33 PREFACE. 34
asserts, without making any mention of the Son A (e). As for the rest of the writings that are carried under the name of Euthymius which have not yet been edited, we have no secure knowledge whether they originated from him. Certainly, as regards the Exposition of Paul’s epistles, B some attribute them to Euthymius, while Rich. Simon, in his *Bibl. crit. de Du Pin* (l. c., p. 323), judges that they have confused Euthymius with Oecumenius.
(e) Thus on John 14:10. And indeed it is given by the Father, as proceeding from Him, but it is sent by the Son as if cooperating, and not as an opponent. Similarly c. 15:26. See, however, that while the Son does indeed send Him, as being of the same honor as the Father; yet consider this as proceeding from the Father. It proceeds, therefore, from the Father, as if from His substance. Noesselt in *Notes* on this passage.
THE DEDICATORY EPISTLE OF JOANNES HENTENIUS OF MECHELEN
To the most illustrious and most reverend Lord, D. Francisco de Bobadilla, Bishop of Coria, Archdeacon of Toledo, etc., Joannes Hentenius of Mechelen, S.D.
If there is no one, even moderately instructed in moral philosophy, who doubts—most eminent prelate, guardian of virtues and letters—that a good is the more excellent the more common it is, there will also be no one who doubts that the public good is to be preferred to the private. And this is so true that even Christ held that most sacred life of His as cheap, so that salvation, once lost, might be restored to the entire human race. But lest anyone say that the works of Christ, being divine, are by no means to be brought into this number, let us also relate a few from the countless number of Gentiles who subordinated their own life and the lives of their own to the common good.
Among these, the first who occurs is that Junius Brutus, the first assertor of Roman liberty, who ordered his own sons to be struck down by the axe because they had been participants in the plan to restore the kings: though he himself was wounded with a heavy wound by their slaughter; for what love could be equal to the love of fathers toward their sons? Nor did that really escape Virgil, who speaks of him in this manner:
Would you see the Tarquins and the proud soul Of the avenger Brutus, and the recovered fasces? He, the first consul, shall receive the savage axes, And the father, for most beautiful liberty, Shall summon his own sons who stir new wars To punishment—unhappy, however future generations shall report those deeds: The love of country and the immense desire for praise shall prevail.
P. Decius Mus, fighting against the Latins with the consul T. Manlius Torquatus, when the response was given by an oracle that whichever army’s commander dedicated himself and his legions to the enemy, the victory would belong to that people and party: dedicated himself for the common safety of the army. And his son, called by the same name, did the same thing when he had already been consul for the third time, and censor once: whose memory the poet also preserves with these words:
Nay, behold the Decii and the Drusi together, and the savage Torquatus with the axe, and Camillus bringing back the standards.
Marcus Curtius, moreover, for the safety of the people, threw himself on horseback into the chasm in the earth. Sp. Post- B humius the consul, who had pledged and promised a shameful peace with Claudius Pontius, the leader of the Samnites, at the Caudine Forks, was the author to the senate that he, with his colleague and the tribunes who had been the authors of the pledge, should be handed over to the Samnites by the fetials, naked and bound, so that the Roman people might be freed from that peace.
Q. Ceditius, a military tribune, whom Titus Livy seems to call Calphurnius Flamma, in the first Punic War with four hundred soldiers, or, as Livy has it, with three hundred, unless perhaps this was another person, surrendered himself to death: so that while they were occupying a certain hill, they might turn away the enemies, [giving time] for the legions with the consuls, who had been surrounded, to pass through unharmed and liberated from the siege. The tribune Decius did the same thing with the consul P. Valerius C Corvinus, joined with the *hastati* of one legion (although fortune liberated them) so that the enemy Samnites would not fight against them. Among the Lacedaemonians, there is a huge wealth of examples of this kind: but the ones who offer themselves to me as primary are Buris and Spartis, who of their own will set out to Xerxes, King of the Persians: about to pay the penalties which the Lacedaemonians were bound to pay according to an oracle, because they had killed the envoys sent by the Persian. When these had therefore come to Xerxes, they ordered that they should be killed for the Lacedaemonians in whatever way seemed best. And when the king, having admired their piety toward their homeland and the fortitude of their spirits, had freed them from the punishment and asked them to remain with him: "How can we," they say, "live here, having left our homeland, and our ancestral laws and men, for whose sake we undertook such a journey, prepared to die?" Why should I relate the death of Codrus, the King of the Athenians, who, when he saw his region being devastated by iron and fire, and could see no other way according to the oracle of Apollo that such a grave war could be resolved, unless he himself died by the hand of the enemy—and this had been bruited about not only in all the Athenian camps but also in the opposing ones, and therefore an edict had been issued that no one should wound the body of Codrus—having laid down the insignia of his command, he donned the clothing of a commoner and threw himself into the crowd of the enemy, and drove one of them, struck by his scythe, to kill him, so that he might save his homeland; for by his death, it was brought to pass that Athens did not perish. D
Preface
I shall now put an end to this matter, if I first recount what was said by a pagan man—namely, Cicero, in his *Dream of Scipio*—truly Christian in its sentiment regarding the greatness of the common good. He says: "Know, Africanus, that for all who have preserved, aided, or increased their fatherland, there is a certain and defined place in heaven, where they enjoy the blessed life forever. For there is nothing more acceptable to that God who rules the whole world than the councils and assemblies of men associated by law, which are called societies: the rulers and preservers of these depart from here, and return here." Therefore, antiquity, desiring to repay those who either boldly gave themselves to death for the sake of the republic, or who discovered some craft, however humble or sedentary, for its utility, or anything else outstanding and pleasing to posterity, erected bronze statues or marble sepulchers, as far as it was permitted, to rescue their memory from oblivion. Furthermore, they preserved the books of the heathens, purchased at great cost and copied with great faith or rather with religion, in cedar chests, and after anointing them with cedar oil, they placed them most carefully in temples: partly so that the guardianship of so sacred and divine a thing might be entrusted to nothing less than the gods themselves, and partly so that neither decay nor rot might harm those monuments. Not content even with this diligence, they hid the codices like an incomparable treasure in the deepest caverns of the earth with such care that they would not perish in the fires or the storms of war, by which all sacred and profane things are wont to be mingled, and so that they would certainly survive for posterity. If this honor was shown even to superstitious books, such as those of Numa or the Sibyl, or to those containing the memory of human deeds, such as the books of the Egyptians, or to those transmitting some portion of human wisdom, such as those of Plato and Aristotle, how much more justly should Christians do the same in preserving their own monuments? For those who, inspired by the Holy Spirit, left us not so much books as oracles, by which, when read, one is filled not only with doctrine or the faculty of speech, but with virtues and piety toward God; whereas the loss of pagan books would certainly result only in us being less learned or less eloquent, not less pious.
There was, therefore, a certain Greek author, no less deserving than those who have handed down to us the writings of ancient authors and Fathers—especially Chrysostom, than whom no one has been more dexterously versed in interpreting the sacred volumes, and than whom you will not find anyone more accommodating to those preparing themselves for the duty of preaching—who, perceiving that the ancient sacred authors, and especially those who had labored most to interpret the books of evangelical doctrine (to teach which the Son of God had descended to earth), were by no means read according to their merit (whether this happened by reason of the multitude of books, or the reader's fastidiousness, or because of a lack of time), gathered into one volume whatever had been left behind regarding the Gospels, selected from that great mass of codices. And though he had bequeathed to posterity a work so useful and worthy of being embraced, such was the modesty of his spirit that he did not even claim it for himself, and he did not even deem it necessary to add his own name; rather, he attributed what he himself had gathered to Chrysostom and the others, whose works—as he ingenuously confessed—were the most important, although he himself had added A many things of his own which were also most excellent. From this you may conjecture how much he differed in character from those who, like the crow in the fable, adorn and advertise themselves with the borrowed feathers of others. This author seems to have been Oecumenius, who gathered similar commentaries from the same authors on the Acts of the Apostles, on the Epistles which are called Catholic, and on all the Pauline ones, as is gathered from certain arguments, even if he did not wish to express his own name there either; regarding which matter we shall speak at greater length when we soon bring that other volume to light.
Desiring, therefore, to share with the Latins a thing so fruitful, it seemed to me an act of envy, not to say impiety, to allow them to be deprived of it any longer, given that I had found this manuscript—copied by a Greek hand many ages ago, and known to us by many arguments, including the images of the evangelists themselves, which were depicted in a new style and are now nearly erased by age—in the library of the monastery of the Mother of God at Guadalupe, of the Order of Saint Jerome in the kingdom of Castile, where it still remains hidden. B Yet I was not unaware of how harsh and arduous a task I was undertaking: partly because, conscious of my own weakness and uncultivated talent, I had always intended to publish nothing for the public, and partly because I was dealing with a book of such a kind that even to read it was no small labor, being written for the most part in characters and abbreviations unfamiliar to me, despite the greatest care and diligence; even the shapes of the letters were mostly obliterated either by rot and damp, or gnawed by worms and silverfish, or depicted in such a new style that I would have to return to C childhood even to recognize the forms. I omit the fact that frequently in the context of the writing, words are not separated from one another; and letters or syllables of the same word are separated from each other by more than the just interval, so that the line often does not even flow with the syllable; commas and periods are scarcely added, or are inserted where there is no need: all of which generally creates no small difficulty. I knew, moreover, D how great a danger, to speak in general, those expose themselves to who publish in the light books translated from a foreign language; how many and how varied are the judges they take on, most of whom, having never even saluted the Greek letters from the threshold, immediately condemn everything because they do not see that rhetorical world on display, ignorant of the ways in which he is constrained who is forced to render into the light the deposit of a foreign language.
A For he must take the greatest care, he who translates something from one language to another, that while seeking elegance for his speech, he does not suddenly act as a paraphraser instead of an interpreter; and again, that he does not cling so closely to the words that he retains the idioms or dialects of the prior language: but rather that each language should have what is its own: otherwise he seems to speak neither Greek nor Latin. And that which has been cast as a joke upon the unlearned will be adapted to him—that he has made what comes from good Greek into not-good Latin; a thing which one might aptly say of many in this festering age. For who is there now who does not claim the holy Scriptures for himself, and before he learns them, twists them, tears them, and forces them to serve his own intellect—nay, his own passions—even when the Scripture opposes him? And just as we see unlearned and learned alike writing poems everywhere, so too do most men, although they might move happily within their own arena, when they have crossed their own boundaries, while they, like cobblers leaving their lasts, attempt to judge things unknown, they not rarely hallucinate quite miserably. For what has a physician or a jurist to do with the version or interpretation of the holy mysteries? And what is to be lamented much more is that, while they are imbued with perverse dogmas, they do not translate from Greek into Latin with sufficient fidelity: now indeed, as frequently happens, forced by an inexperience in these matters—which, however, if they did not approach the handling of sacred things with unwashed hands, might be more easily pardoned—but now, truly, B so that they do not go against their own dogmas, they return the sense to us either truncated or depraved. I shall show this more clearly than light itself when, with God’s favor, I have published the second volume, which, I hope, we shall do shortly.
Because of these and many other things which exaggerate the version with various difficulties, I am not one who does not understand how much of the dignity and splendor of this author a dim-sighted interpreter might have taken away. But however that may be, I believe I have reached the sense, even if I have adorned it with no cultivation: but no one of sound mind will require that in Commentaries, especially from one who, as I have stated, is tied to a foreign language. But if I have not been able to satisfy everyone, I will bear it easily, since I cannot even satisfy myself in all things. However, I have attempted to take up this burden, although it is far unequal to my own shoulders, because, with no one else offering himself, I would consider it a great sin if the faithful were to be deprived of such a treasure for too long. For what, as far as the account of the evangelical history is concerned, will you find in Chrysostom, or subsequently in Origen, Basil, or Nazianzen, which this man does not present most easily and most succinctly? And it is sufficiently clear that it was not the goal of Chrysostom to hand over to us a bare understanding of the Gospels, or the Acts of the Apostles, or the Pauline Epistles. Otherwise, he would not have left behind such vast volumes on a few books of holy Scripture, but he rather seems to have undertaken the task of forming the morals of the common people: and for this reason he treats topics common to the people, and distinguishes his narration with homilies. C Furthermore, Theophylact, although he is desirous of appearing to speak eloquently on history, and not to cling only to the literal narration, yet this author of ours had this one single goal: that he might succinctly open up the evangelical history to all. But if you also desire some exhortation for the correcting of manners, this author provides it too, briefly and more rarely indeed, but most happily. How aptly—good God!—when the evangelists seem to differ significantly, he so connects the passages that they appear clearly to have been spoken by the same person. And regarding this matter, in my judgment, no one has thus far kept watch as usefully and as seriously. In which, however, just as with the others, let no one put faith in my words, unless he finds far more things worthy of praise in reading this than I could achieve by enumerating them.
Therefore, that I should dedicate this work to you, most magnificent prelate, was brought about by your great kindness, among your countless other gifts: which, beyond the fame heard of, dispersed far and wide, I have experienced in you more than once: and by your kindness, as you always embrace most benignly all men, even those of the most extreme fortune, especially those devoted to studies, so too do you promote these same studies with all your strength whenever the least opportunity is given. Furthermore, I dared to undertake this all the more because, when you were visiting us by some stroke of fortune, I had shown you this first production of mine, which was still entirely unformed, together with the Greek original, and you did not at all shrink from it as from a monster, but like a beautiful little child, you kissed it eagerly: you also marveled at some hidden graces in it, not exposed to the eyes of just anyone. And if this had not happened, with what temerity would I have attempted to offer, to a man so wealthy in this regard as well, such a small gift: A small gift, I say: for although it may be a gift in itself, perhaps not to be despised, if it is compared to your immense and most precious assets, it will be deemed unworthy to find even a small place in your treasury. D For, to say nothing of these things meanwhile, what the Apostle says ought not to be lacking in a bishop: namely, that he should be irreprehensible, as a steward of God, watching over the flock, sober, not headstrong, not irascible, but modest, hospitable, apt for teaching, pious, temperate, holding fast to him who is faithful in doctrine, that he may be able also to exhort through sound doctrine and to convince those who contradict, not given to wine, not a striker, not greedy for filthy lucre, but fair and just, far from quarrels and from avarice, who presides well over his own house. (For if anyone, he says, does not know how to preside over his own house, how will he care for the Church of God?) not a novice in the faith, lest being puffed up he fall into the judgment of the devil: who also must have a good testimony from those who are outside. To leave all these things unspoken, I say, which no one who knows you more closely could fail to desire in you—nay, he will find most things even more abundantly than the Apostle has required—along with that most beautiful and most resplendent [virtue] of purity
A girdle. But who will not admire in a man born of such a distinguished family, to whom fortune, which seems never to have denied him anything that might be its own concern, has always smiled from every side, such varied and such hidden erudition, such certain judgment, such a sharp and almost divine talent, such a tenacious memory? In whom, besides an exact knowledge of both laws, who would not also admire a perfect skill in the three languages? For even as a boy he was most practiced in Greek and Latin; but in Hebrew, good God, how happily he has been versed, and how generous he was also toward his tutor. Therefore, who could doubt that he, approaching sacred letters so long ago with these companions, would achieve marvelous things, so that he would lack neither the knowledge of natural philosophy nor of theology, which they call scholastic? And so, you will find no passage in them, however abstruse, for which he cannot render an exact explanation B at once, in matters on which I have labored night and day, and yet I do not think I have attained everything I was seeking. O that all bishops and stewards whom the Lord has set over his family were such, that they might give them food in due season! Certainly, things would go more happily for the sheep of Christ—indeed, for the entire Christian republic. For the whole flock imitates the life and customs of their prelates and pastors. Therefore, most ornate prelate, I entreat you again and again, through your kindness which is known to the world, not to disdain this ornament of your ears. For you know that the commandment was given to Moses himself, that for the building of the tabernacle and sanctuary he should receive not only gold and silver, purple and fine linen, onyx stones and gems, but also, among the other things, the humble goat-hair. And you know that the widow's two mites were not only most pleasing to Christ, but were even preferred by Him to all the splendid gifts of the rich; and that he who offers a cup of cold water in the name of Christ shall by no means lose his reward. If, therefore, you compare this gift to the riches stored up in your house, it will surely be viler than the most worthless goat-hair; to which, nevertheless, just as to those things, there shall be a place kept for the outer parts of the Lord’s tabernacle. But if you look at the spirit with which this little gift is offered to your most illustrious Highness, I dare assert that it will be far more excellent than gold and silver, purple and fine linen, onyx stones, and gems. Indeed, if in any matter it is given to you to make a trial of the mind I have inclined toward you, I would refuse to undergo any sentence if you should find that I have deceived you in any way. Do not, therefore, consider this gift in itself, nor compare it to the entirety of your museum's collection; but turn your eyes for a moment to the spirit of the one offering it, by whom it is bashfully presented, and receive the little gift with a cheerful countenance; so that when I perceive that these things were not unwelcome to you, I may assume greater strength for such studies. Farewell, exquisite ornament of prelates. At Louvain, in the year from the virgin birth, 1543, on the sixth day before the Ides of August.
Admonition of the same author concerning the author of these Commentaries, from the Louvain edition of 1544, in folio
To the Studious Reader
When we brought these Commentaries to light some months ago, studious reader, and had nothing certain that we could conjecture about the author, following the judgment of others more than our own, we prefaced that it seemed to some that the author was D Œcumenius, whom you will receive in Latin from us shortly for the rest of the New Testament. Although (to tell the truth) the phraseology of this one seemed to me not to differ a little from that one. But now, having indeed found the same author for the Davidic Psalms, and for the Canticles which the Church sings together with the Psalms, you will receive both, but what I thought about Œcumenius is stated elsewhere. He is by no means to be compared with Euthymius. But Pseudo-Theophylact is very similar to Euthymius in the Pauline Epistles.