Sermon 89: 1 Samuel 25:2-13

2. Now there was a certain man in the wilderness of Maon, and his possession was in Carmel, and that man was exceedingly great, and he had three thousand sheep and a thousand goats: and it happened that his flock was being shorn in Carmel. 3. Now the name of that man was Nabal, and the name of his wife Abigail. And that woman was very prudent and beautiful: but her husband was hard and wicked and malicious, and he was of the family of Caleb. 4. And when David had heard in the wilderness that Nabal was shearing his flock, 5. he sent ten young men, and said to them: Go up to Carmel, and you shall come to Nabal, and you shall greet him peaceably in my name. 6. And thus you shall say: Peace be to my brothers and to you, and peace to your house, and peace to all things whatever you have. 7. I have heard that your shepherds were shearing, who were with us in the wilderness; we were never troublesome to them, nor at any time did anything fail them from the whole flock all the time they were with us in Carmel. 8. Ask your young men, and they will tell you. Now therefore let your young men find favor in your eyes, for we have come on a good day; whatever your hand finds give to your servants and to your son David. 9. And when David's young men had come, they spoke to Nabal all these words in the name of David, and were silent. 10. But Nabal answering David's young men said: Who is David? and who is the son of Jesse? today the servants who flee from their masters have multiplied. 11. Shall I therefore take my bread and my water and the meat of the cattle which I have killed for my shearers, and give it to men whom I do not know from where they are? 12. So David's young men went back on their way, and turning back came and told him all the words which Nabal had spoken. 13. Then said David to his young men: Let each one gird himself with his sword. And each girded himself with his sword, and David also girded himself with his sword, and there followed David about four hundred men, while two hundred remained behind with the baggage.

Here first of all it must be considered in what state David's affairs were when Saul was persecuting him -- a wretched state indeed, in which he was lacking food and drink and other necessary things, and was suffering many inconveniences, since besides the fear of death he was also compelled to beg his food. This was a grievous and very hard condition for him, and one that could in some way cast David down from the hope of obtaining the royal dignity promised him by God. But because that Davidic kingdom was a living image of the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ, let us learn, when God exercises us by various means, to bear all chances patiently, and not to bear it grievously or insolently if we are pressed by hunger, thirst, heat, cold, and are in some way deprived of things necessary for life, and let us know that God is testing our patience and faith -- of which thing the example is conspicuous in David. Moreover, someone may object that the things recited in this place do not agree with what is reported in Psalm 37; for David there professes that he had been young and had come to old age, and had not seen the just man forsaken nor his seed begging bread. But David was of the number of the just, and of those who fear God, and yet we see him reduced to such great want that he had to send servants to Nabal to beg for sustenance. But the solution is easy, since he says in that place that he had not seen the just man forsaken, nor his seed begging bread. For although God never permits his servants to be pressed by many inconveniences and to be in need of many things necessary for life, yet at length at the opportune time he comes to their aid and helps them. And indeed by those words he does not exempt the faithful from all afflictions. For shortly after he adds that good men will fall into many miseries, but that God will deliver and preserve them. David did not therefore wish to place God's servants and sons in this world as in an earthly paradise, in which they might abound in delights and overflow with pleasures so that nothing would be lacking to them, but to teach that the sons of God, oppressed by many calamities, taking refuge in his goodness, are never to be forsaken, but that God will in fact show that he bears a singular care for them, although he may seem for a time to hide his face. Therefore let the doctrine of the divine Paul be meditated upon, that the faithful are indeed subject to many miseries and oppressions but are never forsaken by God; and he himself sets forth himself as an example of many afflictions, that he may teach in himself what is the condition of the faithful, when he says that he walks through glory and ignominy, through reproaches and praises, and is as one dying, but yet lives, as one who is chastised, and yet not killed, etc. Therefore as often as we fall into the greatest straits and difficulties let us never cast down our spirit, but patiently await God as our deliverer, and just as he himself has promised, if we have been cast down let us wait until he himself raises us up, and if we have come into the greatest want, let us not fear that we shall ever be forsaken by him, provided we place all our trust in his providence and goodness. For God is rich enough and generous toward us to draw us out of any difficulties whatever, and to help us in all necessary matters. By this reasoning therefore David could fall into the greatest difficulties, whom God nevertheless did not therefore consign to oblivion, much less did he blot him out from the number of his own, nor did he wish the promise made to him about obtaining the kingdom to be made void; for God at the opportune time brought him aid, although he did not at the very first opportunity deliver him from all difficulties. For when we see that he sent servants to Nabal to ask for something for sustenance, from this it appears that David in those wilderness places often suffered hunger and other inconveniences of this kind, since he was as it were compelled to live with the wild beasts, driven from the company of men, and to protect his life and his men's by begging. When we hear these things, let us learn to endure hunger and thirst, and whatever other inconveniences God sends, and if he has sent greater abundance and plenty of good things, let us use them soberly. For it is a great virtue to abstain from all intemperance, and to distribute the good things which God plentifully bestows; and Paul teaches us this when he admonishes us to make progress in the school of the Lord, that we may not use God's goods intemperately, nor give the reins to our desires and disordered affections, but rather expend God's gifts liberally on the necessities of our neighbors.

The words of our text therefore say that there was a certain man in the wilderness of Maon. That was the name of a wilderness, which was not full of inhabitants and dwellings, and yet not entirely barren, but the Jews call deserts those pasture places in which there were no fields. Therefore by that desert we do not understand some rough and uncultivated place, but a pasture, in which if there were not many towns, yet it was sufficiently full of inhabitants, namely shepherds with their huts, in which they kept their herds and flocks. Although there was however a town in those places by the name of Maon, and also another by the name of Carmel. Whatever it may be, Nabal is said to have lived in Maon and to have had a possession in Carmel, and to have had four thousand cattle, namely three thousand sheep and a thousand goats -- which were truly great riches for a country man, especially if you join to these the fields, villas, pastures, and other possessions. And these riches of Nabal are mentioned not for praise but rather for blame, since it is added that he was a country man, hard,

malicious and wicked, with whom, endowed with barbarous manners, no one could cultivate friendship. The riches therefore of a country and barbarous man are recited to amplify his malice and cruelty against David. For if he had been of slender fortune and abject condition, he could have defended himself before him with some excuse. And to David asking for sustenance he might have responded that he did not have wherewith to supply food to six hundred men: and he might have protected himself by his poverty and slender condition, which could indeed minister provisions for some traveler, but not for an army of six hundred men. But since he abounded in wealth, and was endowed with such great riches that without his own inconvenience he could have been generous toward David, his cruelty appears in this, that he refused to help David with some part of his goods, and for this reason mention is made by name here of his depraved nature, and of the benefits which he had previously received from David and his soldiers: who had not afflicted his shepherds with any trouble as long as they had been with them in the desert, but had rather helped them with their possessions, and protected them, so that it would not have been a free gift if he had relieved David with some part of his goods, but rather a just compensation and remuneration of past benefits. And therefore David through his servants orders him to inquire both from his servants and from the shepherds, and from other inhabitants of that place, whether David's soldiers had afflicted them with any injury, and whether they had not rather been protectors of that man's herds. For which reason he was bound to David by many titles: and accordingly, as I said before, it would have been not a benefit but a just reward: so much the more therefore does his malice and ingratitude appear, the more he abounded in riches: for David was not daily importunately wishing to extort sustenance from him, but the occasion is expressly stated which impelled David to send his servants to him to ask for something, namely that Nabal was shearing his sheep, and was setting up a great feast. Since therefore Nabal's wealth consisted especially in his flocks, and at that time he was shearing his sheep, and as it were with friends called together was refreshing himself, David seizing the opportunity sent some of his soldiers to come to share in this gladness, and to be refreshed by Nabal. Whose liberality and humanity David, having once experienced, would not have wished to interrupt again, lest he should seem to want to abuse it. Likewise let us learn by Nabal's example, to whose condemnation the abundance of his wealth is mentioned, that each one ought according to his ability to relieve the wretched and the needy, and as in a mirror God wishes us to contemplate that according to the measure of each one's ability the neighbor is to be helped, and accordingly although we may use those resources which we have received from God, and each may rightly call his own what he has received either by inheritance from parents or sought by his own industry: yet not for that reason is it to be borne that our wretched and needy brothers be killed before our eyes by hunger and thirst, and that we should retain the goods which we have received from God which ought to be dispensed to the poor, but rather we should so possess the wealth which each one has obtained as to make those sharers in them whom grave necessity presses, which each one is bound to do according to the measure of his ability. Indeed I confess that there is no law laid down for individuals, as Paul says. For the giver must give from the heart and willingly, but yet, although we are compelled by no necessity of law, each one must strive according to his strength to relieve the wretched and needy with his own resources. Therefore if we have obtained from God wealth and riches by which we see our neighbors are in need, let us know that we are being tested by God, and accordingly that if we fail in our duty we shall be condemned by God as sacrilegious. Let the rich therefore look at Nabal's example, and learn what God requires of them. Riches are indeed a testimony of divine goodness and favor, but Nabal's riches are mentioned to his condemnation. On the contrary Abraham is proclaimed by sacred Scripture to have been rich, indeed not to his disgrace, but rather to his highest praise, [whom] God out of paternal goodness increased with many riches. But because Nabal abused the goods received from God, therefore mention is made of his resources, that by his example those may learn who have many possessions, and many annual revenues by which they could do good to many, that if they have been greedy or stingy and barren, they profane the use of the goods which the Lord had dedicated to the use of the poor. Here therefore Solomon's saying is to be diligently observed, commanding individuals to drink water from their own cistern, and streams from the middle of their own well, and yet to scatter their fountains abroad. For when he commands us to drink water from our own fountain, he teaches each one that we ought to be content with what we have received from the Lord, and to desire nothing more, as commonly certain insatiable whirlpools are accustomed to be, who always gape after new wealth, and although most opulent are accustomed to despoil their wretched neighbors, until at last they have entirely exhausted them. On the contrary Solomon teaches that water is to be drunk from the fountain, that therefore one ought to be content with present things, and that the rich can indeed enjoy the goods received from God and retain and possess the same goods with a good conscience, provided they rise up to their author and fountain, and use them soberly: but besides this Solomon commands the fountains to be scattered abroad, and the rivulets of waters in the wells [streets], so that he may teach that with the remaining resources our neighbors are to be helped who are pressed by some necessity.

Next follow the words of David sending his men to Nabal, and instructing them with what words they should address the man, which words are recited at length, that we may more and more contemplate and be instructed how great was Nabal's wickedness, more like a beast than a man: for David orders the young men whom he was sending to him to address him with this formula. Your servant greets you with all his men, [and] prays for good things for you,

your family, your flock, and all things which you possess. There is no doubt but that by these words he tries to win Nabal's good will: for these words bear before them the formula of prayer, as if he were a suppliant asking for alms, nor can anyone ask for anything more modestly than when he prays well. As if he were saying: May the Lord bless all those things which you possess; therefore this is expressed, that we may know there was nothing in that embassy which would irritate Nabal, that David used neither threats nor reproaches, and although he made mention of his servants who had been at Carmel, this was not done in order to exasperate him, but rather that he might display his faithfulness and friendship to Nabal: this narrative is simple. First however let us observe by these things that Nabal not only displayed the vice of his ungrateful spirit against David, but also revealed his own impiety, since he so framed his petition that he requested some help from Nabal in the name of the Lord himself. For the poor, as often as they are pressed by want and cannot return thanks, pray to God that what they themselves cannot, God may return to those who have had pity on them. And indeed the mention of the divine name causes those who are sordid by nature and given to greed to be in some way bent. By which mention since Nabal was not affected, from this it appears that he was not only ungrateful and unmindful of the benefit received from David, but so impious that not even a spark of piety existed in him. It becomes us therefore to repay a benefit received in time and place, as God will give occasion. For if we ought to do good to enemies, what sort of men ought we to be toward those who have studied to win our friendship by benefits? Therefore ingratitude is so detestable a crime that although no action is given against it, yet they can defend themselves by no excuse who have failed in duty, and have not studied to repay benefits received. Indeed if anyone be accused of an ungrateful spirit, he will be held by all as cruel and inhuman, therefore so much the more diligently here is to be observed the sentence which David passed against Nabal because he had shown himself so ungrateful toward him, and had sent his servants away empty. Furthermore from this it is to be learned that we, although we owe nothing to those who ask anything from us, ought yet for reverence of the divine name to bestow something on them, and so to have mercy on the wretched and needy that we always look to God, from whose right just so much is detracted as is denied to the poor, unless according to the measure of our ability we are ready to bring help to the needy.

Next follow these words of Nabal: Who is David, and who is the son of Jesse? Today the servants who flee from their masters have multiplied: shall I therefore take my bread, and my water and the meat of the cattle which I killed for my shearers, and give it to men whom I do not know from where they are? Let David therefore be off, and seek his food elsewhere. Notice that Nabal not only refuses David sustenance, but also overwhelms him with calumnies and reproaches: as if Nabal were saying, first David is unknown, and a vagabond, then a robber, who receives fleeing servants from their masters and leads them with him -- than which calumny none could be graver. Indeed the mere refusal of a benefit was grievous, and could rightly be condemned simply since it was joined with ingratitude toward those to whom he was bound by many benefits, but when to that are added contumelious and reproachful voices, far more grievous was the sin committed by him, and a greater evil drawn upon himself. He denies that he knows the son of Jesse, although it was sufficiently widespread among all that Saul was persecuting him for no other cause than that he was to succeed Saul in the royal dignity, and we have seen Saul himself openly profess that he knew David would reign because God had pronounced it through Samuel. But if Saul, the lord and king of David, was not ashamed to confess this, how much more ought his subjects to acknowledge the same. Therefore Nabal could not pretend any other legitimate excuse. For although he was rustic and a country man, and shunning the company of men, yet he could not be ignorant of what was most widespread in the whole region: namely that the kingdom had been promised to David by God through Saul's ministry. For why would Nabal be ignorant of this rather than his wife Abigail, who in fact testified that she acknowledged David and held him as the anointed of the Lord and her king, although he had not yet been put in possession of the royal dignity. Hence therefore it appears that Nabal as it were insulted God himself, and willingly trampled on his promises. And by this his impiety appeared more and more. For previously he had indeed seemed a despiser of God and profane, refusing David the liberality which he was demanding from him. But now much more he reveals himself when he openly slanders him whom God had designated as king. So he seemed to wish to extinguish God's promise, and to make void what God had ratified by the sacrament of that anointing. From this we learn to follow with due honor whatever is from God: and to make much, as is fitting, of his gifts which shine in men. For if God has made anyone distinguished by his gifts, and willed it to be in some man, and someone says: Who is this fellow really? truly he will seem to want to turn light into darkness and to extinguish and abolish God's gifts which he places before our eyes. Let us know therefore that Nabal's example is set before us for our instruction, that whomever God has called to any rank of dignity, we may treat with due honors, lest we seem to want to resist God himself, and to disturb the order established by him. Therefore to kings, princes, and all magistrates whom God has willed to sit at the helm of affairs, and to obtain the highest rank of dignity, let us learn to display fitting honor.

Thus let children acknowledge themselves subjected by the Lord to their parents, that they may willingly render due obedience to them. Let servants also display the same reverence to their masters. Finally let us honor all the orders through which the Lord has appointed this world to be ruled and governed, and let us know the various and different vocations instituted by God and willingly subject ourselves to them. For if by Nabal's example we wish to rise up against dignities and to bear ourselves wantonly, let us know that God in turn will bring it about that we may learn in fact who we are; for whoever despises the dignities instituted by God himself certainly rises up against him, and casts off his yoke. For whoever have been distinguished with God's gifts and graces ought to be like a mirror in which we may contemplate the divine majesty and goodness, because God wills to be known in their person. Whoever therefore shall have despised and rejected them, let him be the enemy of God, and be held as contumacious: and let him not be reckoned in the number of God's creatures. But how grave was that contumely of Nabal, and how disgraceful, when he accuses David as if he were carrying off others' servants, and snatching them from their masters as some thief or robber. And yet we saw above that this band of needy and afflicted men had come to David of their own accord, and that he was more burdened than relieved by them, since he did not have the power of making a selection of soldiers, in order to procure authority for himself among them, nor did he wish to lead bands of soldiers to seize the royal dignity by force, and to disturb the political order, or to overthrow houses, or by fraud to invade others' goods and resources. Indeed his deeds testify quite the contrary, so that Nabal's accusation is mere calumny. Thus wicked men are accustomed to exercise themselves in producing calumnies against the sons of God, and to blurt out whatever comes into their mouths even without cause: and to vomit forth against God's sons whatever horrible and atrocious thing they have devised: following Nabal's example. Truly Nabal ought to have been ashamed if he had answered this maliciously to David's servants, and had been said to have fabricated these charges, but he wishes to rest on just reasons, and to be held as a lover of equity in that men of this kind followed David, and so he obliquely accuses David, and overwhelms him with calumnies. How many today reflect Nabal's character and manners, who when asked to confer their work and zeal on some necessary task, recoil from duty, and besides assail with curses, and load with calumnies those by whom they are interrupted, and admonished by honest reasons of their duty? You, they say, are too troublesome and importunate, you afflict us with injury, you snatch from me what is mine and what I need: but besides they add threats: and they breathe fire from their mouth and seem to be appeasable by no reasons: and although they are sufficiently convicted by their own testimony: yet they cannot yield, but wish to obtain their cause by force: and like dogs they thirst for the blood of wretched men. And in this number must be reckoned those who have a great number of debtors. For when the wretched do not have from where to pay the debt and beg that account be taken of their condition -- being destitute of all things and burdened with many children -- and say that they indeed wish and that it is just that debts be paid, but they do not have wherewith to satisfy, and therefore beg that they be pitied: what then do these robbers usually do, except like wild beasts and rabid dogs to leap upon the substance and bodies of these wretches, and to make their triumphs out of their blood? And yet for the most part these are addressed by great and notable titles, they are lords and held in honor -- but for how long? Do they hope to escape the divine vengeance? Indeed they will not be judged by the opinions of men, but they are reserved to be set one day before the tribunal of God, and to be struck by his thunderbolt, that thus they may render an account of what they have unjustly seized, and pay the penalty. Therefore by the example of Nabal, when asked to bestow something on someone, let us learn not to burden the petitioner with reproach and insult; so that, if we remain in the resolve not to help the needy, we may at least abstain from all slander and not betray our inhumanity. For to burden with reproaches those who address us in friendship and beg some help is the highest disgrace.

But what kind of man, I ask, was Nabal assailing with slanders? A man certainly whom God had chosen, and whom he had testified to be after his own heart. From which let us learn, when we are afflicted by unjust slanders, nevertheless to bear them patiently, and not on that account to recoil from our duty -- but rather, employing the doctrine of Paul, by doing good to all, to expect evil for good, and to bring forth silence; and even if there is no end of slanders, with head bowed in good conscience and innocence, to defend and console ourselves before God. Moreover, something is still to be observed in this place, namely that in new and unusual matters there are always some occasions of speaking evil and slandering offered. So today the enemies of truth, although they cannot tear at the word of God, nevertheless try to carp at it obliquely, and try to derive into it all the corruptions which obtain in the world, that, if it could be done, they might detract from the authority of sacred Scripture. For they say: Since this doctrine began to be preached, nothing but confusion obtains everywhere, with some rising up against others; everywhere there are tumults, everywhere uproars, instead of the peace and tranquillity which existed everywhere among the nations before this doctrine emerged. And thus the despisers of God and the enemies of his word try with all their might everywhere to stir up seditions and tumults, by which, if God did not prevent, they would overthrow the true doctrine and utterly destroy it. So we have seen that Nabal first despised David and his kingdom (which was a figure of our Lord Jesus Christ), then loaded him with this slander -- namely, that he was abducting other men's servants. But, I ask, on what foundation? For many wretched and needy men, oppressed by debt, had fled to David, not summoned and not called by him, but sent to him by divine providence, that in his flight and in his hard temptations he might have some consolation. What occasion then did Nabal have for slandering them? For although about six hundred men in the wilderness were following David, nevertheless they are not said to have been robbers or brigands, but men unjustly oppressed by debt; and if David had been eager to call other men's servants to himself, could he not, by that authority and favor which he had with many, have collected a just army, and conscripted an army of twenty or thirty thousand men? But accompanied by a few men he preferred to lurk in caves and caverns, and rather to preserve his life than to harm anyone -- to such a degree indeed that nothing could be objected against him or his companions by anyone as having been stolen by them, nor anyone afflicted by them with any injury. Therefore when we see the godly burdened with reproaches and slanders of this sort by wicked and iniquitous men, and the sound doctrine which they profess subverted, let us call to memory the example of David, and let us learn to bear all injuries patiently, and never on that account to recoil from our duty, even though the wicked cast upon us and upon the doctrine which we profess the cause of all the confusions and corruptions which reign in the world.

There follows next in the text, that the messengers sent by David returned and reported to him all the words which Nabal had said. Then David ordered his companions that each should gird himself with his sword, that they might go forth against Nabal. Truly David seems in this part to have forgotten himself, whose admirable virtue we heard above, when he refused to lay his hand upon Saul — though he seemed to be delivered into his hand by the Lord, and could easily have killed him. But here he becomes very unlike himself. For why does he run to arms? Why, kindled with such fury, does he plot to overturn Nabal's house, as David himself says below, that he will leave nothing of all that belonged to Nabal, even him that pisses against the wall? Surely these two things are very much at odds with each other, and David won great praise in sparing Saul, but seems greatly to be blamed in burning out against Nabal, and in giving place to those vehement passions. But it must be observed that the person of Saul was sacred and inviolable to David, because, since he had been the Lord's anointed, it was not lawful for David to lay hands on him — though he could indeed defend himself against his soldiers with arms. For although he had been designated king by the anointing conferred on him through Samuel, nevertheless he had not yet been put in possession of the kingdom, and accordingly it was not lawful for him to undertake anything to obtain the crown — which David himself well knew. And therefore although anointed of the Lord, and knowing that the succession of the kingdom would pass to his posterity and would remain forever, David nevertheless reserved his dignity to Saul, in whom he knew the grace of God was not yet entirely extinguished, and accordingly he was not unaware that he must show him honor and be subject to him until his death. That humanity of David toward his enemy therefore rested on a special reason and singular privilege, since David, raised by God to royal dignity, had to honor him; but the case of Nabal was very different. For although David had not yet been put in possession of the kingdom, he had nevertheless been designated king, to such a degree indeed that those who did not acknowledge this election of the Lord and did not subject themselves to him deserved to be punished as contumacious against God himself. Moses, when he killed that Egyptian, had not yet been declared head and leader of the people, and the one who would liberate the Israelite people from Egyptian captivity, but, as Saint Stephen says, he well knew his calling. So David knew that power had been given him by God to restrain impiety and ingratitude, and to punish the blasphemous voices which Nabal had vomited against the king designated by God, and besides the slanders which he had unjustly and falsely thrown upon David as a robber: this, I say, David knew. But not on this account does he seem to be excused from a vicious passion, because that would be superfluous and useless — though nevertheless he is not to be condemned as if some private person wished to avenge an injury inflicted: for the condition of David must be diligently distinguished from the calling of private persons. For God binds, as with chains, the hands of private persons, to whom he does not give the power of avenging crimes. But the condition of David was different; if he had certainly been a private person, he would not have dared to attempt anything against Nabal, nor so to forget his duty, even though he might seem to have a just cause. God therefore armed him with authority and a special privilege against Nabal, when he willed that he should be surrounded by soldiers, lest he should come into the hands of his enemies and become their prey. David therefore with his soldiers defended himself with arms, not to harm Saul or to cast him down from his dignity, but to defend his own life and that of his men. God therefore gave to David that retinue, just as if some prince should grant garrison soldiers to someone for his defense — not that they should inflict damage on him and do something tumultuously, but that, if an attack be made on them and some should disturb their quiet, they may defend themselves with arms and rout their enemies. So God gave David, as it were, those garrison soldiers by which he might defend himself. Therefore David's example is not rashly to be imitated by us in collecting soldiers and in shedding human blood, unless a special command of God has come, just as we see David resolved to make an example of severity in Nabal — which was lawful for him in punishing a contumacious man, although nevertheless he allowed himself to be carried away by a more vehement

surge of anger, which is to be condemned. For if a judge sitting on his tribunal pronounces sentence against a malefactor, and burns out against him with some passion as against an enemy, it is certain that he violates and corrupts the integrity of justice. Not otherwise — and indeed with stronger reason — is David to be condemned when he blazed against Nabal to avenge injuries, even though he had received authority from God to avenge himself on him. I confess indeed that David was led by a certain zeal for the glory of God when he saw that wretched Nabal not only hurling those blasphemous voices and insults against him when he said: Who is the son of Jesse, and what have I to do with him? but also against God himself, by whom David had been chosen and called. And there is no doubt that David also employed that very doctrine which he teaches in another place, namely that the reproaches of enemies fall back on their own head. Finally there is no doubt that David was led by zeal for the glory of God; but because there was admixed a certain passion and disturbance of mind, in this we say David is rightly to be condemned. And therefore his example is not rashly to be followed in this place, but rather it is to be acknowledged that to those angelic virtues which he had received from God were admixed the relics of human infirmity. God therefore willed that it should appear in some of David's deeds that David was a man — so that we may learn to acknowledge ourselves and to confess what sort we are, that, although we strive for perfection with all our strength, we may yet know that many vices remain in us within, and accordingly may diligently flee to our Lord Jesus Christ, that we may be ruled by his Spirit and overcome all violent affections.

Now then, come, etc.

## HOMILIA 90.

2. There was a man in Maon whose property was in Carmel. The man was very wealthy and had three thousand sheep and a thousand goats. He was shearing his flock in Carmel. 3. The man's name was Nabal, and his wife's name was Abigail. She was a discerning and beautiful woman, but her husband was harsh, wicked, and mean. He was a descendant of Caleb. 4. David heard in the wilderness that Nabal was shearing his sheep. 5. So he sent ten young men and said to them: Go up to Carmel, go to Nabal, and greet him in my name. 6. Say this to him: Peace be to you, and peace to your house, and peace to everything you have. 7. I have heard that you have shearers. Now your shepherds have been with us, and we did not harm them, and nothing was missing from their flock all the time they were in Carmel. 8. Ask your young men and they will tell you. So let my young men find favor in your eyes, for we have come on a feast day. Please give whatever you can to your servants and to your son David. 9. When David's young men arrived, they said all this to Nabal in David's name, and they waited. 10. Nabal answered David's young men: Who is David? Who is the son of Jesse? There are many servants these days who are breaking away from their masters. 11. Why should I take my bread and my water and the meat I have slaughtered for my shearers and give it to men who come from I do not know where? 12. So David's young men turned back and came and told him everything Nabal had said. 13. David said to his men: Every man strap on his sword. So every man strapped on his sword, and David also strapped on his sword. About four hundred men went up with David, and two hundred remained with the supplies.

The first thing to consider here is the state of David's affairs while Saul was persecuting him — a wretched state in which he lacked food, drink, and other necessities, and suffered many hardships. Beyond the constant fear of death, he was also forced to beg for food. This was a heavy and difficult condition, one that could in some way have shaken David's confidence in the promise of royal dignity that God had made to him. But because that Davidic kingdom was a living image of the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ, let us learn, when God exercises us in various ways, to bear all circumstances patiently — not to grow bitter or rebellious when we are pressed by hunger, thirst, heat, and cold, or deprived of things necessary for life. Let us recognize that God is testing our patience and faith, as David's example plainly shows. Someone might object that what is described here seems to contradict what David says in Psalm 37 — where he declares that he had been young and grown old and had never seen the righteous forsaken, nor their children begging for bread. But David was among the righteous, among those who fear God — and yet we see him reduced to such poverty that he had to send servants to Nabal to beg for food. But the answer is straightforward: when David says he had not seen the righteous forsaken nor their children begging bread, he is not saying God's servants are never pressed by hardship or in need. He adds shortly after that the righteous will fall into many troubles — but that God will deliver and preserve them. David's point was not to place God's children in some earthly paradise overflowing with pleasure where nothing is ever lacking. His point was to teach that God's children, though pressed by many calamities and taking refuge in His goodness, will never ultimately be abandoned — God will in practice show that He cares for them in a remarkable way, even if for a time He seems to hide His face. So let us meditate on Paul's teaching: the faithful are subject to many miseries and pressures, yet never forsaken by God. Paul offers himself as the example — he describes walking through honor and dishonesty, through praise and slander, as dying and yet alive, as punished and yet not killed. So whenever we fall into the greatest difficulty and trouble, let us never cast down our spirit. Let us wait patiently for God as our deliverer. As He Himself has promised: if we have been cast down, wait for Him to raise us up; if we have come into extreme need, do not fear that we will ever be abandoned by Him — as long as we place all our trust in His providence and goodness. For God is rich enough and generous enough to draw us out of any difficulty and help us in all our needs. By this reasoning, David could fall into the greatest difficulties — and yet God did not forget him, much less blot him out from the number of His own, nor did God allow the promise of the kingdom to fail. God brought help at the right time, even though He did not immediately deliver David from all his troubles. That David sent servants to Nabal to ask for provisions shows that in those wilderness places David frequently suffered hunger and other such hardships — as if compelled to live like a wild animal, driven from human society, protecting his life and the lives of his men by begging. When we hear this, let us learn to endure hunger and thirst and whatever other hardships God sends — and if He grants greater abundance and plenty, let us use it with restraint. It is a great virtue to abstain from all excess and to distribute generously what God has richly given. Paul teaches this when he urges us to make progress in the Lord's school — not using God's gifts without moderation, not giving free rein to our desires and disordered appetites, but rather spending God's gifts generously on the needs of our neighbors.

The text says there was a man in the wilderness of Maon. Maon was the name of a wilderness area — not densely populated or filled with dwellings, yet not completely barren either. In Scripture, 'deserts' often refers to pasture lands that had no cultivated fields. So by that wilderness we should not picture a harsh and desolate wasteland, but a grazing area — one without many towns, yet populated enough with shepherds and their huts, where they kept their herds and flocks. There was, however, a town in that region by the name of Maon, and another by the name of Carmel. Whatever the exact arrangement, Nabal is said to have lived in Maon and to have had property in Carmel, with four thousand animals — three thousand sheep and a thousand goats. These were truly great riches for a country man, especially when combined with his fields, estates, pastures, and other holdings. But these riches of Nabal are mentioned not in praise but in blame, since the text adds that he was a rough,

Nabal was wicked and malicious, with such rough manners that no one could befriend him. His wealth is mentioned in order to magnify his cruelty and malice toward David. If Nabal had been poor and of low means, he might have had some excuse. He could have told David he had no way to supply food to six hundred men, and sheltered behind his poverty — able perhaps to help a passing traveler, but not an army of six hundred. But since he was overflowing with wealth and so abundantly rich that generosity toward David would have cost him nothing, his cruelty stands fully exposed: he refused to help David with even a portion of his goods. This is why his corrupt character is expressly named here, and why the benefits he had previously received from David and his soldiers are recounted: David's men had not troubled Nabal's shepherds in any way during all their time together in the wilderness — on the contrary, they had helped and protected them. So even if Nabal had given David something, it would not have been a gift but simply fair repayment for services already rendered. That is why David instructed his servants to tell Nabal to ask his own servants and shepherds whether David's men had done them any harm — or whether they had not in fact been the protectors of Nabal's flocks. Nabal was bound to David on many counts. As I said before, any provision he made would have been not a gift but a just compensation — which makes his malice and ingratitude all the more glaring given how rich he was. And David was not coming to him daily demanding provisions — the occasion is clearly stated: Nabal was shearing his sheep and hosting a great feast. Since Nabal's wealth came mainly from his flocks, and he was now shearing them and celebrating with gathered friends, David saw an opportune moment and sent some of his men to share in the festivities and receive some refreshment from Nabal. David, having once experienced Nabal's generosity, would not have wanted to impose on it repeatedly — yet in this moment of abundance and celebration, it was a reasonable and gracious request. Let us learn from Nabal's example — whose great wealth is mentioned to his condemnation — that each person should relieve the wretched and needy according to their ability. God sets this before us as in a mirror: the neighbor is to be helped according to the measure of each one's ability. Although we may properly use the resources God has given us, and each person may rightly call their own what they have received by inheritance or earned by honest labor — we must not allow our wretched and needy brothers to die of hunger and thirst before our eyes while we hold on to goods that ought to be shared with the poor. Rather, we should hold our wealth in such a way that those pressed by serious necessity are made sharers in it — each one according to their ability. I acknowledge there is no specific quota laid down for each individual, as Paul says. The giver must give from the heart and willingly. But even though no legal compulsion forces us, each person must strive according to their strength to relieve the wretched and needy with their own resources. So if God has granted us wealth and riches and we see our neighbors in need, let us know that God is testing us — and that if we fail in this duty, we will be condemned by God as sacrilegious. Let the rich look at Nabal's example and learn what God requires of them. Riches are indeed a testimony of God's goodness and favor — but Nabal's riches are mentioned to his condemnation. By contrast, Scripture speaks of Abraham's great wealth not as something shameful but as a mark of the highest praise — God out of fatherly goodness enriched him with many possessions. But because Nabal abused the goods God gave him, his wealth is brought up against him — so that those with many possessions and large incomes, who could do much good for many, may learn by his example: if they are greedy, stingy, and tight-fisted, they are profaning the use of goods the Lord dedicated to the needs of the poor. This is why Solomon's saying deserves careful attention — he commands each person to drink water from their own cistern and from the streams of their own well, yet to let those fountains overflow outward. When he says to drink from your own fountain, he is teaching that each person ought to be content with what they have received from God and not constantly hunger for more — unlike those insatiable whirlpools who are always gaping for new wealth and, though already very rich, strip their poor neighbors bare. On the contrary, Solomon teaches that we should drink from our own fountain — be content with present things. The rich can certainly enjoy God's gifts and retain them with a clean conscience, as long as they acknowledge God as their source and use them with restraint. But Solomon also commands the fountains to overflow outward, rivers flowing in the streets — meaning that with whatever remains, our neighbors who are in need must be helped.

The text then records David sending his men to Nabal and instructing them exactly what to say — their words are given at length so we may more fully see and understand the full extent of Nabal's wickedness, more like a beast than a man. David told the young men he was sending to address Nabal with this greeting: Your servant greets you with all his men and wishes you well,

your household, your flock, and all that you possess. There is no doubt that by these words David's men are trying to win Nabal's goodwill. The words carry the form of a prayer — as though David were a suppliant asking for alms. No one could ask more humbly than by praying well for the one being asked. The message was saying, in effect: May the Lord bless all that you have. It is expressly stated this way so that we may see there was nothing in that message to irritate Nabal — David used no threats, no reproaches. Even his mention of his men who had been at Carmel was not meant to put pressure on Nabal, but simply to display David's faithfulness and goodwill toward him. The account is plain and straightforward. Let us first observe this: Nabal not only revealed the vice of his ungrateful spirit toward David, but also exposed his own impiety — since the request was framed in God's name. When the poor are pressed by need and cannot repay kindness themselves, they pray that God would repay on their behalf those who have shown mercy to them. Even the mention of God's name tends to soften those who are naturally stingy and greedy. Since that mention did not move Nabal in the slightest, it is clear he was not only ungrateful and unmindful of the benefits he had received from David — he was so thoroughly godless that not even a spark of piety remained in him. We ought to repay a benefit received when the time and occasion come, as God gives opportunity. If we are obligated to do good even to enemies, what should we be toward those who have gone out of their way to befriend us with acts of kindness? Ingratitude is therefore such a detestable crime that even though no court can prosecute it, those who have failed in this duty and made no effort to repay kindness received have no defense. Indeed, if anyone is accused of an ungrateful spirit, all people rightly hold them as cruel and inhuman — which makes all the more worth noting the judgment David passed on Nabal for showing such ingratitude and sending his servants away empty. Furthermore, we learn from this that even when we owe nothing to those who ask something from us, we ought for the sake of reverence for God's name to give them something. We must show mercy to the wretched and needy always with our eyes on God — knowing that whatever is denied to the poor is, in a sense, taken from what belongs to Him, if we do not help those in need according to the measure of our ability.

Nabal's words follow: 'Who is David? And who is the son of Jesse? Servants who run away from their masters are everywhere today. Shall I take my bread and my water and the meat I slaughtered for my shearers and give it to men I don't even know where they come from?' Notice that Nabal does not merely refuse David's request — he heaps slander and insults on top of it. He implies David is a nobody and a vagrant, then accuses him of being a bandit who harbors runaway servants and leads them about — a slander that could not be more serious. The bare refusal alone was already grievous, and could rightly be condemned simply for the ingratitude shown toward someone to whom Nabal owed so much — but when contemptuous and insulting words are added on top of it, the sin is far graver and the evil he drew down on himself far greater. He claims not to know the son of Jesse — yet it was widely known throughout the whole region that Saul was persecuting David for no other reason than that David was appointed to succeed him in the royal dignity. We even saw Saul himself openly confess that he knew David would reign, because God had spoken it through Samuel. If Saul — David's own lord and king — was not ashamed to admit this, how much more should his subjects acknowledge it. Nabal therefore had no legitimate excuse. Even as a rough country man who avoided other people's company, he could not have been ignorant of what everyone in the whole region knew: that the kingdom had been promised to David through Samuel. Why would Nabal be ignorant of this when even his own wife Abigail clearly knew it — she testified plainly that she acknowledged David as the Lord's anointed and as her king, even though he had not yet taken possession of the royal dignity. So it is clear that Nabal was, in effect, insulting God Himself and deliberately trampling on His promises. And his impiety became more and more apparent. Previously he had seemed a despiser of God — a godless man who refused the generosity David requested. But now he reveals himself still more openly by slandering the man God had designated as king. He was in effect trying to extinguish God's promise and make void what God had sealed by the sacrament of anointing. From this we learn to honor rightly whatever comes from God — to think highly of His gifts as they shine in people. For if God has made someone distinguished by His gifts and placed them in honor, and someone says, 'Who does this person think they are?' — that person is trying to turn light into darkness, to extinguish and abolish the gifts God has placed before our eyes. Let us know that Nabal's example is set before us for instruction: whoever God has called to any position of dignity must be treated with proper respect, so that we do not resist God Himself and disturb the order He has established. Let us therefore learn to display fitting honor to kings, princes, and all magistrates whom God has placed at the helm of government and raised to positions of highest authority.

Let children acknowledge that they are placed under their parents by God, and willingly render them due obedience. Let servants display the same respect toward their masters. Let us honor all the forms of order through which God has appointed this world to be ruled and governed, and let us recognize the various callings God has established — and willingly submit to them. For if we take Nabal's example as license to rise up against authority and conduct ourselves with arrogance, let us know that God will see to it that we discover in practice who we are — for whoever despises the dignities God has established is in fact rising up against God Himself and throwing off His yoke. Those whom God has distinguished with His gifts and graces should be like a mirror in which we see the divine majesty and goodness, because God wills to be known through them. Whoever despises and rejects them has made himself an enemy of God and must be counted among the obstinate — and should not be numbered among God's people. But how serious and shameful was Nabal's contempt — accusing David as if he were a thief or bandit who had stolen other men's servants and dragged them away from their masters. Yet we saw earlier that this group of desperate and afflicted men had come to David on their own initiative — and far from being a resource to him, they were more of a burden, since he had no power to pick and choose his soldiers or to use them to seize the throne by force. He had no intention of disrupting the political order, plundering households, or invading others' property by fraud. His conduct testified to exactly the opposite — so Nabal's accusation is pure slander. This is how wicked people behave toward God's children — manufacturing accusations and blurting out whatever comes into their mouths without cause, vomiting out the most horrible and outrageous things they can invent against God's servants, following Nabal's pattern. Nabal should have been ashamed of himself if he had been exposed as making up these charges — but instead he wants to be seen as the voice of reason and justice, and so he accuses David obliquely and buries him in slander. How many people today mirror Nabal's character — when asked to give their help and effort to some necessary task, they recoil from their duty, then turn on those who approached them with insults and slander, piling on accusations against the very people who came to them honestly and reminded them of their obligation? They say: 'You are too pushy and demanding, you are injuring me, you are trying to take from me what is mine and what I need.' Then they add threats, breathing fire, seemingly beyond all reason, and though thoroughly convicted by their own testimony still refuse to yield — insisting on winning by force, thirsting like dogs for the blood of desperate people. In this group belong especially those who have large numbers of debtors. When a desperate person has no way to pay a debt and begs for consideration of their condition — destitute of everything and burdened with many children, acknowledging it is right to pay but explaining they simply have nothing to pay with and pleading for mercy — what do these robbers usually do but leap on the substance and bodies of these wretches like wild beasts and rabid dogs, making their triumphs from their victims' ruin? And yet most of the time these people carry grand and honorable titles and are held in high esteem — but for how long? Do they think they will escape God's judgment? They will not be judged by human opinion — they are reserved to stand one day before God's tribunal and be struck by His judgment, giving account for what they have seized unjustly and paying the penalty. So let us learn from Nabal's example: when someone asks us for something, do not heap reproach and insult on the petitioner. Even if we have decided not to help the person in need, let us at least abstain from all slander and not expose our inhumanity. For to burden with abuse those who approach us in friendship and ask for help is the height of disgrace.

But who was the man Nabal was assailing with slanders? A man whom God had chosen and declared to be a man after His own heart. From this let us learn, when we are struck by unjust slanders, to bear them patiently without pulling back from our duty. Instead, following Paul's principle, we should do good to all, expect evil in return for good, and answer with silence. Even if the slanders never stop, let us with heads bowed in good conscience and innocence defend and console ourselves before God. There is also something else to observe here: in new and unusual movements, there are always occasions ready-made for slander. Today the enemies of truth, though they cannot attack the Word of God directly, try to undermine it obliquely — attributing to it every corruption and disorder in the world, hoping if possible to strip Scripture of its authority. They say: 'Ever since this doctrine began to be preached, there has been nothing but confusion everywhere — people rising up against one another, tumults, uproar, instead of the peace and quiet that existed among the nations before.' This is how despisers of God and enemies of His Word work — stirring up divisions and conflicts with all their might, which, if God did not prevent it, would overthrow the true doctrine and destroy it utterly. So we see that Nabal first despised David and his kingdom — which was a figure of our Lord Jesus Christ — and then smeared him with this slander: that he was stealing other men's servants. But on what basis? Many desperate and debt-crushed men had come to David — not summoned or called by him, but sent to him by God's providence, so that in his own difficult trials and flight he might have some company and consolation. What actual cause did Nabal have for slandering them? The six hundred men following David in the wilderness are not described as robbers or criminals, but as men unjustly oppressed by debt. And if David had actually been eager to gather other men's servants to himself, could he not — given the influence and favor he had with many people — have assembled a proper army of twenty or thirty thousand men? Instead, accompanied by a small band, he preferred to hide in caves and caverns, preserving his life rather than harming anyone — so much so that no one could accuse him or his companions of stealing anything or harming any person. So when we see the godly burdened with reproaches and slanders from wicked and unjust people — the sound doctrine they profess being attacked from every side — let us remember David's example and learn to bear all injuries patiently, never pulling back from our duty, even when the wicked blame us and the doctrine we hold for all the confusion and corruption in the world.

The text then says that David's messengers returned and reported to him everything Nabal had said. David then ordered his men to each strap on their sword and march against Nabal. At this point David seems to have completely forgotten himself — whose admirable character we heard about above, when he refused to lay a hand on Saul even when Saul seemed to be delivered into his hands by God and could easily have been killed. Here he seems like a completely different person. Why does he reach for arms? Why, blazing with fury, does he plot to wipe out Nabal's entire household — as he says below, that he will not leave alive anything that belongs to Nabal? These two things sit very uneasily together: David won great praise for sparing Saul, yet here he seems greatly blameworthy for his fierce response to Nabal and for giving way to such violent passions. But we must observe that Saul's person was sacred and untouchable to David — because Saul was the Lord's anointed, David could not lawfully lay hands on him, though he could defend himself from Saul's soldiers with arms. Although David had been designated king through Samuel's anointing, he had not yet been placed in possession of the kingdom — and therefore it was not lawful for him to take any action to claim the crown, as David himself well knew. So even though he was the Lord's anointed and knew the succession of the kingdom would pass to his line forever, David still reserved Saul's dignity to Saul, knowing that the grace of God had not yet fully departed from him — and therefore that he must honor Saul and be subject to him until his death. David's humaneness toward his enemy therefore rested on a specific and singular reason — David, raised to royal dignity by God, still owed Saul honor. The case of Nabal was entirely different. Although David had not yet taken possession of the kingdom, he had been designated king to such a degree that those who refused to acknowledge God's choice and did not submit to him deserved to be punished as rebels against God Himself. When Moses killed the Egyptian, he had not yet been publicly declared the head and leader of the people or the one who would deliver Israel from Egypt — yet, as Stephen says, Moses knew his calling. In the same way David knew that God had given him authority to restrain impiety and ingratitude, and to punish the blasphemous words Nabal had poured out against the king whom God had designated — together with the slanders Nabal had falsely and unjustly thrown at David as though he were a robber. This David knew. But he is not fully excused from a corrupt passion on this account — that would be unnecessary and unconvincing. Yet neither should he be condemned as though he were a private individual taking personal revenge, since David's condition must be carefully distinguished from the calling of private persons. God binds the hands of private persons — as if with chains — to whom He does not give the authority to avenge crimes. David's situation was different. Had he truly been a private citizen, he would never have dared to move against Nabal or so forget himself, even if he had a just cause. God had given David authority and a special privilege over Nabal — He had surrounded David with soldiers so that he would not fall into his enemies' hands and become their prey. David and his soldiers defended themselves with arms — not to harm Saul or topple him from his throne, but to protect their own lives. God gave David that military retinue just as a prince might assign garrison soldiers to someone's protection — not to go out and cause harm, but so that if attacked, they could defend themselves with arms and drive back the enemy. So God gave David, as it were, those garrison soldiers for his defense. Therefore David's example in gathering soldiers and shedding human blood is not rashly to be imitated, unless a specific command from God has come. We see that David intended to make an example of severity in Nabal's case — which was within his lawful authority to do as he punished a man who had openly defied God — but he still allowed himself to be swept away by a surge of excessive

anger, which deserves to be condemned. Just as a judge who pronounces sentence on a wrongdoer but lets his personal passion against the man corrupt and taint the justice of his ruling has violated his office — so too, and even more clearly, David is to be condemned for blazing against Nabal to satisfy his injured feelings, even though he had authority from God to act against him. I acknowledge that David was also moved by a genuine zeal for God's glory — he saw that wretched Nabal was hurling blasphemous insults not only at him ('Who is the son of Jesse and what do I owe him?') but against God Himself, by whom David had been chosen and called. And there is no doubt David was also applying the doctrine he expresses elsewhere — that the reproaches enemies heap on God's servants fall back on their own heads. And there is no doubt that David was driven by zeal for God's glory. But because a passionate disturbance of mind was mixed into it, we must rightly condemn him for that. Therefore his example here is not one to be rashly followed — rather, it is to be acknowledged that mixed in with the remarkable virtues God had given him were the remaining traces of human weakness. God willed it that some of David's actions reveal he was a human being — so that we may learn to acknowledge ourselves and confess what we are. Even as we strive for perfection with all our strength, we must recognize that many vices still remain within us — and must therefore diligently flee to our Lord Jesus Christ, to be governed by His Spirit and to overcome all violent passions.

Now then, come, etc.

## HOMILIA 90.