find, especially among the Greeks, who thought fit to indicate their own name by some inscription. And so, in this genre, we have almost all the sacred books, both those pertaining to the New and those to the Old Testament, set forth in Greek, without the name of the one who performed such labor set before them; although, among these very ones which are now in our hands, and which we now dedicate as printed to Your Holiness, Most Blessed Father, we identify one author, Oecumenius, and likewise another, Arethas. By what conjecture we were led to affirm this, we have thought it better and more convenient to indicate in another A short preface placed in the Greek: so that if any who are ignorant of our letters should come to read this work, they too might have at the very outset of the work some light, whatever it may be, to follow. But as to why Gibertus saw fit to have this part most particularly printed, out of such a great abundance, he was led primarily by this reason: that he perceived this was the only thing lacking to us for having a full interpretation of that part of the divine books which they call the New Testament. For the divine Thomas, one of these more recent theologians, most famous and illustrious, whether emulating the Greeks, whom he saw had bestowed so much study upon this, or led by some spirit of his own, did not leave even this kind of labor unattempted or untouched: but having collected into one many of those holy men who from the beginning have expounded the divine letters to us, not only our own, but also the Greeks, whom he had in Latin translation, he elaborated a work upon the four Gospels; which he also, contrary to the custom of the Greeks, with his own name placed before it to illustrate such a labor, called the *Catena Aurea*; but the remainder of this part, he either did not touch, or expounded with his own proper commentaries. And so Gibertus, lest those who are studious of the sacred letters be held longer by a desire for a similar labor in this part also, determined to address this one first of all: the more so because, besides the Epistles of the divine Paul, the rest which are here set forth, had not only no such Catena among us, by which their senses could be grasped and held, but not even expositions of any kind whatever. The recommendation of Joannes Lascaris also carried much weight in this: who, a man excelling in these times in that learning and clarity which all know, was the one advising Gibertus that this part in particular should be published. For it is also necessary to know this above all, that while a Catena of such expositions, from this part which we now give, to the extent that it was circulated among the Greeks with names interposed in the manner we see the divine Thomas followed in Latin, was in circulation: yet Gibertus, by the benefit and gift of that man, obtained a copy described with wonderful skill and expense of the library, and of great antiquity, in which the Epistles of Paul indeed do not have such names interposed, as they do in others, but inscribed in the margin: the text of the expositions itself, however, continues just as if there were a single writer who was bringing his own new commentary to that work. Finally, the Acts of the Apostles and the Catholic Epistles, as they are called, and likewise the Apocalypse, have nothing of such names neither written at length nor interposed. From this exemplar, however, with others of that other kind also compared, which we have mentioned, these many things which now go forth to the light have been expressed.
TO THE MOST ILLUSTRIOUS PRINCE AND MOST REVEREND LORD D. GEORGE OF AUSTRIA, BISHOP OF LIEGE, DUKE OF BOUILLON, COUNT OF LOOZ AND MARQUIS OF FRANCHIMONT, ETC. JOANNES HENTENIUS OF MECHLIN, HIERONYMIAN MONK, WISHES SALUTATION.
PREFACE
Not without reason does Plato in the book *De Republica* banish men from the threshold of sacred philosophy as if they were profanes, and as being in no way fit to undertake it, most illustrious prince, those who are of a narrow and sordid mind, and enslaved to the desires of base things. For he deemed it impossible in any way that the mind, once it has been occupied by that sordid care for base things, could at the same time possess the knowledge of divine and human things. Nor is this without merit. For in what way can the human mind, dedicated to human and even brutish B affections, be able, suddenly snatched from here, all at once to transfer itself to those things which are removed by more than a great distance? Wherefore rightly also does the same say in the *Phaedo*, that it is altogether necessary that those who apply themselves to the study of wisdom should first die, and avert the soul itself from every sense and thought of the body, and claim it as it were for its own right and liberty. For otherwise, just as Lysias the Pythagorean has it in his epistle to Hipparchus, he who mixes speculations on divine discourses with corrupt and obscene morals acts no differently than if he were to pour the clearest water into a muddy pit, which would both disturb the mud and contaminate the purity of the water itself. For if such purity was demanded by him who approaches only human and natural philosophy, how much, I ask, will be required of him who C above—
reaches for divine things? A Since when we seek worldly things, we are entirely caught up in them, and "wisdom will not enter into a malicious soul, nor dwell in a body subject to sins." For the "holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit, and withdraw itself from thoughts that are without understanding, and shall be rebuked when iniquity comes in," which Christ gave the Jews sufficiently to understand when he said: "How can you believe, who receive glory one from another?" Furthermore, a human doctrine is required of you, the greater, the further we are separated from this purity and deprived of the aid of that Holy Spirit, who once indivisibly attended the holy apostles and prophets as his chosen instruments, and directed their tongue and pen in all things, according to that promise of Christ: "The Spirit of truth will guide you into all truth." B
For this reason, I would say that some years ago, seeing these holy and most useful commentaries made available to us by the Greeks, I greatly wondered that no one among so many crowds of most learned men should undertake this duty for themselves—whether, looking primarily to common utility, or for the sake of the grace expected from the Lord, or if for no other reason, at least seeking the renown of their own name among mortals, which seemed to be greatest in this work—to render them into Latin for us. But at last, returning to myself, I recognized that the difficulty of the matter was the cause which held everyone back from such a praiseworthy work: to which they either deemed themselves unequal, or, shunning labors more than Herculean, refused to put their own shoulders to the task, preferring a quiet and leisure to the business they had voluntarily undertaken. I, however, although I perceived that I was far inferior to them, and trusted that I could accomplish very little with my talent and erudition; yet, being pained that the Latins were so undeservedly cheated of this great fruit for so many years, and also being urged on by the prayers of many, which it would have been more impudent than modest to resist, I undertook immense labors in this: so that I might provoke and incite the spirits of the more learned, that, being thus stimulated, they might cast aside all leisure and, instead of the private business by which each seeks his own, seek only the things which are of Jesus Christ. C And the Most High sufficiently favored these pious beginnings: so that, if I have not satisfied everyone in all places, or indeed even myself at times, I have nevertheless believed that I have rarely wandered far from the mark: and indulgence must be given if anything has escaped me in their version, as I do not doubt it has, since I was constrained by various difficulties from every side.
For it can hardly be believed how much labor was added to me, to omit other things, by the fact that Photius, a man truly a most sagacious investigator of the sense and a most diligent observer of the flowers of rhetoric, in very many places weighed individual Greek words of Paul and their structure as if with a scale, while, however, in rendering Paul into Latin, I was forced to change this order of words and at the same time the Greek phraseology, so that Photius’s scholia no longer had a place, and consequently I often hesitated whether it would be better to omit that part of the commentaries entirely than to deliver them to the Latins in a harsh manner and without fruit, as they would serve only the Greeks, namely, concerning the anxious structure and meaning of Greek words. Finally, however, I decided to render all things faithfully: although I was also not a little held back by the not infrequent errors of the single Greek manuscript, whether the fault was in the copyist or the printer, which often forced me to guess: whether happily or otherwise I leave to the judgment of the reader, as I do all other things. And although I am not unaware on account of these things that the phrasing is sometimes a bit harder in some places: I preferred to fulfill the duty of a faithful interpreter than of an elegant paraphrast, even if I could have achieved the latter, as I see that some, while they wish to appear too polished in translating, have sometimes fallen away even from the authors' own concept of mind. D I, however, have sufficiently included myself within the bounds of an interpreter: which the weakness of my talent also compelled me to do. For I am not endowed with such an excellent talent that, just as Phidias not only gave statues a suitable harmony of limbs but also dignity and amplitude, so I too could add splendor and light of speech to a version. Therefore, I measure myself by my own rod: and never do anything else, than, if I do not count the measure of words, at least to pay back the weight of Greek sentences in Latin: and so I have consulted those who are only Latin, that I might not leave even a Greek word, as far as could be done: where this could not be preserved, I added immediately what might respond to it in Latin.
Although I know well enough that nothing will be so blessed in every part as to be received by the applause of all; and I do not seek this, so much so that I would hold it more suspect if my labor were approved by everyone: as I know that among such varied minds of men, there are not a few whose disapproval I would prefer over their approval. Since not without reason Phocion—whom Demosthenes used to call the axe of his orations—who always displayed such constancy of mind that he was never seen to either laugh or weep, when one day he saw his speech equally approved by everyone, turned to his friends: "What," he said, "have I said anything evil imprudently?" But if I have also brought anything worthy of praise, that is not to be ascribed to me, but to the Lord, from whom is every good donation and every perfect gift. Which not only Christians know, but also the heathens, who attributed whatever good was done by them to I know not what gods feigned by themselves. And hence it is that the famous general Pytho, when the Athenians were admiring and praising him for the success of his affairs because he had killed King Cotys, said: "Thanks must be given to the gods, by whose authority this deed was done; for I myself have commodified nothing other than my hand and my work." How great, however, is the utility of these commentaries, not to say the necessity, anyone who has considered even this one thing will be able to perceive easily: that in this divine Instrument, nothing has hitherto appeared that could sufficiently satisfy the mind. For indeed in the Acts we only have Chrysostom, if even he...
is the one, who also is accustomed everywhere to endeavor rather to recall men from vices to virtue, than to disclose the mind of the author. But for those Epistles which are called Catholic, or for the Apocalypse, we have no commentaries at all worthy of being read, except that which, from those which we now bring to light, has been lately excerpted and patched together. And although many have attempted to interpret the Epistles of Paul, yet the reading of them is so rugged and full of knots, keeping the reader frequently suspended by their very long periods and hyperbata, and rendering itself inaccessible and impassable by the depth of its meanings, that unless one has for a guide the Spirit by whom he wrote, they could never be sufficiently explained by anyone.
Moreover, I would not easily believe that the Pauline Spirit is present to just anyone, especially when I see those who impudently assert that they alone grasp the mind of Paul A hallucinating in most wretched and shameful ways, for they wish to consult no other commentaries than their own minds, nay, rather, they calumniate and mock those who do. Therefore, besides this spirit of error of theirs, they receive no explanation of others, but explain all things by their own judgment, or rather distort them: whom Peter painted with his own colors, when he says that the Pauline Epistles are, not indeed as these men claim, very clear and very easy, and in no need of explanation, but that they contain some things hard to be understood, which the unlearned, he says, and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction. For God, by His own secret counsel, did not intend all divine Scriptures to be everywhere accessible to men, lest they should attain them easily: but that, with their own wits subdued by much labor, and having first implored His own aid, they might at length hold the accepted treasure the more dear, and guard it the more cautiously, the greater the study and diligence with which they received it.
Furthermore, it is manifest that the author of these commentaries is not the same primary author of all, since in the Acts of the Apostles and in the Pauline Epistles many things are here condensed which Chrysostom had treated more at length. And again, the opinions of many others are reported, sometimes with the names placed only in the text B of the letter, but sometimes with them added also in the margin: which we have left preserved entirely in the same manner as they were found in the copy. But for the Apocalypse, a certain author [(a)] is prefixed, with the addition also at the beginning of the names of those from whom he had excerpted some things. Moreover, in all these commentaries, the opinions of various authors are also frequently placed, with their names suppressed, I know not whether by the negligence of the librarians. Yet that they are various is evident from the fact that you find what is stated later often contrary to what preceded it. And to offer one example for the sake of example: when earlier in the Apocalypse he had said that Babylon was Constantinople, not the world nor any other specific city, afterwards in many places he says and proves that it is the world, and no particular city.
As for the rest, although in the earlier books no one prefixed his own name C, as is the custom for the Greeks, never to publish under their own name what they have not elaborated by their own efforts, but have, as it were, collected certain centones from various sources: yet from evidence which is almost certain, we gather that Ecumenius is in part the author of these works, and in part a collector who, however, sometimes, where he puts forward his own opinion after others, added his own name, lest someone should attribute it to others, which he himself did not consider worthy to be compared with their opinions. He excerpted many things from Chrysostom, whose name, however, he only took care to add when he was recounting his actual words, but not when he was referring to his opinion in more contracted words.
That it is indeed Ecumenius who handed down to us all these things besides the Apocalypse, as they are now edited into the light, we gather by these arguments. First, after the last words of the commentaries on the Epistle to the Colossians, with his own name also prefixed to the margin D, he writes in this fashion: "Since I had not found the scholia of the blessed John on the Epistle to the Colossians complete in the copy, I transcribed them as I could. If therefore anything light or worthy of censure is found in them, let him who reads know that such a lapse is mine." Again, in the fourth chapter to the Ephesians he has these words, adding in the margin the name of Ecumenius: "Observe what seems to me as well: for it was not given to understand what is of that holy man himself." Being mindful of Chrysostom, for which reason the name of John was also adjoined in the margin.
Thus Ecumenius sufficiently shows himself to be the collector of the commentaries on all the Epistles, and yet that he had not made mention of himself anywhere else, because in those he had found a complete copy of Chrysostom. Again, his own explanation is placed more frequently after the explanations of others, sometimes rendering the cause of those things which had been premised, adding also not rarely, "To me also it seems that this can be said." Or, "What if it also be said in this way, according to this understanding which the divine John also receives?" Or he cites the names of Cyril or Basil or of any others whatsoever. Moreover, these things can be seen in many places, some of which we will recount here. On Romans, chapter five, to the words, "Sin is not imputed where there is no law"; chapter nine, to the words, "Unless the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed"; on the first to the Corinthians, chapter six, when it is said, "He who commits fornication sins against his own body"; chapter seven, "Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord"; chapter fifteen, "When He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God and the Father," and in the same, "That God may be all in all"; on Ephesians, chapter two, "According to the prince of the power of the air"; chapter four, "From whom the whole body is joined together and compacted"; and in the same
A place, "And do not let the sun go down upon your anger," where he says, "I have heard some interpreting it in such a way"; in the second to the Thessalonians III, "May the Lord direct your hearts"; to the Hebrews X, "The law having a shadow of good things to come"; chapter XII, "Who for the joy that was set before him"; and in countless other places. Since, therefore, it is clearer than light from this that Œcumenius compiled commentaries on the Pauline Epistles, we believe that he did the same for the Acts of the Apostles and the Catholic Epistles, although he did not add his name there either: for they are of the very same phrasing, except that there he had fewer models to imitate, whose names we have scarcely ever found added in the Greek copy, B either in the context of the letter or in the margin.
But the most illustrious prince and most reverend lord, D. John of Lorraine, Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church with the title of Saint Onuphrius, an excellent patron of learned men, to whom all who are devoted to the study of the Holy Scriptures owe a great deal, might with fully valid right claim our labors for himself and demand that they be brought to light in his name. For as soon as he learned that I had undertaken such labors for the common good of the Church—though I had never been known to him even by name—he ordered that I be gifted with a generous reward, promising even more once the book had been printed. I would have dedicated this work to him with the greatest willingness, had I not—even before I was given the opportunity to approach him—not only conceived the intention in my mind, C but also declared in words to his Reverend Lordship, for the reason he knows, that I would bring this work to light under his own auspices: so much so that it was by no means open to me to do otherwise or not to keep my word. But even if I had wished most strongly to do so, the most illustrious prince himself, once the matter was known, would by no means have tolerated it, as one who does not care for celebrations of his name of this kind, since he has already attained such splendor that nothing at all can be added to his name from this source. When I ponder within myself his abundant resources, his talents, the grace of his body and mind, and his most gentle manners, he truly seems to me to be the man in whom I would believe that fortune and nature, and with both of them virtue—the three most powerful mistresses of things—have contended, so that one could not easily discern D by whose benefit alone he is held, or which of them might crown him with fuller gifts and a more lavish hand. They have certainly piled them up, and each has performed its duty, nor could you easily decide to whom he owes more. Therefore, I have not used a past excuse, thinking that he himself desired such a celebration of his name: but rather, in the meantime, while consulting for my own name, I would show that I have not acted rashly, nor should I in any way acknowledge a charge of ingratitude. However, another place will be given, I hope, where I may show myself grateful toward that prince.
But now I come to you, most illustrious and most reverend George, beseeching you to receive with a joyful and open countenance our labors, which endeavor to come to light under your auspices. That I might dare to do this, I was partly persuaded by the integrity of your character, proclaimed by one mouth of all men, joined with admirable prudence and equal humanity; and partly by the incredible love which your greatness has appeared not obscurely to show toward authors of this kind; and partly also because your singular and gratuitous favor toward me, and the known propensity of your will toward me, was such that I must ingenuously confess that there is nothing I do not owe to you. This is also for the most important reason: because, as I have arisen from your domains, and since individuals are accustomed to receive their prince as he enters his homeland with some small gift that testifies to an obedient soul, I by no means ought to have approached with empty hands. And if this congratulation seems late, it should not be blamed for that, since it was delayed for a cause that was pressing and approved by all. For I do not think anyone would have approved if, in a rush to congratulate your Greatness in time, I had cast away this fetus, or rather an abortion, prematurely, or had allowed it to go away from me. Furthermore, there was no gift with which I could currently trust that I would earn greater favor in the sight of your Highness than if I were to dedicate these most useful, nay, almost necessary commentaries, to him who is endowed not only with singular piety, but also beyond all kinds of learning with such great eloquence and fluency of speech as can be required even from men of his sort, who have consumed their whole life in literature. Added to such a great knowledge of the most excellent arts are other virtues worthy of a great prince: justice in empire, care for preserving peace, greatness of mind, piety, and a zeal for helping and adorning the Christian religion. What evil can exist under the leadership of such a prince, if all things are favorable with virtue? Let no one fear anything ill-advised in him, he is most prudent; let no one think of insolence of mind, he is most modest; let no one fear injustice, he is most fair. He will confirm those who deserve well with his humanity, he will stir the languid with his industry, he will restrain the wicked with his severity. Certainly, there was an absolute requirement for someone of such a kind to be set over the most celebrated Church in these most unfortunate times, and to moderate the reins of such a vast domain with such prudence and such doctrine, and to snatch the sheep from the almost truculent jaws of wolves, since he was so proven in the moderation of various Churches. For in a calm sea, any of the sailors and passengers can steer: but when a savage storm has arisen, and the ship is snatched by the wind in a troubled sea, then there is need for a man and a governor: and one who, above all things, holds these two precepts of Plato, which Cicero says must necessarily be present in those who are to be of use to the Republic: first, that they so guard the utility of the citizens that they refer whatever they do to it, having forgotten their own advantages. For the same thing does not befit a prince as befits a private citizen. And hence it is that when a woman, whose husband Pelopidas was departing for war, begged him womanishly to save himself, he said, "Others are to be admonished to do that: for a prince and a leader is to be exhorted rather to save the citizens." The second is that they should care for the whole body of the republic: lest while they guard some part, they desert the rest: for that would be a cause of sedition and of the greatest discord and envy. But neither am I such a person that I could give counsel to anyone, not to mention to you, nor are you such that there is need for you to seek it from anyone. You in all things are your own monitor.