Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Synopsis of the Chapter
From the fact that good and evil things happen equally to the pious and the impious, he infers that no one knows whether he is worthy of love or of hatred, but all things are reserved uncertain for the future. Therefore it is the part of the wise man to devote himself to sincerity and purity and good works, especially because just as fish are caught by a hook, so men are caught in an evil time. Finally, in verse 14, he shows that wisdom is superior to strength, and yet in poverty it is not esteemed.
Vulgate Text: Ecclesiastes 9:1-18
1. All these things I pondered in my heart, to understand them carefully: There are just men and wise men, and their works are in the hand of God: and yet man does not know whether he is worthy of love or of hatred: 2. but all things are reserved uncertain for the future, because all things happen equally to the just and the impious, to the good and the evil, to the clean and the unclean, to the one who offers sacrifices and to the one who despises sacrifices; as the good man, so also the sinner: as the perjurer, so also the one who swears truly. 3. This is the worst of all things that are done under the sun, that the same things happen to all; whence also the hearts of the sons of men are filled with malice and contempt in their life, and after these things they are led down to hell. 4. No one lives forever, and no one has confidence in this matter: a living dog is better
Verse 1: ALL THESE THINGS I PONDERED IN MY HEART, THAT I MIGHT CAREFULLY UNDERSTAND: THE JUST AND THE WISE, AND THEIR WORKS, ARE IN THE HAND OF GOD, AND YET MAN KNOWS NOT WHETHER HE IS WORTHY OF LOVE OR OF HATRED. — So this chapter begins in the Roman Bibles and most Latin ones; although the Royal Hebrew, Chaldean, Septuagint, and Thaumaturgus begin chapter IX from 'the just are,' and join the preceding sentence to the end of chapter VIII. For 'that I might carefully understand,' the Hebrew has labur, that is, 'that I might examine,' that is, 'that I might see clearly and purely'; Saint Jerome in his earlier version translated it 'that I might consider'; Pagninus, 'that I might declare'; the Zurich Bible, 'that I might clearly discern'; less correctly Cajetan, 'that I might choose'; better Symmachus, 'that I might winnow'; the Complutensians in their Lexicon, 'that I might test' or 'examine.' These words depend on the end of the preceding chapter. Hence Cajetan attaches them to its end, and begins chapter IX from verse 2. For Ecclesiastes here continues and amplifies what he said in the preceding chapter, namely that good and evil things befall the pious just as much as the impious; whence from these things and others it cannot be discerned who is pious and worthy of love, and who is impious and worthy of hatred.
For 'their works' the Hebrew has מעדיהם abadehem, which Pagninus translates as 'their services'; Vatablus, 'their servants'; the Chaldean, 'their disciples,' as if to say: The just and wise, their disciples or followers, are in the hand of God. But in that case it should have been written עבדיהם abdehem: now it reads מעדיהם abadehem, that is, 'their works,' as our Vulgate, the Septuagint, the Syriac, Arabic, Campensis, and others translate. The Septuagint elegantly translates ἐργασίαν, that is, skillfully crafted works laboriously wrought for profit and gain, such as are those of distinguished craftsmen; such are the works of the just, which, though despised by the world, are nevertheless precious to God and wrought for heaven, and therefore He will repay them with a heavenly reward.
In the hand of God. — First, Hugo: 'in the hand of God,' that is, he says, in the disposition, preservation, judgment, and will of God, likewise as sacrifices acceptable to God. Second, Dionysius: 'In the hand of God,' that is, he says, they are offered and entrusted to God, as creator and judge, and also rewarder. Third, in the genuine sense, 'in the hand of God,' that is, in the protection, care, and love of God. So Olympiodorus, who aptly connects these words with what precedes: 'He had said above,' he says, 'that the knowledge of certain things is hidden, so as to turn us away from the useless and vain anxiety of searching. But now he sets forth in what matter the mind and understanding of the wise man can find satisfaction, namely that just and wise men, together with their works, rest under the shadow of God and the protection of His right hand. For God does not permit them to be devastated by the forces of those who attack them. For upright men and dutiful works are protected by God; but of the impious it is written: And they are driven from Your hand.'
The works of the just are in the hand of God in a fivefold sense.
The wise, therefore, that is, the prudent and just, though they are not in prosperity like the impious but in adversity, and therefore neglected and despised by the world, are nevertheless in the hand, that is, the favor, care, guardianship, and help of God, because He sends them adversities out of love, to increase them in virtues and merits. In this sense God says in Isaiah XLIX, 16: 'Behold, I have inscribed you on My hands,' so that I may always behold you as present before My eyes, and with My hands help, protect, and advance you. See what was said there. Hence again the holy works of the just are 'in the hand of God,' because they flow from the hand, that is, from the help and grace of God (as Saint Prosper teaches, book I, On the Calling of the Nations, chapter XXIV), who will therefore abundantly reward and crown them. Fourth, the works of the just are 'in the hand of God,' that is, certainly known and examined by God, while to the just themselves they are uncertain and doubtful, as follows. So Lyranus. Fifth, 'in the hand,' that is, in the full discretion and power, as well as the knowledge, providence, and governance of God, that He may send them into the world at the appointed time for its salvation, just as before the flood He sent Enoch and Noah; after the flood, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob; to the Hebrews captive in Egypt He sent Moses and Aaron; in the Holy Land He sent David and the Prophets; against the Arians He sent Saint Athanasius; against the Pelagians, Saint Augustine; against Nestorius, Saint Cyril; against Eutyches, Saint Leo; against the Albigensians, Saint Dominic; against Luther, Saint Ignatius with his companions. So it is said in Psalm XXX, 16: 'In Your hands are my lots,' or as others translate, 'my times.' And: 'The heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord: He will incline it wherever He wills,' Proverbs XXI, 1. And: 'For in His hand are both we, and our words, and all wisdom, and the knowledge and discipline of works,' Wisdom VII, 16; and chapter III, 1: 'The souls of the just are in the hand of God'; where more is said on this matter. Akin to this maxim is that of the poet Caecilius, book XXXV: 'Who would not consider God supreme, in whose hand it lies whom He wishes to make foolish, whom wise, whom mad, whom to cast into sickness, whom on the contrary to be loved, whom to be opposed, whom to be sought after?' Now the hand of God is the mind, will, and power of God; in the mind is knowledge and providence; in the will, freedom; in the power, sovereignty. Hence to Vespasian while dining, a human hand brought into the dining room and placed under the table portended sovereignty, says Suetonius in his Life. And the Prophets are depicted with a hand sent down from heaven, as if receiving prophecy from God, as I said at the beginning of the Prophets.
AND YET MAN KNOWS NOT WHETHER HE IS WORTHY OF LOVE OR OF HATRED. — The Hebrew reads: even love, even hatred, man does not know. These words, because in the Hebrew manner they are broad and indefinite, are defined and explained variously by various authors.
First, Symmachus translates: and moreover man knows neither friendships nor enmities; and Campensis: nor does anyone know whom he will have as friends or enemies, as if to say: Man does not know who loves him and who hates him, and therefore does not know whom he should cherish as a friend and whom he should hate, that is, avoid and flee as an enemy. So the Chaldean: Even the love, he says, with which someone loved them, and even the hatred with which he pursued them, is decreed; everything is decreed in providence, to be before them. Thaumaturgus concurs, as if to say: He who cultivates the favor and friendship of men does not know how long he will preserve it because of the inconstancy of the human will, by which love is turned into hatred for a trivial reason.
Second, others refer it to the objects of love and hatred, as if to say: The sensual man does not know what is truly good, what is evil; what is virtue, what is vice; and therefore does not know what he ought to love and pursue, what he ought to hate and avoid. The force is in the Hebrew אדם adam, that is, earthly man, who savors earthly things and does not grasp heavenly ones: for such a man is led by the pleasure of the flesh, not by the honor of virtue; therefore he ignores the true good of virtue, and eagerly embraces the painted good of pleasure. He therefore loves what should be hated, and hates what should be loved. So Olympiodorus. Rabbi Solomon and the Hebrews concur, who explain it as if to say: The common run of men does not know how to dispose the heart to love God, and to hate what is worthy of hatred; but all these things are before the wise and just, who know how to love God and hate evil: indeed, he who does not love God does not know how to love; the impious man does not know this, the pious and wise man does.
Third, Isidore Clarius explains it as if to say: That which man loves and hates is in the hand and power of God, who may either grant it to man or deny and avert it, and man cannot perceive this by his senses. But our translator shrewdly and wisely understood that the passage deals with the love and hatred not of men, nor of creatures, but of God. For he had just said: 'Their works are in the hand of God,' as if to say: Our works are in the hand of God; and yet man does not know whether he is worthy of God's love or hatred, because God indeed certainly preserves our works in His hand, but keeps them enclosed and secret, and does not show man what they are, but reserves them to be revealed at the future judgment; therefore until that time they are uncertain and unknown to man.
You will say: In the Hebrew it reads 'and everything,' or 'all things before them,' or 'in their sight'; how then does our translator render it 'and all things are kept uncertain for the future'? I answer: Because the phrase 'all things before them' signifies that all works far exceed the eyes of man, that is, his sight and knowledge, so that he cannot perceive them; because they are kept far away and hidden in heaven, in the mind and foreknowledge of God. So the Chaldean. Thus the Psalmist says, Psalm CXXXVIII, 6: 'Your knowledge has become wonderful beyond me: it has been strengthened, and I am not able-' to reach it'; and verse 3: 'You have understood my thoughts from afar, etc., and all my ways You have foreseen.' Hence Campensis translates here: all these things are hidden from man. And Symmachus: all things before them are uncertain; or certainly 'all things before them,' that is, before Him, namely God: for since Elohim, that is, God, is plural in Hebrew, correspondingly he says in the plural 'before them,' that is, before Him, namely God, who in the plural is called Elohim. Hence the Zurich Bible translates: but to God Himself all things are set before Him. And the Chaldean: no one knows what will happen to man. Everything is in the providence (of God) so as to be before them. Therefore our translator most aptly rendered it: and all things are kept uncertain for the future. This meaning is required by the Vulgate version, which the entire Church has received and approved for 1200 and more years; indeed even the Reformers approve it, such as Beza, Mercer, and, as it seems, Calvin, book III of the Institutes, chapter II, section 38. And if anyone examines what precedes and follows, he will see that this translation and meaning is the most comprehensive.
Finally, so explains Saint Jerome, a man most learned in expounding the Scriptures, and by the judgment of the Church the greatest doctor. Hear him therefore: 'Now this is the meaning: In this too I gave my heart, and I wanted to know whom God loved, whom He hated, and I found that the works of the just are indeed in the hand of God, and yet whether they are loved by God or not, they cannot now know, and they waver in uncertainty whether they endure what they endure for testing or for punishment. In the future therefore they will know; and all things are in their sight, that is, the knowledge of this matter precedes them when they have departed from this life, because then is the judgment, now is the contest. And whoever endures adversities, whether they endure them through the love of God, like Job, or through hatred, like very many sinners — this is now held uncertain.'
From this passage, therefore, the uncertainty of grace is evident against the heretics and Ambrosius Catharinus, namely that men, even the just, are not altogether certain that they are in the grace of God, that is, that they are just and friends of God; for although they have probable signs and not insignificant conjectures of this, which afford them a certain degree of certainty, they do not however have so much as to exclude all doubt and fear of the contrary; for although they may be conscious of no sin, yet they know that God sees more, and therefore may perhaps discern a sin in their conscience that they themselves do not discern. Therefore they say with Saint Paul: 'I am conscious of nothing in myself, yet I am not thereby justified,' I Corinthians IV. Again, even if they know that they love God, they still do not know whether this love is natural or the supernatural love of charity, which alone justifies. This teaching is a matter of faith: for it was so defined at the Council of Trent, session VI, chapter IX, and Canon XII. Luther, Calvin, Bucer, Chemnitz, and the other Reformers deny this, quibbling that this passage has been badly translated in the Vulgate version. For they teach that the just man ought to believe by divine faith, not only in general that Christ made satisfaction for us, but also in particular that his sins have been remitted through Christ, and therefore that he is just and holy, indeed predestined and chosen for glory: and consequently that he cannot fall from it, nor sin, lest his faith be false; for they firmly persuade themselves that this special faith is justifying faith, and therefore that it is required for anyone's justification.
But this is a stupid error, and a faith supremely unreliable. For, to pass over everything else, this faith is impossible and false. For it believes with certainty what is doubtful and uncertain, and often false. For many among the heretics have this faith, and yet live in adultery, hatred, injustice, plunder, and other very grave sins; who though they believe themselves just, are in truth sinners and criminals. Again, many are converted from this heresy to the orthodox faith, and then they lay aside this faith, or rather perfidy, and embrace the orthodox faith contrary to it; how then in their heresy did they believe they could not fall from it, when in fact they do fall? Ambrosius Catharinus indeed, though he is far removed from this heresy, nevertheless from another principle agrees with it that a just man is certain of his grace and justice. Both are pressed and convicted by this passage of Ecclesiastes: 'Man does not know whether he is worthy of love or hatred.' But they reply that Solomon does not absolutely deny to the just man certainty of charity and grace, but only denies that it can be known and established with certainty from external events, for example, that all things go well for the just man and ill for the unjust, since both happen indifferently to either, as follows; or, as Catharinus and Vatablus maintain, that he only denies that man can know this naturally, or insofar as he is a man; but not supernaturally, or insofar as he is a son of God: for thus he can know himself to be just from the testimony of the Holy Spirit, as the Apostle teaches, Romans VIII, 15.
But I prove that these replies are frivolous and weak: first, because Solomon speaks not of man in himself with respect to nature, but of the just man with respect to grace. For he says: 'The just and the wise are, and their works are in the hand of God, and yet man does not know (namely, the just and wise man, as precedes) whether he is worthy of love or of hatred,' as if to say: The works of the just man are in the mind and knowledge of God in such a way that they are absolutely not in the mind and knowledge of man. For otherwise, if you take the knowledge that is derived from external events, God equally does not know whether man is worthy of love or of hatred, is worthy, and man himself likewise does not know. For those external signs of prosperity or adversity are signs of grace and justice that are altogether indifferent and uncertain, since they befall the impious and the pious indiscriminately. Therefore from these things God cannot know whether someone is worthy of love or hatred, just as from these things man cannot know it.
Responses to the objections of the Reformers. First. It is refuted.
Second, because he asserts that the works of the just are in the hand of God, that is, in the mind, memory, and intellect of God, which like a hand most certainly encloses and contains them within itself, lest they be seen by anyone else, so that He may reveal, praise, and reward them at the proper time; and yet the just man does not know whether he is worthy of hatred or of love. Here the antithesis is clear, as if to say: The works of the just man
Third, because he adds universally: 'But all things are kept uncertain for the future'; all things, that is, both supernatural things, which are properly 'in the hand of God,' and natural things, both internal and external; and consequently whether the prosperous or adverse things, which are most obvious to the eyes and which men most regard, God sends to man out of hatred or out of love; and this alone Solomon intends in this inadequate reason of the similar outcome of the pious and impious, which he adds, as if to say: Man commonly looks at external things, and the external events of good or bad fortune that befall him; and yet he does not know whether God sends them to him out of love or out of hatred. Therefore equally he does not know whether he himself is worthy of love or of hatred. For the remaining arguments and signs by which this could be discerned are, just as this one already reviewed, obscure and ambiguous to man: therefore the phrase 'but all things are kept uncertain for the future' signifies that these things are unknown to man not only by reason of present events, but simply and absolutely: for if they were established and certain to man by some other means, they would falsely be called uncertain.
Fourth, the same thing is taught frequently elsewhere by Sacred Scripture, the Fathers, and the entire Church. See Bellarmine, volume III, book III On Justification, chapter IV and following, and volume I, book II On the Word of God, chapter XII, and also Jacobus Gretser there, who also effectively refutes the inept exposition of Junius, who says that man does not know whether he is worthy of love or hatred — not man himself (for everyone knows himself and his own conscience, he says), but rather any other person who observes another's prosperous or adverse external events.
God indeed willed by this uncertainty of grace to keep us in humility and solicitude, so that we may work out our salvation with fear and trembling, as the Apostle counsels, Philippians II, 12, and so that we may strive to make our calling and election sure through good works, as Saint Peter exhorts. So Saint Augustine, or whoever is the author (for it is clear enough that it is not Saint Augustine), in the book On the Spirit and the Soul, chapter LIX: 'Woe to me,' he says, 'a wretch, who in the region of the shadow of death do not know my end, do not know whether I am worthy of love or hatred.' Now Solomon speaks properly of the love and hatred by which the just man is loved on account of his present justice, and the unjust man is hated on account of the present state of sin in which he lives, as Saint Jerome, Saint Bernard (sermon I), the Septuagint, Saint Thomas (I-II, Question XII, article 5, and frequently elsewhere), and Bonaventure apply it; Bonaventure denies that this passage treats of the love of predestination and the hatred of reprobation: because, he says, no one is worthy of predestination, nor does anyone merit being predestined. For predestination precedes all grace and all merit; indeed it is itself the origin and cause of all grace and merit.
It can nevertheless be extended here to predestination and reprobation: for the former is the supreme love of God, the latter the supreme hatred, and both are kept uncertain until the future day of judgment, as if to say: No one knows whether he is predestined or reprobate, or rather, to be reprobated; for although no one can merit the grace and love of predestination, he can nevertheless be said to be worthy of it, not from merit, but from the grace of God, because God has deigned to predestine him and admit him to the lot of the Saints, and thereby makes him worthy, as Saint Paul says. So this passage is understood of predestination and reprobation by Saint Bernard, sermon 5 On All Saints, and by Saint Thomas in his commentary on Romans chapter VIII, near the end, Hugo, Dionysius, and others.
With the exception of those to whom their justice or predestination has been revealed by a special gift, as Saint Anthony received a revelation of his salvation, according to Saint Athanasius; Saint Francis, according to Saint Bonaventure; Saint Galla, according to Saint Gregory, book IV of the Dialogues, chapter III, and many others whom Saint Gregory lists in the same book.
Finally, although the just do not have the certainty of knowledge that they are just, they nevertheless have the certainty of conjecture and trust, which grows in step with increasing grace and good works, so much so that eminent saints hardly doubt it and are secure, or 'when fear has been consumed by a long anxiety of sorrow, a certain security arises from the presumption of pardon,' says Saint Gregory, book VI of the Register, epistle 23 to Theotista; and Saint Cyprian, in the book On Morals, and the book Against Demetrianus: 'The strength of hope,' he says, 'and the firmness of faith press upon us, and amid the very collapsing ruins of the age, the mind is upright, and virtue immovable, and the soul always secure in its God.' And Saint Augustine on that verse of Psalm CXLIX, 'The saints shall exult in glory,' etc.: 'There is a certain manner of glorying in conscience, so that you may know your faith to be sincere, know your hope to be certain, know your charity to be without pretense.' So Saint Anthony, trusting, used to say: 'I do not fear my God, but love Him.' And that poor man in Tauler used to say that he rested secure in God. I have narrated the story at length from the same author at Romans XII, 2.
Indeed Saint Paul, Romans VIII, 35, so exulting, boasts: 'Who shall separate us from the love of Christ, etc.? I am certain that neither death, nor life,' etc.
Verse 2: BUT ALL THINGS ARE KEPT UNCERTAIN FOR THE FUTURE, BECAUSE ALL THINGS EQUALLY BEFALL THE JUST AND THE UNJUST. — The Hebrew reads: all things are before their face; all things as to all, or whatever to whomever, that is, all things happen alike to all; the Zurich Bible: the very same things happen to all; Campensis: all things will perish in the same manner; there is one event for the just and the unjust. The Septuagint, instead of the second הכל haccol, which our translator renders 'all things' (universa) and others render 'all,' by the similarity of the letter מ with ב with different vowel points, read הבל habel, that is, 'vanity'; whence they translate: all things before their face are vanity in all things, that is, as the Syriac: everything that is before him is vanity; and the Arabic: all things before their faces are vain in all their affairs. Like- of mortal sin. Whence it is clear that these internal signs, just as much as the external ones, are uncertain, doubtful, and ambiguous. See Francisco Suarez, volume III On Grace, book IX, from number 14 to 18, but especially number 18, where he precisely weighs the phrase 'because.' Now in Hebrew it reads: there is one event for the just and the unjust; the Chaldean renders this and the preceding thus: everything depends on providence, and is decreed from heaven; the Complutensians: from the star (but this favors judicial astrologers, whom the Church condemns) it is decreed what shall be, so that one event befalls the innocent and the sinner alike.
With what certainty the just are certain of their grace.
You will say: God, in Leviticus XXVI and frequently elsewhere, promises the Hebrews prosperous outcomes — victory, peace, abundance of crops — if they keep His law and are pious; but if they violate it and are impious, He threatens them with war, famine, plague, and every evil; and as He promised both, so He actually bestowed them: how then is there one event for the just and the unjust?
I answer first: For 'event' the Hebrew has מקרה micre, that is, accident, occurrence, event, about which word I spoke at chapter I, 14. Now by 'accident,' understand what commonly happens, such as death, disease, famine, thirst, cold, heat, etc. For these befall the pious just as much as the impious. Hence Campensis translates: all things will perish in the same manner, nor is anything free from destruction. For it is clear from what follows that by 'event' death is chiefly understood here: 'No one is there who lives forever,' etc., and from what was said at chapter II, 14, and chapter III, 19. For he repeatedly rubs in and insists on this vanity and extreme misery of death, common to the pious and impious alike. I answer second: Those promises made to the Hebrews in Leviticus XXVI and elsewhere look not so much to individuals separately as to the whole body of the people: so that if it worshiped God, not idols, and kept His laws, God would give it peace and abundance of things; if it violated them and worshiped idols, He would punish it with plague, famine, and war. Therefore if the greater part of the people worshiped idols, God would send upon the whole people plague, famine, or war, which afflicted the pious — inasmuch as they were part of that commonwealth and guilty people — just as much as the impious. And so then too there was one event for the just and the unjust: for neither famine, nor plague, nor war distinguishes the pious from the impious, but attacks all indiscriminately. Just as in the destruction of a city, the pious are plundered, captured, and slain equally with the impious. For thus in battle the pious Josiah was killed just as was the impious Ahab, III Kings XXII, 34, and II Chronicles XXXV, 23. I answer third: God often in the Old Law separately bestowed prosperity upon the pious, such as crops and wealth as a reward for piety, and denied the same to the impious as a punishment for impiety; but not always: rather He sometimes sent prosperity to the impious and adversity to the pious, as He did to David the persecution of Saul, to Daniel the persecution of the Babylonians, to Susanna that of the elders, to the Maccabees that of Antiochus, to Elijah and the Prophets that of Jezebel and the idolaters, because He then heaped upon them the greater goods of patience, martyrdom, and eternal glory. Hence then too from one perspective the event was the same, but from another perspective the event was plainly the reverse for the pious compared to what it was for the impious. Now the Hebrews narrow this maxim to Noah and to Pharaoh the father-in-law of Solomon, and relate that the same event befell the just Noah and the impious Pharaoh, namely lameness: for Noah, when he descended from the ark, fell by accident and became lame; Pharaoh likewise, when he sat on Solomon's throne and wished to descend, slipped and became lame; but these are trifles and fables of the Rabbis.
Less ineptly, the same Hebrews divided the following antitheses so that the just and the unjust are viewed in their works, the clean and the unclean in body, the good and the sinner in heart, the perjurer and the true swearer in speech, the one who sacrifices and the one who despises sacrifice in faith and religion. But they divide these things too minutely, since all are virtually synonymous and epithets for the just and the unjust. From this passage Saint Thomas, I-II, Question CXIV, article 10, proves that temporal goods do not of themselves fall under merit, but only insofar as they are referred and contribute to beatitude. 'As the one who swears, so also he who fears an oath,' that is, who avoids and guards against ever committing perjury: 'the one who swears,' that is, the perjurer; for he who frequently swears and becomes accustomed to swearing about anything, must necessarily often perjure himself; indeed he always perjures himself, because by swearing rashly about anything without distinguishing true from false, he always exposes himself to the danger of perjury. Add that the Hebrews lack compound verbs, and therefore use the simple form in their place; נשבע nisba, therefore, meaning 'I swear,' also signifies 'I perjure,' 'I forswear.' Thus in Zechariah V, 3, it is said: 'The one who swears shall be judged,' that is, the perjurer shall be condemned. 'He forswears,' that is, he swears; for 'to forswear' (dejerare) is to swear by God, or to swear solemnly, says Donatus. Hence that line of the Comic poet about Casina: 'He forswore by all the gods and goddesses.' Hence further 'to forswear' is to swear and promise something with attestation, as in I Kings XX, 17: 'Jonathan continued to make David swear.'
Verse 3: THIS IS THE WORST OF ALL THINGS THAT ARE DONE UNDER THE SUN, BECAUSE THE SAME THINGS HAPPEN TO ALL; WHENCE ALSO THE HEARTS OF THE CHILDREN OF MEN ARE FILLED WITH WICKEDNESS, AND CONTEMPT IN THEIR LIFE, AND AFTER THESE THINGS THEY ARE LED DOWN TO HELL. — Thaumaturgus and Olympiodorus consider these to be the words of the foolish and impious. Better, Saint Jerome and others consider them to be the words of Ecclesiastes himself. For he infers and confirms what he said in the preceding verse, as if to say: The worst thing, that is, a very harmful and most burdensome thing, is that the same things befall the pious and impious, and thereby men are filled with wickedness and contempt, so that they despise piety and even God Himself, and are thus thrust down to hell. Therefore 'worst' can here be taken properly, as if to say: The similar outcome of the pious and impious is the occasion of many crimes. So Saint Jerome, Bonaventure, Hugo, Dionysius, and others; or improperly 'worst,' that is, most burdensome, which greatly afflicts the pious. Thus in Matthew VI Christ says: 'Sufficient for the day is its evil' (that is, its trouble and affliction).
For 'contempt' the Hebrew has הוללות holeloth, that is, madness, as Pagninus translates; insanity, as Vatablus; trifles, as Cajetan. The Septuagint: περιφερεία, that is, going around, hallucination, a wandering life, error, and disturbance of mind from excessive thoughts and cares, says Budaeus. Thaumaturgus: errors and deceits; Olympiodorus: they walk about here and there in circles, and do not cease from wearying themselves; Aquila: πλανή, that is, error; Symmachus: αὐθαδεία, that is, insolence, says Saint Jerome. Others: vain exultation and boasting. See what was said at chapter I, 17. It denotes the impiety and folly of men carried to the point of madness, who 'rejoice when they have done evil, and exult in the worst things,' Proverbs II, 14, and who 'make excuses in sins,' Psalm CXL, 4; because they work evil insolently, and glory in it, as despisers of the divine.
AFTER THESE THINGS TO HELL. — In Hebrew: after this to the dead, that is, to the state and place of the dead, namely to hell; for in Solomon's time all the dead descended there, as if to say: The impious live so insolently that they do not think about death, as if they would live forever and never die; and so when they least think of it, unprepared they are snatched away by death, and descend to hell, to pay the penalties of their wickedness in Gehenna. So the Chaldean: And after, he says, the days of a man are reserved for him, to be punished with the dead according to the judgment of the sinner.
Verse 4: NO ONE IS THERE WHO LIVES FOREVER, AND WHO HAS CONFIDENCE OF THIS THING: BETTER IS A LIVING DOG THAN A DEAD LION. — Saint Jerome, following his custom, followed Symmachus, who clearly translates: for who can persevere living forever? 'since,' says Saint Jerome, 'we are suddenly seized by destruction, and while men are unaware they descend to hell.' He here explains the event most common to both the pious and impious, namely death, which visibly demonstrates the vanity of all things, for it makes all things die and vanish; hence he here graphically depicts the idea and effects of death up to verse 7. The Hebrew literally reads: for who is it that shall be joined to all the living? Is there hope? Surely for no one; as if to say: No one hopes that he will be the companion and contemporary of all living things, that is, as our translator clearly renders it, no one is there who lives forever, and who has confidence of this thing. For חבר iechubbar, that is, 'shall be joined,' some manuscripts read by metathesis יבחר iebuchar, that is, 'shall be chosen'; whence with Pagninus you may translate: for who has hope of choice among all the living? For 'the chosen' in Scripture designates a strong young man, whose choice, that is, blooming and vigorous, age it is; as if to say: What young man has hope that he will always remain in the flower and strength of youthful age? Surely none; since he lives among the living, but mortal, who all grow old and wither with time. they die and descend to hell, and then their life is converted into death, that is, their happiness into the utmost misery; because just as a living dog is better than a dead lion, so the most worthless of mortals surpasses the impious, however rich and powerful, if the latter die and the former lives. For in death all their wealth and power comes to an end: for just as a lion, noble though it be, in dying turns to ashes and worms, so too kings and tyrants, who therefore leave behind nothing after them except a splendid tomb, or except their own skin, as the lion does. Hence the saying: 'The spoils of the lion.'
Second, you may refer it more generally to verse 2: 'All things equally befall the just and the unjust'; for from this all these things are woven together, as if to say: The supreme vanity of human affairs is that the same outcome befalls the pious and the impious, a clear example of which is death: for this certainly comes upon both. For there is absolutely no one who lives forever, and who has confidence of this thing. And how great this vanity is, and how much the living surpasses the dead, and life surpasses death, is clear from the fact that the most worthless dog, if it lives, is better than the lion, which is the king of animals, if it is dead.
Third, from this he draws out how greatly life should be valued and well employed, and spent in joy and good works, since death takes from man all joy and all ability to work. Hence at verse 10 he concludes: 'Whatever your hand is able to do, work at it earnestly: because neither work, nor reason, nor wisdom, nor knowledge shall be in the netherworld, where you are hastening.' For the dog in working, running, and hunting is keen, skillful, and provident, so much so that when it is sated, it provides for future hunger, and hides the bones that remain, and buries them in the ground, which when hungry it afterwards digs up and gnaws. Let the wise man do likewise.
Fourth, from this a question is resolved that some raise: who is more honorable — a king, prince, bishop, or pope who is past, or one who is present; and which of the two should be preferred to the other in rank and honor? For example, if Charles V were to return to life, should he be preferred to Philip IV, the reigning king? The answer must be negative, because Charles, having died, has departed from life and likewise from his kingdom; therefore he is no longer king or emperor. But Philip IV is king; therefore he is to be honored as king, not Charles. For death cuts off life and likewise the kingdom, and royal dignity and honor. This is the vanity of kings and of all things in this world; thus passes the glory of the world: 'Better is a living dog than a dead lion.'
Now the Chaldean translates: for indeed who is the man who will be joined to all the words of the law? He has hope for acquiring the life of the world to come. The more recent scholars, in their usual fashion, while forging new versions from the Hebrew, diverge from one another and from the Vulgate, and from the true mind of Solomon, into various and wandering interpretations. Thaumaturgus considers these words to be spoken in the person of the impious, who think that the soul perishes with the body, and therefore that the living, however obscure and squalid, is to be preferred to the dead. More correctly Olympiodorus considers that this passage deals with the impious, whom shortly before he said descend to hell at death. He here adds the reason: that there is no one who lives forever, but all must die, and after death descend to hell. Or, as if to say: When the impious die, among the just, who alone, though dead, are to be considered as living, they will have no place in eternal life. It is best to take it of all, both pious and impious, as if to say: There is absolutely no man who lives forever, but the fatal event, namely death, presses upon all. Hence Saint Jerome, Albinus, Bonaventure, Lyranus, Hugo, Dionysius, and the rest consider these words to be spoken in the person and mind of Solomon. Saint Jerome, meditating on these things and applying them to the death of Saint Paula in her epitaph, groaning exclaims: 'O fragile and fleeting nature of mortals! And unless the faith of Christ raises us to heaven, and the eternity of the soul is promised, the condition of bodies is one and the same with beasts and cattle — the same death for the just and the unjust!'
BETTER IS A LIVING DOG THAN A DEAD LION. — The Hebrew reads: it is better for a living dog than for a dead lion. So Symmachus. It is a parable, which grammatically on the surface of the letter signifies that any animal, however worthless, such as a dog, if it lives, is nobler than the most excellent animal, such as a lion, if it is dead. Parabolically, however, it signifies that the most worthless man, if he lives, surpasses the most excellent man if he is dead; by which reasoning Saint Augustine said that a living fly, or gnat, or single flea is nobler than heaven, because they are endowed with soul and life, which heaven lacks, as I said above. Hence the dog, which fears the living lion, insults the dead one, barks at it, tears it, devours it: so too the most worthless of mortals do not fear to bark at and bite with their taunts the dead, even the most powerful tyrants and kings. Hence the saying: 'Hares insult the dead lion.' And the Comic poet: 'The dead man is worth more than I am.'
How does this parable connect with what precedes? I answer first, it can be referred to the impious, whom in the preceding verse he said descend to hell, in Hebrew, to the dead, as if to say: The impious, even if in this life they feast and triumph, nevertheless soon
Tropologically, the dog is the sinner in this life, who can repent and become most holy, whose lot is therefore better than the lot of the lion — that is, whose hope in this life is better than the lot of the dead lion, that is, the just man already deceased, for whom no further hope of life and salvation remains; which Saint Jerome also shortly proves; for otherwise, from other Scriptures, the same could be said everywhere, and thus the authority of Scripture would everywhere be rendered very uncertain.
But how does he say: 'The dead know nothing more'? Cajetan explains it in the formal sense, namely, the dead know nothing because knowledge is life and a vital action. But this is too subtle and ingenious. I say therefore first that it is true because the dead naturally know, or can know, the things that are done here, for example, about their children, their houses, wealth, offices, etc., which they left here; which is not inconsistent with the fact that even in limbo they could formerly have known these things by revelation from God, or from angels, or from people who depart from here to join them.
Second, the dead know nothing, that is, they have no sensation or taste of the pleasures and things of this life: they do not feel, do not experience, do not taste the things they felt and tasted in this life; especially because the soul, freed from the body, no longer has taste or sensation, but like an Angel is entirely spiritual, and uses only the mind for understanding the spiritual things of the other life. So Saint Bonaventure: 'They do not know,' he says, 'the things that are in this world; they do not remember or care, nor are they affected by them; nor do they have, as is written shortly after, a part in this world, and in the work that is done under the sun.' Moreover, the soul separated from the body is more apt for understanding than when it was joined to the body, because the body dulls the operations of the mind and intellect. Hence angels, because they lack a body, are wholly intelligent and perceptive. The separated soul is similar to these, according to Christ's words: 'They shall be as the angels of God in heaven,' Matthew XXII, 30. For the soul of itself is a spiritual and intellectual substance, whose proper operation is to understand, but it is blunted in the body by the senses and bodily sensations; freed and released from these, it freely gives itself entirely to understanding. Hence Saint Jerome, epistle 61 to Pammachius, against the errors of John of Jerusalem: 'We cannot,' he says, 'think of the incorporeal and eternal soul as motionless and torpid, like dormice.' Indeed Cyrus in Xenophon, and Cicero in the book On Old Age, say: 'It could never be persuaded to me that the soul would be without understanding when it had escaped from an unintelligent body.' See Saint Thomas, I part, Question LXXXIX, and the Scholastics on IV Sentences, distinction 45, and our Conimbricenses, treatise On the Separated Soul, disputation 3, article 1, where they teach that the separated soul, through species both acquired in life and more importantly infused by God at separation, can distinctly know all natural things, namely all sensible objects; likewise itself, and its own internal acts and powers; moreover other souls, and even angels, and their natural properties and operations, excepting the thoughts of hearts as being hidden by their very nature. For this seems connnatural and as it were due to its spiritual nature. Furthermore, the souls of the damned in hell know nothing except their own torments and those things that increase their torments; they feel the wrath of God against them, the fury of demons, their past pleasures and crimes by which they brought these punishments upon themselves. Hence Lyranus, Hugo, and Dionysius explain it thus, as if to say: The dead, that is, the damned, know nothing good anymore. But souls in purgatory know their state and are certain of their salvation. Hence they continuously love and praise God; but they do not know the events, dangers, actions, and prayers of parents or friends living in this life, unless angels reveal them, or the dying report them. Therefore it is ordinarily fruitless to invoke them, as Saint Thomas teaches, II-II, Question LXXXVIII, article 11, reply to 3, and more explicitly Francis de Vitoria in his Relectio. They do, however, pray for us and our needs, which they know in general, having experienced them while they were alive. Hence Jeremiah, dwelling in the limbo of the Fathers, was seen by Judas Maccabeus praying for the Jews, and indeed gave Judas a golden sword, promising him victory against Nicanor, II Maccabees XV, 12; and the soul of Saint Severinus, and equally that of Paschasius while in purgatory, worked miracles, which Saint Gregory, IV Dialogues, chapter XL, and Blessed Peter Damian, epistle 13, chapter VII, recount. Finally, the blessed souls who enjoy God know our affairs in Him, and especially our prayers. Hence it is useful and holy to invoke them, as the faith of the Church teaches against Luther. See Bellarmine, book I On the Saints in Beatitude, chapters XVIII and XIX.
In what sense the dead know nothing.
Mystically the Chaldean translates thus: because the just know that if they sin, they will be considered as dead in the world to come; therefore they guard their ways and do not sin; but if they sin, they turn back in repentance; and sinners know nothing good about the world to come, and there is no good reward for them after their death; for the memory of them is given over to oblivion among the just. Similar to this is the explanation of Olympiodorus, who however explains it of this life, not the future: 'The living,' he says, 'whose intellect is irrigated with living moisture, when they consider with themselves that the course of this life is temporary, live dutifully, strengthened by the hope of eternal life; but those who are dead in sin, occupied by the fog of ignorance, live without reason, in the manner of cattle.'
Note here that this fleeting and brief life is nothing other than a race toward death, and through it toward immortality: therefore he who does not know this, or does not think about or care about it, should be considered not so much living as deprived of life. Hence the living person is here defined as one who knows that he is going to die. The thought of death is therefore innate in man, and as it were flows from the inner depths of the soul and life, so that man should always keep it before him, indeed carry it in the bosom of his mind, and by it spur and drive himself to every virtue and heroic deeds. Hence Plato defined philosophy as the meditation on death. Our Blessed Francis Borgia showed this very thing in practice, whose life was nothing other than a continual mortification and meditation on death and hell.
NOR DO THEY HAVE ANY FURTHER REWARD. — The Zurich Bible renders: recompense; Campensis: price; understand it of this life, as if to say: While they lived, they labored, and received the reward of their labor in the profits and pleasures of this life; but after death they have none of these; they do however have the reward of the other life, either in heaven or in hell, which they merited for themselves by living well or badly in this life. That this is the meaning is clear from the conclusion drawn from this maxim at verse 7: 'Go therefore, and eat your bread with joy,' etc., as if to say: Use and enjoy the reward of your labor in this life, for after it you will not be permitted to enjoy it. Hence Campensis translates: nor are they any longer held in any esteem among the living.
Again, they do not have any further reward, that is, merit — namely, the time for meriting the reward of heavenly glory, as if to say: The dead no longer have time for meriting and acquiring reward in heaven for themselves. Hence the Arabic translates: there is no turning back for them, that is, no time for repenting and converting themselves. It is a metonymy, for the effect is put for the cause, namely 'reward' for 'merit.' For merit is the merit of reward, and conversely reward is the reward of merit. By this maxim the error of Origen is refuted, who said that the punishments of the damned, as well as the joys of the blessed, would not be eternal, and therefore that angels could lose merit and be damned, and the damned could gain merit and be blessed; likewise the error of Luther, who thought that souls in purgatory, as imperfect, could merit or lose merit through their patience or impatience with their punishments — which Bellarmine effectively refutes, book II On Purgatory, chapter II. Therefore the end of life is the limit of meriting. For life is a road and a racecourse, in which the traveler runs, labors, and merits; when it has been traversed, there remains no further place or time for running and meriting, as Sacred Scripture teaches with various similes: Sirach XIV, 17, and XVIII, 22; John IX, 4; Luke XVI, 2; II Corinthians V, 10; Galatians VI, 10.
There is a beautiful paronomasia in the Hebrew: The dead no longer have שכר sachar, that is, reward, because they do not have זכר zecher, that is, remembrance, as if to say: The living do not retain the memory of the dead, but forget them; hence they pay them no reward of this life, for they regard them as having departed life and died, and as not existing in this world. Hence the state and region of the dead is called in Scripture דומה duma, that is, silence; likewise the land of oblivion, Psalm LXXXVII, 13; and this is reciprocal, because both the living forget the dead, and the dead forget the living. Hence that passage of the Sibyl, Aeneid VI:
'By the stream of the Lethean river, they drink the carefree waters and long forgetfulness.'
For λήθη in Greek is 'oblivion'; hence the poets place the Lethean, that is, the river of forgetfulness, among the dead, whose waters when anyone has tasted, he forgets all things past, about which Lucan, book IX, says:
'Near which the silent stream of Lethe glides, delivering (as fame has it) oblivion to the veins of the underworld.'
Hence death in Latin is also called lethum from leo, says Priscian, which the ancients used for deleo ('I destroy'), because death destroys all things; or, as Varro and Festus say, from λήθη, that is, the oblivion that it brings.
Verse 6: THEIR LOVE ALSO, AND THEIR HATRED, AND THEIR ENVY HAVE PERISHED TOGETHER, NOR DO THEY HAVE ANY PART IN THIS WORLD, AND IN THE WORK THAT IS DONE UNDER THE SUN. — For 'envy' the Hebrew has קנאה kina, which with the Septuagint can be translated as 'zeal'; in Arabic, 'jealousy'; Thaumaturgus, 'rivalry.' The meaning is clear, as if to say: The dead are in the land of oblivion and given over to oblivion, because they are no longer moved by love, hatred, or envy toward the living, just as neither are the living toward the dead; and so both forget the others, according to the saying: 'Spite feeds on the living; after death it rests.' Hence Campensis translates: nor do they have friends or enemies any longer, nor anyone to rival, etc. Now this maxim teaches and warns that the affections and passions, whose roots and leaders are love and hatred, must be restrained by the living through the fear of death, which extinguishes them all; hence Titelmannus, and from him Pineda, expounds it fully and movingly thus: Just as death puts an end to love and hatred — that is, just as the deceased is no longer touched by any love toward the living, nor can he do anything for which he might be loved; furthermore, as the deceased will be hated in vain by the living, since they have nothing to fear from him, nor does he himself bear any hatred toward the living; finally, as the same deceased does nothing by which he could provoke the living to rivalry, nor is he led by any envy toward them — so indeed by the thought of impending death one can easily restrain others' hatreds, love, and envy; one will also easily be called back from loving and envying.
NOR DO THEY HAVE ANY PART IN THIS WORLD. — Campensis: nothing is common to them any longer with this world, which they left with all that is in it. Hugo Cardinal, Lyranus, and Dionysius explain it of those dead through sin, as if to say: The dead in sins, namely the damned, do not share in the suffrages of the living, by which they pray for the deceased: for these benefit only the deceased who are in a state of grace and exist in purgatory, not the damned in hell. But this is a mystical interpretation. In the literal sense therefore the meaning is, as if to say: Whoever have departed life and died no longer have anything in common with this life and world, so as to use their possessions in the manner of the living here — eating, drinking, loving, hating, giving alms, dealing with us familiarly as they used to; rather, having departed from this world and all its duties and affairs, they have been transferred to another world entirely different from ours, where they find other companions, other customs, other affections, another life. This precisely, and nothing else, is what Saint Augustine means in the book On the Care of the Dead, chapters XV and XVI.
That this is the meaning is clear from the following verse, where from this he infers: 'Go therefore, and eat your bread with joy,' etc. Therefore the Reformers foolishly twist this passage against purgatory and suffrages for the dead, to prove that we should not pray for them and that our prayers do not benefit them. For these words are directed not against them, but against the avaricious, who continually heap up wealth until death, as if they were going to use it after death; to whom Solomon openly replies that the dead have no share and no wealth in this world; therefore the avaricious derive no fruit from their wealth either in life or in death: because in life they are unwilling to use it, and in death they cannot: and this is a great vanity.
Verse 7: GO THEREFORE, AND EAT YOUR BREAD WITH JOY, AND DRINK WITH GLADNESS (in Hebrew, 'with a good heart,' that is, joyful and cheerful, and so the Septuagint, Syriac, Arabic) YOUR WINE: BECAUSE YOUR WORKS ARE PLEASING TO GOD. — 'Your,' that is, owed to your nature and sustenance; second, 'your,' that is, acquired by your labor or industry; third, 'your,' that is, assigned and attributed to you by God. This is the conclusion drawn from what was said before, as if to say: Do not avariciously heap up wealth and hoard it, but use it modestly, moderately, honorably, and joyfully while you live, because after death you will not be permitted to use it. He has insisted on the same thing above again and again. Bread and wine signify any food and drink, but moderate and frugal.
Allegorically, Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Catechesis 4, takes bread and wine to mean the Eucharist, which we ought to receive as a divine banquet — indeed, God Himself incarnate — with the greatest joy, as well as reverence and devotion. Consequently, by the oil that follows, he takes the sacrament of Confirmation, whose matter is oil mixed with balsam. By the white garments he takes baptism: for the baptized would put these on. Likewise Olympiodorus, Saint Jerome, Albinus, and others take bread and wine to mean the Eucharist.
Anagogically, the Chaldean: 'Solomon said,' he says, 'in the prophetic spirit: From the presence of the Lord it shall come to pass that the Lord of the world will say to each of the just in the face of each one: Go, taste with joy your bread which has been stored for you on account of your bread which you gave to the poor and humble who was hungry; and drink with a joyful heart your wine, for your wine which you mixed for the poor and humble who were thirsty: for behold, these things were already well-pleasing before the Lord.'
BECAUSE YOUR WORKS ARE PLEASING TO GOD. — The Hebrew reads: because He already wills, that is, loves, approves, ratifies, and finds your works pleasing, God does; the Syriac: because God rests in your works; the Arabic: in your arts; Thaumaturgus: do you not see all these things granted by God? The Zurich Bible: for God now graciously grants you to enjoy your works. Some think it is irony, as if to say:
O pleasure-seeker, O Epicurean, indulge your pleasures, because you foolishly persuade yourself that in this very thing and your other works you are pleasing God. So our Prado on Ezekiel chapter XXIII, 42. But others more correctly think these words are spoken simply and seriously, as if to say: Use your resources honorably and modestly for your own needs and those of your needy neighbors, because these are works of temperance and almsgiving, which are pleasing to God. So the Chaldean, whose words I have already quoted. Or, as Isidore Clarius says, as if to say: Live cheerfully, if you have a pious confidence about your works, that God approves them, in that your conscience does not reproach you, nor accuse you of any fault. Or, as a concession, as if to say: Live joyfully, because, as I presuppose and concede to you, your works are pleasing to God. Hence Saint Ambrose, in the Exhortation to Virgins: 'Do you wish,' he says, 'to follow true joy? Make your works pleasing to God.' Hence some think that the word 'because' gives the condition for joy, as if to say: Enjoy your resources, but on this law and condition, that you please God through good works, especially through the blessing of the table before food and the thanksgiving after it, by which you testify that you have received all things from God, and give Him thanks for them, and spend them in His honor, as the first Christians used to do, especially in the Agape, that is, the communal feast for all the faithful after the sacred Eucharistic assembly. All these senses come to the same thing, and signify that the cause of true joy is the zeal of pleasing God everywhere and in all actions through a pure and holy life. Famous is that saying of Saint Bernard: 'Do you wish never to be sad? Live well. A good life always has joy; the conscience of a guilty person is always in punishment.' And that of Solomon: 'A secure mind is like a perpetual feast,' Proverbs XV, 15. And that of Saint Paul: 'Our glory is this, the testimony of our conscience,' II Corinthians I, 12. And that of the Psalmist: 'Light has risen for the just, and joy for the upright of heart,' Psalm XCVI, 11. For, as the Apostle says, Galatians V, 22: 'The fruit of the Spirit is joy.' Hence Saint Bonaventure in the Mirror of Discipline, part I, chapter III: 'The greatest sign,' he says, 'of indwelling grace is spiritual joy.' I have said more on this matter at chapter III, 12, and frequently elsewhere.
Verse 8: AT ALL TIMES LET YOUR GARMENTS BE WHITE, AND LET NOT OIL BE LACKING FROM YOUR HEAD. — For 'white' the Hebrew has לבנים lebanim, that is, white; hence the moon is called לבנה lebana, that is, white, serene, bright; in Greek λευκή, that is, white, also clean, clear, splendid. Hence water, spring, summer, a river, speech, and verse are called λευκά, that is, white, meaning serene, clean, bright. For whiteness is a color that has much light. Hence the white garment of Christ in His passion is called by Saint Luke, chapter IX, 29, λαμπρά, that is, shining and splendid. Following this, Campensis translates: at all times let your garments be splendid, and let your head be continually anointed with ointment.
By the whiteness of garments and the anointing of oil he indicates and recommends three things, namely, propriety in clothing, pleasantness at meals, and joy of mind. The first meaning, therefore, is, as if to say: Wear honorable, clean, and becoming, that is, white and splendid clothing, so that you may maintain your dignity, and not walk about in filthy and cheap clothing out of avarice, so as to be considered stingy, common, and abject. Hence holy men took honorable care of their garments, that they might be clean. Hence poverty in clothing always pleased Saint Bernard and our Saint Ignatius, but never filthiness.
Second, as if to say: At baths and banquets dine pleasantly, and dressed in white and anointed with oil, in the manner of the people, recline at the table, and there enjoy good things, and pass your life as pleasantly as possible with the fear of God, and do not hoard and pile up your wealth for an uncertain future heir. For white garments and oil are symbols of baths and banquets, because in ancient times guests, coming from the baths, would recline at the table clothed in a white garment, which they called tricliniaria or cenatoria, because they dined in it.
Third, as if to say: 'Be joyful at all times,' as Vatablus translates; for joy is denoted by white garments and oil, that is, fragrant ointments (for oil is the base of ointments), which the ancients — not only Greeks and Romans, but also Hebrews and other Eastern peoples — frequently used, especially at banquets; both for the sake of sanctity and of temperance, lest they become drunk with wine; and for the sake of pleasure, fragrance, and softness. For, as Plutarch teaches in the Table Talk, pleasant odors, being warm, heat, relax, and strengthen the cold and contracted brain with their warmth and gentleness, and dry and purify the senses; whereby it happens that one resists the vapors of wine and consequent drunkenness more easily and powerfully, especially because the odors open the passages of the brain, so that through them the fumes of wine are dispersed and evaporate; some ointments are also cooling, whence they blunt the heat of wine. Finally, all of them nourish and sustain the pure and clear spirits of the head. For this reason the ancients said that Pallas, the goddess of wisdom, to whom the olive was dedicated, was born from the brain of Jupiter: by which they signified that the anointing of oil, that is, of ointments, contributes greatly to the head, that is, to the mind and wisdom; and with ointments they not only anointed the head, but also sometimes drank them mixed with wine. Hence Martial: 'You drink luxuriously, if you thirst for foliata.' And hence Juvenal, satire 6: 'When the ointments foam, drenched with Falernian wine.' All these things pertain to the signs and modes of enjoyment of wealth that precede and follow. For Solomon, after reviewing the vanities of things and wealth, according to his custom adds this remedy and counsel: Enjoy your resources. He did the same at chapter VIII, 51.
Note: He alludes to the garment of the ancients — first, the common and ordinary one, which for the Romans and other ancients was white, either because the color white, as Plato holds, is proper to joy; or rather because that rude age, that rustic and simple early people, with artificial colors unknown or despised, retained the natural color of the wool, that is, white. Now they would from time to time wash this white garment when soiled by use, especially on feast days, for the sake of cleanliness.
Second, he alludes to the garment of the ancients not the common one, but the festive and honorable one, especially the cenatoria (dinner garment), which guests reclining at table would put on — a linen and white garment, both among the Romans and among the Jews, as Philo teaches in the book On the Contemplative Life ('wearing white,' he says, 'they celebrated the banquets of the festivals'). For the color white, according to Plutarch in his Problems, chapter XXVI, is supremely natural, simple, pure, transparent, and bright, since it has the most light. Hence they used a white garment, but a more splendid one than the common everyday one, at banquets, at sacred rites, when seeking magistracies (hence those campaigning went about in white, and were called candidati), at manumissions, in the military, at festivals, at spectacles, at triumphs, at weddings. For the white garment signifies, first, simple character; second, pure and noble character; third, joy; fourth, freedom; fifth, victory; sixth, happiness. Hear Prudentius Against Symmachus:
'You may see the fathers exult, the most beautiful lights of the world, and the council of aged Catos rejoice to assume in a whiter toga the snowy garment of piety.'
And Horace, book II Sermons, satire 2:
'He, dressed in white, celebrates the drinking parties, birthdays, and other festive days.'
Tertullian, in the book On the Resurrection of the Flesh, chapter LVII: 'If you set your servant free,' he says, 'he is honored with the shining of a white garment, the distinction of a gold ring, and a patron's name and tribe and table.' Cicero, in the book On the Laws: 'The color white,' he says, 'is especially becoming to God, both in other things and most of all in textiles.' Hence the ancients, dressed in white, used to pray. Whence that passage of Persius:
'May Jupiter deny this to him, even though a woman dressed in white were to ask you.'
Again, the garment of kings and princes was white and precious. Such was Solomon's, about which Josephus, book VIII of the Antiquities, chapter II: 'And Solomon,' he says, 'borne aloft on a royal chariot, clothed in a white garment.' Hence Christ implies that lilies were interwoven into it, Matthew VI, 28 and 29; and Pineda teaches this, book V On the Affairs of Solomon, chapter VI. For a white radiance represents a certain heavenly majesty, and is in God like an ornament of divinity, Daniel VII, 9. Lucan, book X, thus depicts Cleopatra's garment:
'Her white breast shines through Sidonian thread.'
And Martial, book VIII, chapter XXVIII, compares the precious white garment given to him by Parthenius with lilies:
'You surpass lilies, and privet not yet fallen, and ivory that gleams on the Tiburtine mount; the Spartan swan shall yield to you, and Paphian doves, and gems drawn from the Red Sea shallows.'
Finally, Saint James, chapter II, 2, depicting the garment of the rich man and a noble man, he writes: 'If a man wearing a gold ring in a white garment enters your assembly.' The author of the Convivial writings proves the same point at greater length from Plato, Tertullian, Lactantius, Plautus, Persius, Cicero, and others, book II, chapter XXVI; and Lipsius, book I of the Electa, chapter XIII, where he teaches that the garments of the Romans were formerly white. Hence Sisinius, bishop of the Novatians, a soft and delicate man, who washed twice a day and always wore a white garment, and was reproved for this by someone, excused himself with this saying of Ecclesiastes and the example of Moses and Elijah, whom he said wore white garments, as Socrates reports, book VI, chapter XXII. But wrongly. For Ecclesiastes here does not recommend softness, luxury, and an Epicurean life, but moderation and decent propriety in dress. Hence Jerome, book II, epistle 14: 'Avoid dark clothing,' he says, 'equally with white. Ornamentation and filthiness are to be equally avoided, because the one smacks of luxury, the other of vainglory.' Extremes are therefore to be avoided, so that clothing be neither too dark and filthy nor too white and splendid, but hold a mean between the two. Hence the same Jerome to Eustochium: 'Let your garment,' he says, 'be neither too clean nor filthy, and not notable for any peculiarity.' And Seneca: 'Let the toga neither shine nor be dirty.' This is the literal sense, beneath which another, symbolic and moral sense, and that a more important one, lies hidden.
Tropologically, therefore, the meaning is, as if to say: Let the body and its members, as well as works (for both are like garments of the soul) be white, that is, pure, sincere, clean, so that through them we may become candidates for the most pure and most blessed immortality; and this 'at all times,' as if to say: No age, no day, no hour, no moment, no duty, no action, no leisure or business, throughout the whole time of life should be empty of sincerity and innocence, but let both always and everywhere shine forth in you and in your actions and gestures. So Saint Gregory, IX Moralia, chapter XIX; and Saint Jerome: 'Keep your body clean,' he says, 'and be merciful.' The same author, book I Against Jovinian: 'The everlasting whiteness of garments,' he says, 'is the purity of virginity.' So also Saint Ambrose, Exhortation to Virgins: 'At all times,' he says, 'let your garments be white. What is whiter than virginity? What is more resplendent than the garment of untouched modesty? Good indeed is conjugal chastity and the chastity of widowhood. All chastity is clean, but perhaps not all is white, or not white at all times. It is not white when one does not have power over one's own body, when prayer is set aside for a time. Of virginity, therefore, it is beautifully said: At all times let your garments be white, and oil upon your head, so that your torches may always be able to shine and not be extinguished when the heavenly Bridegroom begins to come. But what anointing on your head Ecclesiastes meant, we gather from other passages. Because the eyes of man are in his head, that is, the senses of your wisdom.' Furthermore, Philo Carpathius in his commentary on the Canticles, volume I of the Library of the Holy Fathers, page 671, says: 'At all times let your garments be white: while the faithful soul,' he says, 'cleanses itself from daily sins through penance, while daily it washes away lesser sins with tears and guards itself against greater ones, although it frequently sins, yet through continual penance it perpetually preserves its cleanliness.' This is always true, but especially at the time when the Eucharist is to be received: for then the mind is to be clothed with all whiteness and purity, and it is fitting to represent this by the outward cleanliness of garments. Hence in ancient times Christians about to receive Communion would wash their hands, so that with washed and pure hands they might receive the Eucharist; for in those days it was given not into the mouth, as now, but into the hand of the communicants, who then bringing it to their mouths would receive the Eucharist; women indeed would cover their hand with a white linen cloth, and with it receive the Eucharist. Hear Saint Augustine, sermon 252 On the Times: 'All men,' he says, 'when they desire to receive Communion, wash their hands, and all women produce clean linen cloths on which to receive the Body of Christ. What I say is not burdensome, brothers: men wash their hands with water; likewise let them wash their consciences with almsgiving.' Similarly also women: when 'they produce a clean linen cloth on which to receive the Body of Christ, let them likewise present a chaste body and a pure heart, so that they may receive the Sacrament of Christ with a good conscience. I ask you, brothers: is there anyone who would want to put his garment in a chest full of filth? And if a precious garment is not put in a chest full of filth, with what face is the Eucharist of Christ received in a soul polluted with the filth of sins?' Therefore whiteness denotes purity, oil denotes mercy, as well as spiritual joy. For these accompany each other; for the whiteness of garments, that is, the splendor of grace, is nourished by the oil of mercy. So Olympiodorus, Salonius, and Albinus here. Hence the Chaldean translates: at all times let your garments be washed from every contagion of sin, and a good name, which is compared to ointment, acquire for yourself, so that blessings upon blessings (that is, many blessings) may come upon your head, and your goodness may not fail.
Hence Clement of Alexandria, book II of the Pedagogue, as a teacher instructing the churches of Egypt, recommends that they use white garments, and we believe that by his institution Christians in Egypt used white garments, says Baronius, at the year of Christ 256. Hence it happened that when Saint Anthony, desirous of martyrdom, came before the tribunal, he put on white garments, so that from them he might be recognized as a Christian. 'Girded with a gleaming white garment, he provoked the approaching judge by his appearance, burning with desire for martyrdom,' says Saint Athanasius in his Life. Hence also the 'Essenes,' who under Saint Mark flourished with wonderful holiness at Alexandria, 'are always clothed in white garments,' says Saint Eusebius, book IX of the Preparation, chapter I. In other places, however, Christians used black garments as a sign of modesty, gravity, and penance. Again, Saint Gregory, II Moralia XXVII: 'Oil on the head,' he says, 'is charity in the mind; and oil fails from the head when charity departs from the mind.' and by the whiteness of their garments they would represent the confidence and hope of blessed happiness. Wherefore St. Chrysostom, when about to die, laid aside his ordinary garments down to his shoes, and put on white ones as a martyr clothed in white for eternal life. For the day before, St. Basiliscus the martyr had invited and summoned him in a vision, saying: "John, my brother, tomorrow shall unite us in the same place." Wherefore he, joyful and singing: "Glory be to God, the cause of all things," breathed forth his spirit into His hands, to be blessed with the vision of God, in the 52nd year of his age, in the year of Christ 407. So Baronius from Palladius, vol. V, p. 255.
Memorable is what Victor of Utica narrates, book III of the Vandal Persecution, about Murita the deacon: namely, that when he stood before the judge Elpidophorus, who had apostatized from the faith, to be condemned, he publicly displayed the white garments with which he had clothed him at Baptism, and moved everyone to tears; for he exclaimed: "These are the linens, Elpidophorus, minister of error, which shall accuse you when the majesty of the Judge shall come, preserved by my diligence as a testimony of your perdition, to plunge you into the abyss of the sulfurous pit. These clothed you spotless when you rose from the font; these shall pursue you more fiercely when you begin to possess the flaming Gehenna, because you have put on a curse like a garment, rending and casting away the sacrament of true Baptism and faith," etc.
Again, priests celebrate in white vestments. Hence Isidore says, in his epistle to Redemptus, teaching that the corporal, upon which the sacred host is placed, ought to be of pure linen, not of silk: "But perhaps you object, he says, that silk cloth is more precious than linen, and therefore more suited to divine uses. To which we say that in both Testaments the whiteness of garments is especially approved, because in it sincerity of mind is required, which is known to be more pleasing to God than all other virtues. That this may appear more clearly to your charity desiring to attain it, we shall demonstrate with testimonies of Sacred Scripture. For it says: Let your garments be white at all times; and the Lord's priests were clothed over with a linen ephod for the sake of excellence. The Gospel also clearly testifies that at the Lord's Transfiguration His garments appeared white as snow. And in the Apocalypse, those who stood before the Lamb, and who follow Him wherever He goes, are said to be clothed in white robes, and very many other things. What among cloths is as clean as linen, whose whiteness is increased by frequent washing, whereas in silks it seems rather to be darkened?"
Hence finally in the Life of St. Montanus the martyr and his companions, disciples of St. Cyprian, written by themselves in the spirit of martyrdom, as Surius reports under the 24th of February, we read that he received the omen of martyrdom through a white garment shown him by God. For thus he narrates about himself and his companions: "It seemed to me that centurions had come to us. And when they were leading us along a long road, we arrived at an immense field, in which Cyprian and Leutius met us. We came moreover to a white place, and our garments became white, and our flesh was changed, becoming whiter than our white garments. And our flesh was so translucent that it admitted the sight of the eyes to the inmost parts of the heart. And looking into my breast, I see certain stains, and I awoke in the vision. And Lucian met me, and I related the vision to him, and I say to him: You know that those stains — that is because I did not immediately agree with Julian?" He then adds the vision of Flavian, who was Montanus's companion in martyrdom: "It was shown to me, he says, as if I were questioning Cyprian himself (who shortly before had been crowned with martyrdom together with Pope St. Cornelius) whether the future martyr would feel pain from the blows, he who was consulting about the endurance of suffering, saying: Another flesh suffers (not the flesh of the martyr himself), when the soul is in heaven, and this body feels nothing at all, when it devotes itself wholly to God."
Anagogically, the white or splendid garment signifies the brightness and splendor of heavenly glory, for which we yearn and which we seek, as candidates for it, so that it may always be before our eyes and mind, and thus we may enter upon a holy and heavenly life. Hence the garment of Christ in glory appeared white as snow, Matt. 17:2. Angels too, announcing not Christ's nativity, as St. Gregory notes, homily 45 on the Gospels, but His resurrection, appeared clothed in white to Magdalene. Hence also in Apocalypse 3:5, Christ promises white garments to the blessed: "He who conquers, He says, shall thus be clothed in white garments;" and ch. 7:9: "Clothed in white robes, and palms in their hands;" and ch. 19:8: "And it was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, shining and white; for the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints." See what I have noted on those passages. Hence the Essenes went about clothed in white, as if candidates for eternity, representing by the whiteness of their garments their firm faith and hope of blessed happiness.
Verse 9: ENJOY LIFE WITH THE WIFE WHOM YOU LOVE, ALL THE DAYS OF YOUR UNSTABLE LIFE, WHICH HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO YOU UNDER THE SUN, ALL THE TIME OF YOUR VANITY: FOR THIS IS YOUR PORTION IN LIFE, AND IN YOUR LABOR WITH WHICH YOU LABOR UNDER THE SUN. — In Hebrew it is "see life," that is, frequently taste life, enjoy life, and the sweetness and comforts of life, yet honestly and modestly with your spouse and companion. Hence Olympiodorus says: Conjugal chastity is for us the conciliator of eternal life.
ALL THE DAYS OF YOUR UNSTABLE LIFE. — The Hebrew says "of your vanity." Hence it is clear that the vanity of this life is life's instability, namely that it is unstable, brief, changeable, and fleeting, because it immediately vanishes in sickness and death. Hence Aquila translates it "vapor." of Christ; Vatablus, "of your frivolous life"; the Scholiast, "of your youth" — with the most vain vanity all your days are filled. Thaumaturgus thinks all these things are said from the mind not of Solomon, but of the Epicureans. Hence he adds the reason: For beyond these things nothing remains for you either in this life or after death. But it seems altogether that Solomon speaks from his own sense, as I have said.
Mystically, the wife is wisdom and virtue; to this one alone the whole of life must be pleasantly devoted, because she alone will accompany us after death, and will make us blessed, and place us in heaven. So St. Jerome says: "Follow wisdom and the knowledge of the Scriptures, and unite her to yourself in marriage, of whom it is said in Proverbs, chapter IV: Love her, and she will preserve you; embrace her, and she will surround you." And shortly after: "For you will not be able without such a wife to see life alone, etc. For this is our portion, and the fruit of labor, if in this shadowy life we can find the true life (in heaven)," through the teaching and guidance of wisdom and virtue.
Verse 10: WHATEVER YOUR HAND IS ABLE TO DO, WORK AT IT EARNESTLY: FOR THERE IS NEITHER WORK, NOR REASON, NOR WISDOM, NOR KNOWLEDGE IN THE REALM OF THE DEAD, TO WHICH YOU ARE HASTENING. — "Hand" means the faculty and operative power: for although as regards invention, conception, and arrangement it resides in the head and brain, nevertheless as regards execution and operation it is in the hand; that is to say: Whatever you can do, do it earnestly. Thaumaturgus, whom Cajetan and Arias follow, thinks these words too are spoken from the mind of the Epicureans; hence he translates: "Enjoy therefore the present things; nor should you fear the underworld, to which we are all said to go: for it is devoid of wisdom and sense. These indeed are the triflings of the vain." But better, St. Jerome, Albinus, Lyranus, Bonaventure, Hugh, and others generally hold these words to be spoken from the mind of wisdom and the wise man. For he here suggests a most wise doctrine and counsel: that, since our life is vain and brief, and death presses upon us, we should do whatever good we can while life remains, because once it is spent, after death in the realm of the dead (to which in that age all descended, since heaven had not yet been opened by Christ's passion and ascension) nothing good by which we might merit the glory of heaven and an increase of glory will be permitted, according to that saying of Christ: "I must work the works of Him who sent Me, while it is day; the night comes, when no one can work;" and that of Paul: "While we have time, let us do good," Gal. 6:10; and: "Behold now is the acceptable time, behold now is the day of salvation," II Cor. 6:2. Here pertains the proverb of the Arabs, Cant. II, no. 13: "Riches and the world will pass away, but good works will endure; and no. 41: Do good whenever you can, to your household and to strangers; and speak good words to the good and the wicked alike;" and no. 42: "The world will pass away like erasable writing, wisdom is as enduring as sculpture;" and no. 44: "Provide for your soul good things in good works." These sayings seem drawn from this passage of Solomon.
For "to do" in Hebrew is "to find to do" — not by chance or accident, as Thaumaturgus seems to intend, but by effort and deliberate counsel. Therefore "to find" means the same as to seek, to devise, and by devising to discover; it is a catachresis. The Chaldean restricts it to almsgiving, as if to say: Having put your hand into your purse, whatever you find in it, bring it out and give it to the poor; hence he translates thus: "Every alms that your hand can distribute to the poor, do, because after death there is neither work for a man, nor reason, nor wisdom, nor knowledge in the house of burial to which you go; and nothing will help except good works and almsgiving alone." But this general statement pertains to all good works, as if to say: Whatever good, whatever virtue you can devise, do it, because your life will soon end, after which you will be able to devise nothing, do nothing, merit nothing. Hence Nazianzen says that our life is a marketplace, in which merchandise of every kind is displayed for sale, so that everyone may buy as much as he wishes; but when this marketplace of life is ended, the goods are carried away elsewhere, so that no one can buy even the least thing further. Whatever work therefore of charity, patience, humility, prayer, mortification, and any virtue you can devise, do it at once, because soon you will be able to do nothing more. How the blessed in heaven would wish to still have time for meriting! How the damned would wish to have even one hour of repenting and doing good! And if they had it, what would they not do? But the door of life and merit is closed to them. You who live and are wise, embrace with both hands every occasion of doing good; indeed, constantly seek and devise new and new ones. For you can here gain not ten thousand, but many millions daily — indeed, every hour and moment — stored up for yourself in heaven, if you persist in heroic acts of virtue. Hence Symmachus translates: "All things to which your hand reaches," that is, to which it can reach and extend itself, do.
WORK AT IT EARNESTLY. — In Hebrew becochacha, that is, "in your strength," that is, with all your powers, with all your might, with all your effort. This word therefore signifies and requires, first, the zeal, effort, and striving of the will and of all faculties and powers in the practice of many and great virtues; second, constancy and perseverance; third, fervor; fourth, solicitude and speed, says Bonaventure and Hugh, so that from morning to evening, from infancy to old age, you may apply yourself to good works, and be diligent and solicitous in them, so as to perform heroic deeds, advancing from virtue to virtue;
Here pertains the maxim of Solomon, and from Sirach 14:17: "Before your death, work justice: for there is no finding food in the realm of the dead;" where I said more on this matter. Solomon adds this, lest anyone from what has been said think that what is urged is merely that one should lead a pleasant life and pursue pleasure like Epicurus. He adds therefore that to a pleasant life must be joined the pursuit of good works, for he defined the happiness of this life above as consisting in that.
Hence Job 9:25 compares our life to a runner, to ships, and to eagles, which are the swiftest and most fleeting: "My days, he says, were swifter than a runner: they fled, and saw no good. They passed by like ships carrying fruit (for these pass very quickly, lest the fruit rot), like an eagle flying to its prey." The same, Wisdom 5:11, compares it to a bird in flight, a messenger running, an arrow shot. "Whence also holy men, says St. Gregory, book VII Moralia, ch. 14, because they constantly look upon the brevity of life, live as if dying daily; and they prepare themselves the more solidly for things that will endure, the more they always judge from the end that transitory things are nothing. Hence indeed the Psalmist, seeing the life of the sinner flee with swift course, says: Yet a little while, and the wicked shall be no more, Ps. 36:10. Hence he says again: Man, his days are like grass, Ps. 102:15. Hence Isaiah says 40:6: All flesh is grass, and all its glory like the flower of the field. Hence James 4:15 corrects the minds of the presumptuous: What is your life? It is a vapor appearing for a little while."
From what has been said, it is clear that heretics foolishly twist this passage against purgatory. For Solomon here denies only one's own merits, not the suffrages of others, and says that for no one in the realm of the dead is there a place and time for working and meriting; but he does not deny that souls being purified in purgatory are helped by the prayers and good works of the living, because they themselves, while they lived, merited by their virtues that after death they could be aided by the suffrages of the living, says St. Gregory, IV Dialogues, 39. Add that souls who are in hell properly so called, that is in Gehenna, can be freed by no works of the living. So St. Jerome.
Moreover, some flatter themselves about plenary indulgences, which they will obtain at the hour of death through blessed medals or by some other means, and therefore they live more freely, and commit many venial sins in the hope of this indulgence, as if through it they will go straight to heaven without purgatory; but these are deceived and deceive themselves, both because they abuse indulgences in order to sin more freely, and therefore deserve that God deprive them of indulgences; and because from histories and apparitions it is established that very few after death escape purgatory. The reason is that indulgences do not take away guilt, but only the punishment due for guilt already forgiven. Now in many who are dying, venial sins cling, and many die in them, either because in dying, when tempted by the devil or concupiscence, they easily consent to impatience and venial sins, into which they frequently fell when healthy, and so they die in the attachment and act of venial sin: and it is certain that these are cleansed by no indulgence; or because when healthy they perpetrated many venial sins, in whose guilt and faults they remain and die; for venial sins are sometimes forgiven with more difficulty than mortal ones, because both are blotted out only by serious detestation, that is contrition, and an efficacious resolution of abstaining from them henceforth: but it is easier until you see the God of gods in Zion. Hence the Syriac translates: "Whatever your hand can do, do it in your strength"; the Arabic: "Do according to your power"; the Complutensians: "According to your power"; Olympiodorus: "As much as your ability permits"; the Zurich Bible: "As much as you can, act according to your manly portion"; Campensis: "Do it vigorously." So St. Cassius, Bishop of Narni, as St. Gregory testifies, IV Dialogues, ch. 16, and homily 37 on the Gospels, shortly before death heard from God: "Do what you are doing, work what you are working, let your hand not cease, let your foot not cease; on the birthday of the Apostles you will come to Me, and I will repay you your reward."
FOR THERE IS NEITHER WORK (that is, place and time for working and meriting) NOR REASON. — The Hebrew says: "Nor thought," as if to say: There will be no time for thinking, and for seeking a way and means of acting. Hence Campensis translates: "No counsel"; others: "No calculation, nor wisdom for investigating divine things, and for knowing, loving, worshiping, and meriting God by new methods and acts." "Nor knowledge" — for practicing arts and virtues. Hence Campensis translates: "Nor prudence will be in the realm of the dead." This is the reason a priori why one must work earnestly in life, because after it no one will be able to work, nor to deliberate, nor to discern, nor to love, says Bonaventure; not to work, not to plead, not to know the method of labor and contemplation, says Hugh the Cardinal; not to work externally, not to meditate in the mind, not to know human affairs, nor divine, says Lyranus. Hence St. Gregory, homily 13 on the Gospels: "Because, he says, we are ignorant of the time of coming death, and after death we cannot work, it remains that we seize the time granted before death. For thus death itself when it comes will be conquered, if before it comes it is always feared." A similar sharp maxim is that of R. Tarphon in Pirke Avoth, chapter II: "The day is short, and the work is great; the workers are lazy and slow, the reward is ample; and the master of the house pressing toward the completion of the work urges and pushes."
A memorable example is found in Thomas of Cantimpre, book I of the Bees, ch. 19, no. 6, which Genebrard and Albert the Great also recount, in the book On the Sacraments: Philip, they say, the Chancellor of Paris, after death appeared as a dark shade to William, Bishop of Paris, and said that he was damned for lust and plurality of benefices, and because he had not distributed their surplus fruits to the poor, and he asked the Bishop: "Is the world, he said, ended?" And the Bishop said: "I marvel that you, once the most learned of men, should ask this, when you see me still alive, and it is necessary that all of us living must still die before the world ends at the approaching judgment." And he said: "Do not marvel, because there is neither knowledge, nor work, nor reason for one coming to the realm of the dead." And saying this, the shade vanished from the eyes of the astonished man.
TO WHICH YOU ARE HASTENING. — The Chaldean adds: "And nothing will help you except good works and justice alone." to be certainly contrite about mortal sins because of their manifest turpitude, and to resolve effectively to abstain from them henceforth, out of fear of hell, than about venial sins — especially so many and frequent ones, so common and habitual, in which there is no fear of hell, nor does such great turpitude appear. For that serious contrition and purpose of abstaining are often lacking in these matters is clear from the fact that many, after confessing them, immediately and perpetually relapse into them: therefore serious and effective contrition, which commonly extends to mortal sins and graver venial sins, blots these out; but because the same does not extend to lighter and daily venial sins, which are many, therefore it does not abolish them; the guilt of these therefore remains, and consequently the liability to punishment to be suffered in purgatory, where souls, by eliciting serious contrition, cleanse the venial sins remaining in them, and then pay the penalty for those same sins by the fire of purgatory. For the abolition of these, therefore, no indulgence suffices. With fear and trembling, then, let us work out our salvation, as the Apostle urges; let us studiously avoid every venial sin, and if we fall into any, let us immediately elicit serious contrition for them, by which we may blot out the guilt, and then the remaining liability to punishment will be removed by indulgence.
Verse 11: I TURNED TO ANOTHER THING, AND I SAW UNDER THE SUN THAT THE RACE IS NOT TO THE SWIFT, NOR THE BATTLE TO THE STRONG, NOR BREAD TO THE WISE, NOR RICHES TO THE LEARNED, NOR FAVOR TO THE SKILLFUL; BUT TIME AND CHANCE IN ALL THINGS. — Briefly the sense is, as if to say: The swift do not always have a swift course in their power, nor the strong the strength by which to overcome the enemy in battle, nor the wise the means of procuring food for themselves, nor the learned of procuring wealth, nor the skillful favor; but in all these things time and chance often prevail and predominate, frequently retarding and impeding these things, or inciting and advancing them; and above all God, who is the Lord of time and chance. He notes here the vanity of speed, strength, wisdom, prudence, skill; and of the swift, the strong, the wise, the prudent, the skillful, because time and chance often dominate them. Now,
First, Moringus and David de Pomis hold that these are still the words both of atheists and Epicureans, barking against divine providence and denying it; and of the lazy who flee labor, as if to say: Why should I labor and worship God, when I see that the fruit often does not correspond to the labor? For frequently he who runs swiftly in the race is by some chance overtaken by a slower one, who snatches the prize from him; those fighting bravely are sometimes overcome in war by the unwarlike; from the learned, the ignorant take away honors, offices, and wealth; from outstanding craftsmen, the unskilled, the garrulous, and seekers of popular favor take away the merit of their work. Therefore everything is done by chance, not by any certain providence of the divine will. So the atheists.
Second, conversely, Thaumaturgus holds that here the opinion of Epicureans gaping after pleasures is corrected, as if to say: Those err who run through pleasures toward the goal of happiness, and spend all their strength, all their talent, all their wisdom, all their skill upon them, in order to devise ever new and greater ones, because through all these things they do not attain the happiness and satisfaction they seek.
Third, more plainly Olympiodorus, Bonaventure, Lyranus, Cajetan, and Titelmann hold that Solomon here passes in his usual manner to another species of vanity, namely that the outcomes of things often do not depend on the strength, wisdom, or skill of the workers, but on occasion, chance, and fortune, which in the race and the prize often places the slow before the swift; in war and victory, the unwarlike before the warlike; in wealth and honors, the unlearned before the learned; in favor and success, the idle before the skillful. With these four he encompasses all the estates of men in the commonwealth, to show that chance often dominates all: by the swift, he means merchants who run about on business and traverse lands and seas for the sake of goods and profit; by the strong, soldiers who defend the republic; by the wise, teachers, jurists, lawyers, physicians, counselors who govern the republic; by the skillful, craftsmen who practice all arts — such as weaving, baking, shoemaking, tailoring, smithing, etc. — for all the needs of the citizens. In all of these, therefore, he shows that chance often avails more than counsel, skill, and industry; to this end: first, to show that vanity is inherent in all things. Second, to teach men not to be surprised if in this vanity the fruit often does not correspond to labor and industry, nor rewards to merits — indeed, that wealth and dignities due to the worthy are given to the unworthy and undeserving, and this by the hidden and inscrutable judgments of God, says Olympiodorus: wherefore each must await a just reward in the next life, so that from this vanity he may aspire to truth, and to the true life and happiness in heaven. So St. Jerome. Third, to warn the industrious and wise not to trust in their own industry, strength, wisdom, or skill, but in God, and to rely on God's providence, for it is God's to give happy successes and outcomes to every undertaking: it is God's to govern chance and fortune. For God so orders, combines, arranges, and directs all secondary causes, even contingent and free ones, that although they concur and produce what actually happens by chance, as far as their own nature is concerned, nevertheless as far as God is concerned, they are directed by certain counsel and wise providence, because all things are foreseen, provided for, preordained, and arranged by God, so that what happens, and not something else, comes about: wherefore in reality the fortune that gives fortune — that is, the one directing, ordering, and prospering all things — is none other than God and God's providence. Therefore chance and fortune, which intervenes not always indeed, but often in human affairs and works, manifestly shows God's providence, by which it is directed as a ship tossing on the sea is directed by a helmsman, without whom it would be sunk a thousand times. For likewise this world, composed of so many contrary and conflicting chances, would be overthrown and collapse, unless it were governed by God, who brings all those things into order, reduces to order, and harmonizes discords, and coordinates fortuitous events, and thus from all things produces a beautiful harmony, and as it were a certain musical concert. So teaches St. Thomas, I Part, Question 75, art. 6, ad 1. Here applies the old saying: "Fortune is to be implored with the wheel set in motion by the hand;" by which is signified that the help of the Deity is sought in vain unless you add your own industry and put your hand to the work. So Plutarch in the Laconic Sayings.
THE RACE IS NOT TO THE SWIFT. — The Hebrew says: "The race is not for the light-footed"; Campensis: "Rarely are the swift employed for running"; the Zurich Bible: "Speed of running brings no advantage for salvation"; Symmachus: "It is not for the swift to complete the race, whether in the stadium, in battle, on a journey, or in any other place and manner." Thaumaturgus: "Nor will those who are swiftest of foot accomplish this great race, so as to attain a happy life." The Chaldean: "Nor are men who were swift as eagles helped by running, so as to escape death in battle, according to Amos 2:14: 'Flight shall perish from the swift, and the strong shall not prevail in his strength, and the mighty shall not save his life: and he who holds the bow shall not stand, and the swift of foot shall not be saved, and the rider of the horse shall not save his life: and the stout-hearted among the mighty shall flee naked in that day, says the Lord.'" And Isaiah 30:16: "You said: We will flee on horses — therefore you shall flee. And we will ride on swift ones — therefore those who pursue you shall be swifter." Astrologers report, and among them Julius Firmicus, book VIII of the Mathesis, ch. 15, that those born under the star of Delphinus are swift: "He will be, says Firmicus, distinguished by an innate agility of running." Again, Pliny, book XI, ch. 37, reports that animals with a smaller lung are swifter: "The smaller this organ in their bodies, he says, the greater their speed," because they breathe less: for frequent breathing impedes running. He adds that "a particular impediment to running" is the spleen; "whence it is cauterized in runners who suffer from it, and they say that animals live even with it removed through a wound." Hence some have supposed that the spleen is cut out of runners to make them faster, but Pliny does not say this. The common people assert that runners have their spleen cut and removed so that they may run faster and without fatigue, and travel whole days continuously. But they misunderstand the true matter. For in runners suffering from the spleen, the spleen is not removed or excised, but it is "cut," that is, beaten and pounded with a wooden knife suited for the purpose, so that its swelling may subside, and it may become smaller and tighter, and hold less blood: whereby, being now smaller, tighter, and lighter, it less impedes the neighboring lungs from moving freely and widely, from exhaling and inhaling, and thus the speed of walking and running is aided: for this is impeded by difficulty of breathing, which in the lungs arises from the swelling of the neighboring spleen, which constricts and weighs them down; when this is reduced, they are lighter and breathe freely and easily, and therefore make a person nimble for walking and running. So physicians and surgeons in Rome affirmed to me, who stated that they themselves regularly did this, and thus cured those with spleen disease. Physicians add that diseases of the spleen are healed by running. An example of this maxim is found in St. Jerome's Life of St. Hilarion: for he, by providing holy water to Italicus, gave him victory in the chariot race against a rival who practiced sorcery: "Therefore, he says, at the given signal these fly forward, those are impeded; under the wheels of these the course blazes, those scarcely see the backs of those flying past; the shouting of the crowd becomes excessive, so that even the pagans themselves cried out: Marnas has been conquered by Christ. The undoubted victory was therefore for many at the Circus an occasion of faith." Here applies the proverb of the Spaniards: "The lame run to the pilgrimage of St. James just as well as the healthy, indeed the lame arrive quickly, the fast and hasty ones late, or never." Here likewise pertains the ancient fable, which our Pontanus recounts, Progymnasmata, vol. III, part I, ch. 40. The tortoise undertook a contest with the eagle over a set distance. A goal was established, and whichever of them arrived first would have the victory. The eagle flies off, despising the tortoise for its slowness, and trusting in its wings often rests, often wanders elsewhere and acts sluggishly, sometimes rests the whole night, and begins its flight only well into the day. But the tortoise does not interrupt its labor for even a moment. Day and night it travels, and creeps to the designated place. It conquers the eagle by its diligence, not by speed, and holds the goal, when it was still thought to be far from it.
Mystically, this is truer in the spiritual race of the way of virtues, salvation, and happiness, according to that saying of Paul: "It is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy," Rom. 9:16; and Habakkuk 3:19: "The Lord God is my strength: and He will make my feet like the feet of deer. And upon my high places He will lead me, the conqueror, singing in Psalms;" and Isaiah 40:31: "Those who hope in the Lord shall renew their strength, they shall mount up with wings like eagles, they shall run and not grow weary, they shall walk and not faint." See what I have noted on those passages.
NOR THE BATTLE TO THE STRONG (who are considered powerful and terrible, says Thaumaturgus). — Symmachus: "To win the battle"; the Septuagint: "Nor the battle to the powerful"; the Syriac: "Nor the battle to the giant, according to that saying: 'A giant shall not be saved by his great strength,'" Ps. 32:16. Thus Goliath the giant was overcome and slain in single combat by the small David, I Kings 17:49; Holofernes by a woman. The Chaldean: "Nor are the strong helped when they enter battle by their own strength, according to that saying: 'He shall not delight in the strength of the horse, nor shall He take pleasure in the legs of a man,'" Ps. 146:10. Less correctly Campensis translates: "Nor are the strong employed to wage wars"; better the Zurich Bible: "Nor can warlike strength rescue anyone."
By the strong, therefore, understand here strong in body rather than in spirit and warlike courage; for nothing is so uncertain as the outcome of war: for the smallest thing, such as a favorable or adverse wind, gives or takes away victory. Hence in Scripture, victory is said to belong to God, according to that saying of Judas Maccabeus: "It is easy to deliver many into the hands of few: and there is no difference in the sight of the God of heaven to deliver with many or with few: for the victory of war is not in the multitude of the army, but strength comes from heaven," I Macc. 3:18; and that of David: "Blessed be the Lord my God, who teaches my hands to fight, and my fingers to war," Ps. 143:1. Even Ovid, Metamorphoses VII:
"Between both sides victory flies on doubtful wings, / Mars is uncertain."
And Livy, book II: "Nowhere less than in war does the outcome correspond; therefore nothing is so slight that it cannot become a turning point of a great matter;" indeed, sometimes by fear alone, and a panic terror falling upon the enemies by chance — or rather sent from heaven — victory has been won without arms, as was the case with Gideon, Judges 8; and with Jehoshaphat, IV Kings 3:22. Very many similar examples exist in the books of Judges, Kings, and Maccabees.
NOR BREAD TO THE WISE. — Symmachus: "To provide nourishment." In Hebrew there is a beautiful allusion and paronomasia: lachacamim, that is, "to the wise," corresponding to lechem, that is, bread is often lacking. Some take "the wise" to mean farmers, who, however industrious, due to barrenness, plundering, and devastation, sometimes lack grain and bread. Better to take it as meaning the literate and learned, such as philosophers and theologians, who are often poor because they devote themselves entirely to speculation and wisdom, which surpasses wealth, rather than to amassing gold, which the unlettered and manual workers do. Hence the proverb of the Rabbis: "Famine arose, but did not pass through the door of the craftsman," because by their art craftsmen easily procure their livelihood. Hear St. Jerome: "Bread, he says, is not for the wise; this is proven daily by the example of many, who though most wise, lack necessities. The Chaldean: Nor will the wise man be helped by his wisdom, so as to be filled with bread in time of famine; Campensis: Indeed, the wise often lack the means of living."
NOR RICHES TO THE LEARNED. — For "learned" the Hebrew has nebonim, that is "of the understanding," as the Septuagint translates: "of the prudent, of the clever"; for we see that the industrious and clever are not rarely impoverished; Campensis translates: "the industrious"; Cajetan: "those of intellect." "Aristophanes in his comedy introduces Plutus as blind. But Demetrius said that not only Plutus, i.e. riches, is blind, but also Fortune, the guide of Plutus; so that it is now a proverb: The blind leading the blind. Fortune often lavishes her gifts on the unworthy." So Laertius, book V, ch. 5. Hence Thaumaturgus translates: "Nor is wisdom accustomed to have anything in common with riches"; Pagninus, reading nechonim instead of nebonim, translates: "Riches do not belong to the upright."
NOR FAVOR TO THE SKILLFUL. — The Syriac: "Nor glory to those who know"; Vatablus: "Those skilled in some art are not always in favor." For "skillful" the Hebrew has iodeim, that is "of those who know," as the Septuagint translates, by which Olympiodorus and Vatablus understand those who know the arts of winning men's favor and goodwill — for favor often flees from those eager for it, just as honor flees from those who pursue it, and follows those who flee from it; the Chaldean: "the prudent"; Thaumaturgus: "the sagacious"; Clarius: "the experienced and expert." But because these understand the word nebonim, which preceded, hence our translator aptly renders it "craftsmen," namely those skilled in mechanical or mathematical arts and the like. St. Bonaventure holds that the first two, namely swiftness and strength, are gifts of the body, while the other three belong to the soul, for wisdom is in the heart, learning on the lips, skill in work. Outstanding craftsmen are usually held in favor and esteem by both princes and people, but not rarely some adverse chance brings about the contrary, and this is the vanity of arts and craftsmen, which Solomon here notes. Plutarch, in his book On Fortune, narrates that when Apelles was painting a panting horse and could not adequately express the panting, he threw his brush at the painting in anger, and thus by chance expressed the color of foam, and achieved what he was seeking, so as to win the admiration and favor of all.
BUT TIME AND CHANCE IN ALL THINGS. — The Hebrew: "But time and occurrence happens to all of them"; the Arabic: "It sustains them all"; the Chaldean: "Time and chance under their star happens to all" — for the Chaldeans referred the course and chances of human affairs to the stars, whence they divined about these from them; Campensis: "Time and chance removes them all from the midst"; but this seems foreign and contrary to the sense.
"Time" — that is, an opportunity favorable or unfavorable for accomplishing something, for he who seizes a favorable one successfully accomplishes the matter, while he who seizes an unfavorable one does so unsuccessfully: thus he who catches the soft moments for speaking obtains what he asks for; he who catches the harsh and rough ones suffers refusal. Time and opportunity therefore dominate the affairs to be managed, as I said in ch. 3:1. The encounter and concurrence of contingent causes, which, when they concur fortuitously, produce chance and a fortuitous effect. Cajetan by "time" understands the motion of the celestial spheres, which produce chance effects in sublunary things; Aben-Ezra by "chance" understands God's providence, for this, as I said at the beginning, governs all chances and fortuitous events, and therefore it is itself the fortune that gives fortune. Better, others by "chance" understand a casual cause and effect, which occurs in all things not always, but often. Hence St. Thomas, I Part, Quest. 75, art. 6, ad 1, and Quest. 5 de Veritate, art. 5, ad 5, notes cleverly that "time and chance" are said together: because, he says, according to a certain order of time, casual deficiencies are found in these things — e.g., that the more powerful frequently succumb — which shows that victory is more from divine providence than from human strength. St. Augustine says excellently, book III On the Trinity, ch. 4: "Nothing, he says, happens visibly and perceptibly that is not either commanded or permitted from the interior, invisible, and intelligible court of the supreme Emperor, according to the ineffable justice of rewards and punishments, graces and retributions, in this most ample and immense republic, as it were, of all creation."
Note: Chance or contingent effects are properly only those that come from a free cause, namely from God, an angel, a demon, or a man; for otherwise rains, winds, lightning, and other natural things are determined and certain in their causes; but when these causes are freely changed and combined by God, an angel, a demon, or a man, then contingent and chance effects proceed from them. Hence the Romans, Greeks, and other nations wonderfully worshiped Fortune as a goddess, indeed the first of the gods, who governs all things, and makes some beautiful, wealthy, and happy, others ugly, poor, and wretched; hence so many temples, so many altars, so many names of Fortune. "She herself, says St. Chrysostom, oration 63, is the victory of those waging war, and the concord of those keeping peace, and the goodwill of those contracting marriages, and the pleasure of lovers, and briefly the good success in every matter." Servius Tullius, says Plutarch, Roman Questions 74, "dedicated a temple to 'little fortune,' signifying that fortune can do very much in the smallest moments, and that it has happened to many that by quite small things, whether happening or occurring by chance, they obtained or lost the greatest things, teaching that the mind must be attentive to affairs, and that nothing offered should be neglected on account of its smallness;" the same again: "To wisdom, he says, to this day there is no temple, nor to temperance, or endurance, or magnanimity, or continence: but Fortune's temples are splendid and ancient, and all but laid with the first foundations of Rome." Cornelius Sulla, says the same Plutarch in his Sulla, called himself "a son of fortune." Most notable among the rest was the basilica of Fortune in the city of Fano, which was therefore called Fanum Fortunæ (the temple of Fortune), about which Nicolaus Perottus, Bishop of Siponto, writes in his commentary on book I of Martial: "Fanum is derived from 'speaking' (fando), that is a temple, because the Pontiff is accustomed to speak certain words beforehand in the dedication of a temple; although there are some who prefer it derived from the Greek 'phaneros' (manifest), because responses were given from the temple, etc. Hence Fanum, a city of Picenum, on the Adriatic shore between Pesaro and Senigallia, the most pleasant of all Italian cities, whether you consider the nature of the place or the talents of the citizens, because in it was a most beautiful temple of Fortune, whose remains are still visible: hence its inhabitants are called Fanenses or Fanestres." Vitruvius, the prince of architects, presided over the construction of this temple of fortune; dedicating his books On Architecture to Augustus Caesar, as a prince devoted to building, and having been enriched by him with favors and honors, he writes thus about this temple he writes, book V, ch. 1, near the end: "The comparative plans of basilicas can have no less supreme dignity and majesty, a type of which I placed in the Colony of Julia Fanestris, and had constructed, whose proportions and symmetries are so arranged;" he then describes these exactly and at length, and adds that this temple was next to the temple of Augustus. For more on this temple, see Sigonio and Cluverius in their Description of Italy. The Bishop of Fano was St. Fortunatus, of whom more shortly. For this profane temple of fortune was converted by Christians into a holy church dedicated in honor of the Blessed Virgin, who is the true fortune of the faithful, blessing them and heaping them with all gifts, whose magnificence and religion — and especially that of a chapel dedicated to the Assumed Virgin — many of the foremost Italian poets celebrated in an entire book of poems with wonderful praises, one of whom begins thus:
"This was Fortune's temple, now the Virgin's: that one / Was a divinity (or rather a name), this one is the Mother of the great Divinity."
Seneca, epistle 14: "The wise man, he says, looks to the beginning of all things, not the end. For the beginnings are in our power; fortune judges the outcome." The same, epistle 38: "Disease, he says, attacks the most temperate, consumption the strongest, punishment the most innocent, tumult the most secluded. Chance selects something new, by which it may, as it were, force its strength upon those who have forgotten it. He has given a long delay to hastening evils, who has named the day, the hour, and the moment of time." Nero, says Suetonius, ch. 13 of his Life, "before he began, addressed the judges most respectfully, saying that he had done everything that needed to be done, but the outcome was in the hand of fortune." Plutarch in the Pseudo-Plutarch: "The goddess Fortune overcomes the counsels of a hundred learned men. And this is true: as each man uses fortune, so he excels; and from this we all say he is wise." Livy, Decade I, book IX: "In all human affairs, he says, but especially in war, fortune is powerful;" Aemilius, book I: "Fortune wages peace at her own discretion, but especially wars. She, he says, imposes calm on the sea, summer on winter, speed on the slowest, strength on the weakest." Finally, the Jews worshiped Fortune, against whom therefore Isaiah inveighed, ch. 65:11: "You who set, he says, a table for Fortune, and pour libations upon it;" where I said much about fortune.
Morally, Solomon here teaches that all sublunary things, being subject to fickle fortune, are vain and changeable, and therefore to be held in low esteem, and consequently that the wise man must steel his soul with fortitude and constancy against all the blows of fortune, even adverse ones, and against death itself. Following Solomon as their master in their customary way, Plato and the philosophers taught the same. Hence Bion, as Stobaeus testifies, sermon 103, said "Fortune has given riches to the wealthy, not as a gift, but as a loan." Croesus, consulted by Cyrus about undertaking war against Tomyris, in which he was then killed: "If, he said, you recognize yourself as a man, know that there is such a cycle of human affairs, which, turning, does not allow the same people to be always fortunate." Demetrius said that he who cannot bear adverse fortune cannot bear favorable fortune either. Hence he used to repeat that saying of Aeschylus to fortune: "You raised me up, you yourself cast me down again." So Antonius in the Melissa, part I, ch. 70. The saying of Romulus was: "Deceptive and fleeting are all things that fortune holds in its power." So Maximus, sermon 18. Fabius Maximus feared the favorable fortune of his colleague Minutius more than adverse fortune, because fickle fortune changes its turns, and leaps from prosperity to adversity, and when it shows its face, soon turns its back. So Plutarch in the Life of Fabius. Zeno, when he had lost everything in a shipwreck: "Well done, he said, Fortune, how well you have reduced us to this little cloak!" Socrates, amid all the storms of fortune, remained unmoved with the same mind and the same countenance. Hence St. Jerome says that in Christian virtue the Socratic strength of soul is required. Seneca, in his book On the Tranquility of the Mind, teaches that the wise man, through virtue and vigor of soul, is superior to every fortune and injury. Hence, having reviewed the heroes slain by unjust chance — Socrates, Pompey, Cicero — and that "the best suffer the worst," he adds the remedy: "The braver, he says, the happier you are, having escaped human calamities, envy, disease; you have departed from custody: the gods did not deem you worthy of evil fortune, but deemed fortune unworthy of still being able to do anything to you." Hear the same, epistles 92 and 98, where among other things he gives these axioms of life: "Against fortune, a mind thoroughly steeled avails for endurance; all mortal things are condemned to death; we live among things that will perish; every good of mortals is mortal. Nothing is firm that is infirm, nothing fragile is eternal and invincible; it is as necessary to perish as to lose. Say to fortune: You have to deal with a man; find someone to conquer. Say to yourself: Of those things that seem terrible, nothing is unconquered. Many have already conquered each: Mutius conquered fire, Regulus the cross, Socrates poison, Rutilius exile, Cato death by the sword; and let us too conquer something."
Tacitly therefore Solomon here admonishes us to transfer our mind from sublunary things — being subject to lunation, that is, to various change through the seasons, and to the chance of fortune — to heavenly things, which surpass every chance and sport of fortune, know neither rising nor setting, but abide in the stable eternity of angels and the blessed. Truly wise and happy is he who achieves this. St. Fortunatus of Fano achieved this very thing (it is an ancient city in the Pentapolis of Umbria, called Fanum Fortunæ because it was dedicated to Fortune, as I said above), Bishop in the year of the Lord 592, a contemporary of St. Gregory. Hence the people of Fano placed this eulogy for him:
"Most Fortunate, who, about to reign forever, / Fix Fortune's unstable wheel upon its axis."
Fortunatus was therefore the Bishop, moderator, and governor of Fortune. Hence the same people add these heroic deeds: the heroic deeds of his virtues: "St. Fortunatus frees his homeland from unclean spirits. He drives away the plague raging because of his abandoned basilica. He deters with the violence of winds and dust those furtively carrying off his sacred body. Manna flowing from the mausoleum and the bones of the Saint brings health to pious invalids, death to the impious. A barren woman of Urbino, divinely admonished, visiting his body is healed." These things I received from the public records of the people of Fano, and saw inscribed on his very large image, struck and approved at Rome. There exists an epistle of St. Gregory, book VI of the Register, number 13, to this St. Fortunatus, Bishop of Fano, in which he grants him permission to sell sacred vessels for the ransom of captives — namely from the Lombards, as Baronius rightly observes: for in that age they were devastating Italy. Finally, when in the year 1107 the people of Fano sought the sacred relics of St. Fortunatus, they found them enclosed in the mausoleum together with the relics of St. Eusebius and St. Ursus, Bishops of the Church of Fano, white as snow, so that in them you might behold an image of the future glorification through the resurrection, especially since such a fragrance of scent flowed forth that it surpassed with incomparable sweetness the perfumes of myrrh and balsam and all ointments. Thus the Saints master fortune and all fortuitous things.
Verse 12: MAN DOES NOT KNOW HIS END: BUT AS FISH ARE CAUGHT (the Septuagint: "ensnared") WITH A HOOK, AND AS BIRDS ARE CAUGHT WITH A SNARE, SO ARE MEN CAUGHT IN AN EVIL TIME, WHEN IT SUDDENLY FALLS UPON THEM. — For "his end" the Hebrew has "his time," that is, the end of his time. He proves that time and chance dominate the swift, the strong, the wise, and the skillful, from the fact that it catches them, like fish with a hook and birds with a snare. Catches them, I say, at the end of the work they are undertaking, so that the swift are caught in their running, the strong in their war, the wise in their wisdom, the prudent in their prudence, the skillful in their art; whereby with all these gifts of theirs they gain for themselves not the rewards they hoped for, but the losses of infamy, chains, hunger, poverty, contempt, and sometimes even death and destruction — and that unforeseen, as the Arabic translates, and unexpected, which they did not anticipate. By "end" therefore understand the outcome, both of every work and business, with Thaumaturgus and Olympiodorus; and of life, namely death, with St. Jerome. See the very many analogies between men and fish, which I reviewed on Habakkuk 1:14, at those words: "And you make men like the fish of the sea."
Tropologically, the bait, the hook, and the snare by which men are enticed and caught is pleasure. Hear St. Augustine, On the Christian Combat, ch. 7: "The fish rejoices when, not seeing the hook, it devours the bait; but when the fisherman begins to draw it in, its entrails are first twisted, then from all its joy, through the very bait in which it rejoiced, it is dragged to its destruction. So it is with all who think themselves blessed by temporal goods: for they have taken the hook, and with it they wander about. The time will come when they will feel how great the torments are that they have devoured with such greediness." Moreover, this pleasure is manifold, but especially threefold, namely of gluttony, wealth, and pride. For by some of these man is caught, and while indulging and laughing, he binds upon himself the chains of death, as the Poet says. To the snare of wealth or avarice pertains the axiom, or apophthegm, of Pope Pius II: "Litigants are birds, the court is the threshing floor, the judge is the net, the advocates are fowlers. Wherefore he judged that men should be given to dignities, not dignities to men. The burden of the Pope is heavy, but blessed is he who bears it well." For the first and most important burden and duty of a Pope and prince is to appoint bishops, magistrates, judges, etc., untouched by avarice and worthy of such rank. Hence St. Antony, as St. Athanasius testifies, in a vision beheld the whole world full of snares, which demons stretched for souls trying to ascend, and with them they ensnared and caught them. Hence, grieving and praying: "Lord, who will escape these snares?" he heard: "Humility." For the demon in all things stretches snares for man, and those suited to each person's disposition and affection; for to the glutton he offers feasts and wines, to the ambitious honors, to the wrathful duels, to the timid dangers, to the greedy riches, etc. Hear St. Leo, sermon 7 On the Nativity: "The ancient enemy does not cease to stretch the snares of deceptions everywhere. He knows to whom to apply the heats of cupidity, to whom to thrust the allurements of gluttony, to whom to present the incitements of lust, into whom to pour the poison of envy. He knows whom to disturb with sorrow, whom to deceive with joy, whom to crush with fear, whom to seduce with admiration. He examines the habits of all, sifts their cares, scrutinizes their affections, and there seeks occasions of harm where he sees each one most eagerly occupied."
IN AN EVIL TIME (that is, miserable, difficult, dangerous, calamitous, deadly) WHEN IT SUDDENLY FALLS UPON THEM. — In Hebrew: "When it falls upon them"; in Greek: "When it falls down upon them" — which phrase signifies the inevitability and superiority of sudden punishment proceeding from higher causes, namely from heaven and the angels, says Cajetan. The Chaldean: "In the time of evil, which is about to fall upon them in one instant from heaven." Take this to mean any great thing, but especially death and hell, which is the greatest of all evils, according to that saying of Paul: "The day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night; for when they shall say, 'Peace and security,' then sudden destruction shall come upon them, as labor pains upon a woman with child, and they shall not escape," I Thess. 5:3. And that of Christ: "In the days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, and they did not know until the flood came and took them all: so also will the coming of the Son of Man be," Matt. 24:38.
Verse 13: THIS ALSO I SAW AS WISDOM UNDER THE SUN, AND I JUDGED IT TO BE VERY GREAT. — In Hebrew: "And it is great in my eyes," namely what I narrate in the following verse. Repeatedly Solomon, after reviewing vanities, turns his discourse to the praises of wisdom, to commend it to all, as being the truth and the true happiness of this life. At the same time, however, he shows that its own vanity also clings to it, not intrinsically, but extrinsically: namely, that it is held of little account by wealthy men, and that the wise man, when through his wisdom he has freed a besieged and desperate city, immediately falls into oblivion and relapses into the former neglect of himself, so that he is reduced to the philosopher's cloak, that is, to his poverty and obscurity, like Socrates. Therefore he here holds up before our eyes a new vanity of ingratitude. So Lyranus and Hugh. Others connect these differently to the preceding, but variously and less aptly.
Verse 14: A SMALL CITY (the Arabic: "delicate"), AND FEW MEN IN IT: A GREAT KING CAME AGAINST IT, AND BESIEGED IT, AND BUILT FORTIFICATIONS (the Septuagint: "great siege-works"; Symmachus: "a great siege engine"; the Syriac: "ramparts"; the Arabic: "a rampart whose towers are great") ALL AROUND, AND THE SIEGE WAS COMPLETE. — This is an example in the form of an illustration, or history, which happened from time to time in Solomon's age, so that it could have been seen and heard by him. The city is introduced here as small, that is, having small walls, small towers and engines, so that it cannot defend itself against the besieging enemy, and therefore there are few men in it who can defend it by their strength for long without soon losing heart and running out of strength. Hence the greater power and virtue of the wise and poor man appears, who by his wisdom protects and liberates it.
Verse 15: AND THERE WAS FOUND IN IT A POOR AND WISE MAN; AND HE FREED THE CITY BY HIS WISDOM, AND NO ONE AFTERWARDS REMEMBERED THAT POOR MAN. — Witness Archimedes, whom the Romans besieging Syracuse feared so greatly that if they even glimpsed a rope or a small piece of wood from the wall, they suspected some machine was being turned against them, and crying out "Archimedes!" they turned tail and fled, and were forced, abandoning the assault and siege, to place their hope in a long blockade. So Plutarch in the Life of Marcellus. The same writes of Epaminondas, who defended Thebes and enlarged its empire: "Until his fortieth year, the obscure Epaminondas was of no use to the Thebans. When trust was placed in him, and he assumed command, he preserved the falling city, and asserted Greece's freedom from servitude; he who in glory, as in sunlight, displayed strenuous virtue in due time. For it shines forth in use, would have handed him over to Saul, had he not, after consulting God, fled. Thus Gideon freed the Jews from the Midianites, and yet the Jews did not show mercy to his house, so as to protect his 70 sons while they were being killed by Abimelech, Judges 8:35. For the wise man devotes himself entirely to the public good, so as to dispel its troubles and enemies: therefore he seeks and finds ways to save the city, while the foolish attend to their own comforts and wealth, and neglect public affairs. Hence Thaumaturgus translates: "I would consider a small city inhabited by few as great and populous, if it had even one poor and wise citizen."
Allegorically, Christ, most wise and for our sake most poor, freed the Church, which is a small city in comparison with the whole world, from the tyranny of the devil and of sin: and yet very many ingrates do not acknowledge this benefit of His, indeed they despise Him and His grace, and give themselves over to their own pleasures. So St. Jerome.
Tropologically: "A certain Hebrew, says St. Jerome, interpreted this passage differently. The small city, he says, is man, who even among philosophers is called a 'lesser world.' And the few men in it are the members of which man himself is composed. When the great king, the devil, comes against it (the devil is a slippery serpent, and if his head, that is, his first suggestion, is not resisted, he slips entirely into the interior of the heart unperceived; the beginnings of diabolical temptations are sins; he is not the sender, but the kindler of vices. Hence David: 'You crushed the head of the dragon'), and seeks a place through which he can break in, there is found in it a humble and wise and quiet sense of the interior man, and it will deliver the city that was surrounded and besieged by enemies. And when man has been delivered from the danger — whether of persecution, or distress, or any adversity or sin — that outer man, who is the enemy of that poor and wise man, does not remember the inner man, nor submit himself to his counsels, but again enjoys his free will." The Chaldean agrees, who by the small city understands the human body; by the besieging king, concupiscence; by the poor and wise man, a good inspiration and thought, which resists concupiscence and frees man from sin and hell, and which man afterwards forgets.
Morally, note here that the wise love silence, quiet, and poverty. A wise man, says Plutarch, lives in such a way that no one notices he is alive. Again, wisdom has a great affinity with poverty, just as foolishness has with opulence. Yet the wise man, when need arises and his homeland requires his help, comes into the light and unfolds his wisdom for its salvation, as Jeremiah, Isaiah, and the other Prophets did. Wisely Philo, in his book On the Sacrifices of Cain and Abel, says: "Every wise man is the redemption of the fool, and a reward that would not last even the shortest time, unless he, moved by his mercy and providence, looked after the fool's safety." Hence he shortly infers: "Indeed, whenever I see a good man dwelling in some house or city, I declare both that house and city blessed, judging that the present happiness will endure perpetually, and that absent blessings are to be awaited in yet greater abundance, since God is accustomed to pour out His riches beyond measure in favor of the worthy, even upon the unworthy."
Furthermore, why the wise are often poor — Aristotle assigns various and indeed ready reasons in the Problems, section 29, ch. 4. For he asks: "Why does poverty tend to reside with good men rather than with the wicked? Is it because, hated and expelled by all, it takes refuge with the upright, judging that with them especially it can find safety and a place to remain? Conversely, if it comes to the wicked, they will never be content with such fortune, but will resort to thefts or robberies, by which things it will come about that poverty can no longer remain with them. Or is it because poverty judges that good men will treat it well, and will do nothing insolent or insulting to it? And so, just as we safely entrust deposits of money to good men, so poverty also dispenses and arranges itself accordingly. Or does it willingly go to the best men because it is female, and therefore lacking in strength and counsel, so that it greatly desires and wishes to be entrusted to such men? Or is it because poverty, being bad, never wishes to join with the bad? For if it should prefer to do so, it would itself be laughed at as an irremediable evil." He then asks conversely in ch. 8: "Why are riches for the most part possessed by wicked men rather than by good? Is it because fortune is blind, and therefore cannot discern and choose what is better?"
Again, note here that the benefits of the poor produce not only contempt, but also hatred and envy: therefore the salvation they brought to the city is taken from them and ascribed to themselves or to other powerful men. They despise therefore, says Pineda, both the poor benefactor, whom they are ashamed to acknowledge as the author of the benefit, and the benefit received from a poor man they consider an insult: in the former they are plainly foolish, in the latter clearly ungrateful, in both insolently proud, because they do not wish anything to be owed to a poor man, nor to constitute themselves his debtors, nor to be bound by any gratitude to love in return the poor benefactor. And so, while it is most odious to give a benefit proudly, it is also most insolent to receive a benefit proudly. See Seneca, book II On Benefits, ch. 17, 18, 19. This is what Job says of the just man, ch. 12:5: "A lamp despised in the thoughts of the rich, prepared for the appointed time." Finally, leaders and liberators of their country find it ungrateful, as Scipio, Themistocles, Miltiades, Coriolanus experienced, and the rest who, after gaining victories for their fellow citizens, were driven by them into exile.
Verse 16: AND I SAID, WISDOM IS BETTER THAN STRENGTH: HOW THEN IS THE WISDOM OF THE POOR MAN DESPISED, AND HIS WORDS NOT HEARD?
Wisdom, namely wisdom already known and proven through the liberation of the city, as if to say: What kind of ungrateful stupidity of men is it that, when they have seen that through the counsel of the wise man they escaped siege and destruction, now that they are liberated they despise him, and refuse to hear further his salutary admonitions and counsels, which pertain to the preservation and safety of the city? — because, indeed, they look only at external splendor and pomp, and admire it in the rich, and therefore despise wisdom in the poor man as destitute of this pomp. "Strength" here is taken not of the soul, but of the body, namely as residing in physical powers, wealth, or friends; for this is what the Greek dynamis signifies, the Hebrew gebura, the Chaldean coach. Hence the Septuagint: "Wisdom is better than power"; St. Jerome: "Better than riches and power"; Thaumaturgus: "Better than popular power." For "how" the Hebrew has "and," which in Hebrew is used for any conjunction. Hence some here translate: "And yet"; others: "Therefore"; St. Jerome in his older edition translates "although": "And I said, he says, that wisdom is better than strength, etc., although no one remembers that poor wise man when all things are prosperous, but all admire riches and power; yet I, according to all interpretations, more honor despised wisdom, and the words that no one deigns to hear." But in the later Vulgate version he translates more forcefully with "how"; for this mark of interrogation contains indignation with astonishment, and impels the discourse to exaggerate the unworthiness of the matter. Akin to this maxim is that of Wisdom 6:1: "Wisdom is better than strength: and a prudent man than a strong one." Hence also that of Phocylides: "A wise man is better than a strong one; for wisdom governs fields and cities, just as it governs a ship." Take "strong" as meaning strong in body; for he who is strong in soul is the same as a wise man. Hence Cicero, Tusculan Disputations III: "He teaches that all the wise are brave, and all the brave are wise." For wisdom teaches us to conquer fear, to moderate boldness, to be of exalted spirit in dangers and difficult affairs, and with firm judgment about constancy, to place life below virtue, and to despise death — which are the proper duties and acts of fortitude. This is what is said in Proverbs 20:18: "Plans are strengthened by counsels: and wars must be managed with skill." This is clear in military stratagems, which the clever use to subjugate enemies.
Verse 17: THE WORDS OF THE WISE ARE HEARD IN SILENCE, MORE THAN THE CRY OF A PRINCE AMONG FOOLS. — The Hebrew: "The words of the wise are heard with quiet, more than the cry of the powerful among the foolish"; the Chaldean: "Who commands fools who are shouting"; the Septuagint: "More than the cry of the powerful among the foolish"; St. Jerome in his older edition: "More than the cry of one having power among fools." For "in silence" the Hebrew has "in quiet"; the Scholiast: "with benevolence, kindness, sweetness, gentleness, meekness"; the Syriac: "The words of the wise are heard with quiet, more than the agitation of the powerful fool"; the Arabic: "With tranquility." Now,
First, Aben-Ezra and Osorius explain it thus, as if to say: The words of the wise are despised by citizens while things are prosperous: but when siege and destruction threaten, with the people silent from fear and grief, they are eagerly heard.
Second, Arboreus: as if to say, the wise man does not shout in the crowd and noise, but seeks seclusion from the crowd, where he may speak and be heard in silence. Titelmann agrees, who takes "silence" as a subdued and modest voice, as is the custom of the wise; and Campensis: "The words of the wise, even though they do not cry out much, are more effective than the shouting of a foolish prince."
Third, Clarius and Dionysius hold that the reason is given here why the words of the wise are not heard: namely, because they require a mind that is silent, that is, quiet, calm, and free from the tumult of passions, which the people, boiling with desires, cannot provide.
Fourth, others hold that wisdom speaks silently, that is, in a low voice either from modesty, because the wise man is poor, or from fear and grief, because he sees himself despised, or rather from piety and gravity, as if to say: When in a besieged city the governor loudly speaks about the city's danger and its remedies, and the people are in an uproar, while this one shouts this counsel and another shouts another, then the wise man, coming forth from his quiet, and by his gravity and wisdom commanding the people to silence, calms, quiets, orders, and composes everything, and proposes the soundest remedy for liberating the city. This sense is very fitting.
Fifth and genuinely, Solomon here consoles the poor wise man, and therefore despised, and consequently faint-hearted and grieving that his counsels and warnings are not heard, as I said in the preceding verse. He consoles him, however, from the fact that these same words are heard in silence, as if to say: Although the noisy and tumultuous crowd does not hear the words of wisdom, yet discerning and prudent men do hear them, and receive them with great silence of mouth and quiet of heart, and with greater applause, approval, and reverence than noisy princes or rich men are heard by foolish flatterers, who applaud before them but behind their backs they stamp, hiss, and shout them down.
Note that the words of the wise man proceed from the speaker's silent soul, that is, a quiet, serene, grave, pious, and prudent soul, and therefore are heard by discerning listeners in silence, that is, with a calm, tranquil, and attentive mind. Just as, conversely, the cry of a prince is heard with the noisy applause of fools flattering him. Therefore the silence and quiet of both the wise teacher, and of the listening people is opposed to the clamor and tumult of both the prince shouting and the fools acclaiming him.
Moreover, the silence of the wise man's mouth proceeds from the quiet and silence of his heart, and denotes his modesty, meekness, benevolence, gravity, prudence, constancy, and effectiveness: namely, that his speech — prudent, sensible, and forceful, even though modest, gentle, and soft — is more effective than the noisy addresses, commands, and edicts of princes, because his silence commands all sensible people, and even in siege and dangers, when everything is full of fear and turmoil, it brings about peace and safety. Hence some translate and explain it thus: "The silence of the wise man is more effective than the clamor of the ruler with his foolish followers," that is, one voice of a wise man avails more for the salvation of the republic than a thousand noisy magistrates rioting with the people — a voice that restrains the tumult of the people, quells seditions, brings about unity, scatters harmful counsels, and suggests and persuades sound ones: the wise therefore are moderate and subdued in voice as well as in mind; the foolish are noisy and tumultuous. "The soul, says Olympiodorus, that is filled with folly utters speeches with shouting and turbulence, without quiet, order, or constancy;" and St. Jerome: "Whenever you see a declaimer in the church, exciting applause and provoking laughter by a certain charm and elegance of words, stirring the listeners to feelings of merriment, know that this is a sign of foolishness, both of him who speaks and of those who listen. For the words of the wise are heard in quiet and moderate silence; but he who is foolish, however powerful he may be, and has the acclaim either of his own voice or of the applauding people, will be counted among the foolish." This is what Isaiah says of Christ, the most wise, 42:2: "He shall not cry out, nor shall He show partiality, nor shall His voice be heard abroad, etc. He shall not be sad, nor turbulent;" and ch. 8:6: The waters of "Siloam, which flow in silence." For just as waters flowing gently and as if silently are the deepest, so also men who are modest and taciturn are profound in counsel and judgment.
Anagogically, the just who are oppressed and silent in judgment will cry out against their impious oppressors, according to Wisdom 5:1: "Then the just shall stand with great constancy against those who afflicted them." Hence Thaumaturgus translates: "Here wisdom is silent and despised, but hereafter it will be heard uttering a louder voice than the princes and tyrants burning with desire for evil things."
Verse 18: WISDOM IS BETTER THAN WEAPONS OF WAR: AND HE WHO SINS IN ONE THING WILL LOSE MANY GOOD THINGS. — Thaumaturgus: "For wisdom is stronger than iron itself"; Olympiodorus: "Better is the counsel of any prudent man than all the help that can be hoped for from arms." For wisdom is like fire, which surpasses, masters, inflames, and converts all things to itself. Aptly Francisco Valles, Sacred Philosophy, ch. 5, 74, comparing the natural body to the political body, that is, man to the republic, matches the three primary members of each as follows: Agriculture, he says, corresponds to the liver, because just as the liver supplies blood to the members, so agriculture supplies food to the republic; the military art corresponds to the irascible faculty which is in the heart, because it repels whatever violence or impediment is inflicted; wisdom and knowledge correspond to the brain, in which is the mind and all cognition; commerce then corresponds to the legs, because by traveling it brings in foreign goods; the mechanical arts correspond to the hands by which things are made: therefore, as much as the brain surpasses the irascible faculty and other members, so much does wisdom surpass the military art and all others.
AND HE WHO SINS IN ONE THING WILL LOSE MANY GOOD THINGS. — From the Hebrew, "in one" can be variously translated. For the Hebrew literally has: "One sinner"; the Septuagint: "one sinning"; hence Thaumaturgus: "the folly of one"; and the Chaldean: "One sinful man who is in the generation is the cause that many good things perish from this world"; St. Jerome in the older edition: "He who commits one sin"; the Syriac: "And one sin destroys many goods"; the Arabic: "When one sins, much good perishes." This is an antithesis of wisdom and folly, or of the wise and the foolish, as if to say: Wisdom prevails over arms, because it preserves and liberates entire cities even closely besieged, and conquers and subjugates all things: conversely, even a single act of folly loses and corrupts many good things, to the point of overturning cities and kingdoms. So Cajetan, who aptly cites here the adage: "One fool throws a stone into a well, and a thousand wise men cannot get it out." Hence Thaumaturgus translates: "The folly of one brings danger to many, even if it seems light and contemptible to many." Others explain it thus, as if to say: A small error at the beginning, unless corrected at once, spreads to many, and creeps far and wide, according to the saying: "One nail loses the horseshoe, the shoe the horse, the horse the rider, the rider the camp, the camp the republic." Some refer this maxim to war and the besieged city, about which the discourse preceded, as if to say: One error in war and in a besieged city, even a small one, not rarely loses the camp and the city. Hence the well-worn saying: "In war, not even the least thing should be neglected." Or thus, as if to say: Wisdom is better than weapons of war — provided, however, that the wisdom is precise, so that it errs in nothing; for if it sins even in one thing, it will lose many good things, namely its reputation and esteem, and the wealth and safety of those entrusted to it. But this sense is too narrow. For although these things are said on the occasion of a besieged city, and therefore properly concern war, nevertheless the general statement holds true both in peace and in war, and is everywhere true. Examples are: Adam, one man, by one sin of disobedience lost all his posterity, just as Achan lost the entire camp of Israel, Joshua 7. The foolish obstinacy of one Rehoboam lost ten tribes. One Jezebel, one Ahab, one Manasseh — how many and how great things did they destroy?
Mystically (which however many consider to be the literal sense), he who sins in one thing — so as to depart from the one true good, namely from wisdom — loses many goods, or, as it can be translated from the Hebrew with the Septuagint, much goodness; that is, he who commits one mortal sin loses grace, charity, and the other virtues; so that here essentially the same thing is said as in James 2:10: "And whoever keeps the whole law, but offends in one point, has become guilty of all." So St. Jerome: "Thus, he says, it must be understood, that on account of one sin many many acts of justice perish and go backward; and that the virtues follow one another, and he who has one has them all; and he who sins in one thing is subject to all vices." So also St. Bonaventure, Hugh, Lyranus, Dionysius, and Olympiodorus, whom hear: "One person, whoever he may finally be, while he stains himself with the filth of sin, both corrupts the goods which resided in him from acquired virtues, and also leads many others by his bad example to imitation." So also Rabanus in the Gloss: "One fool, he says, corrupts very many."