In 1 Samuel 2:12-17 two wicked priests named Hophni and Phineas would take portions of sacrifices that were not theirs to take. Animal sacrifices were to be presented to the priest alive, slaughtered, and certain portions would be burned for God, some uncooked meat would be given to the priests, and some would go home with the family to be cooked and consumed within 2 days. Hophni and Phineas would send their servants to go into a family's home while they were cooking the meat from their sacrifice and take some of the meat for the priests.
"13 Now the
priests would always treat the people in the following way: Whenever anyone was
making a sacrifice, while the meat was boiling, the priest’s attendant would
come with a three-pronged fork in his hand. 14 He would jab it into
the basin, kettle, caldron, or pot, and everything that the fork brought up the
priest would take for himself." -1 Samuel 2:13-14
Considering what the priests would take was not part of their portion, they were sinning. Many of the people would remind the priest of this but the priests would threaten them until the meat was given. The Inquisitor threatens Simon with purgatory, hell, long journeys, etc to try and get money out of him. The priest even uses acts of "kindness" to make himself look better through giving the poor some of his soup. In reality he removes "any meat or pieces of fish and save these for ourselves for our own meal this afternoon." (p.77) By threatening Simon and making him sit through his sermon the Inquisitor hoped to gain money or food from him. Simon however fooled the Inquisitor's plan by using the sermon against him and leaving without any threat following him.
This parallel shows that not everyone is who they seem on the outside. The priests in the bible certainly were not who they were supposed to be and neither was the Inquisitor. So maybe we need to examine who we follow, and ourselves, every once in a while.
In The Grand Inquisitor in the Soup, I simply saw the Inquisitor as being the antagonist and Clas as being the protagonist. Simon, the innkeeper, was just a “vessel” to carry out the deeds of either person. From your post, yes, the Inquisitor is selfish and only wants what’s best to satisfy his greed and gluttony. However, I was wondering why Clas really helped Simon. Was it actually for some of that Alsatian wine Simon promised him? Was it because he really was good moral person who wanted to do the right thing and not care for the rewards? OR Was it because Clas didn’t like what the Inquisitor was doing to good people and wanted the Inquisitor to be shamed/fooled like for revenge? If he was doing it to see the Inquisitor get fooled, I would expect him to at least be there at the end to smile/chuckle at what Simon says to the Inquisitor. (Or maybe I’m over analyzing characters… Sorry if I am.)
ReplyDeleteI wasn't trying to analyze the Inquisitor as a character really. I was just merely trying to provide a parallel and to write down my thoughts on the matter. The story in 1 Samuel was the first thing I thought of, and I thought it applied since the Inquisitor was a priest and he would know the story.
DeleteWell, Danielle, it looks like Alice is trying to help you clarify the connection you are making. What do Hophni, Phineas, and the Grand Inquisitor have in common? How are they different? I am encouraging to take the next step after point out a phenomenon in the text. Hypothesize why the phenomenon (here the potential biblical allusion) exists.
Delete