Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Introduction
Three things must be set forth here according to custom: first, concerning the authority of the book; second, concerning its author; third, concerning its subject matter.
IT IS ASKED therefore first, whether Wisdom is a canonical book of Sacred Scripture? The Jews and heretics deny it, and even some Catholics, such as Lyranus and Cajetan: the Jews, because in this book, chapter II, verse 20, the death of Christ is predicted, to be inflicted upon Him on the cross by the impious Jews: the heretics, because, while this book commends chastity, good works, martyrdoms, merits, and rewards, it opposes their contrary heresies; hence Kemnitius rejects it in his Examination of the Council of Trent, session IV; indeed Calvin, book I of the Institutes, chapter XI, section 8, writes that he found a falsehood in the book of Wisdom, namely concerning the inventor of idolatry, who in chapter XIV, verse 15, is said to have been a father mourning a son snatched from him by death; which passage Calvin deemed unworthy of the Bible and fit for the flames: but this must be treated more fully in chapter XIV.
But I respond and say: It is a matter of faith that the book of Wisdom is Canonical Scripture: this is clear, because thus it was defined by the Council of Florence in the Union with the Armenians, and by the Council of Trent, session IV; by the Third Council of Carthage, chapter XLVII; by the Eleventh Council of Toledo in the Profession of Faith; by the Council of Sardica according to Theodoret, book II of the History, chapter VIII; by the Council of Tribur, chapter XXXIV; of Pistoia, chapter I; and the Second Council of Nicaea, act 4.
Hence Christ and the Apostles borrowed testimonies from the book of Wisdom, just as from other canonical books: for from Wisdom chapter III, verse 7: "The just shall shine," Christ cites that passage in Matthew chapter XIII, verse 43: "Then the just shall shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father." Again Matthew, chapter XXVII, verse 43, reports what is found in Wisdom II, 13: "He called Himself the Son of God;" and verse 18: "For if He is the true Son of God, He will receive Him, and will deliver Him from the hands of His adversaries." Paul also in Romans, chapter XI, verse 34, brings forth that passage from Wisdom IX, 13: "For who among men can know the counsel of God? or who can think what God wills?" And in Ephesians, chapter VI, verses 13 and 17, he draws from what is found in Wisdom
chapter V, verses 18 and 19: "His zeal shall take up armor, and He shall put on justice as a breastplate, and He shall take certain judgment for a helmet, and shall take equity as an impregnable shield." The same Apostle, in Hebrews I, 7 and 11 and elsewhere, alludes to the words of Wisdom, chapters IV, VI, VII, and IX.
The Greek and Latin Fathers do the same, who cite Wisdom as divine Scripture, indeed as a book of Solomon. I shall cite their passages in Question II; for now let the opinion of St. Augustine alone suffice, who in book II On the Predestination of the Saints, chapter XIV, and book II On the Creed, writes thus: "The judgment of the book of Wisdom ought not to be rejected, which has merited to be recited in the Church of Christ from the rank of readers of the Church of Christ for so long a time, and to be heard with the veneration of divine authority by all Christian bishops down to the most remote lay faithful, penitents, and catechumens." Wherefore vain is the objection of Cajetan, who says that the book of Wisdom is called canonical by the Fathers, that is, regular, because it serves for the edification of the faithful, but not for establishing dogmas of faith: for divine Scripture, which the Fathers say the book of Wisdom is, serves for both purposes. See Melchior Canus, book II On Theological Places, chapter XI.
Furthermore, St. Athanasius in his Synopsis, St. Epiphanius in the book On Weights and Measures, St. Jerome in the Helmeted Prologue, and letter 115, and on Zechariah, chapters VIII and XI, and Damascene, book IV On the Faith, chapter XVIII, assert that Wisdom is not in the Hebrew canon, and in their time had not yet been received by the Church as a canonical book, but was to be read in the Church for the edification of the people. Wherefore this book is not protocanonical, that is, of the first class of Sacred Scripture, such as are those about whose authenticity there has never been any doubt; but deuterocanonical, that is, of the second class, such as are those about whose authenticity there was once some doubt, and which afterwards the whole Church, having examined the matter, admitted into the canon.
Hear St. Augustine, book II On Christian Doctrine, chapter VIII: "Those two books, one which is entitled Wisdom, and the other which is entitled Ecclesiasticus, since in
whose chorus, said that the book entitled the Wisdom of Solomon was his, just as also the Proverbs;" for thus Rufinus translated the words of Eusebius from Greek into Latin. Third, because the Author himself in chapter IX, 7, calls himself a king and builder of the temple, who can be none other than Solomon: "You, he says, chose me as king of Your people, etc., and You told me to build a temple on Your holy mountain."
But it is far more true that Solomon did not write this book, first, because if this book were Solomon's, it would certainly have been known to the Hebrews, and placed in the canon of Sacred Scripture; but now it is neither in the Hebrew canon, nor has it been seen in Hebrew by anyone: for there is no one who asserts that he saw it in Hebrew, and none of the ancients (except Isidore alone, who is later) asserted that it was written in Hebrew, as St. Jerome and others assert concerning the Gospel of St. Matthew: whereas on the contrary Ecclesiasticus was seen in Hebrew by the younger Jesus son of Sirach, inasmuch as he professes in his Prologue that he translated it from Hebrew into Greek. Second, because this book appears to have been originally written in Greek: for it smells of Greek eloquence, as St. Jerome testifies in the Prologue to the books of Solomon: just as conversely Ecclesiasticus, having been translated from Hebrew into Greek, smells more of Hebrew phraseology and simplicity than Greek. Compare this book with the Proverbs, and you will see how great is the distance of style and phrasing, and especially that here there are elegant, continuous and connected discourses, whereas in Proverbs there are disparate sayings, which have no order or connection among themselves, so that these two books plainly appear to have been written by different authors. Add that Solomon is not the author of this book, which can be certainly inferred from the fact that the author, in chapter XV, verse 14, says that the enemies of God's people, namely the Egyptians, ruled over them. But in Solomon's time no one ruled over Israel except Solomon, who either dominated the neighboring nations or was bound to them by a treaty of friendship. This book was therefore written in the time of Ptolemy Lagus: for he oppressed Judea. Third, because the ancients count only three books of Solomon, namely Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs: thus Amphilochius, bishop of Iconium, in his Poem on the books of Sacred Scripture to be read, Isidore of Pelusium, book IV, letter 40, St. Jerome, in his letter to Paulinus which is prefixed to the Bible, and others. Fourth, because very many and most weighty authors hold this view, such as Lyranus, Hugo, Dionysius, Abulensis, Jansenius, Driedo, Melchior Canus, Michael Medina, Alphonsus a Castro, Alphonsus Curiel, Paulus a Palatio, Lorinus, Pamelius, Georgius Ederus, Didacus, Covarruvias, book IV of Various Resolutions, chapter XIV, Adrianus Finus, Genebrardus, and others, whom our Pineda cites and follows, Preface to Ecclesiastes, chapter II, number 20. Indeed St. Augustine asserts that this is the constant and common opinion of the faithful: I shall presently recite his words. Finally, the author of this book occasionally alludes to the fables of the poets, all of whom lived long after Solomon: thus in chapter I, verse 14, say-
ing: "Nor the kingdom of the underworld on earth," he alludes to the fable of Pluto and Dis, who is imagined by the poets as the king of the underworld, and as having extended the rights of his dominion from the underworld to the earth. Again he alludes to the rites of the Gentiles, when he says, in chapter II, verse 8, following the opinion of the Epicureans: "Let us crown ourselves with roses:" for Tertullian, in his book On the Soldier's Crown, chapter IX, holds that rose wreaths were not known among the Hebrews in Solomon's time, nor even in the time of Isaiah and the Babylonian captivity; they therefore appear to have passed to the Hebrews from commerce with the Gentiles at a later time. Thus in chapter XVIII, verse 13, in the Greek he names Orcus, and alludes to Lethe, which is introduced by the poets as a river of the underworld that brings forgetfulness of all things to the dead who come there, and he asserts that from Orcus came forth the darkness of Egypt; and in the last chapter, last verse, in the Greek he calls manna ambrosia, which is imagined by the poets as the food of Jupiter and the gods. This opinion is clearly indicated by the Syriac version, which prefixes this title to the book: The book of the great wisdom of Solomon himself, son of David, about which there was doubt, as if some wise man among the Hebrews wrote it in a prophetic spirit, having placed, or composed it, under the name of Solomon: and it was received, that is, held canonical. The Arabic has thus: The Book of the Wisdom of Solomon son of David, who reigned over the children of Israel.
To the first objection, St. Jerome responds in the Prologue that the inscription in the Greek codices is false: "Another, he says, is pseudepigraphal, that is, falsely inscribed, which is entitled the Wisdom of Solomon;" and then: "Among the Hebrews it is nowhere to be found, and its very style smells of Greek eloquence, and some of the ancient writers affirm that this is the work of Philo the Jew."
To the second objection, the response is that the Fathers cite this book under Solomon's name for the same reasons for which they attribute Ecclesiasticus to Solomon, which I recounted in the Prooemium to Ecclesiastes, and especially because the author of this book wrote it in Solomon's name, assumes his character, and introduces him as speaking and teaching. Just as Plato entitles his Dialogues with the names of Socrates, Gorgias, Protagoras, Timaeus, etc., because he introduces them as speakers; and Xenophon entitles his work Cyrus, or the Cyropaedia; and Cicero entitles his book On Famous Orators as Brutus, who excelled among orators. So therefore this book is ascribed to Solomon, because Solomon is introduced here as speaking, who by everyone's judgment was the most learned of mortals, and, as that one says, the high priest of wisdom, Minerva's darling, the eye of prudence, the mouth of Themis, the marrow of counsel, the soul of Scripture. Eusebius expressly teaches this, book XI of the Preparation, chapter V: "Moved by this reasoning, he says, he who inscribed the book of Wisdom to his own person (that is, Solomon's): 'He Himself gave me the true knowledge of things that are,' he says," etc., and goes on to cite the words found in Wisdom VII, 17. So also Origen on John, volume XX: "The book of Wisdom, he says, is inscribed to Solomon." Therefore this book was written,
not by Solomon, but by another in the person of Solomon; hence St. Thomas also in I-II, Question CXIII, article 3, reply to 2, says that the speech in this book is in the person of Solomon. The same is expressly taught by Alphonsus Curiel, Controversy 2 on the book of Wisdom. Indeed St. Augustine, book II On Christian Doctrine, chapter VIII, says thus: "Those two books, the first which is Wisdom, and the other which is entitled Ecclesiasticus, are said to be Solomon's on account of a certain similarity; for it is most constantly reported that Jesus son of Sirach wrote them:" and book XVII of the City of God, chapter XX, concerning the same books, he says: "The other two, of which one is called Wisdom, the other Ecclesiasticus, custom has prevailed that they be called Solomon's on account of some similarity of style; but the more learned do not doubt that they are not his." Add that the author of Wisdom imitated Solomon, and perhaps collected his ideas, and even sentences and words scattered in the Hebrew books of that age, arranged them, and expressed them in Greek phrase and style, as is evident to anyone comparing chapters VII and IX of Wisdom with what is said about Solomon in III Kings III, I Chronicles XXVIII, 2, Proverbs VIII, etc. For Solomon spoke three thousand parables, and five thousand songs, as is clear from III Kings IV, 32, all of which cannot be contained in Proverbs, nor Ecclesiasticus, nor the Song of Songs; therefore a part of them may be contained in Wisdom. So think Bellarmine, book I On the Word of God, chapter XIII, Possevinus, in the Sacred Apparatus, under the word Solomon, Adrianus Finus, book VI of the Scourge of the Jews, chapter XIV, and others. To Eusebius I respond that his words were poorly translated by Rufinus: for in Greek they read thus: "Not only he himself, but also Irenaeus, and the whole chorus of the ancients, called the Proverbs of Solomon 'Wisdom full of every virtue'"; and so Eusebius is not speaking of the book of Wisdom, but of the Proverbs of Solomon, and says they are called by many "Wisdom panáretos," that is, treating of every virtue: hence the Church also in the Divine Office, when reciting the Proverbs of Solomon, e.g. "The Lord possessed me," from chapter VIII, "a valiant woman," from chapter XXXI, prefaces it with: "A reading from the book of Wisdom."
To the third objection I have already said that the book was written by another indeed, but in the person of Solomon, and from many of Solomon's sayings, such as those set forth in the introduction.
The SECOND opinion is that of St. Augustine, book II On Christian Doctrine chapter VIII, and book XVII of the City of God, chapter XX, where he writes that the prevailing opinion is that the author of the book of Wisdom, as well as of Ecclesiasticus, is Jesus son of Sirach, as is clear from his words already cited; hence both books are called Wisdom by many: St. Isidore holds the same opinion, and Theodoret as cited by Lipomanus, on Exodus chapter XVI. But St. Augustine himself retracts this opinion, book II of the Retractations, chapter IV: "Concerning the author of the book, he says, which many call the Wisdom of Solomon,
because this book is cited by St. Clement the Pope, letter 1, and by St. Dionysius the Areopagite, chapter IV of the Divine Names, as sacred, divine, and ancient: but St. Dionysius, as well as St. Clement, was contemporary with Philo; indeed the book of Wisdom is cited by Christ and the Apostles, who preceded Philo, as I showed in Question I. Fifth, because St. Jerome, in his book On Illustrious Men, and Eusebius, book II of the History, chapter XVII, in drawing up a catalog of the books of Philo, make no mention of the book of Wisdom.
that also this book, like Ecclesiasticus, Jesus son of Sirach wrote, that this is not as certain as I had said, I later learned, and I found it altogether more probable that he is not the author of this book."
The THIRD opinion is that the author of this book is Philo the Hebrew, who lived shortly after Christ under the emperor Caius Caligula, and undertook an embassy to him on behalf of the Jews; but being rebuffed by him, he turned to his companions and said: "Let us be of good courage, for God will be favorable to us, since Caius is hostile," as Josephus reports, book XVIII of the Antiquities, chapter X. For this Philo was a learned and eloquent man, and published very many books on Scripture, and is entirely moral and pious, as is also the author of Wisdom; hence St. Jerome in the Prologue says: "Some of the ancient writers affirm that this is the work of Philo the Jew." So think Lyranus, Dionysius, Galatinus, book I On the Secrets of the Faith, chapter IV, Ludovicus Vives on chapter XX of book XVII of St. Augustine's City of God. And some allege that Philo wrote this book for the consolation of the Jews, whom the emperor Caius was afflicting; hence he sets before them the example of the liberation of the Hebrews from the tyranny of Pharaoh, whom God crushed with so many plagues; and he describes the government of a just king, but the guilt of an unjust one and a tyrant, and threatens him with God's vengeance.
But this opinion is plainly improbable, first, because this Philo remained a Jew after Christ, that is, an infidel and obstinate in Judaism, and therefore alien from Christ and an adversary of the Christian faith. Who would believe that an infidel wrote so faithful a book, in which the principles of faith are transmitted, and especially about Christ suffering and dying, as is clear from chapter II, verse 20? Second, because Wisdom is numbered by all the orthodox and the whole Church among the books of the Old Testament, which were written before Christ; for it prophesies about Christ in chapter II; therefore it could not have been written by Philo, who lived after Christ. Add that Philo's style differs greatly from the style of Wisdom. Third, because this Philo was very devoted to Plato; hence the saying: "Either Philo platonizes, or Plato philonizes." Hence from Plato he drew his errors, as when in his book On the Creation of the Six Days he holds that the stars are intelligent beings; and that heaven was made by God so that it might be the dwelling place of gods both invisible (angels) and visible (stars): he frequently constructs planetary divinations from Talmudic and astrological delusions: he doubts whether the world was made more in the image of God than man, and whether the earthly paradise truly existed: in the book On the Meeting for the Sake of Seeking Learning, he seems to insinuate that hell is nothing other than the conscience and remorse of a wicked man: in the book On Fugitives, he asserts that only the rational soul of Adam was created by God, but the sensitive soul together with the angels. Sixtus of Siena, book V of the Library, chapters XVII and XCIII, recounts more of Philo's errors; and the author of the book of Wisdom refutes some of them. Fourth,
Convinced by these reasons, some hold that this book was written by Philo, not the one who lived after Christ under Caius, but by an older one, who lived 160 years before Christ under Onias the ancient high priest. So Alphonsus Curiel, controversy 2; Michael Medina, book VI On Right Faith in God, chapter XII; Driedo, book I On Ecclesiastical Dogmas, chapter IV, to the 5th difficulty; Canus, book II On Theological Places, chapter XI, to 5; Pamelius in his notes on St. Cyprian's book On Mortality, number 43. Genebrardus in his Chronology, year of the world 3860. But of this older Philo there is no mention in Josephus, Eusebius, or other ancient writers: for they only mention Philo the Hebrew, who lived under Caius, and Philo of Byblos, that is, one originating from the city of Byblos in Phoenicia, who was not a Hebrew but a Gentile, and therefore unsuited to writing canonical books. Eusebius expressly teaches this, book I of the Preparation for the Gospel, chapter VI: "Philo, he says, not a Hebrew, but of Byblos, translated the history of the Phoenicians written in their language into the Greek language." Josephus cites the same person, not another, book I Against Apion, whose words Eusebius transcribed, book IX of the Preparation, at the end, where he says that Demetrius of Phalerum, the older Philo (of Byblos), and Eupolemus, Gentiles, wrote histories of the Chaldeans, Syrians, and Phoenicians, and incidentally touched on Jewish affairs, but in these, as being foreign to them, they sometimes erred: "To whom, he says, pardon must be given, because they did not have great knowledge of our literature," which cannot be said of Philo the Hebrew. Add: The cited authors hold that this Philo was one of the 72 translators; but this cannot be said, for Aristeas in his History of the 72 translators, assigning the names of each one, names no Philo among them. The cause of the error, namely why some attribute Wisdom to Philo, is that Solomon was called by God, in II Kings XII, 25, in Hebrew Jedidiah, that is, beloved of the Lord, which in Greek is Philon: for phileō means "I love," philia "love," philos "friend"; hence Philo the Jew is also called Jedidiah in Hebrew by the Rabbis (and specifically by R. Azariah): for the ancient Hebrews made Solomon the author of Wisdom, as is clear from R. Moses Bar-Nachmani, who is called Ramban in abbreviated form, and flourished 300 years ago. For he in his Prooemium to the Pentateuch, from the great wisdom of Solomon as from Sacred Scripture, cites that passage Wisdom VII, 7: "I wished, and understanding was given to me," and recites the rest that follows accurately and at length. But he recites it in the language of Jerusalem,
namely Syriac, which the Jews used after the return from Babylon; from which you may infer that the author of this book is Solomon in such a way that it was nevertheless written by some later person after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans, in his own local style, and therefore not in pure Hebrew, as Solomon wrote his works, but in a corrupted form, the language of Jerusalem, that is, Syriac. Or rather this book was originally written in Greek by the author, then translated by some Hebrew into the language of Jerusalem, just as was the third book of Maccabees; for thus both Josephus and Philo wrote their works in Greek, because being skilled in Greek they wrote for Greeks and Latins. For the style of Wisdom plainly smells of Greek phrasing, not Hebrew. Some more recent Latin authors therefore attributed this book to Philo the Jew, because the Hebrews attributed it to Philo, not knowing that by Philo they understood Solomon, for the reason already stated, not Philo the Jew.
I say therefore: It is certain as a matter of faith that the primary author of the book of Wisdom is the Holy Spirit; but it is uncertain who the secondary author was, namely the Hebrew scribe and rabbi who wrote it at the dictation of the Holy Spirit. St. Dionysius the Areopagite sufficiently implies this, chapter IV of the Divine Names, where citing a passage from chapter VIII of Wisdom: "In the first place, he says, in the teachings of Sacred Scripture you will find a certain one saying these things about divine wisdom: I became a lover of her beauty," where the word "a certain one" signifies an unknown author. In the same way Anastasius of Nicaea cites the author of Wisdom, Question XXXV on Sacred Scripture: "A certain wise man, he says;" and St. Gregory, book XXVII of the Morals, chapter XVIII: "Well, he says, it is said by a certain wise man," Wisdom XVII, 10: "Since wickedness is timid," and book XXIII of the Morals, chapter XVI: "Well a certain wise man, Wisdom VII, 15: God has given me to speak according to my judgment." In a similar way St. Chrysostom cites him, homilies 4 and 47 on Genesis, and homilies 40 and 42 on Matthew, and St. Cyril of Alexandria, dialogue On the Trinity, and St. Jerome in the Prologue to the books of Solomon: "Among the Hebrews, he says, it is nowhere to be found, and its very style smells of Greek eloquence." And Eusebius, book XI of the Preparation, chapter V: "Moved by this reasoning, he says, he who inscribed the book of Wisdom to his own person," namely someone unknown. Genebrardus also says the author of Wisdom is anonymous and uncertain. So also the rest, whom Pineda cites and follows, Preface to Ecclesiastes, chapter II.
Furthermore, because this book appears to have been written in Greek style by some Hebrew, as St. Jerome attests, one may conjecture that it was written shortly after the reign of Alexander the Great, who came more than six hundred years after Solomon: for Alexander, together with his empire, introduced the Greek language into Judea, so that the nobler Jews then began to learn Greek. Hence shortly after Alexander, Ptolemy Philadelphus, the second king of Egypt, summoned from Judea the 72 translators, who translated the Hebrew Bible into Greek
language: therefore the Hebrews then learned the Greek language, and wrote books in Greek; hence the grandson Jesus son of Sirach also translated the book of Ecclesiasticus, written by his grandfather in Hebrew, into the Greek language, as he himself acknowledges in the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus, for that was a literary age: therefore at that time wisdom and Greek eloquence flourished among the Jews. Hence the Greek text here appears to be the original text of Sacred Scripture: for the style and eloquence smells more of Greek eloquence than Hebrew simplicity, as St. Jerome rightly observes, and as is inferred from chapter XV, 14. It seems therefore that under the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, the book of Wisdom was written in Greek, by one of the 72 translators, or a similar rabbi, perhaps in honor of Ptolemy Philadelphus; hence throughout this whole book he instructs a king on how to wisely and justly administer the commonwealth: for on this very subject Ptolemy himself posed to the 72 translators the same number of questions, one to each individually, so that he might learn from them the manner of good governance, which Aristeas recounts in his History of the 72 Translators. This chronology and consideration of the time will shed light on this book, and will wonderfully illuminate it, as will be evident in the following question.
IT IS ASKED therefore third, what is the subject matter of this book? The response is: This book reveals its subject by its very name; for it is called Wisdom, because it treats of true wisdom, and its origin, character, works, effects, and rewards: moreover, wisdom here is understood not so much speculatively as practically, namely as the plan for acting according to God, and consequently is nothing other than the true knowledge of the true God joined with His fear, religion, and worship, which leads man to salvation and eternal happiness. Hence Isidore, book III of the Etymologies: Wisdom, he says, is a savory knowledge; hence our author translates this wisdom as eusebeia, that is, piety, in chapter X, 12; and he sometimes calls wisdom "justice," which is a general virtue, and embraces all virtues, and in chapter VII, last verse, he opposes to it "malice," that is, vice and sin. That this is so the Wise Man clearly indicates, chapter VI, verse 18: "The beginning of it, he says, is the truest desire of instruction: the care therefore of instruction is love: and love is the keeping of its laws: and the keeping of the laws is the perfection of incorruption: and incorruption makes one near to God. Therefore the desire of wisdom leads to an everlasting kingdom;" hence also Moses, Deuteronomy IV, 5: "You know, he says, that I have taught you precepts and just judgments, as the Lord my God commanded me, so you shall do them in the land which you shall possess: and you shall observe and fulfill them in deed. For this is your wisdom, and understanding before the peoples, so that hearing all these precepts they may say: Behold a wise and understanding people, a great nation;" and Job chapter XXVIII, verse 28: "Behold the fear of the Lord, he says, that is wisdom," hence Lactantius, book III On True Wisdom, chapter XI, and
book IV, chapter III, said that wisdom and religion cannot be separated, because to be wise is nothing other than to honor the true God with just and pious worship. See what has been said on Ecclesiasticus I, 1, and Proverbs I, 1.
Among philosophers and scholastic theologians, wisdom is understood otherwise and in various ways, as universal knowledge of all things; as that which exists in any kind of art, as metaphysics, as theology, as faith that also issues in action; add, as one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and as uncreated Wisdom, and the divine Word. Our Christophorus a Castro pursues these meanings at length here; but they do not pertain to this subject, except insofar as they are attendants, effects, and rewards of the wisdom already explained, as was evident in Solomon, who accordingly writes of himself, chapter VII, 17: "For He Himself gave me the true knowledge of things that are: to know the disposition of the whole world, and the virtues of the elements, the beginning, and the end, and the middle of times, the changes of seasons, and the successions of times, the courses of the year, and the positions of the stars, the natures of animals, and the rage of beasts, the force of winds, and the thoughts of men, the differences of plants, and the virtues of roots, and whatever things are hidden and unforeseen, I learned: for the artificer of all things taught me wisdom."
The philosophers imitated the author of our Wisdom; hence Plato now defines philosophy as the separation of the soul from the body, or a meditation on death; at other times as the turning of the soul toward those things which are true and divine. But the Stoics, on the authority of Plutarch, book I On the Opinions of Philosophers, chapter I, defined philosophy as the meditation of an art adapted to life, and said that this is one and the same supreme virtue, which through the imitation of God, as Eusebius brings from Plato, book XII of the Preparation, chapter XX, as far as is possible for man, makes a passage from and flight of earthly things; but one imitates God by justice, sanctity, and prudence. Now justice, as Clement teaches, Stromata I, 4, is the harmony of the parts of the soul; and sanctity is the worship of God. Furthermore, it was an axiom, indeed a paradox, of the Stoics, that the wise man alone is king, legislator, commander, just, holy, a friend of God, alone wealthy, free, honored, beautiful: so Clement of Alexandria teaches from Plato's Phaedrus, book I of the Stromata, as does Cicero in his oration for Murena; hence also the Egyptians created kings and judges only from the wise, as Clement testifies, book V; the Persians from the Magi, the Indians from the Gymnosophists: so our a Castro.
Note that the same wisdom is treated here as in Proverbs and other wisdom books; but here more sublimely, more divinely, and as if from the root. Hence it also treats of uncreated wisdom, both essential, which is common to the whole Most Holy Trinity, and begotten and notional, that is, the Eternal Word, and prophesies about His incarnation and passion. For which reason the name Wisdom has been appropriated to this book: for although three books of Sacred Scripture are called Wisdom (for Proverbs is called the Wisdom of Solo-
mon, Ecclesiasticus is called the Wisdom of Sirach, this book is called the Wisdom of Philo, or rather of an anonymous author); yet this book above all others has obtained the name of Wisdom absolutely, both because it treats of wisdom in general, and its nature, origin, and inner properties; and because in Proverbs and Ecclesiasticus ethical precepts of wisdom are given, which instruct any private person about morals and virtues; hence these two books are called sophia paideutikē, that is, wholly virtuous wisdom; but this book of Wisdom gives political precepts, by which it instructs kings and magistrates in governing the commonwealth well, as is clear from chapter I, verse 1, chapter VI, verse 1 and following: for the highest wisdom, and "the art of arts, is the governance of souls," says St. Gregory at the beginning of his Pastoral. Add that Wisdom also treats of other virtues proper to each person, and therefore it too is called panáretos, that is, filled with every virtue, by Damascene, book IV On the Faith, chapter XVIII; indeed this book is more pious and emotional than Ecclesiastes or Proverbs; for everywhere it breathes the fear of God and pious affections toward God, and inspires them in the reader: and also because it prophesies about the Son of God, to whom the name of wisdom belongs by reason of His origin; hence that noble temple of Constantinople dedicated to the Son of God was distinguished by the name Sophia; and Christ, appearing in the form of a beautiful youth to Blessed Lawrence Justinian when he was still a youth, being asked who He was, answered that He was the Wisdom of God, as his Life records. Hence St. Athanasius in his Synopsis of Sacred Scripture applies a good part of this book to Christ; hence also this book is numbered by the Fathers among the prophetical books.
Wherefore it can be divided into three parts, or sections: the first, from chapter I to chapter VII, contains the praise of wisdom, and an exhortation and encouragement to love, study, and zeal for it; the second, from chapter VII to X, treats of the origin of wisdom, namely that it arose from God; the third, from chapter X to the end, narrates its effects and benefits through the examples of the patriarchs Adam, Noah, Abraham, Lot, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, and the Hebrews. Therefore in this book there is a continuous and perpetual praise of wisdom, that is, of justice and virtue; and a censure of folly, that is, of injustice and vice, with the threat of most severe punishments or rewards; hence scarcely any book of the Old Testament more clearly and weightily sets forth the eternal rewards of the just in heaven, and the eternal torments of the wicked in hell, than the book of Wisdom.
Now, to examine more closely and deeply the subject matter and content of this book, one must remember what I said in the preceding question, that this book was written in the time of Alexander the Great and Ptolemy Philadelphus: for Alexander, about to fight against Darius the last king of the Persians (as shortly after he defeated him, and transferred the monarchy from him and the Persians to himself and the Greeks), was offended by the Jews, because they had supported the cause of Darius: therefore marching on Jerusalem he threatened them with destruc-
was offended by the Jews, because they had supported the cause of Darius: therefore marching on Jerusalem he threatened them with destruction, but Jaddus met him clothed in his pontifical vestments, and turned his anger and spirit to benevolence: wherefore he himself was the first to salute the high priest, and adored the tetragrammaton name of God, which he bore engraved on the plate on his forehead; and when all marveled at this, Parmenio asked Alexander, as Josephus says, book XI of the Antiquities, chapter VIII, "why, when he himself was adored by all, he now adored the high priest of the Jews. But he replied that he had not adored this man, but had shown honor to the God whose high priest he was: For this one, he said, I saw before in this very garment, when I was still in Dion of Macedonia, who, when I was deliberating how I might subdue Asia, encouraged me to be of strong heart and without delay to cross over with my army: for under his guidance I would gain the empire of the Persians. Wherefore, because now for the first time I have seen such a garment, recognizing this man, and mindful of the vision that impelled me to this expedition, I believe that not without divine providence I am leading my army against Darius, and that I shall shortly be master of victory, and with the Persian empire overthrown, all things will turn out according to my expectation." After Alexander's death, his four chief generals divided his empire. Antigonus seized Asia, Antipater Macedonia, Seleucus Syria, Ptolemy son of Lagus Egypt: therefore Judea, situated between Syria and Egypt, was for both, and for the descendants of both (namely of Seleucus and Ptolemy), an apple of discord, indeed of prey, now the Ptolemies, now the Antiochids subjugating it to themselves. Therefore Ptolemy son of Lagus, invading Jerusalem by treachery, captured it, and brought from Judea into Egypt one hundred and twenty thousand captives: thus he severely afflicted the Jews, to such an extent that some of the Jews in Egypt defected from Judaism to paganism, and to the idols of the Egyptians. Ptolemy son of Lagus was succeeded in the kingdom of Egypt by his son Ptolemy Philadelphus; he, following in his father's footsteps, at first oppressed the Jews, and afterwards, having been reconciled to them through the 72 translators, was very benevolent and beneficent; all of which Josephus narrates at length, book XII of the Antiquities, chapters I and II. Therefore the author of this book, seeing the afflictions of the Jews, which they suffered from the Ptolemies, wrote this book for the consolation and strengthening of the Jews, lest they fall away from God and the right faith to the idols of the Egyptians. Wherefore at length throughout all of chapters XII, XIII, and XIV, he establishes the worship of the one God, and demonstrates the emptiness of idols, as Jeremiah had previously done in a similar tribulation, writing a letter to the Jews about to go into the Babylonian captivity, in which he shows them the vanity of idols, and exhorts them not to marvel at and worship idols in Babylon: this letter of Baruch exists in chapter VI. For this reason the Wise Man here, in chapters III and V, exhorts the Jews and all the faithful to constancy and martyrdom for the faith in the one God, if need be, because there awaits them in heaven a crown of everlasting glory, just as shortly after, under Antiochus Epiphanes, to the same exhor-
tation Mattathias and the Maccabees encouraged one another and the rest of the Jews, II Maccabees VII, etc.
Again, on the occasion of the persecution by the Ptolemaic kings, he instructs kings on how they ought to govern their subjects wisely, that is, rightly and piously, from the fear and worship of the true God, and threatens unjust rulers and tyrants with the horrible punishments of God, who is the King of kings, and for this reason, in chapters XVI and following, to the end, through four entire chapters he at length commemorates the history, plagues, and destruction of Pharaoh who persecuted the Hebrews, and the liberation, victory, and miracles of the Jews, to this end: first, that the Ptolemies, who had succeeded Pharaoh in the kingdom of Egypt, might set him before themselves as an example and mirror, and know that they would be punished by God in like manner, if they harassed and persecuted God's people, namely the Hebrews. On the other hand, he proposes to the Ptolemies and other kings that they should imitate Solomon, the wisest, wealthiest, and most excellent king, who married the daughter of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and was therefore joined by kinship with the Egyptians. Hence in chapters VII, VIII, and IX, he narrates at length Solomon's zeal for wisdom and the prayer by which he implored it from God and obtained it; and at the same time he recounts his knowledge, wealth, honor, magnificence, and glory, with which he was exalted and heaped by God on account of his wisdom, that is, his justice and virtue, so that kings may know that the same things will be given to them by God, if they are zealous for wisdom, that is, for justice and virtue. Second, so that the Jews oppressed by the Ptolemies may be raised up in hope of liberation, when they read that their ancestors, oppressed by Pharaoh in the same place, were miraculously liberated by God through so many glorious signs and prodigies. It accords with this opinion or conjecture of mine that Jesus son of Sirach, the author of Ecclesiasticus, in chapter LI, verse 7, gives thanks to God for having delivered him "from the lying word, and from the wicked king," namely Ptolemy: for this Jesus was contemporary with the author of Wisdom; hence St. Augustine in the Speculum joins Wisdom with Ecclesiasticus, and places both after Isaiah and the other prophets.
Furthermore, the Wise Man earnestly commends chastity in chapter IV, because the Egyptians, and especially the Ptolemies, were lascivious and dissolute: hence they married their own sisters.
Memorable is what Gregory of Nyssa writes about his sister St. Macrina in her Life, namely that from her tender years she had learned the Wisdom of Solomon and the Psalms of David, and constantly sang them, whether she was praying, eating, studying, or going to bed. Emmelia, the mother of St. Macrina, "proposed for her learning, he says, whatever from the divinely inspired Scripture seemed easier and more suitable for that first tender age, especially the Wisdom of Solomon, and particularly from it what was most conducive to life and morals;" hence she advanced so greatly in holiness and wisdom that by an angel appearing to her mother when pregnant with her, she was compared to St. Thecla, and given the surname Thecla: therefore she was also the teacher and instructress in every virtue of her brothers, Saints Basil, Gregory of Nyssa, Peter, and Naucratius.
he supplies what was omitted there, such as the origin and author of idolatry, chapter XIV, verse 15; the wasps which, sent by God, weakened the Canaanites before the coming of the children of Israel, chapter XII, verse 8; the manna which displayed to the just every sweetness and variety of flavor that they desired, chapter XVI, verse 20; the phantoms and specters, and the fire and hissing of serpents and beasts that terrified the Egyptians in the ninth plague of Egypt, which was of the densest darkness, chapter XVII, verses 5, 6, 9; the terrifying visions of the firstborn, when they were slain as the angel passed over, chapter XVIII, verse 19. Where note that the author of this book often leaps suddenly from one miracle of God to another, and suddenly rebounds and returns to the former, and he does this especially in the last chapters of the book. The prophets often do the same, for this book was written in a prophetical style, as the Fathers teach.
Finally, the book of Wisdom, as well as the second book of Maccabees, seem especially to have been written by some Pharisee against the Sadducees, who denied divine Providence and the immortality of the soul, and consequently the future rewards of the good and the punishments of the wicked, all of which the Pharisees conceded and defended against the Sadducees, as is clear from Acts XXIII, 8. For when Ezra the scribe had established a college of scribes, that is, of those devoted to the study of wisdom, and in the time of the Maccabees, indeed in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, the Jews had come under the yoke of Alexander and the Greeks, it happened that many of the scribes read the books of Plato, Aristotle, and other Greek sophists, or mingled in conversation with their descendants and followers; and, seeing that some of these denied divine Providence and the future life, while others asserted both, they themselves were also divided into two sects, namely the Pharisees who asserted both, and the Sadducees who denied both. The people followed the Pharisees, but the nobles followed the Sadducees, as being devoted to a freer and more licentious life; hence John Hyrcanus, son of Simon, brother of Judas Maccabeus, degenerating from Judas Maccabeus (whose example of faith in this matter is found in II Maccabees XII), in his extreme old age, provoked by a certain Pharisee, and incited by another Sadducee, a friend of his, defected to the Sadducees, as Josephus testifies, book XIII of the Antiquities, chapter XVIII, and most bitterly persecuted the Pharisees. Hyrcanus was followed by his son Alexander, and from him his grandson Aristobulus; of whom Alexander in one day ordered eight hundred Jews to be crucified before him while he feasted with his concubine, as Josephus testifies, book XIII of the Antiquities, chapter XXII. Herod the Ascalonite seems to have followed these, who next succeeded Aristobulus and his brother Hyrcanus in the principate of Judea; for he too killed very many Pharisees, because they refused to swear allegiance to him as king. But soon the contentions between the Pharisees and Sadducees were calmed after the exile of Archelaus, son of Herod, when Roman governors were appointed in his place; for they did not incline to either of these sects; and then both parties, though clinging to their own opinion, conspired against Christ as their common enemy, that is, the enemy of Judaism and the synagogue. So Francisco Lucas on Matthew chapter II, verse 7. The Wise Man therefore, striving to recall the nobles infected by this heresy of the Sadducees (to whom our Machiavellians are similar) to sound faith in and fear of God, addresses them, saying: "Love justice, you who judge the earth, think of the Lord in goodness," that is, well, rightly, and worthily; and thereafter he impresses upon them the future punishments of the wicked, and the rewards of the pious.
Therefore the Wise Man in this book especially celebrates the works of Wisdom, in defending and protecting the good and faithful Hebrews, and in destroying the wicked and faithless, those rebellious against God, the Canaanites and Egyptians, the followers of Pharaoh; for which reason he briefly touches here upon many histories from Genesis, Exodus, and Numbers, and occasionally supplies certain things which there
Now St. Jerome, who is the author of the Latin Vulgate version of the Bible, except for the Psalms (for in these the Church retained the Septuagint version as already well-worn and sung by everyone), does not seem to have been the translator of this book of Wisdom and of Ecclesiasticus, because he does not seem to have considered them canonical; hence he did not prefix a prologue to them, as he customarily does in the other books translated by him: indeed he frequently cites Wisdom differently from what our Vulgate has, as is clear from his Commentaries on Isaiah, chapter LV, and on Zechariah VIII and XII, and often elsewhere. Finally, by St. Augustine, Cyprian, Dionysius the Areopagite, and others more ancient than St. Jerome, sayings from the book of Wisdom are cited in precisely the same manner as they now appear in the Latin Vulgate; therefore it must have existed before St. Jerome: hence it is quite likely that in Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus the ancient version was retained by the Church, which it had used before St. Jerome.
Note: The Greek text here, as in Ecclesiasticus, is often uncertain and varies; therefore the Roman Greek edition, corrected by Cardinal Caraffa and approved by Sixtus V, must be consulted, and much more the Latin Vulgate, which here is purer than the Greek, and therefore to be preferred to the Greek, and to be considered authentic Sacred Scripture, as the Council of Trent decreed, session IV.
Those who have commented on Wisdom include St. Bonaventure, Lyranus, Hugo, Dionysius the Carthusian, Robert Holcot of the Order of St. Dominic, Cardinal Peter of Ailly, Peter Nannius, Jerome Osorius, Vatablus, Isidore Clarius, Cornelius Jansen, and from our Society, John Lorinus and Christophorus a Castro, and Gonsalvus Cervantes of the Order of St. Augustine. Furthermore, Bellator the Presbyter, as Robert Holcot reports, wrote 25 books on Wisdom. Matthew Cantacuzenus published brief but notable scholia on Wisdom, which our Brunellus translated from Greek into Latin.
I shall be briefer here, lest the Solomonic work grow too large, especially because many things which are commemorated and repeated here have already been explained by me in the Pentateuch, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes.