginning from Christ, who is the "end of the Law," as the Apostle says (Romans 10:4). It was not therefore becoming that the Virgin should take a vow of virginity.
Objection 3. Further, the gloss of Jerome says on 1 Timothy 5:12, that "for those who are vowed to virginity, it is reprehensible not only to marry, but also to desire to be married." But the Mother of Christ committed no sin for which she could be reprehended, as stated above (III:27:4). Since therefore she was "espoused," as related by Luke 1:27 it seems that she did not take a vow of virginity.
On the contrary, Augustine says (De Sanct. Virg. iv): "Mary answered the announcing angel: 'How shall this be done, because I know not man?' [Luke 1:34] She would not have said this unless she had already vowed her virginity to God."
I answer that, As we have stated in the II-II:88:6, works of perfection are more praiseworthy when performed in fulfilment of a vow. Now it is clear that for reasons already given virginity had a special place in the Mother of God. It was therefore fitting that her virginity should be consecrated to God by vow. Nevertheless because, while the Law was in force both men and women were bound to attend to the duty of begetting, since the worship of God was spread according to carnal origin, until Christ was born of that people; the Mother of God is not believed to have taken an absolute vow of virginity, before being espoused to Joseph, although she desired to do so, yet yielding her own will to God's judgment. Afterwards, however, having taken a husband, according as the custom of the time required, together with him she took a vow of virginity.
Reply to Objection 1. Because it seemed to be forbidden by the law not to take the necessary steps for leaving a posterity on earth, therefore the Mother of God did not vow virginity absolutely, but under the condition that it were pleasing to God. When, however, she knew that it was acceptable to God, she made the vow absolute, before the angel's Annunciation.
Reply to Objection 2. Just as the fulness of grace was in Christ perfectly, yet some beginning of the fulness preceded in His Mother; so also the observance of the counsels, which is an effect of God's grace, began its perfection in Christ, but was begun after a fashion in His Virgin Mother.
Reply to Objection 3. These words of the Apostle are to be understood of those who vow chastity absolutely. Christ's Mother did not do this until she was espoused to Joseph. After her espousals, however, by their common consent she took a vow of virginity together with her spouse.
Objection 1. It would seem that the Mother of God did not take a vow of virginity. For it is written (Deuteronomy 7:14): "No one shall be barren among you of either sex." But sterility is a consequence of virginity. Therefore the keeping of virginity was contrary to the commandment of the Old Law. But before Christ was born the old law was still in force. Therefore at that time the Blessed Virgin could not lawfully take a vow of virginity.
Objection 2. Further, the Apostle says (1 Corinthians 7:25): "Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord; but I give counsel." But the perfection of the counsels was to take its beginning from Christ, who is the "end of the Law," as the Apostle says (Romans 10:4). It was not therefore becoming that the Virgin should take a vow of virginity.
Objection 3. Further, the gloss of Jerome says on 1 Timothy 5:12, that "for those who are vowed to virginity, it is reprehensible not only to marry, but also to desire to be married." But the Mother of Christ committed no sin for which she could be reprehended, as stated above (III:27:4). Since therefore she was "espoused," as related by Luke 1:27 it seems that she did not take a vow of virginity.
On the contrary, Augustine says (De Sanct. Virg. iv): "Mary answered the announcing angel: 'How shall this be done, because I know not man?' [Luke 1:34] She would not have said this unless she had already vowed her virginity to God."
I answer that, As we have stated in the II-II:88:6, works of perfection are more praiseworthy when performed in fulfilment of a vow. Now it is clear that for reasons already given virginity had a special place in the Mother of God. It was therefore fitting that her virginity should be consecrated to God by vow. Nevertheless because, while the Law was in force both men and women were bound to attend to the duty of begetting, since the worship of God was spread according to carnal origin, until Christ was born of that people; the Mother of God is not believed to have taken an absolute vow of virginity, before being espoused to Joseph, although she desired to do so, yet yielding her own will to God's judgment. Afterwards, however, having taken a husband, according as the custom of the time required, together with him she took a vow of virginity.
Reply to Objection 1. Because it seemed to be forbidden by the law not to take the necessary steps for leaving a posterity on earth, therefore the Mother of God did not vow virginity absolutely, but under the condition that it were pleasing to God. When, however, she knew that it was acceptable to God, she made the vow absolute, before the angel's Annunciation.
Reply to Objection 2. Just as the fulness of grace was in Christ perfectly, yet some beginning of the fulness preceded in His Mother; so also the observance of the counsels, which is an effect of God's grace, began its perfection in Christ, but was begun after a fashion in His Virgin Mother.
Reply to Objection 3. These words of the Apostle are to be understood of those who vow chastity absolutely. Christ's Mother did not do this until she was espoused to Joseph. After her espousals, however, by their common consent she took a vow of virginity together with her spouse.
Luke 16:22
And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
The expression "Abraham's bosom" may be taken in two senses. First of all, as implying that restfulness, existing there, from sensible pain; so that in this sense it cannot be called hell, nor are there any sorrows there. In another way it can be taken as implying the privation of longed-for glory: in this sense it has the character of hell and sorrow. Consequently, that rest of the blessed is now called Abraham's bosom, yet it is not styled hell, nor are sorrows said to be now in Abraham's bosom.
Luke 23:43
And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
I answer that, As Christ, in order to take our penalties upon Himself, willed His body to be laid in the tomb, so likewise He willed His soul to descend into hell. But the body lay in the tomb for a day and two nights, so as to demonstrate the truth of His death. Consequently, it is to be believed that His soul was in hell, in order that it might be brought back out of hell simultaneously with His body from the tomb. Reply to Objection 1. When Christ descended into hell He delivered the saints who were there, not by leading them out at once from the confines of hell, but by enlightening them with the light of glory in hell itself. Nevertheless it was fitting that His soul should abide in hell as long as His body remained in the tomb. Reply to Objection 2. By the expression "bars of hell" are understood the obstacles which kept the holy Fathers from quitting hell, through the guilt of our first parent's sin; and these bars Christ burst asunder by the power of His Passion on descending into hell: nevertheless He chose to remain in hell for some time, for the reason stated above. Rep…
I answer that, As Christ, in order to take our penalties upon Himself, willed His body to be laid in the tomb, so likewise He willed His soul to descend into hell. But the body lay in the tomb for a day and two nights, so as to demonstrate the truth of His death. Consequently, it is to be believed that His soul was in hell, in order that it might be brought back out of hell simultaneously with His body from the tomb.
Reply to Objection 1. When Christ descended into hell He delivered the saints who were there, not by leading them out at once from the confines of hell, but by enlightening them with the light of glory in hell itself. Nevertheless it was fitting that His soul should abide in hell as long as His body remained in the tomb.
Reply to Objection 2. By the expression "bars of hell" are understood the obstacles which kept the holy Fathers from quitting hell, through the guilt of our first parent's sin; and these bars Christ burst asunder by the power of His Passion on descending into hell: nevertheless He chose to remain in hell for some time, for the reason stated above.
Reply to Objection 3. Our Lord's expression is not to be understood of the earthly corporeal paradise, but of a spiritual one, in which all are said to be who enjoy the Divine glory. Accordingly, the thief descended locally into hell with Christ, because it was said to him: "This day thou shalt be with Me in paradise"; still as to reward he was in paradise, because he enjoyed Christ's Godhead just as the other saints did.
Reply to Objection 1. When Christ descended into hell He delivered the saints who were there, not by leading them out at once from the confines of hell, but by enlightening them with the light of glory in hell itself. Nevertheless it was fitting that His soul should abide in hell as long as His body remained in the tomb.
Reply to Objection 2. By the expression "bars of hell" are understood the obstacles which kept the holy Fathers from quitting hell, through the guilt of our first parent's sin; and these bars Christ burst asunder by the power of His Passion on descending into hell: nevertheless He chose to remain in hell for some time, for the reason stated above.
Reply to Objection 3. Our Lord's expression is not to be understood of the earthly corporeal paradise, but of a spiritual one, in which all are said to be who enjoy the Divine glory. Accordingly, the thief descended locally into hell with Christ, because it was said to him: "This day thou shalt be with Me in paradise"; still as to reward he was in paradise, because he enjoyed Christ's Godhead just as the other saints did.
Mark 6:3
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.
Without any hesitation we must abhor the error of Helvidius, who dared to assert that Christ's Mother, after His Birth, was carnally known by Joseph, and bore other children. For, in the first place, this is derogatory to Christ's perfection: for as He is in His Godhead the Only-Begotten of the Father, being thus His Son in every respect perfect, so it was becoming that He should be the Only-begotten son of His Mother, as being her perfect offspring. Secondly, this error is an insult to the Holy Ghost, whose "shrine" was the virginal womb ["Sacrarium Spiritus Sancti" (Office of B. M. V., Ant. ad Benedictus, T. P.), wherein He had formed the flesh of Christ: wherefore it was unbecoming that it should be desecrated by intercourse with man. Thirdly, this is derogatory to the dignity and holiness of God's Mother: for thus she would seem to be most ungrateful, were she not content with such a Son; and were she, of her own accord, by carnal intercourse to forfeit that virginity which had been miraculously preserved in her. Fourthly, it would be tantamount to an imputation of extreme pre…
Without any hesitation we must abhor the error of Helvidius, who dared to assert that Christ's Mother, after His Birth, was carnally known by Joseph, and bore other children. For, in the first place, this is derogatory to Christ's perfection: for as He is in His Godhead the Only-Begotten of the Father, being thus His Son in every respect perfect, so it was becoming that He should be the Only-begotten son of His Mother, as being her perfect offspring.
Secondly, this error is an insult to the Holy Ghost, whose "shrine" was the virginal womb ["Sacrarium Spiritus Sancti" (Office of B. M. V., Ant. ad Benedictus, T. P.), wherein He had formed the flesh of Christ: wherefore it was unbecoming that it should be desecrated by intercourse with man.
Thirdly, this is derogatory to the dignity and holiness of God's Mother: for thus she would seem to be most ungrateful, were she not content with such a Son; and were she, of her own accord, by carnal intercourse to forfeit that virginity which had been miraculously preserved in her.
Fourthly, it would be tantamount to an imputation of extreme presumption in Joseph, to assume that he attempted to violate her whom by the angel's revelation he knew to have conceived by the Holy Ghost.
We must therefore simply assert that the Mother of God, as she was a virgin in conceiving Him and a virgin in giving Him birth, did she remain a virgin ever afterwards...
Some, as Jerome says on Matthew 12:49-50, "suppose that the brethren of the Lord were Joseph's sons by another wife. But we understand the brethren of the Lord to be not sons of Joseph, but cousins of the Saviour, the sons of Mary, His Mother's sister." For "Scripture speaks of brethren in four senses; namely, those who are united by being of the same parents, of the same nation, of the same family, by common affection." Wherefore the brethren of the Lord are so called, not by birth, as being born of the same mother; but by relationship, as being blood-relations of His. But Joseph, as Jerome says (Contra Helvid. ix), is rather to be believed to have remained a virgin, "since he is not said to have had another wife," and "a holy man does not live otherwise than chastely."
Secondly, this error is an insult to the Holy Ghost, whose "shrine" was the virginal womb ["Sacrarium Spiritus Sancti" (Office of B. M. V., Ant. ad Benedictus, T. P.), wherein He had formed the flesh of Christ: wherefore it was unbecoming that it should be desecrated by intercourse with man.
Thirdly, this is derogatory to the dignity and holiness of God's Mother: for thus she would seem to be most ungrateful, were she not content with such a Son; and were she, of her own accord, by carnal intercourse to forfeit that virginity which had been miraculously preserved in her.
Fourthly, it would be tantamount to an imputation of extreme presumption in Joseph, to assume that he attempted to violate her whom by the angel's revelation he knew to have conceived by the Holy Ghost.
We must therefore simply assert that the Mother of God, as she was a virgin in conceiving Him and a virgin in giving Him birth, did she remain a virgin ever afterwards...
Some, as Jerome says on Matthew 12:49-50, "suppose that the brethren of the Lord were Joseph's sons by another wife. But we understand the brethren of the Lord to be not sons of Joseph, but cousins of the Saviour, the sons of Mary, His Mother's sister." For "Scripture speaks of brethren in four senses; namely, those who are united by being of the same parents, of the same nation, of the same family, by common affection." Wherefore the brethren of the Lord are so called, not by birth, as being born of the same mother; but by relationship, as being blood-relations of His. But Joseph, as Jerome says (Contra Helvid. ix), is rather to be believed to have remained a virgin, "since he is not said to have had another wife," and "a holy man does not live otherwise than chastely."
Matthew 1:18
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
As Jerome says (Contra Helvid. i): "Although this particle 'before' often indicates a subsequent event, yet we must observe that it not infrequently points merely to some thing previously in the mind: nor is there need that what was in the mind take place eventually, since something may occur to prevent its happening. Thus if a man say: 'Before I dined in the port, I set sail,' we do not understand him to have dined in port after he set sail: but that his mind was set on dining in port." In like manner the evangelist says: "Before they came together" Mary "was found with child, of the Holy Ghost," not that they came together afterwards: but that, when it seemed that they would come together, this was forestalled through her conceiving by the Holy Ghost, the result being that afterwards they did not come together.