Commentaria in I Regum (I Samuelis)
See what was said on the chastisement of sons, Proverbs chapter 28.—FOR IT IS NO GOOD REPORT,—that is, the report is the worst. It is a meiosis.
GOD MAY BE APPEASED: BUT IF A MAN SHALL SIN AGAINST THE LORD, WHO SHALL PRAY FOR HIM?—“Against God,” not only by transgressing His law (for so everyone who sins sins against God), but by violating and polluting His priesthood, sacred things and sacrifices, and so the holiness of God. This signifies that this sin is not irremissible, as the Novatians wished, but is forgiven with difficulty. For who would dare to pray for so wicked a public minister of God? Surely he who does so must be some Moses. Hear St. Gregory: “What intercessor remains for him, when he who was ordained to intercede for others hurls himself down by transgressing?”
And Origen, homily 40 on Numbers: “Those who are better,” he says, “always take up the faults and sins of their inferiors; but a priest, or Pontiff, if he offend, can purge his own sin, provided he sin not against God: for of sins of this kind we do not easily see any remission designated in the letters of the law.” And Justinian, Novella 123: “If,” he says, “those to whom the business of praying for the people has been given are found unworthy of the ministry of God, how will they be able to appease God for the offences of the people?” Hence St. Leo, epistle 90, proves from Apostolic tradition that to presbyters or deacons for any crime the remedy of penance by imposition of hands is not to be granted, but another, more rigorous satisfaction is to be used by them.
For “may be appeased” the Hebrew has pillelo, that is, God shall judge, or take cognizance of his cause (so Pagninus), so that if He sees that he was previously hurt by the other against whom he sinned, or has some other excuse for the sin, He may spare him.
Moreover the Chaldee, Vatablus and R. David, understanding by the Hebrew Elohim not God but a Judge, thus render and explain: “If a man shall sin against a man, the judge shall judge him, and settle the dispute, and rescue the one who is innocent; but if against God, who shall be judged with him, or for him? who shall interpose himself as judge?”
AND THEY HEARKENED NOT TO THE VOICE OF THEIR FATHER.—This is the fourth crime of the sons of Heli, namely contumacy and obstinacy. He adds the cause:
BECAUSE THE LORD WOULD SLAY THEM.—Note: The first cause, and that direct and proper, why the sons of Heli did not hearken to their warning father, was their wicked and perverse will obstinate in evil, on account of which they would not hear their father’s warnings: but nevertheless Scripture here in its manner assigns another, indirect cause, referring it to the most high providence and judgment of God: namely that God would not have mercy on them for such great crimes so often repeated, and give them efficacious grace to repent and escape death, but permitted them to wallow and harden in their crimes, that He might most justly punish them with the death so often deserved, to repair the scandal given by them to the whole people, and for an example and terror to other priests. For Scripture is wont to inculcate everywhere the attributes of God, especially mercy and judgment, to signify that God has an exact providence of all things whatsoever, good as well as bad, rewarding the one, chastising the other. For this makes men fear and worship God, and restrains them from sins. For there is no greater curb of sins than the fear of the Godhead and the serious thought of God the avenger.
27. AND THERE CAME A MAN OF GOD (a Prophet) TO HELI.—Who was this man? Abulensis, Question 22, thinks it was an Angel clothed in the appearance of a man: R. Solomon and the later Rabbis judge it was Elcana, the father of Samuel. The older Rabbis in St. Jerome’s Questions think it was the Pontiff Phinees, who lived in the time of Josue and Othoniel: for they hold Phinees to be Elias; wherefore he still lives and will live until Antichrist, by whom he will be slain. But I refuted this on Numbers 25, 13. It is therefore uncertain who this Prophet was, since Scripture does not express his name, family or stock.
When he came to Heli is likewise uncertain. But he seems to have come when Samuel was still a boy, both because this is here subjoined to his boyhood; and because, when Samuel was grown, God used him to warn Heli again, nay to condemn him. So St. Jerome in the Questions.
Moreover this prophecy contains first, and recalls, the benefits of God conferred on Heli; then, verse 29, reproaches him and his sons with their sins; finally, verse 31, inflicts on them a fivefold punishment.
DID I NOT PLAINLY REVEAL MYSELF TO THE HOUSE (family) OF THY FATHER (Aaron), WHEN THEY WERE (he and his sons and his brother Moses) IN EGYPT IN PHARAO’S HOUSE?—For then out of all the sons of Israel I chose Moses as their leader, and Aaron as his companion and interpreter, and also as Pontiff, to lead the people out of Egypt, and through the desert to bring them into the promised land.
29. WHY HAVE YOU KICKED AWAY (Hebrew, why have you kicked, not so much thou as thy sons, and thou through thy sons) MY VICTIM?—as if He said: Why have you despised my sacred things, as if you had cast them away with your heels?
AND THOU HAST RATHER HONOURED THY SONS THAN ME,—because thou didst not dare to reprehend and chastise them, lest thou shouldst offend them; and so thou didst permit them to offend me, and therefore thou also didst offend me. So St. Gregory: “He honoured,” he says, “his sons more than God; because, while he despised their open sins, he provided for them temporal gains.”
TO EAT THE FIRSTFRUITS OF EVERY SACRIFICE OF MY PEOPLE ISRAEL?—That is, that you should first eat the flesh of the peace-offerings (which properly belonged to the people, because they were offered for its peace and welfare and eaten by it), before the firstfruits of the fat were burnt and consumed for me on the altar, verses 15 and 16. Again, he calls firstfruits the chief parts of the victims: for these the priest’s servant with his flesh-hook snatched from God and arrogated to himself, verse
30. I SAID INDEED (I certainly said, as if He said: I had firmly decreed) THAT THY HOUSE, AND THE HOUSE OF THY FATHER, SHOULD MINISTER IN MY SIGHT.—Hence it is plain that the Pontificate was given by God to Heli, and transferred from the family of Eleazar to the family of Ithamar, to which Heli belonged, as is plain from the fact that Heli, great-grandfather of Abiathar, 3 Kings 2, is said to be sprung from Ithamar, 1 Paralipomenon 24. Wherefore some falsely judge that Heli invaded the Pontificate on his own authority. The cause of the transfer is unknown, but it seems to have been the sloth or some sin of the descendants of Eleazar.
Moreover this was the series and succession of the Pontiffs through sons: Aaron was succeeded by Eleazar, he by Phinees, he by Abisue, he by Bocci, he by Ozi, as is plain from 1 Paralipomenon chapter 6, verse 4, and from Josephus, book 5 of the Antiquities, last chapter. From Ozi the Pontificate was transferred to Heli, who was of Ithamar, brother of Eleazar. Heli begot Phinees, who was slain before his father in battle, when the ark was taken by the Philistines: in Phinees’s place succeeded his son Achitob, to him his son Achias, to him his son Achimelech, to him his son Abiathar. Josephus adds that Phinees, his father Heli being alive, discharged the Pontificate because Heli, for old age, could not discharge it; which understand not that Phinees was Pontiff, as Josephus seems to will, but that he helped Heli, remaining Pontiff in his old age, in the administration of the Pontificate.
From this verse it is plain that God had promised Heli and his posterity a continual succession of sons in the Pontificate; if, namely, they should discharge it rightly; but they discharging it ill, God here threatens and predicts that He will take it from them again. This He did under Solomon, who removed from the Pontificate Abiathar the pontiff, descended from Heli and Ithamar, because he had conspired against him with Adonias and anointed him king; and he appointed Pontiff Sadoc, who was sprung from Eleazar. So Abulensis. The Pontificate therefore remained in the family of Heli through five descendants, namely Heli, Phinees, Achitob, Achias, Achimelech and Abiathar; thence it returned to Sadoc and the family of Eleazar, and remained in it until Christ.
FOR EVER,—not absolutely, as is plain, but relatively, namely during the whole time of the old law, or as long as Judaism should last until Christ.
thy dignity and thy pontifical authority; that is, I will take from thee the Pontificate. So St. Gregory, Angelomus, Rupert, Lyranus and Vatablus. Moreover the Septuagint render, I will destroy thy seed; the Chaldee, I will root out the strength of thy seed, as if He said: I will make thy sons and grandsons feeble, weak, infirm, so that they live not long, nor come to old age, as follows, and finally I will blot out all thy posterity. This is the first punishment inflicted by God on Heli.
Symbolically, some by strength understand the ark of the testament, which was taken by the Philistines under Heli, according to Psalm 77, 61: “He delivered their strength (in Hebrew, fortitude) into captivity,” that is, the ark, says St. Augustine in the same place, Theodoret, Eucherius and Hugh. For the ark was the strength and firmament of Israel, because it as it were carried God.