Maybe I posted this already, I can't remember but here's a short two page paper I wrote on a sermon by Bernard of Clairvaux (1090 – 1153) "Father of Western Mysticism" and a christian saint canon by Pope Alexander III in 1174.

Bernard of Clairvaux (1090 – 1153)
Sermon: On David and Goliath

Biblical Text

Then he took his staff in his hand, and chose five smooth stones from the wadi, and put them in his shepherd’s bag, in the pouch; his sling was in his hand, and he drew nearer to the Philistine. (NRSV, 1 Samuel 17:40)

What the biblical text says
The book of 1 Samuel is a historical narrative, which shows the changes taking place in the leadership of Israel from the Judges to the monarchy of Saul and David, and the establishment of the House of David dynasty.

I believe the text is straightforward, and tells us that David chose weapons that he was used to carrying as a shepherd to do battle with Goliath.

Stones were plentiful in the area, and small stones were used in a sling as a long-range weapon.

What Bernard of Clairvaux says
Clairvaux says “the law is spiritual and has been written for our learning, not only to delight us with a history of external events as with the contemplation of a beautiful exterior surface, but also and more particularly to nourish our minds with the sweetness of its mystical signification”.

Clairvaux uses an allegory and preaches on the mystical meaning of each element in the David and Goliath story.

Goliath is meant to symbolize sin, and Clairvaux says that Goliath is the sin of a type of pride. Since Goliath was the Philistine’s greatest warrior, Clairvaux makes the case that Goliath represent pride. For Clairvaux, pride is the greatest of sins, the people of God are very prone to pride, and pride shows up when all other sins have been defeated.

Clairvaux assumes that we are in always in constant battle and warfare against sin, and that like David we must defeat Goliath, the sin of pride.

Clairvaux then goes on to talk about what happened earlier in the story, when Saul offered David his armor and weapons. He likens Saul’s battle gear to worldly wisdom and the tradition of philosophers, and he says that these are useless weapons in our battle against sin.

Clairvaux states that we should reject worldly wisdom and the tradition of philosophers, just as David rejected Saul’s armor and rely solely God and be armed with our faith alone.

Clairvaux then goes on to say that the five smooth stones that David picks up represent the “fivefold word of God”:
1) the word of warning,
2) the word of promise,
3) the word of charity,
4) the word of example,
5) the word which relates to prayer.

He then says when we are attacked by the sin of pride, we should use the five stones or “fivefold word of God” to defeat sin, to defeat pride, in whatever order they come to us, and if one stone fails to keep using them until one of them works.

When we are confronted with pride we should think of 1) the word of warnings which are the threats from God; or 2) the word of promise which are God’s promise and covenant with us; or 3) the word of charity or God’s loving actions towards us; or 4) the word of example which means to reflect on the lives of the saints; and if all fails, 5) the word which relates to prayer, in other words, “apply thyself to prayer with all the fervour that canst command.”

Clairvaux concludes by saying that if we want to kill Goliath, the sin of pride with it own sword as did David, we need to create a “feeling of elation” in our minds and “a reason for greater humility”, so we can condemn ourselves as proud people and become afterwards more humble and less conceited. If we can do that, Goliath, the sin of pride will be defeated.

Was the Word faithfully preached?
As much as I like this sermon for its creative attempt to make the historical biblical text more meaningful, I do not believe that you can assign the kind of symbolism to the five stones that Clairvaux has done. There is nothing in the Bible to support such a claim, and while his advice is eminently practical on what to do when facing sin, Clairvaux’s allegory fails when you try to relate the word stone to “fivefold promise of God”.

If you wanted to really stretch it you could say, the word of warnings come from stone used as weapons, the word of promise comes from the Ten Commandments being printed on stone tablets, and the word of charity could be God providing stones for housing. For the words of example and prayer, it becomes increasingly difficult to take the stone symbolism and apply them to charity and prayer without sounding like you’re making it all up.