Admiration

Passages

Every passage tagged with this emotion in the Vela corpus. Search the body text, narrow by source or register, click through to a book’s profile to see how the passage sits with the rest of the work.

Page 109 of 288 · 20 per page

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  Widely as these Reformers differed in talent, temperament, and sundry points of doctrine and discipline, they were great and good men, equally honest and earnest, unselfish and unworldly, brave and fearless, ready at any moment to go to the stake for their conviction. They labored for the same end: the renovation of the Catholic Church by leading it back to the pure and perennial fountain of the perfect teaching and example of Christ. § 66. Calvin’s Place in History. 1. Calvin was, first of all, a theologian. He easily takes the lead among the systematic expounders of the Reformed system of Christian doctrine. He is scarcely inferior to Augustin among the fathers, or Thomas Aquinas among the schoolmen, and more methodical and symmetrical than either. Melanchthon, himself the prince of Lutheran divines and "the Preceptor of Germany," called him emphatically "the Theologian."359 Calvin’s theology is based upon a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. He was the ablest exegete among the Reformers, and his commentaries rank among the very best of ancient and modern times. His theology, therefore, is biblical rather than scholastic, and has all the freshness of enthusiastic devotion to the truths of God’s Word. At the same time he was a consummate logician and dialectician. He had a rare power of clear, strong, convincing statement. He built up a body of doctrines which is called after him, and which obtained symbolical authority through some of the leading Reformed Confessions of Faith. Calvinism is one of the great dogmatic systems of the Church. It is more logical than Lutheranism and Arminianism, and as logical as Romanism. And yet neither Calvinism nor Romanism is absolutely logical. Both are happily illogical or inconsistent, at least in one crucial point: the former by denying that God is the author of sin—which limits Divine sovereignty; the latter by conceding that baptismal (i.e. regenerating or saving) grace is found outside of the Roman Church—which breaks the claim of exclusiveness.360 The Calvinistic system is popularly (though not quite correctly) identified with the Augustinian system, and shares its merit as a profound exposition of the

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  Beza published several editions of his Greek Testament in Geneva (1565– 1598), which were chiefly used by King James’ translators. In the same city appeared the English version of the New Testament by Whittingham, 1557; then of the whole Bible, 1560. This is the so-called "Geneva Bible," or "Breeches Bible" (from the rendering of Gen. 3:7), which was for a long time the most popular English version, and passed through about two hundred editions from 1560 to 1630.674 Geneva has well maintained its literary reputation to this day. § 102. Distinctive Principles of Calvin’s Church Polity. Calvin was a legislator and the founder of a new system of church polity and discipline. He had a legal training, which was of much use to him in organizing the Reformed Church at Geneva. If he had lived in the Middle Ages, he might have been a Hildebrand or an Innocent III. But the spirit of the Reformation required a reconstruction of church government on an evangelical and popular basis. Calvin laid great stress on the outward organization and order of the Church, but in subordination to sound doctrine and the inner spiritual life. He compares the former to the body, while the doctrine which regulates the worship of God, and points out the way of salvation, is the soul which animates the body and renders it lively and active.675 The Calvinistic system of church polity is based upon the following principles, which have exerted great influence in the development of Protestantism: — 1. The autonomy of the Church, or its right of self-government under the sole headship of Christ. The Roman Catholic Church likewise claims autonomy, but in a hierarchical sense, and under the supreme control of the pope, who, as the visible vicar of Christ, demands passive obedience from priests and people. Calvin vests the self-government in the Christian congregation, and regards all the ministers of the gospel, in their official character, as ambassadors and representatives of Christ. "Christ alone," he says, "ought to rule and reign in the Church, and to have all preeminence in it, and this government ought to be exercised and administered solely by his word; yet as he dwells not among us by a visible presence, so as to make an audible declaration of his will to us, he uses for this purpose the ministry of men whom he employs as his delegates, not to transfer his right and honor to them, but only that he may himself do his work by their lips; just as an artificer makes use of an instrument in the performance of his work."676 In practice, however, the autonomy both of the Roman Catholic hierarchy and of the Protestant Churches is more or less curtailed and checked by the civil government wherever Church and State are united, and where the State supports the Church. For self-government requires self-support. Calvin intended to institute synods, and to make the clergy independent of State patronage, but in this he did not succeed.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  The neatness, precision, and lucidity of his style, his classic training and wide knowledge, his methodical accuracy of procedure, his manly independence, his avoidance of needless and commonplace homiletics, his deep religious feeling, his careful attention to the entire scope and context of every passage, and the fact that he has commented on almost the whole of the Bible, make him tower above the great majority of those who have written on Holy Scripture. Nothing can furnish a greater contrast to many helpless commentaries, with their congeries of vacillating variorum annotations heaped together in aimless multiplicity, than the terse and decisive notes of the great Genevan theologian.... A characteristic feature of Calvin’s exegesis is its abhorrence of hollow orthodoxy. He regarded it as a disgraceful offering to a God of truth. He did not hold the theory of verbal dictation. He will never defend or harmonize what he regards as an oversight or mistake in the Sacred writers. He scorns to support a good cause by bad reasoning.... But the most characteristic and original feature of his Commentaries is his anticipation of modern criticism in his views about the Messianic prophecies. He saw that the words of psalmists and prophets, while they not only admit of but demand ’germinant and springing developments,’ were yet primarily applicable to the events and circumstances of their own days." Scotch Tributes.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  and laid the foundation for the temporal wealth of the city. When Lyons, by the patronage of the French crown, surpassed the little Republic in the manufacture of silk, Geneva had already begun to make up for the loss by the manufacture of watches, and retained the mastery in this useful industry until 1885, when American machinery produced a successful rivalry.775 Altogether, Geneva owes her moral and temporal prosperity, her intellectual and literary activity, her social refinement, and her world-wide fame very largely to the reformation and discipline of Calvin. He set a high and noble example of a model community. It is impossible, indeed, to realize his church ideal in a large country, even with all the help of the civil government. The Puritans attempted it in England and in New England, but succeeded only in part, and only for a short period. But nothing should prevent a pastor from making an effort in his own congregation on the voluntary principle. Occasionally we find parallel cases in small communities under the guidance of pastors of exceptional genius and consecration, such as Oberlin in the Steinthal, Harms in Hermannsburg, and Löhe in Neudettelsau, who exerted an inspiring influence far beyond their fields of labor. Let us listen to some testimonies of visitors who saw with their own eyes the changes wrought in Geneva through Calvin’s influence. William Farel, who knew better than any other man the state of Geneva under Roman Catholic rule, and during the early stages of reform before the arrival of Calvin, visited the city again in 1557, and wrote to Ambrosius Blaurer that he would gladly listen and learn there with the humblest of the people, and that "he would rather be the last in Geneva than the first anywhere else."776 John Knox, the Reformer of Scotland, who studied several years in Geneva as a pupil of Calvin (though five years his senior), and as pastor of the English congregation, wrote to his friend Locke, in 1556: "In my heart I could have wished, yea, I cannot cease to wish, that it might please God to guide and conduct yourself to this place where, I neither fear nor am ashamed to say, is the most perfect school of Christ that ever was in the earth since the days of the Apostles. In other places I confess Christ to be truly preached; but manners and religion to be so seriously reformed, I have not yet seen in any other place besides."777 Dr.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  He referred to his books for details, but was ready to give further explanation if desired.1071 Servetus was by no means satisfied with the answer, and wrote back that Calvin made two or three Sons of God; that the Wisdom of God spoken of by Solomon was allegorical and impersonal; that regeneration took place in the moment of baptism by water and the spirit, but never in infant baptism. He denied that circumcision corresponded to baptism. He put five new theological questions to Calvin, and asked him to read the fourth chapter on baptism in the manuscript of the Restitutio which he had sent him.1072 To these objections Calvin sent another and more lengthy response.1073 He again offered further explanation, though he had no time to write whole books for him, and had discussed all these topics in his Institutes.1074 So far there is nothing to indicate any disposition in Calvin to injure Servetus. On the contrary we must admire his patience and moderation in giving so much of his precious time to the questions of a troublesome stranger and pronounced opponent. Servetus continued to press Calvin with letters, and returned the copy of the Institutes with copious critical objections. "There is hardly a page," says Calvin, "that is not defiled by his vomit."1075 Calvin sent a final answer to the questions of Servetus, which is lost, together with a French letter to Frellon, which is preserved.1076 This letter is dated Feb. 13, 1546, under his well-known pseudonym of Charles Despeville, and is as follows:— "Seigneur Jehan, As your last letter was brought to me on my departure, I had no leisure to reply to the enclosure it contained. After my return I use the first moment of my leisure to comply with your desire; not indeed that I have any great hope of proving serviceable to such a man, seeing him disposed as I do. But I will try once more, if there be any means left of bringing him to reason, and this will happen when God shall have so wrought in him that he has become altogether another man. Since he has written to me in so proud a spirit, I have been led to write to him more sharply than is my wont, being minded to take him down a little in his presumption.1077 But I could not do otherwise. For I assure you there is no lesson he needs so much to learn as humility. This must come to him through the grace of God, not otherwise. But we, too, ought to lend a helping hand. If God give such grace to him and to us that the present answer will turn to his profit, I shall have cause to rejoice.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  It was an asylum for persecuted confessors of the evangelical faith without distinction of nationality, an impregnable moral fortress built upon the rock of the Bible.1225 Zürich, Basel, and Strassburg were the only places in that age which can be compared with Geneva in generous hospitality to strangers. At the beginning of the sixteenth century the city of Geneva numbered 12,000 souls, in 1543 not more than 13,000; but in the seven years from 1543 to 1550 it increased to 20,000, or at the rate of 1000 a year. This increase was chiefly due to the continuous influx of persecuted Protestants from France, Italy, and England. Some came also from Spain and Holland.1226 Most of them were educated men and not a few of them distinguished for learning and social position, as Cordier, Colladon, Etienne (Stephens), Marot, Ochino, Carraccioli, Knox, Whittingham. They had made sacrifices for the sake of religion, and thereby acquired the honor of confessors with the spirit of martyrs. There were special congregations for Italians and Englishmen, who were provided by the city with suitable places of worship. Calvin treated the refugees with great hospitality. He secured to them as far as possible the rights of citizenship. Some of them were even elected to the Large Council. An insult to a refugee from religious persecution was as punishable as an insult to a minister of the gospel. The favor and privileges accorded to these foreigners excited the envy and jealousy of the native Genevese, who opposed their admission to citizenship and their right to carry arms. This exclusive nativism gave Calvin a great deal of trouble. The little Republic of Geneva was continually exposed to the danger of absorption by Savoy, France, and Spain, which hated her as the stronghold of heresy. It was in a large measure due to the wisdom and firmness of Calvin that in those critical times she preserved her liberty and independence. He also resisted the repeated attempts of Bern to interfere with the doctrine and discipline of the Church. Geneva offers a wonderful aspect in modern history. Embracing the élite of three nations, melted into one whole by the spirit of one man, it continues in the midst of mighty and bitter foes, without any external support, simply through its moral force. It has no territory, no army, no treasures, no temporal, no material resources. There it stands, a city of the spirit, built of Christian stoicism on the rock of predestination."

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  Cardinal Bembo933 secured him for Lent at Venice through Vittoria Colonna, and wrote to her (Feb. 23, 1539): "I have heard him all through Lent with such pleasure that I cannot praise him enough. I have never heard more useful and edifying sermons than his, and I no longer wonder that you esteem him so highly. He preaches in a far more Christian manner than other preachers, with more real sympathy and love, and utters more soothing and elevating thoughts. Every one is delighted with him." A few months later (April 4, 1539) he wrote to the same lady: "Our Fra Bernardino is literally adored here. There is no one who does not praise him to the skies. How deeply his words penetrate, how elevating and comforting his discourses!" He begged him to eat meat and to restrain from excessive abstinence lest he should break down. Even Pietro Aretino, the most frivolous and immoral poet of that time, was superficially converted for a brief season by Ochino’s preaching, and wrote to Paul III. (April 21, 1539): "Bembo has won a thousand souls for Paradise by bringing to Venice Fra Bernardino, whose modesty is equal to his virtue. I have myself begun to believe in the exhortations trumpeted forth from the mouth of this apostolic monk." Cardinal Commendone, afterwards Bishop of Amelia, an enemy of Ochino, gives this description of him: "Every thing about Ochino contributed to make the admiration of the multitude almost overstep all human bounds,—the fame of his eloquence; his prepossessing, ingratiating manner; his advancing years; his mode of life; the rough Capuchin garb; the long beard reaching to his breast; the gray hair; the pale, thin face; the artificial aspect of bodily weakness; finally, the reputation of a holy life. Wherever he was to speak the citizens might be seen in crowds; no church was large enough to contain the multitude of listeners. Men flocked as numerously as women. When he went elsewhere the crowd followed after to hear him. He was honored not only by the common people, but also by princes and kings. Wherever he came he was offered hospitality; he was met at his arrival, and escorted at his departure, by the dignitaries of the place. He himself knew how to increase the desire to hear him, and the reverence shown him. Obedient to the rule of his order, he only travelled on foot; he was never seen to ride, although his health was delicate and his age advanced. Even when Ochino was the guest of nobles—an honor he could not always refuse—he could never be induced, by the splendor of palaces, dress, and ornament, to forsake his mode of life. When invited to table, he ate of only one very simple dish, and he drank little wine; if a soft bed had been prepared for him, he begged permission to rest on a more comfortable pallet, spread his cloak on the ground, and laid down to rest.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  A greater man and more abundant in self-denying and fruitful apostolic labors has not risen in the Protestant churches since the death of Calvin than John Wesley, whose "parish was the world." But he was aided in the great Anglo- American Revival by George Whitefield, who was both a Calvinist and a true evangelist. Calvinism emphasizes divine sovereignty and free grace; Arminianism emphasizes human responsibility. The one restricts the saving grace to the elect: the other extends it to all men on the condition of faith. Both are right in what they assert; both are wrong in what they deny. If one important truth is pressed to the exclusion of another truth of equal importance, it becomes an error, and loses its hold upon the conscience. The Bible gives us a theology which is more human than Calvinism, and more divine than Arminianism, and more Christian than either of them.1243 § 163. Calvin’s Influence upon Great Britain. Calvin and the Church of England. Calvin first alludes to the English Reformation in a letter to Farel, dated March 15, 1539, where he gives the following judgment of Henry VIII.: "The King is only half wise. He prohibits, under severe penalties, besides depriving them of the ministry, the priests and bishops who enter upon matrimony; he retains the daily masses; he wishes the seven sacraments to remain as they are. In this way he has a mutilated and tom gospel, and a church stuffed full as yet with many toys and trifles. Then he does not suffer the Scripture to circulate in the language of the common people throughout the kingdom, and he has lately put forth a new verdict by which he warns the people against the reading of the Bible. He lately burned a worthy and learned man [John Lambert] for denying the carnal presence of Christ in the bread. Our friends, however, though sorely hurt by atrocities of this kind, will not cease to have an eye to the condition of his kingdom." With the accession of Edward VI. he began to exercise a direct influence upon the Anglican Reformation. He addressed a long letter to the Protector Somerset, Oct. 22, 1548, and advised the introduction of instructive preaching and strict discipline, the abolition of crying abuses, and the drawing up of a summary of articles of faith, and a catechism for children. Most of his suggestions were adopted. It is remarkable that in this letter, as well as that to the king of Poland, he makes no objection to the Episcopal form of government, nor to a liturgy. At the request of Archbishop Cranmer, he wrote also letters to Edward VI., and dedicated to him his Commentary on Isaiah.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  He has been called by competent judges of different creeds and schools, "the theologian" par excellence, "the Aristotle of the Reformation," "the Thomas Aquinas of the Reformed Church," "the Lycurgus of a Christian democracy," "the Pope of Geneva." He has been compared, as a church ruler, to Gregory VII. and to Innocent III. The sceptical Renan even, who entirely dissents from his theology, calls him the most Christian man of his age." Such a combination of theoretic and practical pre-eminence is without a parallel in history. But he was also an intolerant inquisitor and persecutor, and his hands are stained with the blood of a heretic.1265 Take these characteristics together, and you have the whole Calvin; omit one or the other of them, and you do him injustice. He will ever command admiration and even reverence, but can never be popular among the masses. No pilgrimages will be made to his grave. The fourth centennial of his birth, in 1909, is not likely to be celebrated with such enthusiasm as Luther’s was in 1883, and Zwingli’s in 1884. But the impression he made on the Swiss, French, Dutch, and especially on the Anglo-Saxon race in Great Britain and America, can never be erased.1266 Calvin’s bodily presence, like that of St. Paul, was weak. His earthly tent scarcely covered his mighty spirit. He was of middle stature, dark complexion, thin, pale, emaciated, and in feeble health; but he had a finely chiseled face, a well-formed mouth, pointed beard, black hair, a prominent nose, a lofty

• From Introduction to the Hebrew Bible and Deutero-Canonical Books (2018)

  between the Creator and creation. The more typical phrase is “God of all” (36:1). He does, however, see a very close relation between God and nature or creation. In this he is typical of the wisdom tradition. The Praise of the Fathers The long section in chapters 44–50 is devoted to the praise of famous men from Israel’s past (Ben Sira includes no women in the list). This catalog differs from most reviews of biblical history. It is not focused on events or on the mighty acts of God. It is rather focused on individuals and their character. Primary attention is given to those who were leaders of their people. Ben Sira is especially interested in the priesthood. The praise of Aaron in chapter 45 is three times as long as that of Moses and is followed by praise of another priest, Phinehas. David and Solomon are praised at length, as are Elijah and Elisha. Mention is also made of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve (Ben Sira did not know Daniel). Surprisingly, there is no mention of Ezra, although Nehemiah is praised for raising up the fallen walls (49:13). The series concludes with a figure who was a contemporary of Ben Sira. This was Simon the high priest, known as Simon the Just, who was high priest from 219 to 196 B.C.E. During his time (in 198), Jerusalem passed from the control of the Ptolemies of Egypt to the Seleucids of Syria. Simon welcomed the Syrians and was rewarded for his loyalty. Ben Sira’s admiration for Simon was undoubtedly colored by the success Simon enjoyed under Syrian patronage. He was able to repair the temple and the fortifications. Syrian favor, however, would be short-lived, as we know from the stories in the books of Maccabees, which describe events that began a mere quarter of a century after Simon welcomed the Syrians to Jerusalem. The Role of the Scribe Ben Sira gives us a clearer picture of his role in society than do most biblical writers, and certainly more than any other wisdom writer. In 38:24—39:11 he

• From Introduction to the Hebrew Bible and Deutero-Canonical Books (2018)

  ENDURING VALUES The importance that the Bible has enjoyed in the Western world is due in large part to its canonical status in Judaism and Christianity, and to the widespread belief in its inspiration. Be that as it may, the influence of these books on Western culture is enormous. Knowledge of biblical stories is indispensible for the appreciation of Western art and culture. Think, for example, of the Sistine Chapel paintings of Michelangelo, or of Milton’s Paradise Lost . Even apart from its importance as a cultural aid, however, the Old Testament remains vital and engaging literature even from a purely humanistic perspective. Here it may suffice to mention two factors that render the Bible an important resource for humanistic education. First, no other collection of documents from the ancient world, and scarcely any other documents at all, speak with such passionate urgency on the subject of social justice. The primary voices in this respect are those of the Hebrew prophets, but the law codes of the Pentateuch are also of fundamental importance for our understanding of human rights. To be sure, the biblical laws are not always satisfactory by modern standards. Biblical attitudes to slaves, women, and foreigners are all mired in the cultural assumptions of the ancient world, with only occasional flickers of enlightenment. Nonetheless, the concern for the unfortunate of society in these books is remarkable and often stands as a reproach to the modern Western world. Second, it has been claimed that the biblical authors were the pioneers of prose fiction. Whatever the historical merits of this claim, and it is not without substance, the achievements of the biblical writers are not just a matter of literary form. The biblical narratives offer a warts-and-all picture of human nature that has seldom been surpassed. The realism of the narratives of Genesis or the story of David is widely recognized and appreciated. The account of the brutality of conquest is no less realistic, but has less often been appreciated, because it has too often been construed as moral example. When the Bible is

• From Introduction to the Hebrew Bible and Deutero-Canonical Books (2018)

  addressed as Adonai, “my lord”—the phrase that came to be substituted for the divine name in later Judaism. YHWH bids him sit at his right hand. (This is probably a reference to the king’s throne in the temple.) The Deity continues: “From the womb of dawn, like dew I have begotten you” (Ps. 110:3; the Hebrew is corrupt and must be reconstructed with the help of the Greek. The NRSV follows the Hebrew, reading, “Your youth will come to you” instead of “I have begotten you”). In this case, the psalmist adds an intriguing detail: “You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.” Melchizedek was the priest-king of Salem (presumably Jerusalem) in Genesis 14 who blessed Abraham and to whom Abraham gave a tithe of all that he had. Melchizedek was a Jebusite, which is to say a Canaanite. He was priest of El Elyon, a Canaanite deity who was identified with YHWH in the Bible. If the Davidic kings claimed to be “according to the order of Melchizedek,” this meant that they affirmed continuity with the old Canaanite religion that had been practiced in the city for centuries before David captured it. We may infer that they took over the Canaanite understanding of the kingship, at least to some degree, and that understanding in turn had been influenced by Egyptian traditions. (Melchizedek appears again as a mysterious figure, without father or mother, in Heb 7:3, which emphasizes his priesthood. In the Dead Sea Scrolls, in a scroll known as 11QMelchizedek, he is an angelic figure who executes judgment on God’s behalf.) An even more startling view of the kingship appears in Psalm 45. This seems to be a song for a royal wedding. It begins with unabashed praise (flattery?) of the king: “you are the most handsome of men . . . gird your sword on your thigh, O mighty one!” The praise reaches its climax in v. 6: “Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever. Your royal scepter is a scepter of equity. You love righteousness and hate wickedness, therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows.” Here the king is addressed as elohim, “God.” This does not mean that he is put on the same level as the Most High. He is carefully distinguished from “God, your God,” who has anointed him and on whom he depends. But the king is clearly regarded as something more than a regular human being. He is a divine being in some sense.

• From Introduction to the Hebrew Bible and Deutero-Canonical Books (2018)

  Sovereign, how majestic is your name in all the earth!”) or simply by calling on the congregation to praise the Lord, as in Psalms 146–50. They typically give the reasons for praising God, his works in creation or history, or his character. Psalms 8 and 104 put the emphasis on the works of creation. Psalm 114 recalls the exodus. Psalm 146 praises the Lord for liberating prisoners and opening the eyes of the blind. The hymn may conclude by echoing the introductory affirmation (Psalm 8) or call to praise (Psalms 146–50) or by pronouncing a wish (104:31: “may the glory of the L ORD endure forever”; 29:11: “May the L ORD bless his people with peace!”). The form allows some variation from one hymn to another, but nonetheless it is not difficult to recognize. Hymns praising deities figure prominently in all religions of the ancient Near East, and probably in all religions. Psalm 104 has a close parallel in the Egyptian Hymn to Aten (the deity represented by the solar disk, venerated by the heretical, “monotheistic” Pharaoh Akhenaten: ANET , 369–71). There are numerous examples of Mesopotamian hymns to various deities, some dating back to ancient Sumer, including the goddess Ishtar, Marduk, the moon-god, and the sun-god ( ANET, 383–92). Hymns were sung on a wide variety of occasions but were especially associated with the temple and holy places, and with the celebration of festivals. “Happy are those who live in your house, ever singing your praise” (Ps 84:4). “Enter his gates with thanksgiving, and his courts with praise” (100:4; in this case, the singing of hymns is associated with liturgical processions). According to 1 Chron 16:4-7, David appointed Levites as ministers before the ark to invoke, thank, and praise the God of Israel. The singing of praise seems to have been a prominent part of the temple worship throughout the history of Israel and Judah. CLASSIFICATION OF PSALMS IN THE HEBREW BIBLE Hymns 8, 19, 29, 33, 65, 67, 68, 96, 98, 100, 103–5, 111, 113, 114, 117, 135, 145–50 Psalms of YHWH’s Enthronement 93, 97, 99 Psalms of Individual 3, 5–7, 13, 17, 22, 25–28, 32, 38, 39, 42, 43, 51, 54–57, 59, 61, 63, 64, 69–71, Complaint 86, 88, 102, 109, 120, 130, 140–43 Psalms of Communal Complaint 44, 74, 79, 80, 83, 89 Psalms of Thanksgiving 18, 30, 34, 40:1-11, 41, 66, 92, 116, 118, 138 Royal Psalms 2, 18, 20, 21, 45, 72, 101, 110, 132, 144:1-11 Wisdom Psalms 1, 14, 37, 73, 91, 112, 119, 128 (Many psalms are difficult to classify and are omitted from this list.)

• From Little Sister: A Memoir (2019)

  In September 1947, Fakhri published an article in the Center’s quarterly entitled “Sentimental Theology” that boldly proclaimed, “There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.” In other words, the only way for a person to be saved and reach heaven after this life was to be Roman Catholic. Over the centuries, no less than half a dozen popes had championed that dogma and it was so stated in the Baltimore catechism that was part of every parochial school child’s religious education. But in the aftermath of World War II, the Catholic Church turned its focus to fostering ecumenism between Catholics and non-Catholics. The previous hard-line position was deemed too doctrinaire. Feeney railed against ecumenism, against the professors at Harvard for their liberalism, and against Catholic colleges and universities for compromising their faith by suggesting that non-Catholics might find a way to heaven. But the fire of his rhetoric was aimed mostly at the Jews, whose crime was killing Jesus. As Feeney’s vitriol increased, many of his adherents grew wary and stopped attending his lectures at the Center. But a small cadre of followers found inspiration in his oratory and became ardent adherents. Before long, the message of the Center had morphed into a one-issue mantra: “No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church.” My father, as an intellectual and a student of theology, wholeheartedly subscribed to the dogma of “no salvation.” His graduate studies at Boston College only strengthened his orthodoxy in this regard. My mother’s long road to Catholicism had imbued her with a zealous ardor for her faith. There was nothing capricious about her spirituality. She was convinced that she had received a grace from God as a small child that led her to renounce her Episcopalian heritage and convert to Catholicism. Father Feeney had guided her through those final steps and had baptized her into the Catholic Church. She would remain loyal to her priest and her faith. Catholicism was her salvation. In a defiant, and seemingly rash, show of allegiance to Feeney, more than a dozen young, brilliant students at Harvard and Radcliffe resigned from their colleges during the scholastic year of 1947 and 1948, most of them just months away from graduation. Anguished parents, whose families had, in many cases, sent their sons to Harvard for generations and provided generous support for the institution, turned to the archbishop, beseeching him to intervene. At the same time, in May 1948, the dean of the College of Arts and Sciences of Boston College met with my father to offer him the position of instructor in philosophy for the upcoming scholastic year. But that offer came with a condition that he not teach Feeney’s doctrine (as he put it) that espoused “No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church.” My father refused to agree to that stipulation. He was, nonetheless, allowed to teach philosophy, but was aware that he was under scrutiny.

• From Little Sister: A Memoir (2019)

  “What does Sister Catherine say about your coming down here?” I asked her one day. “She’s told me to do what I must,” my mother replied. I sensed that, for once, my mother had the upper hand with Sister Catherine. I observed the ease with which she seemed to adjust to the world beyond the Center. It was as though she had hardly been separated from the real world for all those years. She was particularly at home buying clothes. She knew fabrics and offered advice on matters of quality (which I took) and fashion (which I mostly discarded). She came from an era when handbags were expected to match shoes in both color and texture. I preferred the mix-and-match approach of the late 1960s, perhaps in defiance of anything that seemed rules-based. She shared with me pictures of herself in the newspaper from her days as a teenage model, and I saw her in a new light. I started reading the society pages of the Boston Globe , engrossing myself in a life that seemed almost surreal—cotillions and balls, auctions and fund-raisers, engagements and weddings—and imagining myself as part of that life of privilege. With little understanding of what was entailed to participate in that lofty world, I blithely asked my mother one day, as we sat reading the newspaper, “Do you think it would be possible for me to make my debut?” My mother’s reaction was spontaneous. With a full-throated laugh, she exclaimed, “Where did you come from? You are the funniest child in the world.” I had much to learn. She went to work as a housekeeper for a young married couple getting their Ph.D.’s at Harvard. Not surprisingly, the three of them became fast friends, and when a year later the couple was expecting a baby, they asked her to be their nanny. My mother accepted the offer with delight. It was almost as though she was seizing the opportunity to re-engage as a mother after having shelved her maternal instincts for so many years. Until she became a nanny, I had felt sorry for my mother—she was smart and sophisticated, if not particularly intellectual. She had a commanding knowledge of world history and a prodigious vocabulary—both of which she credited to her education at Cambridge High and Latin. I wished she could be doing something that was more stimulating, but in her nun-like fashion, she never complained. Some of our most enjoyable times together were spent watching TV mystery shows—Hawaii Five-O , Mission Impossible , and Columbo . My mother could pick out the culprit within three minutes of the start of the show, and I had to beseech her to keep it to herself. “I should have been a detective,” she’d say, with an air of supreme confidence. * * * A year of teaching shorthand and typing had become tedious. I craved more intellectual stimulation, but quitting never crossed my mind; that seemed to be a dereliction of duty.

• From Hunger: A Memoir of (My) Body (2017)

  Ina Garten makes cooking seem easy, accessible. She loves good ingredients—good vanilla, good olive oil, good everything. She is always offering helpful tips—very cold butter makes pastry dough better, and a cook’s best tools are clean hands. She uses an ice cream scoop for the dough when she’s making muffins and reminds the audience of this trick with a conspiratorial grin. When she shops in town, she always asks the butcher or fishmonger or baker to put her purchases on her account. She doesn’t sully herself with cash. One day, she invites some construction workers who are rehabbing a windmill over for lunch and she decorates the table with construction accessories like a tarp and some paintbrushes and a bucket. As she prepares their meal, she makes sure to provide man-sized portions, to be followed by a brownie pie, a decadent affair I would eventually try to bake. What I love most about Ina is that she teaches me about fostering a strong sense of self and self-confidence. She teaches me about being at ease in my body. From all appearances, she is entirely at ease with herself. She is ambitious and knows she is excellent at what she does and never apologizes for it. She teaches me that a woman can be plump and pleasant and absolutely in love with food. She gives me permission to love food. She gives me permission to acknowledge my hungers and to try and satisfy them in healthy ways. She gives me permission to buy the “good” ingredients she is so fond of recommending so that I might make good food for myself and the people for whom I enjoy cooking. She gives me permission to embrace my ambition and believe in myself. In the case of Barefoot Contessa, a cooking show is far more than just a cooking show. 64I am not the kind of person who can survey the pantry, identify four or five random ingredients, and assemble a delicious meal. I need the protection and comfort of recipes. I require gentle instruction and guidance. On a good day, I can experiment with a recipe, try to mix things up, but I need a foundation of some kind. There is, I must admit, something very satisfying about making things from scratch, to know every dish in a meal was made by your own hands. As a lazy person, I’m a fan of premade things, but it was a lot of fun and deeply relaxing to make, for example, my own dough and my own cherry filling for a beautiful cherry pie. I felt productive and capable. What has fascinated me about cooking, and coming to it in the middle of my life, is how it’s actually a really good endeavor for a control freak. There are rules, and to succeed, at least in the early going, those rules need to be followed. I am good at following rules when I choose to.

• From Reading Biblical Literature: Genesis to Revelation (2016)

  138 LECTURE 21 Esther, Daniel, and Life under Empire T he books of Esther and Daniel tell stories of life under the Persian Empire and the Hellenistic or Greek empires that followed. They show the schemes of the high and mighty being subverted and the vulnerable winning out in the end. At this time, the Jewish people were a small minority of these vast empires’ populations. Some of them had returned to Jerusalem, while others had stayed in Babylon and other regions ruled by the Persians. Wherever they were, they needed to make lives for themselves, with hope and encouragement, at a time when they were subject to the whims of those in power. The books of Esther and Daniel suggest how they did so. Esther as Queen ‹The Persian rulers saw themselves as dignified and authoritative, but the Persian king in the story of Esther is not too bright. He repeatedly has other people tell him what to do, and his decisions are often ludicrous. The king’s primary adviser is the wicked Haman. ●By way of contrast, a truly noble figure in the story is a Jewish man named Mordecai, who lives among the exiles under Persian rule. Mordecai has adopted his cousin Esther, who is an orphan, and raised her as his own daughter. He will foil the evil schemes of Haman and seek the welfare of his own people. ●Esther herself is beautiful, and she rises from the status of commoner to become queen of the empire. She shows wisdom and courage and uses her powerful position to save those who are threatened. Esther’s story shows that even under domination by a foreign power, ordinary people may do great things. ‹In the first scene, the king of Persia holds a great banquet and commands his wife, Vashti, to make an appearance to allow everyone to see her great beauty. But his wife refuses to come. The king’s advisers warn that Vashti’s refusal to

• From The Bible: A Biography (2007)

  Calvin never tired of pointing out that in the Bible God condescended to our limitations. The Word was conditioned by the historical circumstances in which it was uttered, so the less edifying stories of the Bible must be seen in context, as a phase in an ongoing process. There was no need to explain them away allegorically. The creation story in Genesis was an example of this divine balbative (‘baby talk’), which adapted immensely complex processses to the mentality of uneducated people.27 It was not surprising that the Genesis story differed from the new theories of learned philosophers. Calvin had great respect for modern science. It should not be condemned simply ‘because some frantic persons are wont boldly to reject whatever is unknown to them. For astronomy is not only pleasant but also very useful to be known: it cannot be denied that this art unfolds the admirable wisdom of God.’28 It was absurd to expect scripture to teach scientific fact; anybody who wanted to learn about astronomy should look elsewhere. The natural world was God’s first revelation, and Christians should regard the new geographical, biological and physical sciences as religious activities.29 The great scientists shared this view. Nicolaus Copernicus (1473–1543) regarded science as ‘more divine than human’.30 His heliocentric hypothesis was so radical that few people could take it in: instead of being located in the centre of the universe, the earth and the other planets were rotating around the sun; the world appeared to be stable, but was in fact in rapid motion. Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) tested the Copernican theory empirically by observing the planets through his telescope. He was silenced by the Inquisition and forced to recant, but his somewhat aggressive and provocative temperament had also played a part in his condemnation. At first, Catholics and Protestants did not automatically reject the new science. The Pope approved of Copernicus’s theory when he first presented it in the Vatican and the early Calvinists and Jesuits were both keen scientists. But some were disturbed by the new theories. How could you reconcile Copernicus’s theory with a literal reading of Genesis? If, as Galileo suggested, there was life on the moon, how had these people descended from Adam? How could the revolutions of the earth be squared with Christ’s ascension to heaven? Scripture said that the heavens and the earth had been created for man’s benefit, but how could this be so if the earth was just another planet revolving round an undistinguished star?31 The old allegorical exegesis would have made it much easier for Christians to cope with their changing world.32 But the increasing emphasis on the literal meaning of scripture was the product of early modernity: the scientific bias of early modern thought required people to see truth as conforming to the laws of the external world. It would not be long before some Christians would conclude that unless a book was historically or scientifically demonstrable it could not be true at all. *

• From The Bible: A Biography (2007)

  We do not know very much about the Yavneh period, however.1 The coalition of scholars was led by the Pharisees, initially by R. Johanan and his two gifted pupils, R. Eliezer and R. Joshua, and later by R. Akiba. Long before the tragedy of 70, the Pharisees had encouraged the laity to live as though they were serving in the temple, so that each hearth became an altar, each householder a priest. Yet the Pharisees had continued to worship in the real temple as well and never imagined that Jews would one day have to manage without it. Even during their years at Yavneh, they seem to have believed that Jews would be able to build a new temple, but their ideology was well suited to the post–70 world because they had, as it were, constructed their daily lives around a virtual temple which became the focus of their spirituality. Now R. Johanan and his successors would begin to build this imaginary shrine in more detail. The first task of the rabbis at Yavneh was to collect and preserve all the available memories, practices and rituals of traditional religion, so that when the temple was rebuilt the cult could be resumed. Other Jews might plan new rebellions against the Roman empire; Christians could insist that Jesus had replaced the temple; but together with the scribes and priests who had joined them at Yavneh, the Pharisees would make a heroic effort to keep every single detail of the lost shrine in their minds, at the same time as they revised the Torah to meet the needs of their drastically altered world. It would take the Pharisees many years to become the undisputed leaders of the new Judaism. But by the late 80s and 90s, as we have seen, some of the Christians had begun to feel seriously threatened by Yavneh, whose vision seemed more compelling and authentic to many Jews than the gospel. Yet in fact the Pharisaic enterprise had much in common with early Christian churches. The Pharisees would also search the scriptures, invent another form of exegesis, and compose new sacred texts – even though they would never claim that these formed a ‘New Testament’.

• From The Bible: A Biography (2007)

  Like the Yerushalmi, it was a commentary ( gemara ) on the Mishnah, but did not ignore the Tanakh, which was used to support the Oral Torah. In some ways, the Bavli was similar to the New Testament in that its author-editors regarded it as the completion of the Hebrew Bible – a new revelation for a changed world. 53 Like the New Testament, the Bavli was highly selective in its treatment of the older scripture, choosing only those portions of the Tanakh that it found useful and ignoring the rest. The commentary of the Bavli went systematically through the Mishnah, portion by portion. The gemara referred not only to the Bible but also to the opinions of the rabbis, legends, history, theological reflections and legal lore. This method compelled the student to integrate the written and oral traditions, so that they merged together in his mind. The Bavli included a good deal of material that was older than the Mishnah but much of its content was new, so the student gained a fresh perspective that changed his view of both the Mishnah and the Bible. The Bavli revered the older texts but saw neither as sacrosanct. In their commentary, the author-editors would sometimes reverse the legislation of the Mishnah, play off one rabbi against another, and point out serious gaps in the Mishnah’s arguments. They did exactly the same with the Bible, noting lacunae in the biblical texts , 54 suggesting what the inspired authors should have said, 55 and even changing a biblical law to more congenial rulings of their own. 56 When read in conjunction with the Bavli, the Bible was transformed, in the same way as the New Testament altered the Christians’ reading of the ‘Old Testament’. If biblical texts were included in the gemara, they were never discussed on their own terms and in a biblical context, but were always read from the point of view of the Mishnah. As R. Abdini of Haifa explained, the rabbis were the new prophets: ‘Since the day the temple was destroyed, prophecy has been taken from the prophets and given to the sages.’ 57 The Torah was thus a transcendent reality embodied in two earthly forms: a written scripture and an oral tradition. 58 Both came from God; both were necessary, but the rabbis privileged the Oral Torah because a written text could encourage inflexibility and a backward-looking orientation, whereas the spoken word and the ever-shifting currents of human thought made the Word more sensitive to changing conditions. 59 We hear many voices in the Bavli: Abraham, Moses, the prophets, the Pharisees and the rabbis. They were not confined to their historical period but brought together on the same page, so that they seemed to be debating with each other across the centuries – often disagreeing quite vehemently. The Bavli gave no definitive answers. If an argument ended in impasse, the students had to sort it out to their own satisfaction with their teachers.