HOMILIES ON GENESIS 6.2
But what is the meaning of that which Scripture adds: “And the Lord did not permit him to touch her”? If Sarah represents virtue and Abimelech wished to receive virtue “with a pure heart,” why is it said that “the Lord did not permit him to touch her”?Abimelech means “my father is king.” It seems to me therefore that this Abimelech represents the studious and wise men of the world, who by giving attention to philosophy, although they do not reach the complete and perfect rule of piety, nevertheless perceive that God is the Father and King of all things. Those, therefore, so far as it pertains to ethics (that is, moral philosophy), are acknowledged also to have given attention in some respects to purity of heart and to have sought the inspiration of divine virtue with all their mind and zeal. But “God did not permit” them “to touch” her. For this grace was designed to be delivered to the Gentiles not by Abraham, who, although he was great was nevertheless a servant, but by Christ.… Abraham was eager that what was said to him be fulfilled through and in himself, that “all the nations shall be blessed in you.” Nevertheless the promise to him is established in Isaac, that is, in Christ, as the apostle says: “He did not say, And to his seeds, as of many, but as of one, and to your seed, which is Christ.”26
Nevertheless “the Lord heals Abimelech and his wife and his handmaids.”
Преведи са Гуглом
Commentary on Genesis (Hexaemeron)
And I know that you have done this with a simple heart; therefore I have kept you from sinning against me. But also that he immediately rose in the night, called all his servants, and narrated to them what had happened to him; and that they, having heard the danger of the offense into which the king had fallen, were all greatly afraid, demonstrates how devoted to justice both the king and his servants were: For the king himself, when he said to Abraham: What have you done to us? What did we sin against you, that you have brought upon me and my kingdom a great sin? clearly implies that he did not consider the sin of ignorance to be trivial, which he confessed was harmful not only to himself but also to his kingdom. Hence, he did not believe it sufficient for him that he had obtained pardon from God, or had deserved to be kept from sinning by God’s favor, unless he also gave money abundantly along with the returned wife to the man against whom he had unknowingly sinned, so that he might be appeased, as it is read in the following passages. Nor is it to be wondered that uncircumcised men at that time could have been worshippers of truth, since the blessed Job and his royal friends are believed to have faithfully served the Lord with all that they had after the times of the given circumcision, without the sacrament of circumcision: but also, it is evident that the patriarch Shem, along with Arphaxad, Salah, Heber, his sons or grandchildren, were still alive in the flesh at that time and led a life pleasing to God without the law of circumcision. From this, it seems likely that the sign in the circumcision of Abraham was given only to him and his seed and family, but among other nations, there could still have been some who naturally served God devotedly according to the law; whether by the offerings of sacrifices or certainly by the profession of true faith alone, cleansed from the stain of the first transgression, especially those who still survived and remembered the destruction of the human race in the flood, the building of the tower and the division of tongues, or the ruin of Sodom. For the very history of Genesis testifies that Shem himself endured in the body up until the fiftieth year of Jacob’s birth; to which opinion the blessed Pope Gregory agrees, saying it should by no means be believed that the lifespan of men in those times was as short as the few records of his writers seem to comprehend in Moses’ law. And when Abraham replied to the king who persistently questioned him why he had said his wife was his sister, and answered among other things: Besides, she is indeed my sister, the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; the ancient translation has more fittingly: Indeed, she is my sister by my father, but not by my mother; that is, the daughter of his brother, not his sister; for brothers or sisters are sometimes called kin in the Scriptures, who are of one family, that is, from the fatherland, which the Latins interpret as fatherhoods, when many branches of the family spread from one root; otherwise, how is it that Abraham, a just man, took his father’s daughter as his wife, when in the first men for the sake of the ears’ health the Scripture does not name it, preferring to be understood rather than openly stated? And that the king said to Sarah:
Преведи са Гуглом