QUESTION V
On Elijah's' complaint to the Lord on the death of the widow's son Although the phrase is pronounced, we would not be surprised by the words of Elijah when he says: O Lord, witness of this widow in whose house I stay, you have not done well to take away her son (1Kings 17,20). The one of the prophet is not a language of reproach God for the death of the widow's son who gave him so pious reception, especially during the time he was there and she put at his disposal all his meager provisions in such great and extreme misery. It is, then, as if to say to the Lord: O Lord, witness of this widow who lodges me in her house, did you do wrong to take away her son? Where it is understood that the Lord, knowing the heart of that widow and his great piety, to whom the Lord sent his prophet, did not deprive him of the son to afflict him with an evil, but to have the occasion of a miracle, with which he had to glorify his name and make known such a great prophet among contemporaries and posterity. In the same sense, Christ also says that Lazarus did not die for death, but so that God might be glorified in his Son. For what follows and the confidence with which Elias believed, shows that this event did not occur to afflict the hospitable woman with a bitter duel, but rather to put before his eyes with more emphasis the greatness of the man of God whom he had Hosted For the Scripture continues and says: He breathed three times to the child, invoking the Lord and saying: Lord my God, may I return, I beg you, the soul of this child to enter it. And so it was (1Kings 17,21-22). This brief and confident plea with which Elijah asked for the child's resurrection indicates well with what affection he also said what has been said above. And the same woman shows that she saw the death of her son in the same spirit with which Elijah said those words with a sense contrary to his letter. Because after receiving his son alive he exclaimed: Now I know that you are a man of God and that the word of the Lord is true in your mouth (1Kings 17,24). There are many passages in Scripture that, if not interpreted in this way, contain a contradiction. For example, who will accuse the elect of God? (Rm 8,33) The God who justifies. If the answer is affirmative here, it contains a pernicious error. The phrase must be pronounced as if it were said: Is God perhaps justifying ?, so that the answer is heard: Not certainly. I think this clarifies that phrase of Elijah, which is obscured by a bad pronunciation.
QUESTION VI
From the spirit of lies sent to deceive Ahab.
Let us apply to the spirit of falsehood by which Ahab was deceived (1 Kings 22:20, 23) the principle that I have, it seems to me, stated above clearly enough, namely: that God, almighty and just dispenser of penalties and rewards, uses not only the good and the saints for works worthy of their ministry, but also the wicked for purposes related to their nature, when these evil beings wish to do evil according to their bad inclinations and obtain the faculty as much as the good judge The one who disposes everything with measure, weight and number (Wis. 11:21). But the prophet Micah indicated by what way he had known of what was happening. Indeed, the images themselves serve as words to reveal to the prophets, as far as human intelligence permits, mysterious things, deeply hidden. But to say how God acts in this case, he who is present everywhere and entirely; how the holy angels, how these sublime and very pure spirits that he has created, consult his simple, immutable and eternal truth, and execute, in time and according to the necessities of this world, the decisions they see in him eternal equity; how also the fallen spirits, who have not been faithful to the truth, and who can no longer, because of their impurity and their weakness, sad effects of their lusts and their tortures, contemplate in itself and consult this same truth, expect external signs from some creature to decide to act or not to act; how bound and chained they are, by the eternal law which governs the universe, to wait for God's permission or to obey his commands; yes, to embrace and explain these questions would be an arduous and very long task fill.
I am even afraid that what I have said does not satisfy your expectation, and has not caused your gravity a boredom, since in answer to all your questions you only ask me a little treatise, and that I have sent two, and two very long, which may not even contain exact and clear solutions to the difficulties you have proposed. I therefore ask you for many fervent prayers to expiate my errors, and I beg you to tell me in a few words, but seriously, your opinion of this work. However severe your judgment may be, I submit to it, provided it is your true judgment.
|