Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Word of God · Book II: On the Editions and Versions of Scripture
Chapter 13: The Psalm places Calvin calls mistranslated are defended
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. I, De Verbo Dei, Book II: On the Editions and Versions of Scripture. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
Now we shall come to those places which John Calvin, in the Antidote to the Council of Trent, noted as corrupt and depraved; and although before us William Lindanus diligently did this same thing in the book On the best kind of interpreting, yet it does not seem useless if the calumnies of the heretics be refuted by more than one.
The first place, then, is in those words of Psalm 2, Embrace discipline. Which place Calvin shows to be depraved by the fault of the interpreter, whereas in the Hebrew it is [nashequ bar], Kiss the son; nor could this in any way have happened by the fault of the copyists, since there is no likeness of letters. I answer: word for word in the Hebrew it is, Kiss, or adore, the Son; yet the weight of that place is most rightly rendered by Embrace discipline. For so the Chaldaic translates, so the Greek, so all the ancient Greeks and Latins have hitherto read. It is therefore to be observed that when it is said Kiss the son, the sense is, Acknowledge the Son of God to be your true King and Messiah, by kissing his hand for honor's sake, as blessed Jerome expounds book 1 against Rufinus; and therefore it can also be translated Adore the Son. Now we cannot acknowledge the Son to be King and Messiah otherwise than by receiving his Faith and doctrine. And what else is Embrace discipline, but Receive the erudition and doctrine of the Son of God?
The second place is Psalm 4: O ye sons of men, how long will you be dull of heart? This place Calvin reprehends in the same place, because in the Hebrew there is nothing similar; for instead of those our words dull of heart, why, in the Hebrew is [Hebrew], my glory unto ignominy. I answer: it is very likely that the Hebrew text is corrupt by the fault of the copyists; for if [beth] be changed into [kaph], and the points changed, it will become dull of heart, why, namely thus [Hebrew]; and without doubt the Seventy so read, whose version all the Greek and Latin Fathers followed, except Jerome, who, because he read otherwise, translated my glorious ones. Yet the sense is always the same, which suffices for the truth of the interpretation. For God in that place complains of men, that, neglecting eternal things, they love the temporal; and indeed according to the Greek and Latin version he calls them dull of heart, because such they are by their own fault; according to the Hebrew text, as it now stands, he calls them his glory, or his glorious ones, because such they are by the divine benefit, if we consider in them the heavenly image, not their own vice. Moreover that [Hebrew word] can be either the passive participle of the verb [kabad], or a verbal noun.
The third is Psalm 31: I am turned in my anguish, whilst the thorn is fastened. This place too Calvin reprehends, because in the Hebrew there are other words and another sense. For word for word in the Hebrew it is: My moisture is without sap, and my greenness is turned into summer droughts. And indeed the sense of our edition is: I am turned to penance in the time of anguish and affliction, while the thorn of calamity began to be fastened in me; but the sense of the Hebrew truth is: All my goods have perished, as moisture and greenness in summer is dried up and perishes by the heat of the sun. I answer: our interpreter cannot be reprehended in this place, because he did not translate from the Hebrew, but rendered from the Greek into Latin; and the Greek text answers most excellently to our text. Now the Seventy Interpreters seem to have read the Hebrew text a little otherwise than it now stands; and therefore there is an error of the scribes in the Hebrew; for by the least change of one or two letters it can be made that there be in the Hebrew the sense of our edition. For that [word] is turned, my greenness, if it be read [otherwise], will be I am turned in my anguish, as blessed Jerome also reads, who translated, I was busied in my misery. And what follows, [Hebrew], into summer droughts, if it be read [otherwise], will be, Whilst the thorn is fastened for me.
And certainly, if when we see in the Latin text that something could easily be changed by the copyists on account of the likeness of letters, and could not in the Hebrew, we say the error of the copyists is in the Latin, why in this place, where the error could easily be made in the Hebrew, and not in the Greek or Latin, shall we not also say that in the Hebrew the text was changed by the error of the copyists?
The fourth is in the same Psalm, where we read: With bit and bridle bind fast the jaws of them that come not near to thee. Calvin will have it read: With their lupine-bit and bridle, to coerce them, that they come not near to thee. I answer: wonderful is his impudence in this matter; for both the Seventy, and blessed Jerome in his Psalter to Sophronius, and all the Fathers always so read as we now read; and the Hebrew words, even as they now stand, can be most conveniently so expounded.
The fifth is Psalm 37: For my loins are filled with illusions. And what do we understand, says Calvin, by loins filled with illusions? I answer: the Hebrew word [niqleh] signifies ignominy and burning; wherefore David speaks of that itching and burning of lust, which, while it exists in the body, begets illusions in the mind. And that the Greek interpreter, whom the Latin, and (what is more wonderful) the Chaldaic followed, put the effect for the cause; which ought to seem to no one new or wonderful.
The sixth is Psalm 67: Who maketh men of one manner to dwell in a house. Calvin will have it read, who maketh solitary ones to dwell in a house, that is, who enriches the bereaved and solitary with a family. I answer: the Hebrew words admit excellently several senses, and all true. One sense is: Who in his house, which is the Church, maketh men of one manner to dwell, that is, of one Faith, one hope, one will, according to that of Acts 4, The multitude of believers had one heart and one soul. For those who are of diverse Faith or will, as heretics and schismatics, cannot remain in the Church, but either go out themselves or are cast out. This sense the Seventy expressed, and thence the Latin interpreter, and almost all the Greek and Latin Fathers. Nor does this sense depart from the Hebrew word, for [Hebrew] comes from the verb [yachad], which is to unite, whence is made united, or one composed of many. But because it also signifies a single and solitary one, thence is another sense, also true: Who maketh men forsaken and solitary, who have none by whom they may be defended, yet to dwell securely in their houses, the divine aid protecting them. To this St. Jerome seems to have looked, who translated solitary ones. A third sense is also true, and not destroying the others: Who maketh single men, that is, bereaved or barren, to dwell in a house, that is, to possess a great family. Nor is the exposition of those absurd who thus interpret: He maketh solitary ones to dwell in a house, that is, he maketh that some, for love of heavenly contemplation, leaving the crowd, betake themselves to desert places and dwell alone, as of old Elias, afterward John the Baptist, and our Paul, Antony, Hilarion, and others did.
The seventh is in the same Psalm, where, for what we have, Who dwell in sepulchres, Calvin contends it should be read, In a thirsty place. And indeed it cannot be denied that the Hebrew word designates a dry and parched place; but neither is it credible that the Greek interpreter was ignorant of this, since the word is well enough known. The interpreter therefore wished to express the horror of that desert out of which God led his people, which indeed seemed to be like a sepulchre. Which phrase we see used Ezechiel 37, who called the Babylonian captivity the sepulchres of the Jews.
The eighth is in the same Psalm, where it is said: The Lord shall give the word to them that preach good tidings with great power; the King of powers is of the beloved, of the beloved; and the beauty of the house shall divide spoils. If you sleep among the midst of lots, the wings of a dove covered with silver, and the hinder parts of her back with the paleness of gold. This place above the rest Calvin most vexes, saying that the interpreter, where the sense flows excellently in David's words, wrapped up enigmas from which no Oedipus can extricate himself. And he himself will have it read: The kings of armies fled, they fled, and the dwellers of the house divided the spoils. If you slept among the midst of the pots, you shall be as the wings of a dove which is covered with silver, and whose wings are covered with gold like the honeycomb. I answer: the Latin interpreter cannot be accused, who translated most faithfully what he found in the Greek. And although in the Latin edition that place is very obscure, yet it is also obscure in the Greek and Hebrew, and in Calvin's own version, as is plain.
I say besides: the Hebrew text can easily be accommodated to our reading. For that [Hebrew] signifies kings of powers, or of armies; yet if the points be changed, and we read [Hebrew], it will be King of powers, as [Hebrew] King of justice. And that [Hebrew] signifies they shall flee; yet the Seventy seem to have read [Hebrew], only one letter changed, which signifies Beloved; which word is had in the title of Psalm 44, where it is said a canticle of the beloved. And that [Hebrew] signifies the dweller of the house (feminine singular), not the dwellers, as Calvin wrongly translates; it signifies also a beautiful and delicate woman, who almost always remains at home; and thence, by transferred word, it signifies beauty and comeliness. For blessed Jerome in this place translated Beauty, and elsewhere almost always. Finally that [Hebrew] does not signify pots, as Calvin thinks, for it is of the dual number, and therefore signifies something by its nature doubled; for so the Hebrews commonly use the dual. But pots are infinite in number; it signifies rather two lips, or two borders or ranks; for [the root] is to arrange. Whence Jerome here translates, “Between the borders,” and the Seventy, “Between the lots,” that is, “portions,” or “inheritances,” as if they said, “Between the borders of two lots.” We have therefore that our reading is not foreign to the Hebrew text. Now let us explain the sense.
The sense therefore of those words, as is gathered from Augustine and other Fathers, is this: “The Lord shall give the word to them that preach the Gospel with great power,” that is, “the Lord shall give to the preachers of the Gospel a mouth and wisdom, which all their adversaries shall not be able to resist and gainsay.” For what they say, they shall confirm also with signs and wonders. “The King of powers is of the beloved, of the beloved,” that is, “that Lord of whom we spoke is the King of powers,” that is, “a most powerful King, the Lord of the armies of many thousands of Angels, and at the same time the father of the beloved, the beloved,” that is, “of the Messiah his most beloved Son, who also shall give to divide the spoils for the beauty of the house,” that is, “shall give to those same preachers to divide the spoils of the Gentiles converted to Christ, for the beauty and adornment of his house, which is the Church.” For that “of beauty” is of the dative case, and is the same as “for beauty.” “If you sleep among the midst of lots,” that is, “if you, O Preachers and Pastors of the Church, remain between the two lots or inheritances, the heavenly and the earthly, so that while you live here you be not wholly occupied in temporal things, nor wholly in spiritual, nor wholly in action, nor wholly in contemplation, but in the midst; then shall the Church be as a most fair and beautiful dove, having silvered wings and a gilded back, etc.”
The ninth is in the same place, where we read: Why suspect ye curdled mountains? For Calvin will have it read, why envy ye the rich mountains? But since that word is found only in this place, and there are almost as many expositions of this word as there are interpreters, why, I ask, should one Campensis be followed rather than the Seventy Interpreters? Certainly Calvin will not be able to confirm the version of his Campensis from any other place. Since therefore we must necessarily acquiesce in the judgment of the interpreters, who does not see that the Seventy Interpreters are to be preferred to all others, especially since the Catholic Church has approved their version by so long a usage?
The tenth is in the same place, where we read: For those who believe not, that the Lord God may dwell. For thus Calvin thinks it should be read, Even the deserters, that the Lord God may dwell. But truly this is too great a lust of contradicting, since the sense is the same, the words of the Vulgate edition are better, and St. Jerome himself translated from the Hebrew, Those who believe not that the Lord God dwelleth.
The eleventh is in the same place, where we read: I will turn them into the depth of the sea. For in the Hebrew, Calvin says, the contrary is had, that is, I will bring back from the depths of the sea. But first, that it can rightly be translated from the Hebrew Into the depth, R. David testifies, who asserts that sometimes [min] is used for [be], as Deuteronomy 33 verse 2, [Hebrew] In Sinai. Then the readings are various, both in the Greek and in the Latin codices; since some read Into the depth, others In the depths. Which latter reading seems both truer and coheres well enough with the Hebrew word. For what else is, I will turn in the depths of the sea, I will draw out and turn? as Augustine, Bede, Euthymius, and not a few others expounded.
The twelfth place is in the same Psalm: There is Benjamin in ecstasy of mind. Calvin wonders what the interpreter thought, who so translated, whereas in the Hebrew it is [Hebrew], that is, their ruler. I answer: that word can signify their ruler, from one verb, and also deeply sleeping, from another verb; the latter reading the Greek and Latin interpreter followed, but each is a true interpretation, nor does one destroy the other. For by Benjamin the Catholic writers, with Augustine, understand the Apostle Paul, who was both in ecstasy of mind, so deeply sleeping that he knew not whether he was in the body, and at the same time was the chief Lord, or spiritual Prince, of the Church of the Gentiles.
The thirteenth is Psalm 131, where we read: Blessing I will bless her widow. Which place both Calvin and Kemnitz say is corrupt, whereas in the Hebrew it is [tzeidah], that is, her provision. Calvin adds that some blear-eyed little priest had in his codex Victum (provision), and thought c and t to be one d, and therefore read Vidum; and because this signified nothing, added an a, and made Viduam (widow); and that there was no one who could observe this error. I answer: Calvin lies twice in this place. First, when he says no one observed this variety; for Chrysostom and Hilary noted it on this place, and blessed Jerome in the Hebrew Questions on Genesis, likewise very many of the more recent, Cajetan, Titelmann, and others on this place. Secondly, when he says a blear-eyed little priest so corrupted this place; for this variety arose not from the Latin, but from the Greek; for in almost all the Greek codices it is [chēran], that is, widow, and so Ambrose, Hilary, Augustine, Chrysostom, Prosper, Cassiodorus, and others read. St. Hilary also asserts that before Christ was born there was in this text [chēran], that is, widow.
I say besides: if there is any error here, it is in the Greek; for since [chēran, widow] and [thēran, prey] differ by only one letter, it could easily happen that some wrote [chēran] for [thēran]. For even now some Greeks have [thēran], and Jerome in his Psalter translated hunting; and so Chrysostom and Theodoret expound in their Commentaries on this place. But because the sense is almost the same, and always in the Greek and Latin Church Widow has been read and sung, I would not think this place ought to be changed; for Jerome in the epistle to Sunnia and Fretela wisely admonishes that those things which in the Latin Psalms seem to differ from the Hebrew are indeed to be noted and observed by the learned, yet the text ought not therefore to be changed, which has been in ecclesiastical use so many ages and obtained so great authority. Which counsel of Jerome Calvin by no means kept, who so inverted and changed all things that he made plainly another Psalter.
It has seemed good, at the end, to add certain words of Conrad Pellican, a Zwinglian man, that we may truly say of our edition what Moses said of the true God: Our edition is not as their editions, and our enemies are the judges. He therefore, when he had twice published a Psalter turned by himself to the Hebrew truth, gave this testimony of our Psalter, in his preface of the year 1534: “With such dexterity, erudition, and fidelity do we find the Vulgate edition of the Psalter to agree with the Hebrew as to the sense, that I do not doubt the Greek and Latin interpreter was most learned, and likewise most pious, and truly endowed with a prophetic spirit; although in some places they differ from the Hebrew points which the Jews now use, which I am compelled to doubt were formerly the same, and there is a suspicion that a change of certain letters was made, to those who carefully compare the several particulars.” So he. And thus far of the Old Testament.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XIII.
Defenduntur loca , quce in Psalmis male reddi¬
ta fuisse a Latino interprete Calvinus con¬
tendit.
Nunc ad ea loca veniemus, quae Joannes
Calvinus in Antid. Concil. Trid. tamquam
corrupta et depravata notavit, et quamvis
ante nos diligenter hoc idem praestiterit Gu-
lielmus Lindanus inlib. de Opt. gen. interpr. ,
tamen non videtur inutile, si haereticorum
calumniae a pluribus refellantur.
Igitur primus locus est in illis verbis Psal.
II, Apprehendite disciplinam { 1). Quem locum
ostendit Calvinus vitio interpretis deprava¬
tum, cum in Hebraeo sit 12 Osculamini
filium ; nec potuerit hoc ullo modo accidere
culpa Librariorum, cum nulla sit litterarum
similitudo.
Respondeo : ad verbum in Hebraeo esse
Osculamini , sive adorate Filium : tamen pen¬
sum ejus loci rectissime versum per Appre¬
hendite disciplinam. Nam sic vertit Chaldaeus,
sic Graecus, sic omnes veteres Graeci et La¬
tini hactenus legerunt. Est igitur observan¬
dum, cum dicitur Osculamini filium, sensum
esse agnoscite Filium Dei esse verum Regemet
Messiam vestrum osculando illi manum honoris
gratia : ut et B. Hieronymus exponit lib. I,
contra Ruffinum : et propterea etiam verti
posse Adorate Filium. Porro agnoscere Fi¬
lium esse Regem et Messiam non aliter pos¬
sumus, quam Fidem et doctrinam ejus re¬
cipiendo. Et quid aliud est Apprehendite dis¬
ciplinam. , nisi eruditionem et doctrinam Filii
Dei recipite ?
Secundus locus Ps. IY : Filii hominum us-
quequo gravi corde (2). Hunc locum repre¬
hendit ibidem Calvinus, quod in Hebraeo
nihil simile sit : nam pro illis verbis nostris
Gravi corde ut quid; in Hebraeo est V7I23
noVib gloria mea ad ignominiam.
Respondeo : valde verisimile esse, corrup¬
tum esse textum Hebraeum vitio Librariorum :
nam si mutetur 2 in 2, et puncta mutentur,
fiet graves corde ut quid , nimirum sic nbbhb
V^'22 et sine dubio sic legerunt Septuaginta,
quorum versionem omnes Patres Graeci et
Latini secuti sunt, praeter Hieronymum, qui
quoniam aliter legit, vertit inclyti mei : sen¬
sus tamen semper est idem, quod sufficit ad
veritatem interpretationis. Deus enim eo lo¬
co conqueritur de hominibus, quod neglectis
aeternis, diligant temporalia : et quidem se¬
cundum versionem Graecam et Latinam vo¬
cat eos graves corde, quia tales sunt vitio
suo : secundum Hebraeum textum, ut modo
se habet, vocat eos gloriam suam, seu in¬
clytos suos, quia tales sunt beneficio divino,
si in eis imaginem coelestem, non vitium
proprium consideremus. Porro illud sVl23
esse potest vel participium passivum verbi
‘123, vel nomen verbale.
Tertius est Psal. XNXI. Conversus sum in
aerumna mea , dum configitur spina (3). Hunc
etiam locum reprehendit Calvinus, propterea
quod in Hebraeo sunt alia verba, et alius
sensus. Ad verbum enim est in Hebraeo :
Succus meus sine humore , et viror meus versus
est in siccitates cestivas. Et quidem sensus no¬
strae editionis est : Conversus sum ad poeniten¬
tiam tempore aerumnae , et afflictionis , dum
spina calamitatis in me figi coepit : sensus au¬
tem Hebraicae veritatis est : Omnia mea bona
perierunt , quomodo humor et viror in aestate
Solis ardore siccatur et perit.
Respondeo : nostrum interpretem non
posse reprehendi in hoc loco, quia non ver¬
tit ex Hebraeo, sed de Graeco transtulit in
Latinum : Graecus autem textus nostro textui
optime respondet. Videntur autem LXX
Interpretes paulo aliter legisse textum He¬
braeum, quam modo se habeat ; proinde esse
errorem scribarum in Hebraeo : nam minima
mutatione unius vel duarum litterarum po¬
test fieri, ut sit in Hebraeo sensus nostrae edi¬
tionis. Illud enim $'%•> versus est Viror
meus , silegatur Viu^msni, erit Conversus sum
in aerumna mea , quemadmodum legit etiamB.
Hieronymus, qui vertit, Versatus sum in mi¬
seria mea. Et quod sequitur jnp imin’2, In
siccitates cestivas, si legatur sic jnp 53l'27n3
erit : Dum configitur mihi spina.
Et certe si cum videmus in Latino textu
facile potuisse aliquid mutari a Librariis
(1) Psal. II, 12. — (2) Psal. IV, 3. - (3) Psal. XXXI, 4.
148
LIBER II.
propter litterarum similitudinem, et non po¬
tuisse iu Hebraeo, dicimus errorem Libra¬
riorum esse in Latino : cur hoc loco, ubi fa¬
cile potuit fieri error in Hebraeo, et non in
Graeco, vel Latino, non etiam dicemus, in
Hebraeo errore Librariorum textum esse im¬
mutatum ?
Quartus est in eodem Psalmo, ubi enim
legimus : In chamo , et frceno maxillas eorum
constringe , qui non approximant ad te (1).
Vult Cailvinus, debere legi ; In lupato et frce-
no eorum ad coercendum nec accedant ad te.
Respondeo : miram esse ejus in liac re im¬
pudentiam ; nam et LXX, et B. Hieronymus
in suo Psalt. ad Sophron., et omnes Patres
sic semper legerunt, ut nunc legimus : et
Hebraea verba, etiam ut nunc habentur, sic
possunt commodissime exponi.
Quintus est in Psal. XXXVII. Quoniam
lumbi mei impleti sunt illusionibus (2). Et quid
intelligimus, inquit Calvinus, per lumbos
impletos illusionibus? Respondeo : verbum
Hebraeum riVni ignominiam et ardorem sig¬
nificare : quocirca Davidem loqui de eo pru¬
ritu ac ardore libidinis, qui dum in corpore
existit, illusiones in mente gignit. Porro
Graecum interpretem quem Latinus, et (quod
magis est mirum) Chaldaeus secutus est, ef¬
fectum pro causa posuisse, quod neque no¬
vum, neque mirum cuiquam videri debet.
Sextus est in Psal. LXVIL Qui habitare
facit unius moris in domo (3). Calvinus vult
debere legi, qui habitare facit unicos in domo,
id est, qui orbos et solitarios ditat familia. Re¬
spondeo : verba Hebraea optime recipere
plures sensus, et omnes veros. Unus sensus
est : Qui in domo sua , quae est Ecclesia, ha¬
bitare facit homines unius moris , id est, unius
Fidei, unius spei, unius voluntatis, juxta il¬
lud Actor. IV. Multitudinis credentium erat
cor unum et anima una. Qui enim diversae
Fidei, aut voluntatis sunt, ut haeretici et
schismatici, in Ecclesia permanere non pos¬
sunt, sed vel ipsi exeunt, vel ejiciuntur.
Hunc sensum expresserunt Septuaginta, et
inde Laitinus interpres, et omnes fere Graeci
et Latini Patres. Neque hic sensus ab He¬
braea voce discedit, nam DUHhl venit a ver¬
bo Ttt, quod est unire, inde fit ifn? unitus,
sive unus e multis compositus. Quia tamen
etiam unicum et solitarium significat, inde'
est alius sensus etiam verus : Qui facit ut
homines derelicti et solitarii , qui non habent a
quibus defendantur , tamen securi habitent in
domibus suis, divino eos auxilio protegente.
Huc videtur respexisse S. Hieronymus, qui
vertit solitarios. Tertius sensus est etiam ve¬
rus, et alios non destruens : Qui facit homines
unicos, id est, orbos, vel steriles habitare in do¬
mo, id est, magnam familiam possidere.
Neque absurda est eorum expositio, qui
sic interpretantur : Facit habitare solitarios
in domo , id est, facit ut quidam prce amore
caelestis contemplationis relicta frequentia ad
loca deserta se recipiant, et soli habitent, ut
olim Elias, postea Joannes Baptista, et nos¬
ter Paulus, Antonius, Hilarion, et alii fece¬
runt.
Septimus est in eodem Psalmo, ubi pro
eo, quod habemus : Qui habitant in sepul-
chris (4). Calvinus contendit esse legendum ;
In siticuloso loco. Et quidem negari non po¬
test, quin vox Hebraea 'nnVn'2? locum arentem
et siccum designet : sed neque credibile est,
id ignorasse Graecum interpretem, cum vo¬
cabulum sit satis notum. Voluit igitur inter¬
pres horrorem deserti illius exprimere, unde
Deus populum suum eduxit; quod quidem
instar sepulcliri esse videbatur. Qua phrasi
usum videmus Ezech. c. XXXVII. qui Baby¬
lonicam captivitatem sepulchra Judaeorum
nominavit.
Octavus est in eodem Psalmo, ubi dicitur:
Dominus dabit verbum evangelizantibus virtute
multa , Rex virtutum dilecti, dilecti, et speciei
domus dividere spolia. Si dormiatis inter me¬
dios cleros, pennae columbce deargentatae, et po¬
steriora dorsi ejus in pallore auri (5). Hunc
locum prae caeteris maxime vexat Calvinus
dicens, interpretem, ubi sensus optime fluit
in verbis Davidis, involvisse aenigmata, unde
se nullus QEdipus expediat. Vult autem ipse
legi : Reges exercituum fugerunt , fugerunt,
et habitatrices domus diviserunt spolia. Si dor¬
mistis inter medias ollas , eritis sicut pennce co¬
lumbce, quee tecta est argento, et cujus alce tec¬
tae sunt favo auro. Respondeo : non posse
accusari Latinum interpretem, qui vertit fide¬
lissime quod in Graeco reperit. Et quam¬
quam in Latina editione locus iste valde ob¬
scurus est, tamen etiam est obscurus in
Graeco et Hebraeo, et in ipsa Calvini versio-
ne, ut patet.
Dico praeterea : posse facile Hebraeum tex¬
tum ad nostram lectionem accommodari :
nam illud u-a ji*lK33f significat Reges virtu-
(1) Psal. XXXI, 9. — (2) Psal. XXXVII, 8. — (3) Psal. LXVII, 7. — (4) Ibid. 7. — (5) Ibid. 12.
CAPUT XIII.
149
tum , seu exercituum : tamen si puncta mu¬
tentur, et legamus hiNhltf erit, Rex vir¬
tutum , sicut pi3rw->D Rex justitice. Et illud
significat Fugient; tamen LXX. viden¬
tur legisse njlVli, una tantum littera muta¬
ta, quod significat Dilectum ; quae vox habe¬
tur in titulo Ps. XLIV. ubi dicitur canticum
dilecti. Illud autem atornii significat habita¬
tricem domus , non habitatrices , ut male ver¬
tit Calvinus : significat etiam mulierem spe¬
ciosam et delicatam, quae fere semper domi
manet ; et inde translato vocabulo, significat
speciem et pulchritudinem. Nam B. Hiero¬
nymus hoc loco vertit Pulchritudo , et alibi
fere semper.
Denique illud Oismf, non significat ollas ,
ut Calvinus putat, nam est dualis numeri, et
proinde significat aliquid natura sua dupli¬
catum ; sic enim fere utuntur duali Hebraei.
Ollae autem sunt infinitae : sed significat duo
labia, sive duos terminos, aut ordines : nam
est ordinare. Unde Hieronymus hic ver¬
tit : « Inter terminos » : et LXX « Inter cle¬
ros, » id est, « sortes, » sive « haereditates, »
quasi dicerent ; « Inter terminos duarum
sortium; » habemus igitur lectionem nos¬
tram non esse alienam a textu Hebraeo. Nunc
sensum explicemus.
Sensus igitur illorum verborum, ut ex Au¬
gustino et aliis Patribus colligitur, talis est :
« Dominus dabit verbum evangelizantibus
virtute multa > : id est, « Dominus dabit prae¬
dicatoribus Evangelii os et sapientiam, cui
non poterunt resistere , et contradicere om¬
nes adversarii eorum. » Nam quae dicent,
signis etiam et prodigiis confirmabunt. « Rex
virtutum dilecti, dilecti, » id est , « ille Do¬
minus, » de quo dicebamus, a est Rex virtu¬
tum, » id est, « Rex potentissimus, Dominus
exercituum multorum millium Angelorum,
et simul pater dilecti, dilecti, » id est, «Mes¬
siae Filii sui dilectissimi, qui etiam dabit di¬
videre spolia speciei domus, » id est, « dabit
iisdem praedicatoribus, ut dividant spolia
Gentium ad Christum conversarum, ad spe¬
ciem et decorem domus suae, quae est Eccle¬
sia. » Illud enim , « speciei , » est dativi ca¬
sus, et idem valet quod, « ad speciem. Si
dormiatis inter medios cleros, » id est, «si
vos o Praedicatores et Pastores Ecclesiae ma¬
neatis inter duas sortes, sive haereditates,
ccelestem et terrenam, ita ut dum hic vivitis,
non toti sitis in rebus temporalibus occupati,
nec toti in spiritualibus , nec toti in actione,
nec toti in contemplatione , sed in medio :
tunc erit Ecclesia quasi columba formosissi¬
ma et pulcherrima , habens alas deargenta¬
tas, et dorsum deauratum etc.
Nonus est ibidem ubi legimus : « Ut quid
suspicamini montes coagulatos (1). » Yult
enim Calvinus esse legendum , « ut quid in¬
videtis montibus opimis » : sed cum verbum
illud : I3h , nonnisi hoc loco inveniatur , et
tot sint fere expositiones hujus verbi , quot
sunt interpretes ; cur, quaeso, magis sequen¬
dus erit unus Campensis, quam interpretes
Septuaginta? Certe non poterit Calvinus ex
ullo alio loco Campensis sui versionem con¬
firmare. Cum igitur necessario interpretum
judicio acquiescendum sit, quis non videt,
LX Interpretes omnibus aliis anteponen¬
dos esse , praesertim cum eorum versionem
Catholica Ecclesia tam longo usu approbave¬
rit?
Decimus est ibidem , ubi legimus : « Et¬
enim non credentes inhabitare Dominum
Deum (2) Sic enim legendum Calvinus cen¬
set, « Etiam defectores ut inhabitet Domi¬
nus Deus. At profecto nimia est haec libido
contradicendi, cum et sensus sit idem , et
verba vulgatae editionis sint meliora, et ipse
etiam S. Hieronymus ex Hebraeo verte¬
rit : « Non credentes inhabitare Dominum
Deum. »
Undecimus est ibidem, ubi legimus : « Con¬
vertam in profundum maris » (3). Nam in
Hebraeo contrarium haberi Calvinus dicit,
hoc est, « Reducam ex profundis maris. At
primum, posse recte ex Hebraeo verti « In
profundum, » testatur R. David, qui asserit,
interdum 'p pro D usurpari, ut Deuteronom.
XXXIII. vers. II. dq y In Sinai. Deinde va¬
riae sunt lectiones tam in Graecis , quam in
Latinis codicibus ; cum alii legant In profun¬
dum ; alii In profundis. Quae lectio posterior,
et verior esse videtur, et cum Hebraica voce
satis cohaeret. Nam quid aliud est « Conver¬
tam in profundis maris , extraham , et con¬
vertam?» quemadmodum Augustinus, Be-
da, Euthymius, et alii non pauci exposue¬
runt.
Duodecimus locus est in eodem Psalmo :
Ibi Renjamin in mentis excessu (4). Miratur
Calvinus, quid cogitarit interpres , qui sic
vertit, cum in Hebraeo sit tznVl, id est, domi¬
nator eorum. Respondeo : illud verbum posse
(1) Ib. 17. — (2) Ib. 19. — (3) Ib. 23. — (4) Ib. 28.
150
LIBER II.
significare dominator eorum a verbo *irh, et
etiam alte dormiens a verbo TP : posterio¬
rem lectionem secuti sunt Greecus et Latinus
interpres, sed utraque est vera interpretatio,
nec una alteram destruit : nam per Benja-
min intelligunt Catholici Scriptores cum Au¬
gustino Apostolum Paulum , qui et fuit in
mentis excessu tam alte dormiens, ut nesci¬
ret an esset in corpore , et simul fuit praeci¬
puus Dominus , sive Princeps spiritualis Ec¬
clesiae Gentium.
Decimus tertius est in Psal. CXXXI., ubi
legimus : Viduam ejus benedicens benedicam (1).
Quem locum et Calvinus et Kemnitius dicunt
esse corruptum, cum in Hebraeo sit ftTft, id
est, victum ejus. Addit Calvinus, aliquem sa¬
crificulum lusciosum habuisse in suo codice
Victum ; et putasse c, et t, esse unum, d, et
propterea legisse Vidum ; et quia hoc nihil
significabat, addidisse unum a, et fecisse Vi¬
duam , et neminem fuisse qui hunc errorem
advertere potuerit.
Respondeo : bis mentiri Calvinum in hoc
loco. Primo , cum dicit neminem advertisse
lianc varietatem : nam notarunt eam Chry¬
sostomus et Hilarius in hunc locum , necnon
B. Hieronymus in quaest. in Genes. Item re-
centiores plurimi, Cajetanus, Titelmanus, et
alii in hunc locum. Secundo, cum dicit sa¬
crificulum lusciosum ita corrupisse hunc lo¬
cum ; nam non ex Latino, sed ex Graeco nata
est haec varietas : in Graecis enim codicibus
fere omnibus est X^av, id est, viduam , et sic
legerunt Ambrosius, Hilarius, Augustinus,
Chrysostomus, Prosper, Gassiodorus, et alii.
Asserit quoque S. Hilarius, antequam Chris¬
tus nasceretur, fuisse in hoc textu, x-hpuv id
est viduam.
Dico praeterea : si ullus error hic est, esse
in Graeco : nam cum X^«v, et Q-hpuv tantum
una littera differant, facile potuit fieri, ut ali¬
qui pro Q-ripw scripserint Xhpm. Nam etiam
nunc aliqui Graeci habent Q-hpca et Hierony¬
mus in suo Psalterio vertit venationem , et sic
exponunt Chrysostomus et Theodoretus in
Gomment. hujus loci.
Quia tamen sensus fere est idem , et sem-
per in Ecclesia Graeca et Latina lectum et
cantatum est Viduam : non putarem hunc
locum debere mutari : nom Hieronymus in
epist. ad Suniam et Fretellam sapienter mo¬
net, ea quae in Psalmis Latinis videntur dis¬
sentire ab Hebraeo , esse quidem notanda et
observanda a doctis , tamen non esse prop¬
terea mutandum textum, qui tot seculis in
Ecclesiastico usu fuit , et tantam obtinuit
auctoritatem. Quod Hieronymi consilium
minime servavit Calvinus , qui ita omnia in¬
vertit et mutavit , ut aliud plane Psalterium
fecerit.
Yisum est, ad extremum adseribere verba
quaedam Conradi Bellicani, hominis Zwin-
gliani, ut vere de nostra editione dicere pos¬
simus, quod de Deo vero Moses ait , non est
editio nostra ut editiones eorum , et inimici
nostri sunt judices. Ille igitur cum bis Psal¬
terium ad Hebraicam veritatem a se conver¬
sum edidisset ; hoc testimonium de nostro
Psalterio dedit, in praefat. anni 1534. « Tan¬
ta dexteritate, eruditione et fide, Hebraico
quo ad sensum concordare deprehendimus
vulgatam editionem Psalterii , ut eruditissi¬
mum, pariterque piissimum, et vere prophe¬
tali spiritu praeditum fuisse interpretem Grae¬
cum et Latinum non dubitem ; quamquam
alicubi dissentiant a punctis Hebraicis , qui¬
bus nunc Judaei utuntur, quae olim non fuisse
similia ambigere cogor, et quarumdam litte¬
rarum mutationem factam suspicio sit confe¬
rentibus singula diligenter. » Haec ille. At¬
que hactenus de Testamento veteri'.