Lecture 2 — Job asks God what grievances he has against him

^13:13^ Be silent for a little while so I may speak everything the mind suggests to me.

^13:14^ Why should I tear my flesh with my teeth and carry my soul in my hands?

^13:15^ Even if he should kill me, I will hope in him; nevertheless, I will blame my own conduct in his sight,

^13:16^ and he will be my savior: for no hypocrite will come into his presence.

^13:17^ Hear my discourse and understand my riddles with your ears.

^13:18^ If I were judged, I know I would be found just.

^13:19^ Who will be judged with me? Let him come! Why must I be spent in remaining silent?

^13:20^ Spare me in only two things and then I will not hide myself from your face.

^13:21^ Put your hand far from me, and let not your power terrify me.

^13:22^ Call me and I will answer you, or at least allow me to speak and you will answer me.

^13:23^ Show me how many crimes, sins, wicked deeds and faults I have.

^13:24^ Why do you hide your face and think of me as your enemy?

^13:25^ Do you show your power against a leaf which is driven by the wind? Do you break a dry stick?

^13:26^ Do you write bitter things against me, and do you want to consume me with the sins of my youth?

^13:27^ Have you placed my foot in fetters, have you observed my paths, and have you considered the traces of my footsteps,

^13:28^ I who must be consumed like something rotten and like a garment eaten by moths?

225. Be silent for a little while so that I may speak. Job had corrected the friends' process of reasoning, who sought to defend divine justice with lies. He now proceeds to destroy their false dogmas under the form of a discussion with God. First he asks for a hearing, as though he were about to say important things, saying, be silent for a little while, so I may speak everything the mind suggests to me. He adds this because perhaps they could say, you say useless things and some will not listen. But to listen to someone who speaks for a little while is not burdensome. Or, he adds this phrase to show that he will not speak by composing lies or by devising fraud, but by what he has in his mind.

226. His friends have accused Job of two things: impatience and ostentation (Job 4:2; 4:7), both of which he excludes from himself so that he might not seem to speak either from anger or from pride in the following disputation. Observe that impatience comes from an overabundance of sadness not moderated by reason, for sadness leads to despair when excessive. In despair, a man disregards the health of both his body and soul. So to exclude impatience he says, why should I tear my flesh with my teeth? for there is no reason why I should despair of the health of my body by impatience like those who, in torment, despair of bodily life and devour their own flesh. And also, why should I carry my soul in my hands? for there is no reason why I should disregard the salvation of my soul. For what a man carries in his hands is lost easily, and so it seems one is not very afraid to lose it. But a man hides what he is afraid of losing. He then states the reason why he does not tear his flesh by impatience or carry his soul in his hands, saying, even if he should kill me, I will hope in him, saying in effect, “You should not believe that I would stop hoping in God because of the temporal evils which I suffer. For if my hope were in God only because of temporal goods, I would be driven to despair,” for he already said, I have despaired (Job 7:16). But because my hope is in God because of spiritual goods which remain after death, even if he would afflict me unto death, the hope which I have in him will not end.

However, because inordinate hope degenerates into presumption, he adds, nevertheless, I will blame my own conduct in his sight. For I do not hope in him because I believe he will free me, even if I should persevere in my sins, but I believe he will free me if I renounce my sins. Therefore, he will be my savior, if my sins displease me. He shows why he will save those who blame their own conduct in his presence, saying, for no hypocrite will come into his presence, for he is a master of deceit who, although he is unjust, professes openly to be just and does not accuse his conduct in the presence of God. Therefore, he will not come into the presence of God, to see God in whom the ultimate salvation of man consists—something which Job will explain later (Job 4:13; 19:25). He will still come into his presence to be judged by him. Thus he not only excludes impatience from himself, but also the presumption of innocence, when he confesses publicly that he blames his conduct in the presence of God so that in so doing, every calumny of his friends may end.

227. Then, as he is about to enter into a discussion, he first renders his listeners attentive in two ways:

In one way by couching what he will say with a certain mystery, since if we declare what must be said to be difficult, our listeners would be more attentive. So he says, hear my discourse and understand my riddle with your ears. A riddle is an obscure discourse, which presents one thing on the surface and means something else interiorly.

In another way he renders them attentive by assuring them of the truth of what must be said, and so he says, if I were judged, I know I would be found just, which he certainly does not say about his own innocence, since he has already said, I will accuse my conduct in his presence (Job 13:15). But he says this of the truth of the doctrine about which he will dispute, as though in a trial. The one is found just in a trial in whose favor the sentence is decided. So, when someone, in disputing, shows that what he has said is true, it is as though he were judged just in a trial.

228. After he has rendered his listeners attentive, he determines the manner of his disputation. For he wants to dispute in the form of a debate. He expresses this, saying, who will be judged with me? that is, with whom will I dispute about the truth? Let him come, that is, let him begin the dispute! He then states the reason why he intends to dispute about the truth, saying, why must I be spent in remaining silent? For man is spent little by little in the course of this present life, especially when he is subject to infirmity, like Job. He is spent in silence when he so passes this present life that he does not leave any trace of his wisdom by his teaching. To avoid suffering that fate then, Job decides not to be silent about the truth, so that he may survive after death in his teaching, although his body has died. There can also be another explanation. Indeed, when someone expresses in word what he suffers in his heart, his soul is in a certain sense pacified, whereas in remaining silent, his pain becomes more acute interiorly and in a certain sense he is destroyed by his silence.

229. Since, then, he has sought someone to argue with him, saying, who will be judged with me? and as he had said already, I desire to dispute with God (Job 13:3), from here on he speaks as if he is in the presence of God and is disputing with him. But for a man to dispute with God does not seem fitting because of the excellence of God. However, one must consider that the truth does not change because of the difference of persons, and so when someone speaks the truth, he cannot be convinced of the contrary, no matter with whom he argues. Now Job was sure that he was speaking the truth inspired by God through the gift of faith and wisdom. So, though he confides in the truth, he asks that divine strength might not strike him down, either through the evils he presently bore, or through the fear of what he would have to undergo. He says, spare me only two things, and then I will not hide myself from your face, as though I am afraid to dispute with you. For when someone is afraid, he usually hides himself from the sight of those whom he fears. He shows these two things when he says, put your hand far from me; that is, do not whip me with the scourges of the present. And let not your strength terrify me, with future punishments. For in a disputation, a man can be impeded in two ways from even being able to defend the truth which he knows for certain: when he is either molested in body, or disturbed by fear or by some other passion in the soul.

230. Now, a debate is between two persons: namely, the one making objections and the other one answering them. So, in entering a dispute with God, he gives the option to God of choosing which person he wants to be: the one making objections or the one answering. He therefore says, call me and I will answer you, saying in effect, “You will object and I will answer.” Or at least allow me to speak, by raising objections, and you will answer me. He says this enigmatically to show that he is prepared to do both, either to defend the truth which he professes, or to refute what will be said against the truth. First he offers God the part of the opposing party, saying, show me how many crimes, sins, wicked deeds, and faults I have. Here one must comment that the friends of Job seemed to argue against Job, as though taking the part of God, according to what was said already, do you take his part to try to judge for God? (Job 13:8).

Now the friends of Job used the argument against him that he had been punished for his sins. He therefore asks what objection God will use against him, saying, show me how many crimes, sins, wicked deeds and faults I have, saying in effect, “If you afflict me for my sins, as my friends charge falsely trying to speak for you, then I ask you to show me for what sins you afflict me so gravely.” So he does not say, what evils I have, but how many, because if there is no other reason for present afflictions than the sins of men, as is the opinion of the friends of Job, those sins must be the most grievous which are punished with the most grievous afflictions. Some sins are committed against the negative precepts of the law. There are other sins of omission by which one neglects affirmative precepts of the law.

One does something against a precept of the law in three ways:

in one way when he harms his neighbor, like theft, murder, and things of this sort, which are properly named wickedness, because they are contrary to the equity of justice which regards the other.

In another way a man sins against himself by a disorder of his own act, as appears especially in the sins of gluttony and lust, and these are called sins, as certain disorders of man.

In a third way one sins directly against God in deeds like blasphemy and sacrilege. These are called crimes because of their gravity. Omissions are properly called delinquency.

231. Then, as though the one to whom he had given the part of the opponent were silent, he assumes the part of the objector and asks about the cause of his punishment.

First, since someone could object that God punished him as his enemy, he rejects this by saying, why do you hide your face and think of me as your enemy? For it seems evil that someone regard someone else as his enemy without proof. But the only fitting cause for the judgment that someone is an enemy is an offense. Thus, it is evident that God thinks a man his enemy when his sins are clear. But Job had asked him to show him his sins, and they were not shown to him. So there appeared no reason why God treated him like his enemy. He insinuates this when he says, why do you hide your face? as though he hated him secretly, for a hidden motive. For the face of a man who hates another is uncovered when he does not hide the reason for his hate.

232. Second, because someone could object that God punished him in order to show his power, he rejects this cause, saying, do you show your power against the leaf which is driven by the wind? For it is not fitting that some very powerful man should want to show his power against the weakest thing of all. The human condition is compared to a leaf which is driven by the wind, because man himself is frail and weak like a leaf which falls easily, and notwithstanding the passing of time and the variety of fortune, he is driven like a leaf by the wind. So it does not seem fitting to say that God punishes man only in order to show his power.

233. Third, since someone could object that God punished him because of the sins which he committed in his youth, he also rejects this by saying, do you break a dry stick? Do you write bitter things against me, and do you want to consume me with the sins of my youth? For a man in his youth is compared to a verdant plant, but in his old age he is compared to a dry stick. Likewise, it seems that to punish a man in his old age for the sins of his youth is as though someone should rage violently on a dry stick for the defect of a verdant plant. But we should note in this examination that he does not deviate from the opinion that the adversities of man are caused by divine judgment, and to indicate this he says, you write bitter things against me, as though bitter things, that is, the adversities of man result from the writing of divine sentence.

234. Fourth, someone could object that even though Job had not committed grave sins, he had still committed sins which are inevitable in this present life, and so he is punished for them. He also rejects this, saying, have you placed my foot in fetters; have you observed all my paths, and have you considered the traces of my footsteps, I who must be consumed like something rotten and like a garment eaten by moths? Here we should consider that those who are placed in prison fetters are so bound that they cannot get free. Just as a man’s foot is bound in fetters, so the proceeding of man is bound by the law of divine justice from which he cannot be moved to and fro, and thus it is it said, have you placed my foot in fetters. Divine justice examines the deeds of men, not only as to what each one does, but also as to what spirit and with what end, and so he says, have you observed all of my paths; that is, my deeds, and have you considered the traces of my footsteps, as to the good‑will of my deeds, and also all of the circumstances of the deed. It seems unreasonable that God should have such great care for human acts if they disappear completely in the death of the body, a death which is sometimes natural and sometimes violent. So for both he adds, I who am consumed by rot, expressing natural death, and like a garment eaten by moths, expressing a violent death, saying in effect, “If, as my friends suppose, there is no other life except the present one, which man loses either by rotting away or by being torn asunder, it seems unreasonable that God should be concerned with such strictness about human acts that he punishes man even for the slightest sins and negligences.”

235. Since this last point is of particular value for the investigation of the truth, he insists more on clarifying this truth. What he had said about himself in particular he applies again generally to the whole human race.