Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Argumentum
It is asked FIRST, who was Malachi? Origen, as cited by St. Jerome and Cyril, responds first that he was an angel who assumed a body and hypostatically united it to himself, so that he might be a type of Christ, and so that he might announce these oracles of God to the Jews. He proves this from the fact that Malachi in Hebrew means the same as "angel of the Lord." And so the Septuagint translate chapter 1:1, and from them Clement of Alexandria in Book I of the Stromata, and St. Augustine in Book XX of The City of God, chapter 25. And St. Chrysostom in Oration 2 Against the Jews, and Homily 14 on the Epistle to the Hebrews: "Read, he says, what Haggai says, what Zechariah, what the angel (namely Malachi), what Ezra accuses." Moved by a similar argument, Origen judged that Haggai and John the Baptist were incarnate angels, because they are called angels in the Scriptures, as is clear from Haggai 1:13 and Matt. 11:10. Tertullian seems to have agreed with Origen in his book On the Flesh of Christ, chapters 3 and 6, where he proves that it was not impossible for the Word of God to assume flesh, from the fact that this was possible for angels: which unless you understand it of a hypostatic assumption, his reasoning would be futile and of no weight. Furthermore, Origen transmits this opinion both elsewhere and expressly in tome II on John, explaining those words of Malachi: "Behold, I send My angel." But this is an error. For it is a matter of faith that John the Baptist was a man, begotten of Zechariah and Elizabeth, as is clear from Luke 1:15 and John 1:6. And it is certain that all the Prophets were men. Hence Sirach 49:12: "And may the bones of the twelve Prophets, he says, sprout from their place." If they had bones, and these will again sprout and rise; therefore they were true men: for these are composed of flesh and bones. So St. Jerome, Cyril, Theodoretus, and others throughout. To the argument I respond that the Prophets are called angels, that is, messengers and legates of God. Thus every priest is called an angel by Malachi, when he says in chapter 2:7: "The lips of the priest shall guard knowledge, and they shall seek the law from his mouth; because he is the angel of the Lord of hosts." Second, they are called angels on account of their angelic character, appearance, and life. In a similar way, many today give the name Angel to their children, out of devotion to the angels, and so that they might imitate their purity. So St. Epiphanius in his book On the Life and Character of the Prophets, under Malachi and Haggai, who also adds from the tradition of the Hebrews that Malachi was called an angel because whatever he preached, the same things were taught and confirmed by an angel coming from heaven. But the credibility of this rests with the Hebrews; it certainly seems to smack of a fable and Rabbinic invention.
Second, the ancient Hebrews, as well as the modern ones, hold that Malachi was Ezra the priest and scribe. St. Jerome, Remigius, Rupert, Ribera, and others report and follow this tradition. The reasons and conjectures for this opinion are various. First, because Malachi treats the same subject as Ezra, namely he censures the neglect of the law and the worship of God, and specifically marriages with foreigners, which Ezra condemns in chapter 9. Second, because Ezra lived at the same time as Malachi, and he mentions Haggai and Zechariah in chapter 5:1, but not Malachi: therefore it is a sign that he himself was Malachi, who was so called when he was sent by God as an angel, that is, a messenger and prophet, to the people, to lead them to repentance by which they might escape the impending calamities. Third, because Ezra, a man wonderfully holy, zealous, and an outstanding preacher, clearly seems to have been a prophet, and could not have been other than Malachi.
Fourth, because Sirach chapter 49, when praising Zerubbabel, Joshua, and Nehemiah, passes over Ezra, who yields to none of them in virtue and deeds: therefore it is probable that he praised him among the 12 Minor Prophets, under the name of Malachi. On the other hand, Josephus in his books of Antiquities and Eusebius in his Chronicle mention Ezra but not Malachi, as if they were one and the same: yet Eusebius in Book X of the Preparation, chapter 3, mentions Malachi and associates him with Haggai and Zechariah.
But others throughout distinguish Malachi from Ezra. First, because Ezra is everywhere called Ezra, never Malachi: just as Malachi is everywhere called Malachi, never Ezra: nor does Malachi give any indication of being Ezra. Second, because Ezra is everywhere called a scribe, but Malachi is everywhere called a prophet. Third, because Malachi was the last of all the Prophets, and in him prophecy ceased among the Hebrews, as they themselves acknowledge. He was the youngest of all the Prophets, as St. Epiphanius, Dorotheus, and Isidore write in his Life: but Ezra was older than Haggai and Zechariah, who prophesied after the return from the Babylonian captivity, just as Malachi did. For Ezra was born before the captivity, or at least in the first year of the captivity, as is clear from the fact that in that year Seraiah his father was killed by Nebuchadnezzar, shortly after the capture of Jerusalem, at Riblah, Ezra 7:1, joined with 4 Kings 25:18 and 21. Now the captivity lasted 70 years: therefore if you place its beginning at the destruction of Jerusalem, it follows that Ezra was at least 70 years old at its end: but if you place its beginning 11 years earlier, at the slaughter of Jehoiakim and the captivity of Jehoiachin, it follows that Ezra was 59 years old at its end: to which add 3 years of Cyrus, 8 of Cambyses, 36 of Darius Hystaspes, 20 of Xerxes, 7 of Artaxerxes (for in the 7th year of Artaxerxes, Ezra was sent by him to Jerusalem, Ezra 7:1 and 6) and you will have 133 years of Ezra's life; after which he was still surviving and carried out what is narrated from chapter 7 of Ezra to the end of the book. Therefore he must have been very old and aged: therefore Ezra was not Malachi, who died young, as Epiphanius, Isidore, and Dorotheus relate in his Life. Fourth, Ezra spent almost his entire life in Babylon; hence he was the cupbearer of Artaxerxes: but Malachi lived in Judea and was born there after the return of the people from Babylon, as Epiphanius, Dorotheus, and Isidore teach. Fifth, because St. Chrysostom cited at the beginning, Theodoretus in his preface to the Canticles, St. Augustine in Book XVIII of The City of God chapter 36, Athanasius in the Synopsis, Lyranus, Vatablus, Clarius, a Castro, Arias, and others distinguish Ezra from Malachi. Indeed, the Hebrews, according to Genebrard in the Chronology, under the beginning of the sixth age, relate that the Hebrews held a council to draw up the canon of canonical books, and that Daniel, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi presided over it, while the scribe was Ezra. From this the response to the arguments is clear.
To the first argument it is answered that most of the Prophets treat nearly the same subject as others, namely the threats of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans.
To the second, Ezra does not mention Malachi because he was prior to him: for after him Malachi prophesied in the last place. Add that Ezra only mentioned Prophets who incited the people to restore the temple: such were Haggai and Zechariah, but not Malachi, inasmuch as he prophesied after the temple was restored.
To the third I have already said that Ezra was a historian and scribe, but Malachi was a prophet, and St. Augustine expressly teaches this in Book XVIII of The City of God, chapter 36. For God distributes His gifts, especially that of prophecy, as He wills; hence He sometimes denies it even to the holier, but communicates it to the less holy, indeed even to the impious, as Christ asserts in Matt. 7:22.
To the fourth, Sirach does not mention all illustrious men, but only some: hence just as he omits Ezra, so also Daniel. I say the same about Josephus and Eusebius's Chronicle. Add that perhaps Josephus and Eusebius followed the Hebrew tradition that Ezra and Malachi were one and the same, just as St. Jerome followed the same tradition.
Malachi prophesied under Darius Hystaspes, and thereafter, under whom Haggai and Zechariah also prophesied; but after them. So St. Jerome, who also following the Hebrews, gives this chronological canon of the Prophets. For he relates and says: "Those Prophets in whose titles no time is indicated, prophesied under those kings under whom also those who have titles before them prophesied." Furthermore, he prophesied not before, as St. Jerome seems to suggest, but after the completion of the building of the temple, as will appear if one compares chapter 2 with chapters 9 and 10 of Ezra. For in chapters 1 and 2 he censures the priests and threatens them with a curse, because they served the temple and altar carelessly and impiously; he condemns the solemnities which the Jews performed in the temple without devotion, avariciously, and unworthily; and especially because they celebrated them polluted both by other sins and by marriages with unbelievers, a sin which Ezra likewise condemns and rebukes in chapters 9 and 10. Hence Malachi alluding to him in chapter 2:7: "The lips, he says, of the priest (Ezra) shall guard knowledge, and they shall seek the law from his mouth." For Ezra for a long time
after the temple was completed (for this happened in the 6th year of Darius Hystaspes), namely in the 7th year of Artaxerxes, came from Babylon to Jerusalem, and there instructed the people in the law of God, and rebuked and dissolved marriages with foreigners. So Cyril, Theodoretus, and others. Therefore a little before the 7th year of Artaxerxes, Malachi seems to have warned about repudiating foreign wives, and by God's command to have ordered it. For in this 7th year Ezra arrived, who helping Malachi, actually persuaded the Jews to repudiate them, so that there was no longer need for further admonition from Malachi.
It is asked second, what is the subject of Malachi? I answer first, he accuses the Jews of ingratitude, and the priests of negligence and impiety toward God; because although they should be angels of the Lord, both in teaching and life, they exhibit neither. Second, he predicts that the Aaronic priesthood and sacrifice in Jerusalem will be abolished, and that the pure and holy sacrifice of the Eucharist, to be celebrated throughout the whole world, will succeed it. Third, he rebukes the Jews who were divorcing their wives and marrying foreigners. Fourth, he predicts the coming of Christ and His precursor John the Baptist. Fifth, he curses the harvests of the Jews on account of tithes and first fruits denied to God. Sixth, he foretells the day of judgment and its forerunner and herald Elijah, who will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children. Therefore the prophecy of Malachi is brief in its sentences, but rich in mysteries, especially those to come in the New Testament, which he announces more clearly than the rest, being the last and closest to Christ and the Apostles, and he hands on to them the torch of prophecy, as it were, while as their herald and morning star, he ends and rests in them. Hence St. Jerome to Paulinus: "Malachi, he says, openly and at the end of all the Prophets, concerning the rejection of Israel and the calling of the Gentiles: I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord of hosts, and I will not accept an offering from your hand. For from the rising of the sun to its setting, great is My name among the nations, and in every place sacrifice is offered and a pure offering is presented to My name."
Moreover, since the whole people revered him as a man endowed with no less holiness than gentleness, they gave him the name of Malachi, that is, "angel": for he was indeed of exceedingly handsome appearance. Moreover, whatever Malachi said in prophecy, an angel seemed to instruct and declare to him daily, etc. But before his time, while still a youth, he passed away, and was laid to rest beside his ancestors in his own little field." Dorotheus has virtually the same words. Isidore adds that he is called an angel because the people believed his oracles as if they had been delivered by God through an angel. A Castro adds that God through his mouth censured and instructed the Jewish priests, and promised golden ones in the New Testament; these therefore, since they are angels, required a prophet and teacher of angels, namely Malachi.
Rightly therefore was Malachi, that is "angel," so named; whose face, spirit, actions, and speech were angelic: for which reason he frequently speaks with angels and about angels, as in chapter 2:7 he calls the priest an angel of the Lord, and in chapter 3:1 he calls both Christ and John the Baptist angels: "Behold, he says, I send My angel (John the Baptist), and he shall prepare the way before Your face. And presently the ruler whom you seek shall come to His temple, and the Angel of the Covenant (the new one, namely Christ the Lord, who is the Angel of great counsel) whom you desire. Behold, He comes, says the Lord of hosts. And who shall be able to think of the day of His coming? And who shall stand to see Him? For He is like a refining fire, and like fullers' herb: and He shall sit refining and cleansing silver, and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and shall refine them as gold and as silver, and they shall offer sacrifices to the Lord in justice."
Hence comparing Him to the sun in chapter 4:2: "And the sun of justice shall arise for you who fear My name, and healing in His wings; and you shall go forth and leap like calves of the herd." Are not these the voices and jubilations of an exultant, heavenly, and angelic spirit? Rightly therefore is Malachi recorded as enrolled in the choir of angels and the catalogue of the Saints in the Roman Martyrology, on the 14th of January.
Therefore St. Bernard, alluding to him in his sermon On Malachy Archbishop of Ireland, as one similar to him both in name and surname, and also in character: "Beloved, he says, of God and men was Malachy,
The life of Malachi was summed up in these few words by St. Epiphanius in his book On the Life of the Prophets: "Malachi, he says, of the tribe of Zebulun, is said to have been born in Sopha after the return of the people from Babylon. He is reported to have led a blameless life from his earliest age and while still young. Certain things were prophesied by him concerning the coming of the Lord and the judgment of the dead, and that the rites together with the laws of Moses would be changed and amended.
and rejoices in blessedness." And shortly after: "Let us rejoice that today he is received into the fellowship of the angels, having attained in reality what he was called by name. And indeed before he was an angel no less in purity than in name; but now more happily in glory is the meaning of his name fulfilled, when with a glory equal to the angels our angel has ascended to his fellow citizens, carrying out the embassy for the children of captivity, winning for us the hearts of the blessed, bringing to them the prayers of the wretched."