"Aber jetzt Achtung!"

"Sie haben gesagt: «der handelnde und der sprechende Gott» - und ich als der erklärte «Laie» möchte Sie fragen: Hat Gott [nur] einmal gesprochen, oder spricht er auch heute?"

"Ja, natürlich spricht er auch heute. Der Gott, der sein entscheidendes Wort in Jesus Christus gesprochen hat - der ist kein toter Gott, wie heute die Toren sagen, sondern der ist der lebendige Gott, der auch heute spricht. Und wenn wir Ohren hätten, zu hören, dann könnten wir ihn beständig hören. Denn die Welt, in der wir leben, ist von ihm geschaffen. Und wenn wir Augen hätten, zu sehen, dann würden wir etwas von Offenbarung wahrnehmen - nicht nur in der Bibel, sondern auch sonst. Aber jetzt Achtung! Was man nun so Offenbarung außerhalb der Bibel nennen könnte und gerne nennt, das könnte etwa so sein auf der Linie «Hitler», nicht? Und da passieren immer wieder die Irrtümer, wenn die Menschen meinen: Ha, jetzt hab' ich's, hier und dort! Und deshalb wird es wohl für uns dabei bleiben müssen, bei aller Offenheit für die Welt, für die Schönheit des Frühlings, der uns da draußen umgibt, auch für das, was in der Geschichte geschieht, entschlossen und geschlossen dorthin zu blicken, wo Gott unzweideutig für sich selber gesprochen hat in Jesus Christus, der wahrer Gott und wahrer Mensch gewesen ist und heute ist und sein und bleiben wird."

     Karl Barth, Interview von H. Knorr und R. Rohlinger, Westdeutscher Rundfunk (2.5.1966). In Gespräche 1964-1968 (GA IV.28).  Center for Karl Barth Studies video here.

"dreadfull pourtraicts of deformitee"

MBARI

. . . all that here on earth
          we dreadfull hold,
Be but as bugs
          to fearen babes withall,
Compared to the creatures
          in the seas entrall.

     Edmund Spenser, The faerie queene II.xii.25, ll.7-9.

"Faith may look for a well-grounded confidence, but when it has won its confidence, it ventures upon it."

     Oliver O'Donovan, "Resurrection and the senses:  in defence of Thomas," ABC Religion and Ethics, 25 March 2016.

"theologia is the apprehension of God by a man restored to the image and likeness of God. . . ."

Orthodox Christian Student Society,
University of Oxford

     Andrew Louth, Discerning the mystery:  an essay on the nature of theology (Oxford:  Clarendon Press, 1983), 4.

"'prayer' and 'precariousness' have the same root in Latin"

Jean Bourdichon (1457-1521), Poverty.
From The four conditions of society.
Ecole Nationale Superieure des Beaux-Arts, Paris.

"What is this 'being snatched from oneself' but consent to one's creaturely condition?  Here Augustine's path separates itself decisively from Platonic ecstacy, which involves awakening to oneself by escaping the body in order to access the intelligible and be united to the divine.  It is this being snatched that alone makes prayer possible, as consent not to exist on the basis of oneself, but to be radically dependent on another.  Only 'the man of prayer discovers in himself and upon himself the light which the man in search of his "self" does not discover':  assent to an ontological poverty that reveals even the etymology of the word 'prayer,' since in Latin, 'prayer' and 'precariousness' share the same root."

          Jean-Pierre Batut, 'Praying to the Father through the Son in the Spirit:  reflections on the specificity of Christian prayer," trans. Michelle K. Borras, Communio:  international Catholic review 36, no. 4 (Winter 2009):  627 (623-642).  Forgetting that I had already read this in English, I later re-read it in French ("Prier le Père par le Fils dans l’Esprit:  réflexions sur le spécifique de la prière chrétienne," Communio:  revue international catholique 34, no. 2 (mars-avril 2009):  56-57 (53-71)), and translated it out myself as follows:  "What, therefore, is this 'tearing [of oneself away] from self [(arrachement à soi)]' if not a consent to the condition of [being a] creature?  It is here that the Augustinian approach separates itself decidedly from Plotinian [(plotinienne)] ecstasy, for which it was a question of awakening to oneself by escaping from one’s body in order to accede to the intelligible and be united with the divine.  And it is only this tearing away [(arrachement)] which makes prayer possible, [considered] as the consent not to exist from self, but to be radically dependent on another.  Only 'the man who prays finds in himself and above himself the light that he who seeks the "self" does not' [(H. de Lubac, Sur les chemins de Dieu (Paris:  Éditions du Cerf, 1983), 189)]:  consent to an ontological poverty that betrays the very etymology of the word 'prayer', since 'prayer' [(prière)] and 'precariousness' [(précarité)] have the same root in Latin."

     prière < precaria (a popular replacement for the classical preces (morphologically a plural)), nominative feminine singular of precarius; précarité < précaire (> eventually precarious) < precarius, obtained by prayer (Dictionnaire alphabétique et analogique de la langue Française, vol. 5 (1962)).

My song is love unknown

Hymnology Archive

God forbid that I should glory save in the Cross of our Lord Iesus Christ, 
Gal. 6.14.

1.
MY Song is love unknown;
My Saviours love to me.
Love to the loveless shown,
That they might lovely be.
Oh who am I,
That for my sake
My Lord should take
Frail flesh, and die.
2.
He came from his bless'd Throne,
Salvation to bestow:
But men made strange, and none
The long'd-for Christ would know.
But oh! my Friend;
My Friend indeed,
Who at my need
His life did spend.
3.
Sometimes they strow his way,
And his sweet praises sing;
Resounding all the day,
Hosannah's to their King.
Then Crucifie
Is all their breath,
And for his death
They thirst, and crie.
4.
Why, what hath my Lord done?
What makes this rage, and spite?
He made the Lame to run,
He gave the Blind their sight.
Sweet injuries!
Yet they at these
Themselves displease,
And 'gainst him rise.
5.
They rise, and needs will have
My dear Lord made away,
A Murderer they save:
The Prince of life they slay.
Yet cheerful he
To suff'ring goes,
That he his Foes
From thence might free.
6.
In life no house, no home,
My Lord on earth might have:
In death no friendly tombe,
But what a Stranger gave.
What may I say?
Heav'n was his home;
But mine the tombe
Wherein he lay.
7.
Here might I stay, and sing;
No story so divine.
Never was love, dear King!
Never was grief like thine.
This is my Friend,
In whose sweet praise
I all my daies
Could gladly spend.

     Samuel Crossman, c.1624-1684, in The young mans meditation, or Some few sacred poems upon select subjects, and scriptures, in The young mans monitor, or, A modest offer toward the pious, and vertuous composure of life from youth to riper years (1664).

Table grace

c. 1537:  The primer in English for children after the use [(or vse)] of Sa[lisbury/rum], also titled The manual of prayers, or the prymer in Englysh & Laten (and variants) (1539):

O Lord Jesu Christ without whom nothing is sweet. . . .

1545:  The primer set fvrth by the kings maiestie & his clergie, to be taught lerued, and red: & none other to be used thorowout all his dominions.  London: Richard Grafton, 1546 [1545]:

O Lord Jesu Christ, without whom nothing is swete nor sauery, we beseche the to blesse us and our supper, and wyth thy blessed presence to chere our hertes, that in al our meates and drynkes we maye tast and sauoure of the to thy honor and glorye, Amen. 

O Lord Jesus Christ, without whom nothing is sweet nor savory, we beseech thee to bless us and our supper, and with thy blessed presence to cheer our hearts, that in all our meats and drinks we may taste and savor of thee, to thy honor and glory, Amen.

This is often called the King's primer, or Henry VIII's primer.  The full title is, in some printings, The primer set foorth by the Kynges maiestie and his clergie. . . .  So far as I can tell, the table grace does not occur in the 1545 Primer: in Englishe and Latyn, set foorth by the Kynges maiestie and his clergie to be taught learned, and read: and none other to be vsed throughout all his dominions.

1553:  A prymmer or boke of private prayer nedefull to bee used of all faythful Christians: whiche boke is auctorised and set forth by the Kynges Maiestye, to be taught, learned, read, and used by his lovynge subiectes. . . .  Here we see the later Edwardian (?) incipit:

O Lord Jesu Christ, without whom nothing is good, nothing is holy, . . .

[O Domine Jesu Christe sine quo ni(c)hil est bonum ni(c)hil est sanctum, . . .] 

[O Domine Jesu Christe sine quo ni(c)hil est ualidum ni(c)hil est sanctum, . . .]

[O Domine Jesu Christe sine quo ni(c)hil est sanctum ni(c)hil est ualidum, . . .]

The phrase sine quo ni(c)hil est is fairly common, but returns (in Google) mostly (from the Gelasian sacramentary) Corpus orationum no. 4745 (which does not list the Gelasian sacramentary, but only the late 8th-century Gellonesis) =Bruylants no. 911 (which does):

Protector in te sperantium, deus, sine quo nihil est validum, nihil sanctum, multiplica super nos misericordiam tuam, ut, te rectore, te duce, sic transeamus per bona temporalia, ut non amittamus aeterna.