The first manner, by which Joshua led Achan — now accused and indicated by the lot — to the confession of [his] sin, was twofold. First: a bland and gentle address (v. 19), “my son.” What name, what bond, could more flow into his heart? Good princes are, as one of the ancients advised, the Fathers of their subjects, and pursue them with a paternal love — why not Joshua too? Achan, indeed, had degenerated, and by his crime had struck the greatest grief into that so great Prince and Father of his. Yet because [Joshua] now beholds him himself oppressed with grave sadness, he is not vehemently angry against him: he does not reproach [his] avarice, wickedness, [or] the disaster received; but he addresses [him] gently — [so] that, because it behooved to employ the extreme severity by God’s command, he consoles [him], by word at least, since by deed it was not lawful. He gives an example to Princes and Magistrates, notable for all to imitate: that they prefer to be more inclined toward mildness, and moderation of soul, and gentle speech. Rightly, in Stobaeus (Sermon 20), Epicharmus [says] ἐπιπλάζειν ὅτι χρὴ τὸν θυμόν, ἀλλὰ τὸν νόμον [Serarius renders: “It behooves that not anger, but Law, prevail”]. And therefore Abraham too, to that wretched and unhappy rich man now sunk to the netherworld, says, “son, remember, because thou didst receive good things in thy life” (Luke 16:25). Second [manner]: the serious and effective proposing of the thing to be done. For instead of what he could have said in a word — “confess thy sin” — he employs four phrases, of which the latter always contain a greater explication of the former. And [he gives] first of all also the reason and argument why Achan ought deservedly to confess the crime. For he says (v. 19): “Give glory to the Lord God of Israel” — as if he should say:
That by which glory is given to God is deservedly and gladly to be done by us; / but by confessing our sins, glory is given to God; / therefore [it is to be done].
Instead of “give glory,” in the Hebrew it is “Place, or set, glory,” but with the same sense; and therefore the Seventy [LXX] too render δὸς δόξαν [“give glory”]. Nay, on account of the added Hebrew particle “na,” it could still be rendered more gently: “give, I pray, glory to God”; or “give now glory to God.” For in either way, as indicated above, that “na” is everywhere rendered. Secondly: the word “confess” — to God, namely. For in Hebrew it is “give confession to him” — to whom, namely, it had just now been said that glory is to be given. And in Greek δὸς αὐτῷ τὴν ἐξομολόγησιν [“give to him the confession”]. “Confession,” says St. Augustine (on Psalm 94), “is taken in the scriptures in two ways. There is a confession of one praising, and there is a confession of one groaning. The confession of one praising pertains to the honor of him who is praised. The confession of one groaning pertains to the penitence of him who confesses. For men confess when they praise God: they confess, when they accuse themselves.” And he confirms this distinction of confession a little after: “If confession were always [that] of a penitent, it would not be said in the Gospel of the Lord himself: In that hour Jesus exulted in the Holy Spirit, and said: I confess to thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hidden these things from the wise
(col. 873)
and prudent, and hast revealed them to little ones. Was Christ, then, a penitent because he confessed? Nothing could he repent of, because he had done nothing culpably: but he confessed unto the praise of the Father.” One can add those [passages] in the Psalms, so many: 42[43]:5 [“the sound of confession, of one feasting”]; 104:1 [“confession and comeliness”]; 111:3 [“confession and magnificence”]; 148:13 [“his confession above heaven”]; Ps. 33:2 [“confess to the Lord on the harp”]; 100:4 [“in hymns confess to him”], and very often elsewhere. It must be said, therefore, that the name of “confession” — as much Hebrew as Greek and Latin — is taken not only “when we subject ourselves to God as [guilty] sources,” as Masius will have it always to be [the case] in the scriptures (fol. 133) — for this is clearly refuted by St. Augustine, from the example of CHRIST the Lord confessing to the Father (Matt. 11:25) — but universally, when we either profess and proclaim the magnitude, wisdom, power, goodness, and beneficence of God, or recognize and confess our ingratitude toward him, [our] impiety, and [our] sins. But which confession is here demanded of Achan? Surely the latter, which is [that] of one groaning and acknowledging [his] fault; in which, nevertheless, a great praise and glory of God is always contained, as will be said below. But this, which was a confession to God — ought it [only] to be made so [greatly] in Achan’s heart? or with the very lips and voice too, but secret from all men? in a place where Achan was alone? [that] he alone should hear himself? [that] no other of men be present? [that] the ears of no one should receive that confession? This most of the Innovators think is now “to confess to God.” But that confession extends more widely. For [there is] one who confesses also to a man, the servant of God, and for God’s sake — as Achan did in this place, as is understood from what follows. For the third phrase is: “Show me what thou hast done” — in Hebrew, with that same particle “na”: “Declare to me, I beseech, what thou hast done”; or, “Declare now.” Thou hast not declared hitherto, thou hast kept silent up to now. Now thou seest thyself pointed at, as with a finger of God: confess to me what thou hast perpetrated. Fourthly: “Hide not.” In Hebrew: “hide not from me” — anything, namely. In Greek μὴ κρύψῃς ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ [“hide not from me”]. And so the true manner of confessing is indicated: that we conceal nothing from him to whom we confess, but bring forth and disgorge all things. And so indeed did Achan, as follows (v. 20), and as [was] already expounded above (qq. 3, 4, and following).