Fear

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 352 of 529 · 20 per page

• From Blue Like Jazz (2003)

  Paul pushed himself up a little to the pitch of the roof from which you can see the Portland skyline. I joined him. “We all want to be loved, right?” “Right.” “And the scary thing about relationships, intimate relationships, is that if somebody gets to know us, the us that we usually hide, they might not love us; they might reject us.” “Right,” I tell him. Paul continued. “I’m saying there is stuff I can’t tell her, not because I don’t want to, but because there aren’t words. It’s like we are separate people, and there is no getting inside each other to read each other’s thoughts, each other’s beings. Marriage is amazing because it is the closest two people can get, but they can’t get all the way to that place of absolute knowing. Marriage is the most beautiful thing I have ever dreamed of, Don, but it isn’t everything. It isn’t Mecca. Danielle loves everything about me; she accepts me and tolerates me and encourages me. She knows me better than anybody else in the world, but she doesn’t know all of me, and I don’t know all of her. And I never thought after I got married there would still be something lacking. I always thought marriage, especially after I first met Danielle, would be the ultimate fulfillment. It is great, don’t get me wrong, and I am glad I married Danielle, and I will be with her forever. But there are places in our lives that only God can go.” “So marriage isn’t all that it is cracked up to be?” I ask. “No, it is so much more than I ever thought it would be. One of the ways God shows me He loves me is through Danielle, and one of the ways God shows Danielle He loves her is through me. And because she loves me, and teaches me that I am lovable, I can better interact with God.” “What do you mean?” “I mean that to be in a relationship with God is to be loved purely and furiously. And a person who thinks himself unlovable cannot be in a relationship with God because he can’t accept who God is; a Being that is love. We learn that we are lovable or unlovable from other people,” Paul says. “That is why God tells us so many times to love each other.” When the sky got dark Paul and I went back into the attic. We made small talk for an hour before he went downstairs to be with his wife, but I kept thinking about these things. I turned out the light and lay in my bed and thought about the girls I had dated, the fear I have of getting married, and the incredible selfishness from which I navigate my existence.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  BEDE. (ubi sup.) But He prays, that the cup may pass away, to shew that He is very man, wherefore He adds: Take away this cup from me. But remembering why He was sent, He accomplishes the dispensation for which He was sent, and cries out, But not what I will, but what thou wilt. As if He had said, If death can die, without my dying according to the flesh, let this cup pass away; but since this cannot be otherwise, not what I will, but what thou wilt. Many still are sad at the prospect of death, but let them keep their heart right, and avoid death as much as they can; but if they cannot, then let them say what the Lord said for us. PSEUDO-JEROME. By which also He ceases not up to the end to teach us to obey our fathers, and to prefer their will to ours. There follows: And he cometh, and findeth them sleeping. For as they are asleep in mind, so also in body. 1But after His prayer, the Lord coming, and seeing His disciples sleeping, rebukes Peter alone. Wherefore it goes on: And saith unto Peter, Simon, steepest thou? couldest not thou watch with me one hour? As if He had said, If thou couldest not watch one hour with me, how wilt thou be able to despise death, thou who promisest to die with me? It goes on: Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation, that is, the temptation of denying me. BEDE. (ubi sup.) He does not say, Pray that ye may not be tempted, because it is impossible for the human mind not to be tempted, but that ye enter not into temptation, that is, that temptation may not vanquish you. PSEUDO-JEROME. But he is said to enter into temptation, who neglects to pray. There follows: The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. THEOPHYLACT. As if He had said, Your spirit indeed is ready not to deny me, and for this reason ye promise; but your flesh is weak, in that unless God give power to your flesh through prayer, ye shall enter into temptation. BEDE. (ubi sup.) He here represses the rash, who think that they can compass whatever they are confident about. But in proportion as we are confident from the ardour of our mind, so let us fear from the weakness of our flesh. 2For this place makes against those, who say that there was but one operation in the Lord and one will. For He shews two wills, one human, which from the weakness of the flesh shrinks from suffering; one divine, which is most ready. It goes on: And again he went away and prayed, and spake the same words.

• From New Testament Words (1964)

  It can easily be seen that NT thought traces many of the greatest things to this phobos, this ‘reverence’, this constant ‘awareness’ of the presence of God. We may now turn to the other side of phobos, the side in which phobos is an evil thing. (i) Before we turn to the really bad side of phobos we must look at two things which are not bad in themselves, but which could become bad, Phobos describes the ‘natural shrinking’ from some difficult task. So Paul uses phobos of his own feelings regarding the unhappy situation in the church at Corinth (I Cor. 2.3; II Cor. 7.5). Such a phobos is natural and inevitable. The more sensitive a man is the more acutely it will come to him. In itself it is nothing to be ashamed of, but it becomes a bad thing if it stops a man doing what he knows he ought to do and facing what he knows he ought to face. (ii) Phobos is used of the feeling of ‘respect’ a man should have in the presence of human authority. The Corinthians received Titus with phobos (II Cor. 7.15). The NT repeatedly enjoins that those who are in positions of authority in the State and the Church must receive the phobos which is their due (Rom. 13.7; Eph. 6.5; I Pet. 2.18). But it is to be noted that this respect must never become subservience. Caesar must always receive his things, and God must always receive his. (iii) And now we come to the definitely bad side of phobos. There is a phobos which is characteristically the bad man’s emotion (Rom. 13.3). In the face of authority the upright man has nothing to fear. Phobos is the child of evildoing. (iv) There is the phobos, the ‘fear’, of dying (Heb. 2.15). An American journalist set high in the list of his personal rules for life, ‘Never to allow myself to think of death.’ It was Dr Johnson who declared that the fear of death was so naturally ingrained into man that life was one long effort to keep it at bay. That is a phobos from which the Christian hope must deliver a man. The Christian cannot be haunted by the fear of death. (v) Phobos and legalism go hand in hand. Legalism reduces a man to being a slave instead of a son, and the characteristic feeling of the slave is phobos, ‘fear’ (Rom. 8.15). It was Paul’s belief that a religion dominated by law cannot issue in anything elsç but fear. But the Christian holds a faith dominated by grace, in which he is a son of love and not a slave of law. (vi) The cure for phobos, ‘fear’, is love (I John 4.16, 18). Perfect love ejects fear from life.

• From Buddenbrooks: The Decline of a Family (1901)

  Tom worked in the clerk for that... Yes, the nature of this part was certainly the right one; but definitely Mr. Grünlich... She saw him in front of her, his golden-yellow favourites, his rosy, smiling face with the wart on the nostril, his short steps, she thought she could feel his woolly suit and hear his soft voice... "I knew well," said the Consul, "that we are open to quiet imaginations... Have we made up our minds yet?" 'Oh, save!' exclaimed Tony, and she punctuated the 'O' with sudden indignation. 'What nonsense to marry Grünlich! I kept taunting him with taunts... I can't understand how he still likes me! He ought to have a little pride in him..." And with that she began to drizzle honey on a slice of country bread. Third chapter In that year, the Buddenbrooks did not undertake any vacation trips, even during Christian's and Klara's school holidays. The Consul declared that he was too busy on business, and the pending question concerning Antonia contributed to the waiting in the Mengstrasse. A very diplomatic letter, written by the consul, had been sent to Herr Grünlich; but the progress of things was hampered by Tony's obstinacy, expressed in the most childish forms. "Forbear, Mama!" she said. 'I can't stand him!', emphasizing the second syllable of the last word with great emphasis and, for once, not splitting the 'st'. Or she declared with solemnity: "Father!" otherwise Tony used to say "Dad" - "I'll never say yes to him." The matter would certainly have remained at this point for a long time if the following had not happened, perhaps ten days after that conversation in the breakfast room - it was the middle of July... It was afternoon - a blue, warm afternoon; the consul had gone out and Tony was sitting by the window with a novel alone in the landscape room when Anton brought her a visiting card. Before she had time to read the name, a gentleman in a bell-shaped frock coat and pea-colored trousers entered the room; It was, of course, Herr Grünlich, and there was an expression of pleading tenderness on his face. Terrified, Tony sat up in her chair and made a movement as if she wanted to flee into the dining room... How was it possible to still speak to a gentleman who had proposed to her? Her heart was pounding in her throat and she had turned very pale. As long as she knew Herr Grünlich was far away, she had downright enjoyed the serious negotiations with her parents and the sudden importance of her person and decision. But now he was back! He was in front of her! what would happen She felt again that she was going to cry. With brisk steps, arms outstretched and head tilted to the side, in the attitude of a man who wants to say: Here I am!

• From Four Days to Glory: Wrestling with the Soul of the American Heartland (2005)

  He is completely focused on the goal for his sons, and for North-Linn’s other wrestlers. He wants it for his family and for the team. He wants it for the town. He ought to feel right at home in this gym, on this day, around these little kids with the big parents and their bigger dreams. He is one of them. Near the end of the morning session, the noise inside the building suddenly recedes. Near the middle of the mats, the action has stopped. As people mill around, a wrestler lies on the mat, unmoving. “Let’s give them some room, folks,” intones a voice through the public-address system. To spend even a few minutes around wrestling is to understand one of its immutable laws: People get hurt. This isn’t by accident; it’s by design. A wrestler’s job is to inflict immense amounts of pain and suffering on his opponent, often by means that look outright cruel but in fact are the products of months of hard labor spent in perfecting the technical aspects of the sport. Wrestling is about power and leverage, and it is very clean in its consistent reward of the person who uses both to his greatest advantage. To quote from the book Coaching Wrestling Successfully , “A clean, hard-fought wrestling match is the most honest of athletic contests. There are no technological interventions, no teammates to blame, no panel of judges to bias the score. In wrestling, you compete or you quit. No alibis. I like that.” Dan Gable wrote that. And the unspoken addendum is this: If you should quit, be it mentally or physically, and you are still at some indeterminate midpoint of an actual match, then you stand roughly a 99 percent chance of getting hurt. Then again, you can also get hurt because you landed wrong, or because the other guy put you in an arm-bar or a chicken-wing, one of the holds designed to apply pain, or because your shoulder got wrenched over the wrong way, or your knee got yanked in one direction while the rest of you was headed in another, or, hell, pretty much anything. Injuries come even to the most prepared wrestler, which makes it all the more noteworthy that so many of the great super-seniors of 2005—Jay, Dan, Joey and the rest—have gone through entire careers without significant physical setbacks. The odds would have suggested otherwise. On this day, the wrestler is prone, face-up on the mat, his match in a timeout. Those who are following the action wait expectantly for things to resume. That’s the norm with injured wrestlers, especially in mid-match: head off to the side, grab some quick treatment (a wad of tissue stuffed up the nose, a bandage wrapped around the scrape), and continue with enthusiasm. Only this time the boy doesn’t get up.

• From New Testament Words (1964)

  Fear, said John, has torment (I John 4.18). Fear has to do with punishment, but Christianity teaches us to think not so much of the vengeance as of the love of God, not so much of the punishment as of the forgiveness of God. When we put that saying of Paul and that saying of John together we get a very interesting and suggestive thought. Together they go to prove that fear is the sign of an inadequate religion. When fear becomes the motive power of religion it means that a man is thinking of religion in terms of law and of God in terms of vengeance. In Christianity there is both law and judgment, but when they become so dominant that they oust grace and love from a man’s thoughts they issue in an inadequate religion. (vii) Phobos, ‘fear’, is the cowardice which prevents a man from bearing the Christian witness he ought to bear. This is a characteristic usage of the Fourth Gospel. Fear of the Jews kept men from confessing their faith in Jesus (John 7.13). It made Joseph of Arimathaea remain a secret disciple (John 19.38). It kept the disciples terrified and behind loçked doors after the crucifixion (John 20.19). It is that which may prevent a man in time of trouble from showing whose he is and whom he serves (I Pet. 3.14). Phobos destroys the essential heroism of the Christian faith. In the NT phobos is one of the great words. There can be no religion at all without the awe of the creature in the presence of the Creator. The feeling of reverence, the awareness of God, is at once the prophylactic against sin, the dynamic of the Christian life, and the mainspring of Christian effort. But when reverence turns to fear in the lower sense of the term then religion becomes a stunted and inadequate thing, which, because it has lost its grace, has lost its glory. PLEONEXIA THE SIN OF GREED Pleonexia is a sin which the NT again and again most unsparingly condemns. The word occurs in Mark 7.22; Luke 12.15; Rom. 1.29; II Cor. 9.5; Eph. 4.19; 5.3; Col. 3.5; I Thess. 2.5; II Pet. 2.3, 14. The regular AV translation is ‘covetousness’. Once, in Eph. 4.19, the AV translates it ‘greediness’. The RSV retains ‘covetousness’ in most passages but translates ‘greedy practice’ in Eph. 4.5 and ‘greed’ in the II Peter passages. Moffatt varies more. He retains ‘covetousness’ in Luke 12.15, but his regular translation is ‘lust’, which he uses in seven of the passages. Once, in I Thess. 2.5, he uses ‘self- seeking’. Pleonexia in all ages of Greek is an ugly word, and always it has a certain basic idea behind it which none of the translations wholly bring out, because it cannot be brought out in any one word.

• From Go Tell It on the Mountain (1953)

  Many nights ago, as she turned on her bed, this message came to her. For many days and nights the message was repeated; there had been time, then, to turn to God. But she had thought to evade him, seeking among the women she knew for remedies; and then, because the pain increased, she had sought doctors; and when the doctors did no good she had climbed stairs all over town to rooms where incense burned and where men or women in traffic with the devil gave her white powders, or herbs to make tea, and cast spells upon her to take the sickness away. The burning in her bowels did not cease—that burning which, eating inward, took the flesh visibly from her bones and caused her to vomit up her food. Then one night she found death standing in the room. Blacker than night, and gigantic, he filled one corner of her narrow room, watching her with eyes like the eyes of a serpent when his head is lifted to strike. Then she screamed and called on God, turning on the light. And death departed, but she knew he would be back. Every night would bring him a little closer to her bed. And after death’s first silent vigil her life came to her bedside to curse her with many voices. Her mother, in rotting rags and filling the room with the stink of the grave, stood over her to curse the daughter who had denied her on her deathbed. Gabriel came, from all his times and ages, to curse the sister who had held him to scorn and mocked his ministry. Deborah, black, her body as shapeless and hard as iron, looked on with veiled, triumphant eyes, cursing the Florence who had mocked her in her pain and barrenness. Frank came, even he, with that same smile, the same tilt of his head. Of them all she would have begged forgiveness, had they come with ears to hear. But they came like many trumpets; even if they had come to hear and not to testify it was not they who could forgive her, but only God. The piano had stopped. All around her now were only the voices of the saints. ‘Dear Father’—it was her mother praying—‘we come before You on our knees this evening to ask You to watch over us and hold back the hand of the destroying angel. Lord, sprinkle the doorpost of this house with the blood of the Lamb to keep all the wicked men away. Lord, we praying for every mother’s son and daughter everywhere in the world but we want You to take special care of this girl here to-night, Lord, and don’t let no evil come nigh her.

• From Heptaméron (1559)

  The assignation having been made, and the requisite measures concerted, the gentleman failed not to present himself at the rendezvous, at whatever risk of his life, for the fair widow resided with her relations. But as he was not less cunning than handsome, he managed so adroitly that he was in the lady's chamber at the moment appointed. He found her alone in a handsome bed ; but as he was undressing in eager haste, he heard whisperings outside the chamber-door, and the noise of swords clashing against the walls. " We are undone," cried the widow, more dead than alive. " Your life and my honour are in mortal peril. My brothers are coming to kill you. Hide yourself under the bed, I beseech you ; for then they will not find you, and I shall have a right to complain of their alarming me without cause." The gentleman, who was not easily frightened, coolly replied, " What are your brothers that they should make a man of honour afraid } If their whole race was as- sembled at the door, I am confident they would not stand the fourth lunge of my sword. Remain quietly in bed, therefore, and leave me to guard the door." Then wrapping his cloak round his left arm, and with his sword in his hand, he opened the door, and saw that the threatening weapons were brandished by two servant maids. " Forgive us, monsieur," they said. " It is by our mistress's orders we do this ; but you shall have no more annoyance from us." The gentleman, seeing that his supposed antagonists were women, contented II 1 62 THE NEPTA.UEKO.V OF THE [Noz<el i6. himself with bidding them go to the devil, and skimming the door in their faces. He then jumped into bed to his mistress without delay. Fear had not cooled his ardour, and without wasting time in asking the meaning of the sham alarm, bethought only of satisfying his passion.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  Whether negligence can be a mortal sin?Objection 1: It would seem that negligence cannot be a mortal sin. For a gloss of Gregory [*Moral. ix. 34] on Job 9:28, “I feared all my works,” etc. says that “too little love of God aggravates the former,” viz. negligence. But wherever there is mortal sin, the love of God is done away with altogether. Therefore negligence is not a mortal sin. Objection 2: Further, a gloss on Ecclus. 7:34, “For thy negligences purify thyself with a few,” says: “Though the offering be small it cleanses the negligences of many sins.” Now this would not be, if negligence were a mortal sin. Therefore negligence is not a mortal sin. Objection 3: Further, under the law certain sacrifices were prescribed for mortal sins, as appears from the book of Leviticus. Yet no sacrifice was prescribed for negligence. Therefore negligence is not a mortal sin. On the contrary, It is written (Prov. 19:16): “He that neglecteth his own life [Vulg.: ‘way’] shall die.” I answer that, As stated above (A[2], ad 3), negligence arises out of a certain remissness of the will, the result being a lack of solicitude on the part of the reason in commanding what it should command, or as it should command. Accordingly negligence may happen to be a mortal sin in two ways. First on the part of that which is omitted through negligence. If this be either an act or a circumstance necessary for salvation, it will be a mortal sin. Secondly on the part of the cause: for if the will be so remiss about Divine things, as to fall away altogether from the charity of God, such negligence is a mortal sin, and this is the case chiefly when negligence is due to contempt. But if negligence consists in the omission of an act or circumstance that is not necessary for salvation, it is not a mortal but a venial sin, provided the negligence arise, not from contempt, but from some lack of fervor, to which venial sin is an occasional obstacle. Reply to Objection 1: Man may be said to love God less in two ways. First through lack of the fervor of charity, and this causes the negligence that is a venial sin: secondly through lack of charity itself, in which sense we say that a man loves God less when he loves Him with a merely natural love; and this causes the negligence that is a mortal sin. Reply to Objection 2: According to the same authority (gloss), a small offering made with a humble mind and out of pure love, cleanses man not only from venial but also from mortal sin.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  JEROME. This is against those rash persons who think that whatever they believe they can perform. The more confident we are of our zeal, the more mistrustful should we be of the frailty of the flesh. ORIGEN. Here it should be enquired, whether as all men’s flesh is weak, so all men’s spirit is willing, or whether only that of the saints; and whether in unbelievers the spirit is not also dull, as the flesh is weak. In another sense the flesh of those only is weak whose spirit is willing, and who with their willing spirit do mortify the deeds of the flesh. These then He would have watch and pray that they should not enter into temptation, for the more spiritual any one may be, the more careful should he be that his goodness should not suffer a great fall. REMIGIUS. Otherwise; In these words He shews that He took real flesh of the Virgin, and had a real soul, saying that His spirit is willing to suffer, but His flesh weak in fearing the pain of Passion. ORIGEN. There were, I conclude, two ways in which this cup of Passion might pass from the Lord. If He should drink it, it would pass away from Him, and afterwards from the whole race of mankind also; if He should not drink it, it would perhaps pass from Him, but from men it would not pass. He would fain therefore that it should so pass from Him as that He should not at all taste its bitterness, yet only if it were possible, saving the righteousness of God. If it were not possible, He was rather willing to drink it, that so it might pass from Him, and from the whole race of mankind rather than against His Father’s will shun the drinking thereof. CHRYSOSTOM. That He prays for this a second and a third time, comes of the feelings belonging to human frailty, through which also He feared death, thus giving assurance that He was truly made man. For in Scripture when any thing is repeated a second and third time, that is the greatest proof of its truth and reality; as, for example, when Joseph says to Pharaoh, And for that thou sawedst it twice, it is proof of the thing being established by God. (Gen. 41:32.) JEROME. Or otherwise; He prays a second time that if Nineveh, or the Gentile world, cannot be saved unless the gourd, i. e. the Jews, be withered, His Father’s will may be done, which is not contrary to the Son’s will, who Himself speaks by the Prophet, I am content to do thy will, O God. (Ps. 40:8.) HILARY. Otherwise, He bare in His own body all the infirmities of us His disciples who should suffer, and nailed to His cross all wherein we are distressed; and therefore that cup cannot pass from Him, unless He drink it, because we cannot suffer, except by His passion.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  II. The idolatry of the elements signifies the idolatry of the covetous, Colos. 3:5, “Covetousness, which is idolatry.” The idolatry of animals is that of carnal concupiscence, which exists in the pleasures of the flesh, S. Jude 10, “But what they know naturally as brute beasts in those things they corrupt themselves.” Of these three, S. James 3:15, “This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly,” through avarice; “sensual,” by luxury; “devilish,” through pride. HOMILY XVIII THE GREAT ACCOUNT NINTH SUNDAY AFTER TRINITY.—(FROM THE GOSPEL)“Give an account of thy stewardship.”—S. Luke 16:2. THIS word is spoken to every one at death or in the judgment, since it behoves us all to come before the heavenly tribunal of Christ the Judge, 2 Cor. 5:10, “For we must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in his body according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad;” and therefore every man ought to think how he will then be able to give account. But we ought to consider three things about this account. (1) The difficulty of rendering the account; (2) of the witnesses, who will accuse those rendering a false account, themselves giving the true one; (3) the severity of the sentence which will be given against those who have rendered a false account. I. On the first head, it is to be noted that (1) it will be difficult to render account of all the thoughts, Ps. 75:11, Vulg., “For the thought of man shall give praise to Thee.” Wisd. 1:9, “For inquisition shall be made into the thoughts of the ungodly.” (2) Of the sayings, S. Matt. 12:36, “But I say unto you that every idle word that men shall speak they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment; for by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.” Eccles. 12:14, “For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good or whether it be evil.” II. On the second head, it is to be noted, that three most true witnesses will accuse the ungodly in the judgment. The first witness will be God, Mal. 3:5, “And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers … For I am the Lord: I change not.” The second will be conscience, Rom. 2:15, “Their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts in the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another, in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ.” The third will be every creature, Job 20:27, “The heavens shall reveal his iniquity, and the earth shall rise up against him;” whence a certain holy father said: we are about to render an account in the presence of heaven and earth; and do you mock?

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  12. Now the brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father the son; and children shall rise up against their parents, and shall cause them to be put to death. 13. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. BEDE. (ubi sup.) The Lord shews how Jerusalem and the province of Judæa merited the infliction of such calamities, in the following words: But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten. For the greatest cause of destruction to the Jewish people was, that after slaying the Saviour, they also tormented the heralds of His name and faith with wicked cruelty. THEOPHYLACT. Fitly also did He premise a recital of those things which concerned the Apostles, that in their own tribulations they might find some consolation in the community of troubles and sufferings. There follows: And ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them. He says kings and rulers, as, for instance, Agrippa, Nero, and Herod. Again, His saying, for my sake, gave them no small consolation, in that they were about to suffer for His sake. For a testimony against them, means, as a judgment beforehand against them, that they might be inexcusable, in that though the Apostles were labouring for the truth, they would not join themselves to it. Then, that they might not think that their preaching should be impeded by troubles and dangers, He adds: And the Gospel must first be published among all nations. AUGUSTINE. (de Con. Evan. ii. 77) Matthew adds: And then shall the end come. (Matt. 24:14) Mark, however, by the word first means before the end come. BEDE. Ecclesiastical historians testify that this was fulfilled, for they relate that all the Apostles long before the destruction of the province of Judæa were dispersed to preach the Gospel over the whole world, except James the son of Zebedee and James the brother of our Lord, who had before shed their blood in Judæa for the word of the Lord. Since then the Lord knew that the hearts of the disciples would be saddened by the fall and destruction of their nation, He relieves them by this consolation, to let them know that even after the casting away of the Jews, companions in their joy and heavenly kingdom should not be wanting, nay that many more were to be collected out of all mankind than perished in Judæa.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  § 770. Next, at ‘Imaginative phantasms’, he compares the mind’s movement to the process of sense-knowledge as he has described it. And he does two things here: he shows how the mind is related (a) to sense-objects, and (b) at ‘The mind understands by abstraction’ to objects beyond the range of sense. (a) divides into (i) an explanation of the way the mind is related to sense-objects in practical activity; and (ii) at ‘And generally in practical affairs’ a comparison of the practical and speculative intellects. And with regard to the former point, he first states and then, at ‘This is comparable to the way’ illustrates the resemblance between the mind’s activity and that of the senses. First, then, he observes that phantasms are to the intellectual part of the soul as sense-objects to the senses; as these last are affected by their objects, so is the intellect by phantasms. And as sensation of the pleasant or painful is succeeded by desire or avoidance, so also the intellect, when it affirms or desires goodness or badness in an object it apprehends, tends either towards or away from that object. § 771. But note that Aristotle’s use of terms here suggests a two-fold difference between intellect and senses. For in the first place, when the senses apprehend their good and evil, this awareness is not immediately succeeded by pursuit or avoidance, but by pleasure and pain,—after which the sensing subject pursues or withdraws. The reason is that as the senses are not aware of goodness in general, so sense appetition is not swayed by the good or the bad in general, but only by this or that particular good, pleasant to sense, or, by this or that particular evil, unpleasant to sense. The soul’s intellectual part, on the contrary, is aware of goodness and badness in general; hence its appetition at once and immediately responds to this apprehension. § 772. The other difference appears in Aristotle’s observing, unconditionally, that the intellect affirms or denies, whereas of the senses he only says that they affirm ‘so to say’. The reason for this has already been given. And from what has been said he draws the further conclusion that if intellect is related to phantasms as the senses to their object, then just as the senses cannot sense without an object, so the soul cannot understand without phantasms. § 773. Then, where he says ‘This is comparable’, he explains the resemblance still further: (a) as regards the likeness between phantasms and sense-objects in relation to the intellectual soul; and (b)—at ‘The, intellectual faculty therefore’—as regards the avoidance or pursuit that follows the affirmation or denial of goodness or badness.

• From The Swimming-Pool Library (1988)

  It did not take me long to fear the consequences to myself of any of these possible events. If it had not been for our week of love I would perhaps have been frightened of Arthur too; but I was never even critical of his crime. A rare, unjustified trust kept me on his side. Even so, that part of the road, with its parked cars and spring trees, which could be seen from the windows took on an ominous feel. I scanned it as one looks at a photograph with a glass to make out half-decipherable details, but its mundanity was unaltered: it rained and dried, wind blew scraps of litter across, children walked dogs—dawdling, looking in at the houses, nosey for details, but only as people always, routinely are. I’m not sure what form I expected the threat to take; a police car actually stopping outside, a powerfully built black man darting up the drive? I had several dreams of siege, in which the house became a frail slatted box, shadowy and exquisite within, the walls all cracked and bleached louvres which fell to powder as one brushed against them. In one dream Arthur and I were there, and others, old school friends, a gaggle of black kids from the Shaft, my grandfather tearful and hopeless. We knew we had no chance of surviving the violence that surrounded us, closing in fast, and I was gripped by a nauseating terror. I woke up in the certain knowledge that I was about to die: the bedsprings were ticking from the sprinting vehemence of my heartbeat. I didn’t dare go back to sleep and after a while sat up and read, while Arthur slept deeply beside me. It took days to lose the mood of the dream, and its power to prickle my scalp. The neighbourhood seemed eerily impregnated with it, and its passing made possible a new confidence, as if a sentence had been lifted. That Thursday I had my lunch with Lord Nantwich. I told Arthur I had a long-standing arrangement and he made a point of saying, ‘Okay, man—I mean you’ve got to lead your own life: I’ll be all right here.’ I realised I’d been apologising in a way and I was relieved by his practical reply. ‘You can always have some bread and cheese, and you can finish off that cold ham in the fridge. Anything you want me to get you?’ ‘No, ta.’ He stood and smiled crookedly. I didn’t kiss him but just patted him on the bum as I slipped out.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  25. And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken. 26. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. 27. And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven. THEOPHYLACT. After that the Lord had finished all that concerned Jerusalem, He now speaks of the coming of Antichrist, saying, Then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ; or, lo, he is there; believe him not. But when He says, then, think not that it means immediately after these things are fulfilled about Jerusalem; as Matthew also says after the birth of Christ, In those days came John the Baptist; (Matt. 3:1) does he mean immediately after the birth of Christ? No, but he speaks indefinitely and without precision. So also here, then may be taken to mean not when Jerusalem shall be made desolate, but about the time of the coming of Antichrist. It goes on: For false Christs and false prophets shall arise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect. For many shall take upon them the name of Christ, so as to seduce even the faithful. AUGUSTINE. (de Civ. Dei, xx. 19) For then shall Satan be unchained, and work through Antichrist in all his power, wonderfully indeed, but falsely. But a doubt is often raised whether the Apostle said Signs and lying wonders, because he is to deceive mortal senses, by phantoms, so as to appear to do what he does not, or because those wonders themselves, even though true, are to turn men aside to lies, because they will not believe that any power but a Divine power could do them, being ignorant of the power of Satan, especially when he shall have received such power as he never had before. But for whichever reason it is said, they shall be deceived by those signs and wonders who deserve to be deceived. GREGORY. (v. Greg Hom. in Ezech. lib. i. 9) Why however is it said with a doubt if it were possible, when the Lord knows beforehand what is to be? One of two things is implied; that if they are elect, it is not possible; and if it is possible, they are not elect. (non potest, ap. Cat.) This doubt therefore in our Lord’s discourse expresses the trembling in the mind of the elect. And He calls them elect, because He sees that they will persevere in faith and good works; for those who are chosen to remain firm are to be tempted to fall by the signs of the preachers of Antichrist.

• From The Triumph of Christianity (2018)

  < 105 < Lecture 15  Early Opposition to the Christian Message `There is nothing in the text to indicate that it is an actual official persecution ordered by the Roman state. On the contrary, the author intimates that the suffering is coming at the hands of former friends and neighbors of the Christians who do not like or appreciate the fact that they have abandoned their pagan ways and customs to adopt this new faith. A relevant passage here is 1 Peter 4:3–4. `Other writings suggest that the physical abuse went to the extreme. We have seen in Acts that Stephen was allegedly stoned to death. Paul himself says that one time he was stoned, though miraculously he survived it. `The book of Revelation, at the end of the New Testament, indicates that there were many, many Christian martyrs already by the end of the 1st century. That may be another exaggeration. One recent scholar of early Christianity, Candida Moss, has argued that the idea there were sizeable numbers of Christian martyrs is simply a myth. `Still, it is not a myth that there was some opposition and that sometimes that opposition could turn violent. Even if we’re not talking about thousands of executions, there were certainly some. Already in the 1st century and increasingly in the 2nd, some Christians paid the ultimate price for their faith. Reading Ehrman, The New Testament, chapter 26. ———, The Triumph of Christianity, chapter 7. Matthews, Perfect Martyr. Questions ̧What do the writings of the New Testament tell us about the persecution of Christians in the early decades of the church? Do you find these reports plausible? < 106 < TABLE OF CONTENTS Lecture 16 Imperial Imperial Persecution of the Persecution of the Early ChristiansEarly Christians E ven though the early followers of Jesus made converts at a reasonably good pace, they were still a very tiny movement until 200 CE or so. They simply weren’t seen as newsworthy, let alone a general threat. Nonetheless, they eventually came to the public eye. The Situation in Rome `The largest city in the empire by far was Rome, with a population of about 1 million. We have good reasons for thinking that, within 30 years of Jesus’s death, the Christian church in Rome was one of the largest in the world. It wasn’t comprised of thousands of Christians, but there were probably many dozens. `Therefore, it is perhaps not surprising that Rome produced the first recorded Roman persecution of Christians that started at the top. This first official persecution was unlike any of the others to come and is by far the most misunderstood.

• From The Triumph of Christianity (2018)

  < 118 < TABLE OF CONTENTS Lecture 18 Major Imperial Major Imperial Persecutions of Persecutions of ChristiansChristians I n the early days of Christianity in the Roman Empire, Christians were sometimes seen as a strange lot, but they were not declared illegal for more than 200 years. Persecutions were isolated events, normally driven from popular distrust and suspicion. However, matters changed significantly in the middle of the 3rd century. That time saw the beginning of major state-sponsored persecutions against Christians, whose church had begun to grow at a high rate. The Crisis of the 3rd Century `It is no surprise that highly placed imperial officials began taking notice of Christians. The officials were and always had been pagan. Leaders who have gained power under one system are rarely eager to see any fundamental changes in society that might affect their standing. < 119 < Lecture 18  Major Imperial Persecutions of Christians `It was also widely thought that refusing to worship the gods could lead to disastrous results: famine, drought, epidemic, economic collapse, and military disaster. As the Christian movement became increasingly known, the threat came to be taken very seriously indeed. Additionally, when major disasters did start to occur, Christians increasingly became the scapegoats. `For the Roman Empire, historians call the years from 235–284 CE the crisis of the 3rd century. It was a very bad time. The empire appeared to be falling apart and its very existence was in serious peril. `The empire itself became fragmented, with civil wars leading to two breakaway states, one in the east and the other in the west. The central part of what had been the entire Roman world was a reduced part of its earlier self. `Natural disasters took a devastating toll. An epidemic wiped out large populations of some major cities, and a drought seriously reduced much needed agricultural productivity. Economic disaster followed. This time also saw barbarian invasions on the frontiers and political chaos internally.* `There were large numbers of reasons for these various calamities. In their time, many ancient people appealed to religion, believing the problems were from above because the gods were not happy. `It is not at all clear that most elite members of the aristocracy, including the Roman emperors, actually believed that personally. Regardless, this was a period when imperial authorities occasionally included a religious approach among their attempts to address the crises. `That led to some rather serious persecutions of the Christians, thought by many of the populace to be part of or the entirety of the problem. The persecutions were sporadic, but they did become empire-wide, at least in principle. * This half century witnessed repeated assassinations of emperors and usurpations, with 21 legitimately appointed emperors and 38 usurpers.

• From The Triumph of Christianity (2018)

  < 87 < Lecture 13  Miraculous Incentives for Conversion yAnother f law is this: If it were true that Christians tended to the infected more often than pagans did, that would almost certainly mean that Christians themselves became infected far more often than pagans did. They would die more frequently, not less. yThat is precisely what our Christian sources indicate. The 3rd-century church father Cyprian, for example, extols the Christian virtues of love in the time of epidemic by admitting that the virtuous believer who tended the dying was almost always the next to be carried out feet first. Increased exposure to epidemic leads to high fatality rates, not lower. The Miraculous Explanation `Probably the most compelling explanation that takes account of the surviving evidence is in a classic study by the historian Ramsay MacMullen. The explanation appears in a book called Christianizing the Roman Empire. `MacMullen argues that Christians convinced people because of the miracles they did or that they were said to have done. This is not a religious explanation requiring belief. Miracles or alleged miracles are virtually the only explanation that, in one way or another, our ancient accounts almost uniformly attest. `The reason the appeal to miracles as the basis for conversion in antiquity makes sense is that it connects directly with the one reason virtually everyone in the ancient world worshiped the gods in the first place: to access divine power. `For ancient folk, the gods provided humans with what they could not provide for themselves: successful childbirth, health, healing, rain and sun, fertility of crops and livestock, and so on. `People wanted to follow the gods that could provide the most help. That led to the question: What if there was one god who was more powerful than all the others and who could provide everything one needs? What if that god could do so in ways that were both highly impressive and obvious? < 88 < Lecture 13  Miraculous Incentives for Conversion `That is what the Christians claimed about their god. He was more powerful than all the others, and he showed that power by manifesting it in miracles. For instance, take the following scenarios. yA child is sick. Her mother prays to the Christian God, and the girl recovers. yA person is possessed by an evil spirit. A Christian holy person drives out the demon. yThere is a drought. The Christians pray for rain. A thunderstorm appears out of nowhere. yA young man tragically dies. A Christian leader learns of it, comes and prays over the corpse, and the person rises from the dead. The Christian God has power over life and death. `People worship the gods because of what they can provide. If the Christian God can provide better than others, then that is who to worship. But to worship the Christian God, one has to abandon all the others. Christianity alone is exclusivist.

• From The Triumph of Christianity (2018)

  < 91 < Lecture 13  Miraculous Incentives for Conversion yThere was also the great theologian Augustine from the 5th century. At the very end of his great classic The City of God, he indicates that so many people committed to the Christian faith precisely because of all the miracles they saw. A Variation `There is an important variant of the notion that miracles could lead people to convert. Sometimes the miracles Christians described involved not the desperate needs of everyday life but matters directly connected with death. `Christians, unlike most pagans and Jews, came to believe that the power of God seen in earthly miracles would be particularly manifest in the life after death. Believers would be given fantastic eternal rewards; unbelievers would be subject to divine omnipotence in the most horrific ways, to be tortured for all eternity. `If a pagan came to believe God could do great miracles now, it would not take much to be convinced that these miracles would continue after death. Many Christians were so certain that they would be fantastically rewarded for their faith after death that they willingly experienced torture for the better things to come. `According to some of our texts, the miraculous ability to withstand pain in the face of death convinced others that the Christians did indeed hold the truth. There are numerous gory accounts of Christian martyrs in the period leading up to Constantine. The stories about them were very popular. `In virtually all of these stories, the martyrs don’t mind their tortures. In fact, they are oblivious to them. The martyrs keep their minds focused on the life to come, soon to be theirs. `These stories are recounted as miracles. The martyrs don’t scream or even moan when whipped to shreds or torn apart by wild animals. They are miraculously protected by God. We find this perspective in the earliest known martyr account, the Martyrdom of Polycarp. < 92 < Lecture 13  Miraculous Incentives for Conversion `Most pagans, of course, did not see anything at all miraculous about Christians being f logged within an inch of their lives or torn apart by wild animals. They simply didn’t believe in alleged Christian miracles. `That leaves us with a very difficult question: If at any one time the vast majority of people did not accept the Christian claims and message, how did Christianity end up taking over the empire within 400 years? That is the subject of the next lecture. Reading Ehrman, The Triumph of Christianity, chapter 5. Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament. MacMullen, Christianizing the Roman Empire. Questions ̧What do you make of all the miracle stories in early Christianity? Do you find them plausible? Unlikely? Exaggerated? However you answer those questions, explain why miracles or stories of miracles would lead people to leave their traditional pagan practices to become followers of Jesus.

• From The Triumph of Christianity (2018)

  < 81 < Lecture 12  Reasons for Christianity’s Success Differentiating Features `Despite the aforementioned overlap, there were two other features that do explain the triumph of Christianity, as scholars over the past 30–40 years have come to recognize. These features are indeed distinctive to Christianity, making it unlike any of the other religions on offer in Roman antiquity. `Unlike all the other religions Christianity aggressively sought converts. And anyone who converted was expected to give up everything else. `No other religion was like that. Christianity was both evangelistic and exclusive. These two factors, in tandem, led to the triumph of Ch rist ia n it y. Evangelism `People in the Western world today are accustomed to evangelistic religions, with missionaries who are Methodist, Mormon, Muslim, and many other things, all seeking converts from among outsiders. Within the Christian tradition, the evangelistic impulse goes all the way back to the very beginning. `Numerous sources indicate that the very earliest Christians were eager and determined to win converts. The reason has to do with why faith in Christ was understood to be important in the first place. yThe original Christians were apocalypticists who believed the world was an evil place that was soon to be destroyed by God. In turn, God was intent on restoring the world to a state of perfection where his followers could live a utopian existence forever. yThis destruction was coming very soon, and anyone who was not on the right side of God would be annihilated. The only way to be on God’s right side was through accepting the death and resurrection of Jesus, which alone could bring forgiveness of sins and a right standing before God.