Homily 13

Concerning the feast days, and the lamp, and the lampstand, and the oil for light, and concerning the table and the shew bread.

  De diebus festis et lucerna et candelabro et oleo ad lumen et de mensa et panibus propositionis.

Whoever is “perfect”¹ is taught by God himself about the reasons for the festivals and is not accustomed to learn these from a human teacher but he learns them from God, if anyone can grasp the voice of God. But whoever is not such, but is inferior, learns from him who has learned from God. Therefore, concerning the festivals, there is a two­fold explanation of the doctrine. One, by which the prophetic mind illuminated by the Spirit is taught, which, if I may say so, is learned more by intuition of the mind than by the sound of the voice, through which the truth itself, not the shadow² and the image of the truth, is known. But those who cannot grasp the clearness itself of God nor observe the whole splendor of the truth with an attentive mind, hear about the festivals second hand from those who had learned first; and since the distinctive character of the investigation has given to the first the truth of things, the hearer alone bears the shadow of the truth to the second. Conscious of this mystery, the Apostle used to say about the Jews, “They serve a shadow and a copy of the heavenly.”³ For it is written that Moses had seen “the heavenly things” themselves, but had passed on to the people types and images of what he had seen. For thus the divine ú oracle says to him, ‘‘Behold, make all things according to the form which was shown to you on the mountain.”⁴ Therefore, such is that which was read in this passage because the Lord had spoken about the festivals to Moses.⁵ And after this, it  ^[p.233] says, “And Moses spoke to the sons of Israel about the feast days of the Lord God.”⁶

1. Qui 'perfectus' est, ab ipso Deo docetur de sollemnitatum ratione et homine ad haec discenda magistro non utitur, sed a Deo discit, si qui potest capere Dei vocem.  Qui autem non est talis, sed inferior, discit ab eo, qui didicerit a Deo.  Est haec ergo de sollemnitatibus duplex quaedam ratio doctrinae.  Una, qua illuminata per spiritum prophetica mens docetur, quae, ut ita dicam, magis intuitu mentis discitur quam sono vocis, per quam veritas ipsa, non umbra et imago veritatis agnoscitur.  Hi vero, qui ipsam Dei claritatem capere non possunt nec totum fulgorem veritatis intenta mentis acie conspicari, audiunt de sollemnitatibus secundo loco ab his, qui primo didicerunt; et cum illis veritatem rerum ipsa inspectionis proprietas dederit, ad istos veritatis umbram perfert solus auditus.  Huius mysterii Apostolus conscius dicebat de Iudaeis quia: "umbrae et exemplari deserviunt coelestium".  Ipsa enim 'coelestia' Moyses vidisse describitur, typos autem et imagines eorum, quae viderat, populo tradidisse; sic enim ad eum divinum dicit eloquium: "vide" inquit "omnia facito secundum formam, quae ostensa est tibi in monte".  Tale ergo est, quod et in hoc loco recitatum est quia Dominus locutus fuerit de sollemnitatibus ad Moysen.  Et post haec: "et locutus est Moyses" inquit "dies sollemnes Domini Dei filiis Istrahel".

(2) But bypassing words about these things, let us see what Moses is taught next. First, he is taught about “the lamp” and “the lampstand” and “the oil”⁷ which is poured in it; in the second place, about “the table” and “the shew bread” and also their number and who ought to use them.⁸ Therefore, let us more carefully turn our mind to these things which were written and let us pray that we may be granted the grace of the Lord to know in these letters which we read what the will of the Holy Spirit is.

Et post haec: "et locutus est Moyses" inquit "dies sollemnes Domini Dei filiis Istrahel".  Transacto vero de his sermone videamus quid post haec edocetur Moyses.  Primo de 'lucerna' et 'candelabro' et 'oleo', quod ei infunditur; secundo in loco de 'mensa' et 'panibus propositionis' ac numero eorum et qui iis uti debeant.  Intendamus ergo animum diligentius his, quae scripta sunt, et ad haec dinoscenda concedi nobis gratiam Domini deprecemur, ut in his quae legimus litteris, quae sit voluntas sancti Spiritus, agnoscamus.

(3) It says, “Command the sons of Israel, and let them bring you pure oil extracted from olives for the light so the lamp may always burn outside the veil of the Tent of Witness, and Aaron and his sons will light it from evening until morning before the Lord without ceasing; this is an external law for your descendants. On a pure lampstand you will light the lamps before the Lord until morning.”⁹ It calls for “a pure lampstand”; it orders “the lamps” to be lit by the high priest and it prescribes their “light” to be supplied with “oil” that is given by the people. And so, unless the people give “oil,” without a doubt “the lamp” will be extinguished and there will be no “light” in the sanctuary. Therefore, according to the literal sense, the result was that the people brought “pure oil extracted from olives” that “the light of the lamp” might be supplied by it; “and Aaron kept lighting the lamps from evening until morning,”¹⁰ supplying the fuel for the light from the supply of oil which the people brought.

"Praecipe" inquit "filiis Istrahel, et deferant tibi oleum de olivis mundum expressum ad lumen, ut ardeat lucerna semper extra velum in tabernaculo testimonii, et accendent illam Aaron et filii eius a vespera usque in mane contra Dominum indesinenter, legitimum aeternale in progenies vestras.  In candelabro mundo accendetis lucernas contra Dominum usque mane".  'Candelabrum mundum' nominat; 'lucernas' accendi per pontificem iubet et earum 'lumen' ministrari ex 'oleo', quod datur a populo, praecipit.  Itaque nisi dederit 'oleum' populus, sine dubio exstinguetur 'lucerna' et non erit 'lumen' in sanctis.  Secundum litteram ergo haec erat consequentia, ut conferret populus 'oleum mundum de olivis expressum', ut ex eo ministraretur 'lumen lucernae'; 'et Aaron accendebat lucernas a vespera usque mane', fomentis olei, quod contulerat populus, lumini pabulum praebens.

2. But “since the Law is spiritual,”¹¹ let us ask the Lord, if we still “are turned to the Lord,” “to remove for us the veil from the Old Testament lesson”¹² that we may be able to perceive what may be the meaning “of the lampstand and the lamps” according to its spiritual understanding. Before the advent of my Lord Jesus Christ, the sun was not rising for the people of Israel but they were using “the light of a lamp.” For “the lamp” among them was the word of the Law, and the prophetic word was confined within narrow walls which could not let the light pour into the circle of the earth. For the knowledge of God was enclosed within Judea, as the prophet also says, “God is known in Judea.”¹³ But when “the Sun of righteousness,”¹⁴ our Lord and Savior, arose and was born as a man about whom it is written, “Behold a man, East is his name,”¹⁵ the light of God’s knowledge was poured out through the whole world. Therefore, the word of the Law and the prophetic word were “a glowing light,” but it was burning within the Temple and could not radiate its splendor beyond there.

2. Verum 'quoniam lex spiritalis est', petamus a Domino - si tamen 'conversi sumus ad Dominum' - 'auferri' nobis 'velamen de lectione veteris testamenti', ut possimus advertere, quae ratio sit 'candelabri vel lucernarum' eius secundum intelligentiam spiritalem.  Ante adventum Domini mei Iesu christi sol non oriebatur populo Istrahel, sed 'lucernae lumine' utebatur.  'Lucerna' enim erat apud eos sermo legis et sermo propheticus intra angustos conclusa parietes, quae non poterat in orbem terrae lumen effundere.  Intra Iudaeam namque concludebatur scientia Dei, sicut et propheta dicit: "notus in Iudaea Deus".  Ubi vero exortus est 'sol iustitiae' Dominus et Salvator noster et natus est vir, de quo scriptum est: "ecce vir, Oriens nomen est ei", per universum mundum scientiae Dei lumen effusum est.  Sermo ergo legis et sermo propheticus erat 'lucerna ardens', sed ardebat intra aedem nec ultra poterat emittere splendorem suum.  Quod autem sermo legis et prophetarum 'lucerna' dicatur, Dominus ipse nos docuit dicens de Iohanne baptista: "ille erat lucerna ardens et lucens, et vos voluistis ad horam exsultare in lumine eius".

(2) But that the word of the Law and Prophets is called “a lamp,” the Lord himself taught us when he said about John the Baptist, “That one was a glowing and clear light and you wanted to rejoice in his light for an hour.”¹⁶ And in another place he says, “The Law and the Prophets were until John.”¹⁷ And so, “the glowing light” is “John” in whom “the Law and Prophets” were concluded. Therefore, so long as the people had “the oil,” which “they bring for the light,” “the lamp” was not extinguished. But when the oil of mercy, the oil of good works, ceased to be in them, and purity was not found among them—for a pure oil was sought for the light— “the lamp” was of necessity extinguished. But why do we say these things happened to them but are foreign to us? On the contrary, there is a greater concern for the Christian to search for the oil. For see how the Lord in the Gospels through a parable calls “the virgins foolish” who “do not carry oil in their vessels,” and they were so foolish, because there was no oil for them to light their lamps, that they were excluded from the marriage chamber, and when those who had neglected to care for the oil knocked, the bridegroom ordered nothing be opened.¹⁸

Et alibi dicit quia: "lex et prophetae usque ad Iohannem".  'Lucerna' itaque 'ardens' est 'Iohannes', in quo 'lex' concluditur 'et prophetae'. Donec ergo populus ille habebat 'oleum', quod 'conferret ad lumen', 'lucerna' non est exstincta.  Ubi vero defecit in iis oleum misericordiae, oleum operum bonorum nec inventa est apud eos puritas - purum namque oleum quaerebatur ad lumen -, necessario exstincta 'lucerna' est.  Sed quid dicimus quia illis haec evenerunt, a nobis vero aliena sunt?  Immo maior cura est Christiano olei conquirendi.  Vide enim, quomodo Dominus in evangeliis per parabolam 'stultas virgines' nominat, quae 'oleum non portant in vasculis suis', et in tantum stultas, ut, quoniam defuit iis oleum ad succendendas lampadas suas, thalamis exclusae sint nuptiarum nec pulsantibus, quae olei curam neglexerant, ultra aperiri iusserit sponsus.  

(3) Nevertheless, I remember, when we explained that verse of the one hundred eighteenth Psalm, in which it is written, “Your Law, Lord, is a lamp to my feet and a light to my paths,”¹⁹ we showed the difference between “lamp” and “light” as best we could. For we said that “the lamp” was allotted “for the feet,” that is, the lower parts of the body; but “the light” was given “for the paths,” which “paths” are called in another passage “eternal paths.” Therefore, because according to such a mystical understanding this world is understood as the lower parts of creation, therefore, “the lamp” of the Law is mentioned as having been lit for these who are in this world as the feet of the whole creation. But the eternal “light” will be for those “paths” through which each one in accordance with his merits will advance into the future age. But enough was said about these in its place to the best of our ability.

Memini tamen dudum nos, cum centesimi octavi decimi psalmi exponeremus illum versiculum, in quo scriptum est: "lucerna pedibus meis lex tua, Domine, et lumen semitis meis", diversitatem 'lucernae' et 'lucis' pro viribus ostendisse.  Dicebamus enim quod 'lucernam' quidem 'pedibus', id est inferioribus corporis partibus deputarit, 'lucem' vero 'semitis' dederit, quae 'semitae' in alio loco 'semitae aeternae' nominantur.  Quia ergo secundum quandam mysticam rationem inferiores partes creaturae mundus hic intelligitur, ideo 'lucerna' legis his, qui in hoc mundo tamquam totius creaturae pedes sunt, accensa memoratur.  'Lux' autem aeterna erit illis 'semitis', per quas in futuro saeculo unusquisque pro meritis incedet.Sed de his in suo loco sufficienter pro nostris viribus dictum est.

(4) Therefore, now since it is evening and night “until the end of the age”²⁰ and until that new day of the future age and of new light shines forth, this “lamp” burns for each of us furnishing the splendor of light in proportion to the oil that has been supplied by the richness of works. Finally, also Job in some passage, when he explained about the goodness of his works, likewise added, “When the lamp shone upon my head.”²¹ Therefore, this “lamp” shines for each of us inasmuch as it has been lit by the oil of good works. But if we do evil and our works are evil, not only are we not lit, but we also extinguish that lamp for us and, that which Scripture says, is fulfilled in us: “Whoever does evil walks in darkness and whoever hates his brother walks in darkness.”²² For he has extinguished the “lamp” of love and therefore walks in darkness. Or does he who extinguishes “the “light” of love not appear to you to have extinguished “the lamp”? “But whoever loves his brother”²³ abides in the light of love and can say with confidence, “But I am as an olive tree bearing fruit in the house of God;”²⁴ and “his sons are as young olive trees around his table.”²⁵

Nunc ergo quoniam vespera est et nox 'usque ad consummationem saeculi' et usque quo novus dies futuri saeculi et novae lucis effulgeat, ardet unicuique nostrum 'lucerna' haec in tantum splendorem luminis praebens, quantum olei copia ubertate operum fuerit ministrata.  Denique et Iob in quodam loco, cum de bonis operum suorum exponeret, addidit etiam hoc: "cum splenderet" inquit "lucerna super caput meum".  'Splendet' ergo unicuique nostrum 'lucerna' haec, in quantum oleo bonorum operum fuerit accensa.  Si autem male agamus et opera nostra mala sint, non solum non accendimus, sed exstinguimus nobis istam lucernam et completur in nobis illud, quod Scriptura dicit quia: "qui male agit, in tenebris ambulat, et qui odit fratrem suum, in tenebris ambulat".  Exstinxit enim 'lucernam' caritatis et ideo 'in tenebris ambulat'.  Aut non tibi videtur exstinxisse 'lucernam', qui 'lumen' caritatis exstinxit?  'Qui autem diligit fratrem', in caritatis luce perdurat et cum fiducia potest dicere: "ego autem sicut oliva fructifera in domo Dei" et: "filii eius sicut novella olivarum in circuitu mensae" eius.  

(5) Therefore, “oil” is ordered to be brought by the people,  ^[p.236] and not just any kind of oil but “pure”²⁶ and not from any seeds, as is the custom in certain regions, but extracted “from olives” in which an indication of peace is shown. For your works cannot be acceptable to God unless they are accomplished in peace; just as the Apostle James says, “But the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace.”²⁷ For that reason, I believe, the Lord also transmitted a faithful deposit to his disciples when he said, “My peace I give to you, my peace I leave with you.”²⁸ Therefore, from this “olive” let us extract the oil of our works, from which a lamp can be lit for the Lord “that we may not walk in darkness.”²⁹ That is all we have to say as regards “the lamp of the lampstand” and its “oil.”³⁰

'Oleum' ergo offerri iubetur a populo et oleum non qualecumque, sed 'mundum', et non ex quibuscumque seminibus, ut fieri diversis in regionibus mos est, sed 'de olivis' expressum, in quibus indicium pacis ostenditur.Neque enim accepta possunt esse Deo opera tua, nisi in pace peragantur; sicut et Iacobus Apostolus dicit: "fructus autem iustitiae in pace seminatur".  Idcirco, credo, etiam Dominus discipulis suis tradebat fidele depositum dicens: "pacem meam do vobis, pacem meam relinquo vobis".  De hac ergo 'oliva' oleum premamus operum nostrorum, ex quo lucerna Domino possit accendi, 'ut non in tenebris ambulemus'.  Haec quidem nobis dicta sint, quantum ad 'lucernam candelabri' et 'oleum' eius spectat.  

3. But now let us see what was also written next about the shew bread. It says, “And you will take fine wheat flour and will make from it twelve loaves; each loaf will be two tenths. And you will place them in two places, six loaves in each place, upon the clean table before the Lord. And you will place on each pure incense and salt, and the loaves will be offered for a remembrance to the Lord. On the sabbath day, they will always be set before the Lord by the sons of Israel as an eternal covenant. And it will be for Aaron and his sons and they will eat them in a holy place; for they are very holy. This will be an eternal law for them concerning these things which are offered to the Lord.”³¹

3. Nunc vero videamus, quid etiam in consequentibus de panibus propositionis scriptum est.  "Et sumetis" inquit "similaginem et facietis de ea duodecim panes, de duabus decimis erit unus panis; et imponetis eos duas positiones, sex panes una positio, super mensam mundam contra Dominum.  Et imponetis super positionem tus mundum et salem, et erunt panes in commemorationem appositi Domino; die sabbatorum proponentur contra Dominum semper a filiis Istrahel, testamentum aeternum.  Et erit Aaron et filiorum eius, et edent ea in loco sancto; sunt enim sancta sanctorum. Hoc erit illis de his, quae offeruntur Domino, legitimum aeternale".

(2) According to the text there seems to be “a remembrance before the Lord” of the twelve tribes of Israel in the twelve loaves, and the precept is given that without ceasing these “twelve loaves are placed in the sight of the Lord, so that also the memory of the twelve tribes is always to be held before him, by which, as it were, a certain entreaty and supplication is seen to be done through these things for each of them. But an intercession of this kind is quite small and poor enough. For how much does it accomplish as a propitiation when the fruits of each tribe must be considered through a loaf and the works through the fruits?

Secundum ea, quae scripta sunt, in duodecim panibus duodecim tribuum Istrahel videtur 'commemoratio ante Dominum' fieri et praeceptum dari, ut sine cessatione isti 'duodecim panes in conspectu Domini proponantur'; ut et memoria duodecim tribuum apud eum semper habeatur, quo veluti exoratio quaedam et supplicatio per haec pro singulis fieri videatur.  Sed parva satis et tenuis est huiuscemodi intercessio.  Quantum enim proficit ad repropitiandum, ubi uniuscuiusque tribus per panem fructus, per fructus opera consideranda sunt?

(3) But if these things are referred to the greatness of the mystery, you will find this “remembrance” to have the effect of a great propitiation. If you return to that “loaf which descends from heaven and gives life to this world,”³² that shew bread “whom God set forth as a propitiation through faith in his blood”³³ and if you turn your attention to that “remembrance” about which the Lord says, “Do this in remembrance of me,”³⁴ you will find that this is the only “remembrance”³⁵ which makes God gracious to men. Therefore, if you recall more intently the ecclesiastical mysteries, you will find the image of the future truth anticipated³⁶ in these things which the Law writes. But there is not much more to discuss about these things because it is enough to be understood by a single recollection.

Sed si referantur haec ad mysterii magnitudinem, invenies 'commemorationem' istam habere ingentis repropitiationis effectum.  Si redeas ad illum 'panem, qui de coelo descendit et dat huic mundo vitam', illum panem propositionis, 'quem proposuit Deus propitiationem per fidem in sanguine eius', et si respicias illam 'commemorationem', de qua dicit Dominus: "hoc facite in meam commemorationem", invenies quod ista est 'commemoratio' sola, quae propitium facit hominibus Deum.  Si ergo intentius ecclesiastica mysteria recorderis, in his, quae lex scribit, futurae veritatis invenies imaginem praeformatam.  Sed de his non est plura disserere, quod recordatione sola intelligi sufficit.  Possumus vero et aliter dicere.

(4) But we can also give another explanation. Every word of God is a loaf but there is a difference in loaves. For there is a certain word which can be delivered in the common hearing and which can teach the people about the works of mercy and of all kindness; and this is a loaf which will appear common. But there is another which contains secrets and speaks about the faith in God or the knowledge of things. That loaf is pure and is made from “fine wheat flour.” That one “must always be placed in the sight of the Lord and must be set forth upon a clean table.”³⁷ That one was separated for the priests only and was given to the sons of Aaron for an eternal gift. However, lest you think that we relate these things, contrived in our own meanings and that we did not observe them in the sacred volumes, I will show you from Scriptures how among diverse persons a different loaf is served to each one according to his merit. It is related in Genesis that the patriarch Abraham received angels as guests, and also Lot in like manner,³⁸ But Abraham, who excelled in merits, is said to have set forth loaves from “fine wheat flour”³⁹ which he called “cryptic,” egkruphias that is, ‘secret’ and ‘hidden.’ But Lot because he did not have fine wheat flour, set out loaves from regular flour⁴⁰ for his guests; not that he was so poor that he did not have fine wheat flour, nor is he described as inferior to his uncle in riches,⁴¹ but the difference of each one’s merits is designated by these signs. Indeed, this one to whom the mysteries must be revealed by the Lord and to whom it was said, “I will not hide from my son Abraham what I am about to do,”⁴² who had to be filled and taught about the mysteries and secrets of God, this one is described as having loaves made from “fine wheat flour.” But that one to whom was brought nothing of the mystery but the understanding of the present salvation and life, is described as having common loaves made from only “regular flour.”⁴³ And you, therefore, if you have knowledge of the secrets, if you can discuss wisely and carefully about faith in God, about the mystery of Christ, the unity of the Holy Spirit, you offer to the Lord loaves “from fine wheat flour.” But if you use common exhortations for the people and only know how to treat a moral issue which pertains to all, you know you have offered a common loaf.

Omnis sermo Dei panis est, sed est differentia in panibus.  Est enim aliqui sermo, qui ad communem proferri possit auditum et edocere plebem de operibus misericordiae ac totius beneficentiae; et iste est panis, qui communis videbitur.  Est vero alius, qui secreta contineat et de fide Dei vel rerum scientia disserat.  Iste panis mundus est et ex 'simila' confectus.  Iste 'in conspectu Domini semper ponendus est et super mensam mundam proponendus'.  Iste solis sacerdotibus sequestratus est et filiis Aaron aeterno munere condonatus.  Verum ne putes haec nos propriis sensibus excogitata narrare et non in divinis observasse voluminibus, proferam tibi de scripturis, quomodo apud diversos viros panis diversitas pro merito uniuscuiusque servata est.  Refertur in Genesi quod Abraham patriarcha angelos suscepit hospitio, similiter autem et Lot.  Sed Abraham, qui meritis praecellebat, panes ex 'simila' apposuisse describitur, quos et 'ἐγκρυφίας', id est occultos ac reconditos, nominavit.Lot vero, quod non habuit similam, ex farina panes hospitibus apposuit; non quo ita pauper esset, ut non habuerit similam, qui in divitiis non inferior patruo scribitur, sed utriusque meritorum differentia per haec designatur indicia; quod is quidem, cui erant a Domino mysteria revelanda et ad quem dicebatur: "non celabo a puero meo Abraham quod facturus sum", qui imbuendus erat et edocendus de occultis et secretis Dei, ille panes 'ex simila' scribitur habuisse; ille vero, ad quem nihil sacramenti deferebatur, sed ratio praesentis salutis et vitae, panes communes ex sola 'farina' scribitur habuisse confectos.  Et tu ergo si habes scientiam secretorum, si de fide Dei, de mysterio Christi, de sancti Spiritus unitate potes scienter caute que disserere, panes 'ex simila' offers Domino; si vero communibus uteris ad populum monitis et moralem scis tantummodo locum tractare, qui ad omnes pertinet, communem te obtulisse noveris panem.

4. But let us see now what is the preparation of this shew bread which is commanded “always to be placed before the Lord.” It says, “Let each loaf be two tenths.”⁴⁴ Certainly, it said “two tenths,” but it does not specify what measure these “tenths” are; since surely it would follow logically that if it wanted the quantity of fine wheat flour to be known, it would have to name that measure of which it commanded “two tenths” to be taken. Therefore, what is this thing whose measure and method could neither be specified nor named? Everywhere the number ten is found as perfect; for the reason and origin of every number rises from it. Therefore, suitably, the author and origin of all, God, appears to be shown under this number. But if I speak in the Church about the Father alone and bring forth praises of him alone, I have offered one “tenth of a loaf.” Or if I should make a sermon about Christ alone and should recount his passion and proclaim his resurrection,  ^[p.239] I have offered one “tenth of a loaf.” But if I should say that the Father is always with the Son and “he himself does his works” or also if I should say “the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father”⁴⁵ and “he who sees the Son sees the Father,”⁴⁶ and that the Father and Son are one,⁴⁷ I have offered one “loaf from two tenths of” pure “fine wheat flour,” the true loaf “who gives his life for this world.”⁴⁸

4. Sed videamus iam, quae sit confectio in istis panibus propositionis, qui 'ante Dominum poni semper' iubentur.  "De duabus" inquit "decimis sit panis unus" 'Duas' quidem 'decimas' dixit, sed cuius mensurae sint istae 'decimae', non comprehendit; cum utique consequens fuisset, si de quantitate similae volebat agnosci, ipsam, cuius 'duas decimas' sumi iubebat, nominare mensuram.  Quae ergo ista res est, cuius mensura et modus nec comprehendi potuit nec nominari?  Decem numerus ubique perfectus invenitur; totius enim numeri ex ipso ratio et origo consurgit.  Competenter igitur auctor et origo omnium, Deus, sub hoc numero videtur ostendi.  Sed si in ecclesia de solo patre loquar et ipsius solius laudes proferam, unius 'decimae panem' feci.  Aut si de Christo solo fecero sermonem et ipsius enumeravero passionem et resurrectionem praedicavero, unius 'decimae' obtuli 'panem'. Si vero dixero quia pater semper cum filio est et ‘ipse facit opera sua’, vel etiam si dixero quia ‘pater in filio est et filius in patre’ et ‘qui vidit filium, vidit et patrem’, et quia pater et filius unum sunt, ‘ex duabus decimis similae’ mundae obtuli unum ‘panem’, panem verum, ‘qui vitam dat huic mundo’.

(2) The heretics do not make “one loaf from two tenths” for they deny that God the Creator is the Father of Christ, and they do not make the Old and New Testament “one loaf,” and they do not profess one Spirit to be in each document. But we  ^[p.240] say that one and the same Holy Spirit is in the Law and the Gospels and in this way we also offer “from two tenths one loaf” of shew bread. Thus, the heretics who separate Christ from God the Creator, his Father, and the Jews who accept only the Father and do not accept Christ, his Word and Wisdom, do not make “one loaf from two tenths.”

Haeretici non faciunt ‘de duabus decimis unum panem’, negant enim creatorem Deum patrem Christi esse neque vetus et novum testamentum ‘unum’ faciunt ‘panem’ et unum spiritum in utroque instrumento profitentur.  Nos autem in lege et evangeliis unum atque eundem inesse sanctum Spiritum dicimus et isto quoque modo ‘ex duabus decimis unum panem’ propositionis offerimus.  Qui ergo separant Christum a creatore Deo patre suo haeretici et Iudaei, qui solum patrem recipiunt et verbum ac sapientiam eius, Christum non recipiunt, non faciunt ‘ex duabus decimis unum panem’.

(3) However, we cannot specify or find the name or the definition of this measure, that is, of the substance; nevertheless, confessing the Father and Son, we make “one loaf from two tenths”; not that one loaf comes from one tenth and another from the other, that these “two tenths” are separated but that these “two tenths” are one mass and “one loaf.” How do “two tenths” become one mass? Because I do not separate the Son from the Father nor the Father from the Son. He says, “For whoever sees me, sees the Father also.”⁴⁹

Nos autem mensurae quidem ipsius, id est substantiae, nomen vel rationem comprehendere aut invenire non possumus; confitentes tamen patrem et filium ‘unum’ facimus ‘panem ex duabus decimis’, non ut panis unus ex una decima fiat et alius ex alia, ut sint ipsae ‘duae decimae’ separatae, sed ut sint ‘duae’ istae ‘decimae’ una massa et ‘unus panis’.  Quomodo ‘duae decimae’ una massa fit? Quia non separo filium a patre nec patrem a filio: “qui enim vidit me” inquit “vidit et patrem”.

(4) Therefore, the loaves are made individually “from two tenths and are placed in two positions,”⁵⁰ that is, in two orders. For if there should be one position, the word about the Father and the Son would be confused and mixed. But now there is certainly “one loaf,” for there is one will and one substance, but there are “two positions,” that is, two individual persons. For we call that one who is not the Son Father and this one who is not the Father Son. And in this way we preserve “two tenths” in “one loaf” and we profess “two positions before the Lord.” But in fact it is, if I may say so, the art of a great and very creative baker to preserve diligently these measures and thus to temper the word about the Father and the Son; to join them where it is appropriate and, on the other hand, to separate them where it is fitting that “the two measures” in some degree are never absent and the one loaf never fails to appear.

Fiunt ergo panes singuli ‘ex duabus decimis et proponuntur duabus positionibus’ id est duobus ordinibus.  Si enim una positio fieret, confusus et permixtus esset sermo de patre ac filio.  Nunc autem ‘unus’ quidem est ‘panis’ - una enim voluntas est et una substantia -, sed ‘duae’ sunt ‘positiones’, id est duae personarum proprietates. Illum enim patrem, qui non sit filius, et hunc filium dicimus, qui non sit pater.  Et hoc modo ‘duas decimas’ in ‘uno pane’ servamus et ‘duas positiones ante Dominum’ profitemur.  Sed revera magni, ut ita dicam, cuiusdam pistoris et valde artificis est diligenter istas servare mensuras et ita temperare de patre et filio sermonem, coniungere ubi oportet et rursum ubi competit separare, ut neque ‘duae mensurae’ aliquando desint neque umquam non ‘unus panis’ appareat.

(5) Therefore, it is commanded “twelve loaves” be made “from this fine wheat flour” according to the number of the tribes which were then Israel in the flesh. In this the form of the entire rational nature seems to me to be contained; for there are thought to be twelve general orders of the rational  ^[p.241] creation, whose figure was in those twelve tribes. Among these there was one royal order that is called “Judah.” Another was the priestly order and it was called “Levi.” And there was another neighboring order of Judah which is called “Benjamin,” in which order both the temple and the altar of God were located. Another order, “Isechar and Zebulon and Ephraim,” and the others whom the divine Scriptures designate by name,⁵¹ the meaning of which there is not now time to explain. Nevertheless, for each tribe or order there is “a loaf before the Lord.” And although there may be some tribe which descends not from a free woman but from a concubine of Israel and may be partly free and partly slave,⁵² yet for all “a loaf from two tenths is placed before the Lord” and all consist of “two tenths of fine wheat flour.”

‘Duodecim’ ergo ‘panes ex’ ista ‘simila’ fieri mandantur secundum numerum tribuum, quae tunc erant carnalis Istrahel.  In quo mihi videtur forma totius naturae rationabilis contineri; duodecim namque putantur esse generales ordines rationabilis creaturae, quorum figura erat in illis duodecim tribubus.  In quibus erat unus quidam ordo regalis, qui ‘Iudas’ nominatur.  Alius erat ordo sacerdotalis et ‘Levi’ appellatur.  Erat et alius ordo Iudae vicinus, qui ‘Beniamin’ dicitur, in quo ordine et templum Dei et altare collocatum est.  Alius ordo ‘Isachar et Zabulon et Ephrem’ alii que, quos nominatim designat Scriptura divina, quorum rationem non est nunc temporis explicare. Est tamen uniuscuiusque tribus vel ordinis ‘panis ante Dominum’.  Et licet sit aliqua tribus, quae non ex libera, sed ex concubina Istrahel descendat et ex parte libera, ex parte servilis sit, tamen pro omnibus ‘ex duabus decimis panis proponitur ante Dominum’ et in universis ‘duae decimae similaginis’ constant.

(6) They are ordered “to be set forth upon a clean table.”⁵³ Who is there of us who has such “a clean table” that “the loaves” can be offered upon it to the Lord? Solomon says, “If you would sit to dine at the table of the powerful one, understand intelligently what is set before you.”⁵⁴ What therefore is “the table of the powerful one,” except the mind of that one who says, “I can do all things in Christ who strengthens me”;⁵⁵ and “when I am weak, then I am strong”?⁵⁶ On this “clean table of the powerful one,” that is, in his heart, in his mind is offered “a loaf” to the Lord. At the table of this powerful Apostle, if you sit to eat, “understand intelligently what is set before you,” that is, perceive spiritually what is said by him that you can do what is added; for its says, “Knowing that you should prepare such things.”⁵⁷

‘Proponi’ autem iubentur ‘supra mensam mundam’.  Quis est nostrum, qui ita habeat ‘mensam mundam’, ut ‘panes’ super eam Domino offerantur?  “Si sederis” inquit Solomon “coenare ad mensam potentis, intelligibiliter intellige, quae apponuntur tibi”.  Quae est ergo ‘mensa potentis’, nisi mens illius, qui dicebat: “omnia possum in eo, qui me confortat, Christo” et: “cum infirmor, tunc potens sum”?  In istius ‘potentis mensa munda’, hoc est in istius corde, in istius mente Domino ‘panis’ offertur.  Ad huius ‘potentis’ Apostoli ‘mensam si sedeas coenaturus, intelligibiliter intellige, quae apponuntur tibi’, hoc est spiritaliter adverte, quae dicuntur ab eo, ut et tu facere possis, quod additur; ait enim: “sciens quia talia te oportet praeparare”.

5. But let us see how these “twelve loaves” are placed “in two places, six loaves in each place.”⁵⁸ Do you think this division is meaningless? Why is it that the number twelve is again divided into six? For the number six has a certain relationship with this world; for in six days this visible world was made. Therefore, there are two orders in this world, that is, two  ^[p.242] people, who preserve faith in the Father and the Son in one Church as on “one pure table.”

5. Sed videamus, quomodo hi ‘duodecim panes’ proponantur: “duae” inquit “positiones, in una positione sex panes”. Putas ne, otiosa est ista divisio? Quid est quod duodecimus numerus iterum partitur in sex?  Habet enim propinquitatem quandam cum hoc mundo senarius numerus; in sex enim diebus factus est iste visibilis mundus.  Duo igitur ordines habentur in hoc mundo, id est duo populi, qui fidem patris ac filii in una ecclesia tamquam in ‘una mensa munda’ custodiunt.

(2) It says, “And pure incense will be placed upon the setting.”⁵⁹ The type of incense symbolizes prayer. Therefore, it is necessary to join to the loaves of faith the vigilance and purity of prayers. Pure prayer is, as the Apostle says, “Lifting up pure hands without wrath or dispute.”⁶⁰ At the same time, the sweetness of the odor makes complete that which is written, “Let my prayer be directed as incense in your sight.”⁶¹ If therefore anyone indeed offers prayers to God but does not have a clean conscience from evil works, this “incense” certainly appears “to be placed upon” the loaves but not completely “pure” incense. For if all incense were “pure,” the Scripture would surely not have added “pure incense placed before the Lord”⁶² over the shew bread. For do not think that the omnipotent God commanded this and consecrated this in the Law that incense be brought to him from Arabia. But this is the incense that God seeks to be offered by human beings to him, from which he receives “a pleasing odor,”⁶³ prayers from a pure heart and good conscience in which God truly receives a pleasing warmth.

“Et superponetur” inquit “super positionem tus mundum”.  Turis species formam tenet orationum.  Oportet ergo panibus fidei orationum vigilantiam puritatem que coniungere.  Pura autem oratio est, sicut Apostolus dicit: “levantes puras manus sine ira et disceptatione”.  Simul et odoris suavitas impleri facit illud, quod scriptum est: “dirigatur oratio mea sicut incensum in conspectu tuo”.  Si qui ergo orationes quidem offerat Deo, non tamen habeat mundam conscientiam ab operibus malis, hic ‘tus’ quidem videtur panibus ‘superponere’, sed non penitus ‘mundum’. Nam si omne tus ‘mundum’ esset, non utique addidisset Scriptura ‘tus mundum’ super panes propositionis ‘ponendum ante Dominum’.  Nec enim putes quod omnipotens Deus hoc mandabat et hoc lege sanciebat, ut tus ei ex Arabia deferretur.  Sed hoc est tus quod Deus ab hominibus sibi quaerit offerri, ex quo capit ‘odorem suavitatis’, orationes ex corde puro et conscientia bona, in quibus vere Deus suscipit flagrantiam suavitatis.

(3) It says, “And the loaves will be placed for a remembrance before the Lord. You will place them on the Sabbath day.”⁶⁴ If it is not yet clear to you that these “loaves” are the word of God, these words now confirm it. For what is it that makes for us “a remembrance” of God? What is it that will recall us to the memory of justice and of every good thing except the word of God? Therefore, for this reason it says that “they will be placed for a remembrance before the Lord.”⁶⁵ And it adds “on the Sabbath day,”⁶⁶ that is, in the rest of souls. And what is a greater rest for the soul of the faithful than “the memory” of God, than to live “in the sight of the Lord,” than to remain in faith in the Father and Son, than to offer prayers to the Lord as “a pleasing odor”?

“Et erunt” inquit “panes in commemorationem propositi ante Dominum.  In die sabbatorum proponetis ea”.  Si nondum tibi manifestum est quia ‘panes’ isti verbum Dei est, ex his nunc sermonibus confirmare.  Quid est enim quod nobis ‘commemorationem’ Dei faciat?  Quid est quod nos ad memoriam iustitiae et totius boni revocet nisi verbum Dei?  Ideo ergo dicit quia “erunt in commemorationem propositi ante Dominum”.  Addit et ‘in die sabbatorum’, id est in requie animarum.  Et quae maior fideli animae requies quam ‘memoria’ Dei, quam ‘in conspectu Domini’ versari, quam in fide patris ac filii permanere, quam orationes Domino tamquam ‘odorem suavitatis’ offerre?

(4) ^[p.243] It says, “This will be an eternal covenant for Aaron and his sons, and they will eat them in a holy place.”⁶⁷ “Aaron and his sons are an elect race, a priestly race”⁶⁸ to whom God gave this portion of holy things which all we who believe in Christ now are.⁶⁹ Moreover, I do not seek “a holy place” on earth but in the heart. For “the holy place” means a rational soul; therefore the Apostle also says, “Do not give a place to the devil.”⁷⁰ Therefore, my soul is a place of the devil if I do evil, a place of God if I do good. Finally, it also says, “The evil spirit when it leaves a person, will go about desert places and will not find rest. Then it says, I will return to my place which I left.”⁷¹ Therefore, “a holy place” is a pure soul.

“Testamentum” inquit “aeternum erit Aaron et filiis eius, et manducabunt ea in loco sancto”.  ‘Aaron et filii eius’ ‘genus est electum, genus sacerdotale’, quibus haec portio sanctorum donatur a Deo, quod sumus omnes, qui credimus in Christo.  ‘Locum’ autem ‘sanctum’ ego in terris non requiro positum, sed in corde.  ‘Locus’ enim dicitur ‘sanctus’ rationabilis anima, propter quod et Apostolus dicit: “nolite locum dare diabolo”.  Anima ergo mea locus est, si male ago, diaboli, si bene, Dei.  Denique et “spiritus malignus cum” inquit “exierit ab homine, et circuierit loca arida, et requiem non invenerit, tunc dicit: revertar ad locum meum, unde exivi”.  ‘Locus’ ergo ‘sanctus’ anima est pura.

(5) In that place we are commanded to eat the food of the word of God. For it is not proper that a soul that is not holy should receive the holy words; but when he has purified himself from every filth of the flesh and bad habits, then having become “a holy place,” he will receive the food of that “bread which descended from heaven.”⁷² Is not “the holy place better understood in this way than if we imagine a structure of insensible stones to be called “a holy place”? Whence in like manner this law is also set before you that, when you receive the mystical bread, you eat it in a clean place; that is, you do not receive the sacrament of the Lord’s body with a soul contaminated and polluted by sins. For “whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let each one examine himself and then eat from the bread and drink from the cup.”⁷³

Neque enim convenit, ut sancta verba anima non sancta suscipiat, sed cum purificaverit se ab omni inquinamento carnis et morum, tunc ‘locus sanctus’ effecta cibum capit ‘panis’ illius, ‘qui de coelo descendit’.  Nonne melius sic intelligitur ‘locus sanctus’ quam si putemus structuram lapidum insensibilium ‘locum sanctum’ nominari?  Unde simili modo etiam tibi lex ista proponitur, ut, cum accipis panem mysticum, in loco mundo manduces eum, hoc est ne in anima contaminata et peccatis polluta dominici corporis sacramenta percipias: “quicumque” enim “manducaverit” inquit “panem et biberit calicem Domini indigne, reus erit corporis et sanguinis Domini.  Probet autem se unusquisque, et tunc de pane manducet et de calice bibat”.

6. “For these are very holy.”⁷⁴ See how it did not say merely holy but “very holy” as if to say, this food is not common for all and not for any unworthy person, but it is “for the saints.” How much more will we say this rightly and suitably about the word of God. This word is not for all; not any one who can hear the mystery of this word, but it is only for the saints who  ^[p.244] are purified in mind, “who are pure in heart,”⁷⁵ who are “simple in soul,”⁷⁶ who are blameless in life, free in conscience; it is for them to hear the word about this, these mysteries can be explained to them. It says, “For to you it was given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but to those,”⁷⁷ that is, to those who are not worthy, who are not such that they are worthy and are not capable of understanding the secrets, this priestly loaf, which is the secret and mystical word, “cannot be given” except in “parables”⁷⁸ which is common and public.

6. “Sancta enim sanctorum sunt”.  Vides quomodo non dixit sancta tantummodo, sed ‘sancta sanctorum’, ut si diceret: cibus iste ‘sanctus’ non est communis omnium nec cuiuscumque indigni, sed ‘sanctorum’ est.  Quanto magis hoc et de verbo Dei recte merito que dicemus: hic sermo non est omnium; non quilibet verbi huius potest audire mysterium, sed sanctorum est tantummodo qui purificati sunt mente, ‘qui mundi sunt corde’, qui ‘simplices animo’, qui vita irreprehensibiles, qui conscientia liberi, ipsorum est de hoc audire sermonem, ipsis possunt explanari ista mysteria.  “Vobis enim datum est” inquit “nosse mysteria regni Dei, illis autem”, id est qui non merentur, qui non sunt tales ut mereantur nec capaces esse possunt ad intelligentiam secretorum ‘illis non potest dari’ iste sacerdotalis panis, qui est secretus et mysticus sermo, sed in ‘parabolis’, qui communis est vulgi.

(2) “This will be an eternal law.”⁷⁹ For truly “the eternal law” is everything that is mystical. For these things present and visible here and there are temporary and come to an end quickly. “For the appearance of this world passes away.”⁸⁰ If the appearance “of this world passes away,” without a doubt that of the letter also passes away, and those things which are eternal, which contain spiritual meanings, remain. Therefore, if we have understood first how God speaks to Moses and Moses to the sons of Israel,⁸¹ and second the reason for the “pure lampstand and the lamps” and their oil,⁸² third [if] we have also understood the shew bread, “each one made from two tenths”⁸³ according to the will of the Spirit, let us pay heed to how we may not be shown unworthy of this so great and so sublime understanding but that our soul may first become “a holy place” and in “the holy place” we may receive the holy mysteries through the grace of the Holy Spirit by whom everything is sanctified that is holy. “To him be glory and power forever and ever. Amen!”⁸⁴

“Legitimum aeternale hoc erit”.  ‘Legitimum’ namque ‘aeternum’ est omne quod mysticum est.  Nam praesentia haec et passim visibilia temporalia sunt et finem cito accipiunt: “praeterit enim habitus huius mundi”.  Quod si ‘huius mundi praeterit’, sine dubio et litterae ‘habitus’ praeterit et manent illa, quae aeterna sunt, quae sensus continet spiritalis.  Si ergo intelleximus primo quomodo Deus loquatur ad Moysen et Moyses filiis Istrahel, secundo etiam rationem ‘candelabri mundi’ et ‘lucernarum’ atque olei eius, tertio quoque ‘panes’ propositionis ‘ex duabus decimis singulos quosque confectos’ secundum voluntatem spiritus intelleximus: demus operam, quomodo et nos hoc tanto et tam sublimi intellectu non efficiamur indigni, sed ut anima nostra prius fiat ‘locus sanctus’ et in ‘loco sancto’ capiamus sancta mysteria per gratiam Spiritus sancti, ex quo sanctificatur omne quod sanctum est.  “Ipsi gloria et imperium in saecula saeculorum. Amen!”.