In this conference on the woman at the well, Bishop Williamson segues into some interesting conversation on women.
One interesting thought is the normality of women being in public.
The highlights:
"The present state of affairs whereby any woman appears anywhere in public, in any state of dress or undress, to converse with practically any man, that's abnormal. The present state of affairs, which has become completely normal, is over the centuries completely abnormal.
Even back in the 50s, a woman would not appear in public without a hat and gloves. I mean, you know, any self-respecting woman would not. Even just as close as the 50s, let alone in trousers or anything like that. I mean, you know, this freedom, quote unquote, of converse between the sexes is not normal. For the very simple reason that easily most people down in the history of the human race have recognized that there's a problem, which Catholics know is original sin.
And therefore, especially young women have been, you know, have been put under wraps of one kind or another. But today, I think you can say that a lot of women dress and behave like yesterday, only prostitutes would have dressed and behaved. I'm not saying that today's women are prostitutes, but objectively, their manner of behavior and state of dress is such as you would only have seen in women of ill repute a ways back."
But their happiness is to be found in motherhood:
"But other than that, the one thing they need to know is how to be a good wife and how to be a good mother. How to make a home in which a husband will be happy. How to make a man happy. Because that will be their happiness.
Selflessness is their happiness. To make their man happy and their children and bring up their children. That's what God made them for. That's what they're good at. That's what they want. That's what will fulfill them.
Whereas getting it out... Getting into the marketplace and duking it out with the men is not fulfilling, as they're now finding. All the men tell them that it's fulfilling. All the women... All the women's livers tell them that it's fulfilling. But deep down, they know that it isn't. That's not what they're made for."
THE FULL TEXT
So we were dealing with Calvin's heresy, God must be worshipped in spirit and in truth, therefore we don't need any external flummery. You've got all kinds of quotes all through the New Testament to indicate that God indeed does want the Catholic religion to be material and physical, but not only material and physical. Obviously the interior spirit is what matters, but nevertheless that interior spirit will express itself externally. Therefore, all the vestments and the incense are okay, but there's got to be the heart that goes with it. So 25, the Samaritan is bewildered.
The Samaritan woman is bewildered. She says, I know that the Messiah is coming, who is called Christ, therefore when he is coming, he will tell us all things.
She relies on Messiahs. There's no, actually there's no article in the Greek.
I know that the Messiah is coming. When he's coming, he will tell us all things. She must have heard by rumour from the Jews of that, of his imminent coming. You may remember when the John the Baptist is in the desert, they said, are you, who art thou? He confessed and I said, I'm not the Christ. Because chapter 1, verse 20, John the Baptist guessed that the question uppermost in the minds of those coming to ask him who he is, is, are you the Christ? Because he might be. He's a figure of some stature out in the wilderness. He's obviously got a lot of holiness. Is he the Christ? So only then they ask him, what then? Are thou Elias? No. Are thou the prophet? No. But the first, he read the question in their minds, are you the Christ? Why would the Jews at this time have been expecting the Christ?
O'Connor? Yeah, that's it. So they were expecting him. And so the Samaritan woman will have picked up some of this. So she said, I know the Messiah is coming, who's called the Christ. Therefore, when he has come, he will tell us all things.
So she will have heard by rumour from the Jews that he is imminent.
26, Jesus said to her, I am he who I'm speaking with thee. And so now he's, so to speak, it's a very, she has hit the jackpot. That's really it.
Our Lord has been leading the conversation higher and higher and higher. And now he tells her something that he hasn't told a lot of people, that he is the Messiah. This poor Samaritan woman with seven husbands. It's her she tells he's the Messiah.
I am he who I'm speaking with thee.
Because she did make, in verse 25, some profession of faith.
She does make some profession of faith. Firstly, I know he's coming.
And secondly, he will tell us all things. So she has some belief in the Messiah. She has some belief.
She could have said when she heard it from the Jews, oh, nonsense, you're all a pack of rats, you lot. Forget it.
I just don't believe in your Messiah. You've completely discredited him. You're such so-and-sos that if you think of, if any Messiah of yours wouldn't be worth the paper he was written on.
But that's not her attitude. Somehow, she has an inkling that the Messiah is coming and that he will explain all things. So there's an impression of faith there. So our Lord says, our Lord rewards her faith. I am he who I'm speaking with thee.
Immediately, his disciples came. At that moment, and they wondered that he talked with a woman. Yet no man said, what seekest thou or why talkest thou with her? They wondered. Jєωιѕн doctors did not normally talk in public with a woman.
Jєωιѕн doctors did not normally talk in public with a woman.
The present state of affairs whereby any woman appears anywhere in public, in any state of dress or undress, to converse with practically any man of 15, 55, 95, that's abnormal. The present state of affairs, which has become completely normal, is over the centuries completely abnormal.
Even back in the 50s, a woman would not appear in public without a hat and gloves. I mean, you know, any self-respecting woman would not. Even just as close as the 50s, let alone in trousers or anything like that. I mean, you know, this freedom, quote unquote, of converse between the sexes is not normal. For the very simple reason that easily most people down in the history of the human race have recognized that there's a problem, which Catholics know is original sin.
And therefore, especially young women have been, you know, have been put under wraps of one kind or another. But today, I think you can say that a lot of women dress and behave like yesterday, only prostitutes would have dressed and behaved. I'm not saying that today's women are prostitutes, but objectively, their manner of behavior and state of dress is such as you would only have seen in women of ill repute a ways back.
The people today do it with goodwill. The women today do it with goodwill, quote unquote.
Because everybody expects them to do it and it's totally normal. And they would be laughed at if they did the opposite.
But nevertheless, objectively, that's the truth of the matter. For to for? I think some of today's women actually... Well, yeah. Well, you know, God judges.
Most people will tell... Anyone will tell you that most women are well aware of the effect that their dress has on men. I think that's true.
Most women are well aware. But today, they think it's absolutely fine to excite all the men, to arouse concupiscence. There's nothing wrong with it. Concupiscence is what life is about. The men enjoy having their concupiscences aroused. What else is life for? There's no afterlife.
You die and that's it. So you might as well enjoy every day as much as you can. What's the principal enjoyment? The principal enjoyment is S-E-X.
So if I go to the office and make all the men interested, that's grand. It's if I didn't do it that they would have reason to rebuke me.
So they take it as normal in such a misguided mentality. And it goes without saying, you know, you may see that it's wrong, but be careful how you crash into it. You know, don't go out of the seminary and suddenly crash into some poor poor, because they're just not going to understand.
And you may be right that they're hypocrites. You may be right that they're dressed worse than even women of ill repute a little ways ago. But the mentalities are so far gone that you can't just crash into it if you want to straighten it out.
You've got to be careful. It's wrong. It's ways wrong. And that's, I mean, obviously adultery and fornication, the most normal thing today. They become banal. They become commonplace. And it's because they become commonplace that abortions become commonplace. Because if you arouse the interest of the men, and then what follows naturally follows, or what follows in the course of things follows, you've got an extra little baby that you don't want. He's a nuisance. He's getting in the way. There's no afterlife. There's no Ten Commandments. There's no God. You just eliminate this little piece of tissue.
It stands to reason.
But it's so universal. It's so accepted. It's, you can't assume that people know the evil that they're doing.
Deep down, but, and even if they do, deep down know the evil that they're doing, still, it's easily counterproductive if you crash into it.
Because if you crash into it, they can whip up public opinion all around. Hey, he's against abortion. This is not case.
You married? No. You've got a girlfriend? No. You meant to have a girlfriend? Oh, no, no, no. I'm a seminarian. Well, then, what do you know about it all? How about it, gals? Hoo, hoo, hoo, hoo. And they all start laughing.
Public opinion is all around you, all against you.
See, you can't lean on public opinion. In the old days, if a girl in the village was misbehaving, you could back her up against the moral wall of everybody else's judgment and opinion. Or if a girl, if a young wife wanted a divorce, or if an older wife wanted a divorce, you could back her up against the wall of what everybody else thinks. But today, there's no such wall. On the contrary, if she wants to misbehave, she can back you up against the wall of what everybody else thinks. It's incredible. It's incredible. Absolutely incredible. Green? It's against femininity. It's generally, St. Thomas, apparently there's some I haven't found it, but St. Thomas says, you know, obviously there are occasions. For instance, a girl's honor is more important than her femininity. That is to say, if she's going to walk through a quarter of town, where if she's dressed in a skirt, she's going to get herself attacked, where if she goes through in jeans like everybody else, she'll be left alone. Common sense, obviously, to avoid being attacked, she's entitled to wear jeans. I just take that as a little example.
All right? So there are occasions, obviously. There are exceptions.
But as a general rule, the problem with shorts and trousers for women is not that it's immodest, although a number of them are immodest. The problem is that it attacks their femininity. It defeminizes them.
And women will tell you who put on trousers, especially women who only began putting them on at a later age, they are very well aware that it gives them a different mentality.
Somebody wrote to me just recently that her sister, who wears trousers, her sister told her, it's a nun, it's a Dominican nun, told me that her sister told her, the nun, that she, the farmer's wife, wore trousers in order to be more equal with her husband.
That's it. In order to be more equal with her husband. She's very well aware. That's what they mean. Trousers mean emancipation. They mean the woman is no longer a woman. The woman is no longer subordinate. The woman is the equal of the man. The workman is going to get in there and duke it out with a man, just like a man. In other words, what trousers say in the mentality is there's no difference between men and women. All right? That's the real problem of trousers for women. That's the real. The real problem is there. The real problem is in the level of the intelligence, not just the level of the senses.
You can have trousers which are, which are, in certain circuмstances, trousers are more modest than skirts, but they're still, they're still wrong because they attack a woman's femininity.
That's the real problem. Look up a few back issues of those summary letters some time ago. Come, you unmortal spirits, unsex me here and fill me from top to toe full of the direst cruelty. Quotation? Lady Macbeth. There's the feminist. Unsex me here. And trousers are, for a woman, a way of unsexing her. And she begins to lose. I have come, you murdering ministers. And she says, take my mother's milk and turn it to gall, meaning poison. Incredible speech. It's horrific.
In other words, Lady Macbeth, Shakespeare has got it right on the, he's got it right on the nail. This spirit of a woman turning against her own womanliness, turning against motherhood, turning against the milk of her little child. She wants the milk turned into poison, and she wants the brat dashed with his head dashed out, if that's what it needs, so that she will get up her spirits to make Macbeth commit this murder and become king.
Horrific. Absolutely horrific. That's what it is.
The girls want to be king.
Or they want to be the woman of a king. Or the companion of a king. That's what's behind it. And it's obviously not, again, not every girl is a Lady Macbeth, but behind, and they will tell you, ask women, ask women, what does it mean to them? If they're honest, they will tell you something like that.
I know a very decent, I'm thinking of one decent mother. I can tell you, there's several people who have spoken to me about, on the question, I don't know why. But this one said to me, there's one who said to me just a little while ago, after those letters, or one or two of those letters, at the beginning of one Lent, I decided to only wear skirts, and I realized what a difference it makes, what a difference to the mentality it makes. And from the end of that Lent, I never went back to trousers.
Another one said to me, how do you know how women think?
Because when I said, you know, that when a woman puts on trousers, it's in her mind that there's a slight twinge of conscience, and a slight awareness that she's unhooking her femininity, and that she's asserting her equality with men. She said to me, how do you know? Well, you don't have to be much psychology to guess, but she admitted that that's exactly what went through her mind when she began putting on trousers.
It's a defeminization which is the problem.
Because when you un-woman, I mean, I've said it millions of times, but when you un-woman women, you un-human human beings. You dehumanize human beings.
Because it's the gentleness that, I mean, think of the Blessed Virgin Mary always. If you want to understand how women should work, or what women should be, you only need look at the Blessed Virgin Mary. I mean, she is a tower of strength, tower of ivory, tower of David.
Woman, what is it, Vigo, strong like an army arrayed in battle. I mean, you know, there's not softness there, but there's immense tenderness and gentleness. You know, instead of being tender, they're soft, and instead of being strong, they're harsh. The mother of God is strong and tender and gentle. Modern women are harsh and soft.
It's the men's fault. I say, how many times do you say, it's like a crack record. But it's the men's fault.
It's primarily the men. It's the liberalism in the men that does the damage.
And that's what Rao says.
Because liberalism attacks the intelligence.
And men are more designed to work by their intelligence than women are. Women are designed to work by their heart.
If there was a disease that attacked the heart, it would hurt women more than men. If the disease attacks the intelligence, it hurts men more than women. And liberalism attacks the intelligence, therefore it hurts men more than women. And therefore the men collapse.
The men collapse. As the men collapse, the woman, what makes the woman woman, what the woman is therefore, doesn't change. The womb motherhood doesn't change. And that's what essentially governs woman.
Motherhood, being the helpmate of the man in order to generate children and to perpetuate the human race. That's what women are for. That doesn't change. That's why, since it doesn't change, they rip it out. Hysterectomy.
And Lady Macbeth would have had a hysterectomy. You can be absolutely sure of that.
She would have jumped at the chance.
And she would have had a mastectomy. And she would have torn off her breasts as well. Anything that made her woman, she would have torn to pieces. Got the surgeons to tear to pieces. Which is what poor modern women do.
It's such a horror. It's such a horror as only Macbeth gives an idea of. You had to go to Shakespeare to see it. I saw it 300, 400 years ago. You've got to take off your hat to the man. Go and read that horrible speech of Lady Macbeth. As she is gearing herself up in order to gear Macbeth up to murder. Horrible.
Does that answer your question?
I mean, you may or may not persuade them. But if there's an inkling of understanding on their part on which you can build.
You know, when the patient is very, very sick, you can't give him the medicines he needs.
You've got to give him one part of medicine and then 99 parts of sugar. But as long as the sugar won't do more harm than the medicine, that 100th part is still worth it. Because what else can you do for him? But that's what people are like today. They can't take the medicine. They can't take the... Mankind cannot bear too much reality. They can't take what they need. So you can't give them what they need. You've got to dose it, dose it, dose it. That's my experience. You've got to be very careful.
At the end of the world, it's interesting, the two prophets are going to come back, Elias and Enoch, and they're going to sock it to the human race. The human race is going to be in bad shape. They are really going to sock it to everybody. But that will be under inspiration of God. I don't think God inspires society priests today to get out there and hit people. I don't think so.
I don't think so. It's a shame you might wish to get out there and hit everybody with the truth.
But I don't think God inspires us to do so.
And you can't arrogate yourself grace that God doesn't give. God gives us the grace to defend the truth and to stick with the truth, but I don't think he gives us the grace to get out there and shout it on the hustings.
They will be very exceptional men. If you and I were exceptional, I mean, if we really had a grasp on the truth, you and I could get out there and hit it. So be careful. See how things are, but be very careful how you convey it today. So are we?
Possibly. If you catch them before the modern world has completely got to them. If you appeal to their chivalry, if you tell them that the adults are jerks and the adults have got it all wrong and you've got to change the world around and you've got to do it better, that sometimes appeals to them. It's maybe not quite the right approach.
You know, in that sense, because a number of youngsters today do sense that there's something seriously wrong.
And of course, that's something you can build on. You can say how and why, because, you know, you're made for motherhood.
Apparently, somebody told me, in the business world, some women are now realizing that being a businesswoman is not such a big deal after all. Or being a businessman is not really what they want. For to for.
That's interesting. But the women, there's another point that I was making, that some of the women today are apparently realizing that business just doesn't satisfy them. Women are not made for the marketplace. Women are made for the home.
Women are interested in people. They're not interested in things. They're not interested in machines. They're not interested in money, basically. I mean, you know, they are.
No money, no honey, said Gary Waltershyter the time.
But so they are interested in money. But I mean, you know, but at a deeper level, they're not interested in the way men are. The politics, law, all of that business, they're interested in people. God made them for people.
They're people oriented. That's why they gossip. And it's normal and natural for women to gossip.
It's not normal for them to sin. So sinful gossip, no. But human gossip, in other words, to be able to talk about babies and to be able to talk about husbands and babies is the most normal thing for women. And it should not be deprived of it. If you deprive them of it, what will they do? Cocaine? They'll watch the soap operas. Of course they will. Because that's a need. They need. So soap operas is nothing but people. Of course it's a pretty low kind of... But it's still people. It's affections. It's affections misdirected. But it's still who's falling in love with who, who is, etc., etc. But it's still, you know, that's what in the village the women used to be able to get together and talk about. They'd all go down to the well and they'd all wash clothes. And while they were all washing clothes at the well together, they'd all talk. And they'd talk about babies and husbands. And that's normal. In Victorian times, when husbands and wives went out to dinner, after the meal, the husbands would be in this room and the wives would be in another. And the wives would talk about what interested them and the husbands would talk about what interested them.
Dr. White tells me about one of the recent... 22 minutes to three. You're winning.
Dr. White says that one of the... What's it? The Von Hildebrand Institute sessions over in Italy, which were organized by Dr. Rao this summer and the summer before. I remember he told me one of those. He said that... No, it's... There were lectures and lectures on history and lectures on the church and lectures on... Even literature. Dante was talking about Dante, the one of these. And one evening afterwards, they had... There was a group of men there when they were talking. They were talking about serious things. Then up came one or two women and the conversation was destroyed.
Because the women just aren't interested in that.
I mentioned another case to him the other day and he said, her problem, she's over-educated.
And he said... What did he just say?
They shouldn't be in school.
They should not be in school. They're not interested. And broadly speaking, that's true. They're only in school because the men expect them to be in school. That's the only... And because they'll find... Perhaps they'll find a man. The most sensible reason for them to be in school is to catch a husband. Now that's serious and that's worthwhile. As a reason to be in a school, that's a good reason. To catch a good husband.
And to learn something that they can then give to their children.
But... Because they may have to be a homeschooling mum. I mean, you're after all... But other than that, the one thing they need to know is how to be a good wife and how to be a good mother. How to make a home in which a husband will be happy. How to make a man happy. Because that will be their happiness.
Selflessness is their happiness. To make their man happy and their children and bring up their children. That's what God made them for. That's what they're good at. That's what they want. That's what will fulfill them.
Whereas getting it out... Getting into the marketplace and duking it out with the men is not fulfilling, as they're now finding. All the men tell them that it's fulfilling. All the women... All the women's livers tell them that it's fulfilling. But deep down, they know that it isn't. That's not what they're made for.
They're having to dose their womb with all kinds of chemicals in order to... They have to denature their womanhood in order to lead this life.
It's incredible. It's simply incredible. Well, 22, you lose.
Jєωιѕн doctors were not normally talking public with a woman. And that's... The Muslim countries, you know, they wear a veil.
The Jєωιѕн woman, the Hasidic women, the moment they marry, they chop off all their hair.
They chop off all their hair.
The Hasidics, I think that's right. Everybody confirm that.
A woman chops off all her hair.
And she's very strictly regulated as to how she appears in the public once she's married. Very strictly regulated. I dare say they still commit adultery because human beings are human beings, but at least there's an effort to... Today, obviously, the whole thing is just absolutely wide, wide, wide open.
And if you want to put a cover on your adultery by changing husbands once every three or four years, you're welcome. The law will allow you to. No-fault divorce. The law will encourage you. God have mercy. God have mercy. Oof.
Christ have mercy. God have mercy. Oof. It's horrific. So the disciples are surprised that our Lord is talking alone with a woman like that. And that they should be surprised is normal.
Today's lack of surprise is what's abnormal. Because she's obviously still an attractive woman. She still has all of these husbands. I mean, she's... Surely not above the age of 40 or whatever, you know, near as soon.
28. Once the...
Yet no man said... That's interesting.
In other words, they were... John registers that they were surprised, but he doesn't register that any of them thought that our Lord had sinned. They nevertheless never asked. They didn't try questioning our Lord about it. They were surprised, but they didn't question Him. In other words, it's out of what's normal, but with our Lord, there was no question of sin. The woman therefore left her water pot and went away into the city. Now she's forgotten the material. Now she's rising above the material. She forgets her water pot and went away into the city and said to the men there, Come and see a man who has told me all things whatsoever I've done. Is not he the Christ?
Notice that it's the miraculous and not the sublime which convinces her. It's not the supernaturalness of our Lord's discourse. It's the miracle of his knowing her whole past. He said, You've had so many husbands, you know exactly how many she said.
Thou hast had five husbands. I mean, that he fingers the exact number. I mean, yeah, that's miraculous. So it's the miracle that impresses her and not the nobility, sublimity, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
And that's normal.
Per se, of course, the sublimity of our Lord's discourse should do more converting. But quo ad nos, as to us, it's the miraculous that converts. And that's normal.
Human beings are that way. There's nothing wrong with it.
It's not the ideal, but you can't say that it's wrong. If it was wrong, what would follow?
Our Lord would have sinned by, Kerry, by working so many miracles. The Gospels are full of his miracles. If it was wrong to persuade people by the miraculous or to put the miraculous up front in order to persuade and convert people, our Lord would never have done it. He does it all the time. So it's obviously not wrong because it's simply the way human beings are built.
Come and see a man, and besides, to accept such a difficult and demanding and incomprehensible doctrine as Christ presents, you can perfectly reasonably expect some solid proof that this really is the truth, that it really is God speaking. And that proof is the miracles, and God provided the miracles. He provided a tough doctrine to believe and a tough doctrine to live by, but he provided a sufficient number of miracles at the same time in order to say that this really is God, and therefore, difficult though it is, you must accept the belief and live by the doctrine.
But the miracles are there. Come and see a man who has told me all things I shall have. He said, they therefore went out of the city and came unto him. In the meantime, the disciples prayed him, saying, Rabbi, eat.
He said to them, I have meat to eat which you know not.
Obviously, the apostolate, the service of his father is what is his nourishment.
To serve his father is his nourishment.
Again, the disciples are on the material level, which again, is perfectly normal. You've got nothing to eat. We've gone to the supermarket. We bought you something. You've got your hot dog. Come on.
No, I have meat to eat which you know not. The disciple therefore said, once I have any man brought him to eat, again, they're still, you see, again, the disciples are also material.
He's not, he doesn't want our hot dogs. Well, somebody else must have brought him one in the meantime or whatever it is.
Someone else brought him, got him something to eat.
Jesus said to them, and then again, so Jesus does the same with the disciples that he does with the, my meat is to do the will of him that sent me that I may perfect his work. As if I, I don't need, my bodily needs will, will take second place next after the spiritual need to serve my father, to look after souls. My meat is to do the will of him that I may perfect his work. The conversion of the Samaritans is serious work.
To convert the Samaritans is serious work and it overrides bodily needs.
You will find that if you get, if as a priest you get involved in priestly work, properly priestly work, you can, you know, of course you have to eat, but you can, you can forget it for quite a while. You know, it comes back in the end, but I mean, it's, so, to look, to look after souls overrides looking after the body.
Do you not say that there are yet four months and then the harvest cometh? Behold, I say to you, lift up your eyes and see the countries for they are white or ready to harvest.
You say that the harvest of nature is four months away, but I say to you the harvest of grace,
so that tells us we're in the brown, around the springtime, obviously. You say that the harvest of nature is four months away, it's coming,
but I say to you the harvest of grace is as close as all of these Samaritans coming towards us because these are souls which, thanks to this woman, we've got a chance to talk to. The harvest of nature is four months away, but the harvest of grace is walking towards us.
Lift up your eyes and see the countries, they are white or ready to harvest. It's much more, what our Lord says is much more than just the Samaritans walking towards him, but the time is ripe for the conversion of the Gentiles and within a few tens of years, within a few dozen years, there's going to be fields and fields and fields of Gentiles coming to the Heavenly Father thanks to Christ and thanks to his disciples and apostles.
So you apostles, I tell you, your harvest, the spiritual harvest is coming.
The country all around, all of these Gentiles are ready. He that reapeth wages and gathereth fruit unto ever life everlasting, both he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together.
And he that reapeth receiveth wages and gathereth fruit unto ever everlasting, that both he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together.
36. Our Lord is sowing, the disciples are going to be the reapers.
The disciples, the apostles are going to get their wages of the apostolate. He that reapeth receiveth wages and gathereth fruit unto life everlasting, the fruit of the souls that he saves.
And by saving souls, he will receive the wage of saving his own soul.
He that works to save souls will be rewarded because he will be gathering other souls unto life everlasting in order that both I who am now sowing and you who will do the reaping may all of us rejoice together.
Our Lord didn't do much reaping during his own life. By the time our Lord died on the cross, not all that many converts.
But immediately after our Lord died, then of course, 3,000, 5,000, then the harvest began. Then the harvest really began. There was a small harvest of souls before our Lord's death and resurrection, but not many.
This is the same truth. There is one man that soweth and there is another that reapeth.
Well, that's either our Lord's sowing while the apostles will reap or it's the prophets and doctors of the old law, plowing and sowing and the apostles who will reap.
So the one man that soweth, it might be our Lord himself or it could easily be the prophets and doctors of the Old Testament.
Again, who didn't have much effect. What Old Testament prophet, do you remember, knew he would not have much effect? He was told at the beginning of his ministry he would not have much effect. Isaiah is told, yeah, yeah. Look, look, remember Isaiah. When the Lord God gives him his marching orders, he says, you're not going to succeed. You're going to be told to get lost. But I still tell you, go and tell them.
He said, go and thou shalt say to these people, hearing, hear, and understand, not to see the vision and know it not, blind the heart of these people and make their ears heavy and shut their eyes, lest they see with their eyes and hear where they is and understand with their heart and be converted and I heal them. And I said, how long, O Lord? He said, until the cities be wasted and the houses be without man, the land that shall be left desolate.
So when the Lord calls Isaiah, at the same time he tells him that he's not going to have much success, but it's still his duty to go and tell them.
So the apostles and the prophets and doctors of the old Lord did not succeed all that much in numbers of conversions, let's say, but the real fruit of everything they did was in the New Testament. So the apostles will reap.
Who else says, of course, one man sows and another man reaps? Who else does he say does what? One man sows, another man, and another man reaps.
David? St. Paul says, what's the in between?
Fortifer?
Another man waters, that's right. That's the beginning of 1 Corinthians. Look at that for a moment. And one man, where is it?
There it is. He that planteth and he that watereth are one. I have planted, Apollo watered, but God gave the increase. 1 Corinthians 3. Therefore neither he that planteth, nor he that watered, but God that giveth the increase. So, and surely the function of the society is not to reap a great harvest of souls.
There is a time for reaping and a time for sowing. Quotation.
Stephen MacDonald?
There's a time for reaping and a time for sowing.
There's a time for war and a time for peace. A time for weeping and a time for laughing.
A time for dancing and a time for mourning. Shepard? I think you're right. Yes, it is.
Ecclesiastes 3.
There is a time to be born and a time to die. A time to plant and a time to pluck up that which is planted. A time to kill and a time to heal. A time to destroy and a time to build. A time to weep and a time to laugh. A time to mourn and a time to dance. A time to scatter stones and a time to gather. A time to embrace and a time to be far from embraces. A time to get and a time to lose. A time to keep and a time to cast away. A time to rend and a time to sow. A time to keep silence and a time to speak. A time of love and a time of hatred. A time of war and a time of peace. He doesn't say a time of reaping and a time of sowing but it's obviously his sense.
That's Ecclesiastes 3.
I have sent you to reap in that in which you did not labor. Others have labored and you have entered into their labors. I have sent you to reap. This is where the apostles are formally called. F-O-R-M-A-double-L-Y. This is their calling to be apostles.
If they haven't yet been called in the full sense here they are called to be apostles.
I have sent you to reap.
I have sent you. What's that I have sent?
If our Lord has not mentioned it before. He may or may not have mentioned it before.
The context suggests he hasn't mentioned it before. I have sent you. It's the eternal decree.
The decree from eternity which he now expresses.
If our Lord hasn't yet formally called the apostles then he does it now when he uses he says he doesn't say I send you to reap. He's expressing a decree which has been from eternity as every vocation is.
Green?
No. No. No connection.
No because that servant misbehaved by doing what he did with that talent and there's no question of our Lord.
Oh you mean no. Well the master is God yes. God expects every man to do to make his talent fructify.
But if our you know if our talent is to sow then all he will expect of us is to sow. and the society and the function of the society is surely to sow rather than to reap because of the times.
The reaping when somebody else may well reap the harvest that the society is now sowing it seems to me in any case because there's certainly not a mass of conversions there's certainly not a large number of souls coming into the church. A time of reaping was the 1950s then large numbers of souls came into the church.
The 1950s was reaping but today it's sowing.
So when the I have sent you to reap now of that city many of the Samaritans believed in him for the word of the good woman giving testimony he told me all the things which have ever done. Notice again 39 the Samaritans go by the miracle.
So when the Samaritans were come to him they desired that he would tarry there and he abode there two days. What does tarry mean Grammarish?
Verse 40 tarry.
Yes.
Then oh yes Then be not this is a famous poem Gather ye rose while ye may old time is still a flying and this same flower that smiles today tomorrow will be dying Then maiden so and so and so Be not coy but use your time and while ye may go marry for having lost but once your prime ye may forever marvelous 40 So when the Samaritans were come to him they desired that he would stay with them because obviously he's he's a hit and he abode there two days and many more believed in him because of his own word so what so obviously the Samaritans are not as miserable creatures as the Jews think and they said to the woman we now believe not for thy saying for we ourselves have heard him and know that this is indeed the savior of the world not so much for what you told not so much for your miracle but because we have listened to what he says and what he says makes a lot of sense this is indeed the savior of the world so there's faith amongst the Samaritans and that's a forerunner of the faith that will be of the Gentiles O'Connor well here in this case yes at least materially speaking perhaps it could work other how but that's how it works here yes now after two days he departed thence and went into Galilee for Jesus himself gave testimony that a prophet hath no honor in his own country that looks a little strange after two days he departed thence and went into Galilee which is his own country and then verse 44 says for Jesus himself gave testimony that a prophet has no honor in his own country so he went to Galilee because there's no point in his being in Galilee right verse 43 Jesus went to Galilee verse 44 because Jesus said there's little point in his being in Galilee you've got a problem 43 and 44 you've got a problem answer either one 44 gives the reason why Jesus had left Galilee before he returned there or two it gives the reason why he passed through Nazareth and went on to Capernaum Matthew 4 verse 13 in other words hath no honor in his own country the country refers to Nazareth and so when our Lord says our Lord went into Galilee it's not into Nazareth but to some other part of Galilee than Nazareth or thirdly why he left his birthplace Judea to go to Galilee we'll pick up that again tomorrow thirdly why he left his birthplace Judea to go to Galilee we'll pick up that now thank you I・ man who are who are I don't walk I who I saw
Topic: Bishop Williamson - women being allowed in public alone (Read 1234 times)