9. Now if you are of opinion that this interpretation of the dancing has not been made unreasonably, do not spare yourself the trouble of reading a little further, in order that we may consider together the case of Isaiah, how, as is well known to you, Isa. xx. 4. he was uncovered, not in mockery but gloriously,in the sight of the assembled people, as one who reported with his own mouth the oracles of God.
10. But perhaps it may be said, Was it not then disgraceful for a man to walk wholly uncovered through the people, seeing that he must be met both by men and women? Must not the sight itself have shocked the eyes of all, especially of women? Do not we ourselves generally shrink from looking upon naked men? And are not men’s persons concealed by garments that they may not offend the eyes of beholders by an unseemly spectacle?
11. In this I also acquiesce; but consider what it was this act represented, and what was set forth under this outward show; it was, that the young men and maidens of the Jews should be led away prisoners, and walk naked, Isa. xx. 3. like as My servant Isaiah, it is said, hath walked naked and barefoot. This might also have been impressed in words, but God chose to render it more expressive by example, that the sight itself might thus strike greater terror, and what they shrunk from in the person of the prophet, that they might dread for themselves. In which of the two then does the baseness most shock us; in the person of the prophet, or in the sins of those unbelievers which deserved to fall into this great misery of captivity?
12. But what if there was nothing worthy of reproach in the prophet’s body? He indeed alluded not to corporeal but to spiritual things; for in his ecstasy of mind he says, not Ps. lxxxv. 8. I will hearken what I shall say, but, what the Lord God shall say in me. Nor does he consider whether he is naked or clothed. Again, Gen. ii. 25. Adam before his sin was naked, but knew not he was naked, because he was endued with virtue; Ib. iii. 7. after he had committed sin he saw that he was naked, and covered himself. Noah was uncovered, but he blushed not, because he was full of gladness and spiritual joy, while he who derided him for being naked, himself remained subject to the disgrace of perpetual baseness. Joseph too, that he might not be basely uncovered, Ib. xxxix. 12. left his garment, and fled away naked; now which of the two was base in this instance, she who kept another’s garment, or he who put off his own?
13. But that it may be more fully evident that the prophetsregard not themselves nor what lies at their feet, but heavenly things, when Stephen was stoned he saw Acts vii. 56. the heavens opened, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God; and therefore he felt not the blows of the stones, he regarded not his bodily wounds, but his eyes were fastened on Christ, he clung closely to him. So also Isaiah Isa. xx. 2. looked not on his own nakedness, but offered himself to be the organ of the Divine voice, that he might utter what God spake within him.
14. But be it supposed that he saw himself, could he not do that which he was commanded? Could he believe that to be base which God enjoined? Sarah, Gen. xviii. 12. because she laughed, was convicted of unbelief; Abraham was praised, Ib. xv. 6. because he doubted not the word of God; yea, he received a very great reward, because he believed that at God’s command, Ib. xx. 3. even parricide might be piously committed.
15. What cause for shame then had the prophet here, when one thing was enacted, but that of which it was a figure was quite different? The Jews, being deserted by God for their wickedness, began to be vanquished by their enemies, and were fain to betake themselves to the Egyptians, to be a protection to them against the Assyrians, whereas had they consulted for good, they ought rather to have returned to the faith. The Lord, being angry, shews that their hope was vain in thinking that the offence against Him could be removed by a greater sin, for that very people in whom the Jews were trusting, were themselves to be vanquished. This was the meaning as regards the actual history.
16. But this history itself is a figure, signifying that he trusts in the Egyptians who is given up to impurity, and enslaved to wantonness. For no man abandons himself to excess but he who departs from the precepts of the true God. But as soon as a man waxes wanton, he begins to fall off from the true faith. And then he commits two grievous crimes, lassitude as regards the flesh, and sacrilege as regards the mind. He then who follows not the Lord his God ingulfs himself in impurity and lust, those pestilential passions of the body. But he who has engulfed and plunged himself in such wallowing places, fallsalso into the snare of unbelief; for Exod. xxxii. 6. the people sat down to eat and to drink, and required that gods should be made for them. Hereby the Lord teaches us that he who gives up his soul to these two kinds of vices, is stript of the garment, not of a woollen vest, but of living virtue; that clothing which is not temporal but eternal.
Farewell, love me, for I also love you.