Bonaventure

Commentarius in librum Ecclesiastes.

Capitulum I.

Verba Ecclesiastae etc. Iste totalis liber dividitur in tres partes: in titulum sive prooemium et tractatum, qui incipit ibi³: Vanitas vanitatum etc.; et epilogum, qui incipit ibi: Cumque esset sapientissimus Ecclesiastes. — In titulo manifestatur efficiens, in tractatu materia et forma, in epilogo finis.

De titulo.

(Vers. 1.). In titulo igitur manifestatur auctor quantum ad sapientiam, quantum ad bonitatem, quantum ad regiam potestatem. — Ratione sapientiae dicit⁴: Verba Ecclesiastae, supple: quae sequuntur sunt verba Ecclesiastae; quia Ecclesiastes dicitur concionator, et concionator esse non potest, nisi sit sapiens; quia dicitur Proverbiorum vigesimo sexto: « Quomodo si nascatur spina in manu temulenti, sic indecens est in ore stultorum parabola »; unde Proverbiorum decimo septimo: « Non decent stultum verba composita ». — Quantum ad bonitatem manifestatur, cum dicitur: Filii David. David enim sanctus fuit, et imitationis filii sancti sunt; unde in Scriptura nomen est benignitatis et mansuetudinis; Matthaei decimo quinto⁵: « Miserere mei, fili David ». — Quantum ad regiam potestatem, cum dicitur: Regis Ierusalem, quia Ierusalem nobilissima erat civitas et totius regni principium, infra⁶: Ego Ecclesiastes fui rex Israel in Ierusalem, quia ibi maxime morabatur.

Quaestiones.

I. Incidit hic quaestio: cum Salomon tres libros fecerit, quid est, quod libro Proverbiorum et huic praemittit titulum, in quo exprimitur nomen suum, sed non praemittit in Canticis canticorum?

Respondeo: dicendum, quod in libro Proverbiorum introducitur ipse Salomon loquens ut sapiens ad discipulum; unde vocat auditorem filium; similiter p. 10 hic introducitur ut homo diversa expertus; sed in Canticis canticorum loquitur sponsa et sponsus. Ne igitur videretur, quod essent verba Salomonis ad uxorem suam — sed sunt Christi ad Ecclesiam — non praemittit ibi nomen suum. Hic autem quia in persona sua ut plurimum loquebatur, et in libro Proverbiorum; ideo praemittit titulum, in quo nomen eius specificatur et aperitur¹.

II. Item quaeritur, quare in libro Proverbiorum dicit parabolae, hic autem dicit verba. — Si tu dicas, quod ibi loquitur parabolice et figurative, hic autem aperte; tunc quaero, quare hic et ibi diversificat modum agendi.

Respondeo: dicendum, quod quidam est modus loquendi proprius et apertus, quidam parabolicus; et hic est duplex: quidam per parabolas et apertas similitudines; quidam per occultas et profundas. Quoniam ergo Salomon in libro Proverbiorum loquitur parvulis et indoctis, ideo loquitur parabolice et aperte; quia vero in Ecclesiaste proficientibus, ideo aperte et proprie; sed in Canticis, quia perfectis, quorum est solidus cibus², ideo parabolice et occulte.

III. Quaestio est, quare in titulo Proverbiorum se vocat nomine suo, hic vocat se Ecclesiasten?

Respondeo: dicendum, quod, sicut dicit Hieronymus³, Salomon fuit trinomius, quod quidem convenit ei secundum triplicem scripturam, quam edidit. Dictus est enim Salomon, dictus Ecclesiastes et Idida. Salomon, pacificus, quia totum regnum in pace possedit; unde et omnibus doctrinam parabolarum tradidit. Ecclesiastes, concionator, quia in personis loquitur diversorum. Idida idem est quod dilectus Domini. — Ideo igitur se vocat Ecclesiasten, quia in hoc libro diversorum adducit sententias et secundum hoc diversimode persuadet. Idida dictus est in titulo Psalmi⁴ Eructavit, qui de ipso est ad litteram.

IV. Item quaeritur, quare hic se dicit filium David et regem Ierusalem, sed in Proverbiis dicit se regem Israel?

Respondeo: sumitur una ratio ex parte auctoris, quia, secundum quod credunt Hebraei, liber iste fuit Salomonis poenitentiam agentis et se humiliantis⁵. Et ideo in Proverbiis non denominat se ab alio, immo manifestat totius regni sui potentiam; hic autem se humiliat; ideo, ab alio se denominans, non totam potentiam, sed partem indicat, et ideo etc.

Alia ratio fuit ex parte operis, quia in Proverbiis inducit ad cognitionem agendorum, hic ad contemptum praesentium. Et quia plurimi sunt, qui plus volunt sapere quam praesentia contemnere; ideo ibi se dicit regem Israel, hic vero Ierusalem, quia contemptores mundi sunt cives supernae Ierusalem, qui non habent hic manentem civitatem, sed futuram inquirunt⁶.

V. Et ex hoc patet solutio illius quaestionis, quae potest fieri: quare hic non exprimit finem, sicut in Proverbiis. Quia finis Proverbiorum est sapientia⁷, quae allicit ad audiendum; finis huius libri est mundi contemptus, de quo pauci audire volunt.

Ex his patet, quare dixit verba, quare dixit Ecclesiastes, quare filii David, quare regis Ierusalem, quare etiam non addidit de utilitate sententiae huius libri, sicut in Proverbiis.

---

Commentary on the Book of Ecclesiastes.

Chapter I.

The words of Ecclesiastes etc. This whole book is divided into three parts: into the title or prooemium, and the treatise, which begins there³: Vanity of vanities etc.; and the epilogue, which begins there: And whereas Ecclesiastes was very wise. — In the title the efficient cause is made manifest, in the treatise the matter and the form, in the epilogue the end.

On the title.

(V. 1.). In the title, therefore, the author is made manifest as to his wisdom, as to his goodness, as to his royal power. — By reason of wisdom he says⁴: The words of Ecclesiastes, supply: what follows are the words of Ecclesiastes; because Ecclesiastes means preacher, and one cannot be a preacher unless he is wise; for it is said in Proverbs, the twenty-sixth chapter: « As if a thorn should grow in the hand of a drunkard, so unseemly is a parable in the mouth of fools »; whence Proverbs, the seventeenth chapter: « Well-composed words do not become a fool ». — As to his goodness it is made manifest when it is said: The son of David. For David was holy, and sons by imitation are holy; whence in Scripture the name is one of kindness and meekness; Matthew, the fifteenth chapter⁵: « Have mercy on me, thou son of David ». — As to his royal power, when it is said: King of Jerusalem, because Jerusalem was the most noble city and the head of the whole kingdom, below⁶: I Ecclesiastes was king of Israel in Jerusalem, because he dwelt there chiefly.

Questions.

I. Here a question arises: since Solomon made three books, what is the reason that to the book of Proverbs and to this one he prefixes a title in which his own name is expressed, but does not prefix one in the Canticle of Canticles?

I respond: it must be said that in the book of Proverbs Solomon himself is introduced speaking as a wise man to a disciple; whence he calls the hearer son; likewise p. 10 here he is introduced as a man who has had experience of divers things; but in the Canticle of Canticles the bride and the bridegroom speak. Lest therefore it should seem that these were the words of Solomon to his wife — whereas they are Christ's to the Church — he does not prefix his name there. But here, because he was for the most part speaking in his own person, and in the book of Proverbs likewise, he prefixes a title in which his name is specified and disclosed¹.

II. Likewise it is asked why in the book of Proverbs he says parables, but here says words. — If you say that there he speaks in parables and figuratively, but here openly; then I ask why here and there he varies the manner of proceeding.

I respond: it must be said that there is one manner of speaking that is proper and open, another that is parabolic; and this latter is twofold: one by parables and open likenesses, another by hidden and deep ones. Since therefore Solomon in the book of Proverbs speaks to the little ones and the untaught, he therefore speaks parabolically and openly; but because in Ecclesiastes he speaks to those making progress, therefore openly and properly; but in the Canticle, because to the perfect, whose is strong meat², therefore parabolically and hiddenly.

III. The question is why in the title of Proverbs he calls himself by his own name, while here he calls himself Ecclesiastes?

I respond: it must be said that, as Jerome says³, Solomon was three-named, which indeed belongs to him according to the threefold writing which he published. For he was called Salomon, called Ecclesiastes, and Idida. Salomon, the peaceable, because he possessed the whole kingdom in peace; whence also he handed on to all the teaching^tr. of parables. Ecclesiastes, the preacher, because he speaks in the persons of divers men. Idida is the same as beloved of the Lord. — Therefore, then, he calls himself Ecclesiastes, because in this book he brings forward the opinions of divers men and according to this persuades in divers ways. He is called Idida in the title of the Psalm⁴ Eructavit, which is about him literally.

IV. Likewise it is asked why here he calls himself the son of David and king of Jerusalem, but in Proverbs calls himself king of Israel?

I respond: one reason is taken on the part of the author, because, according to what the Hebrews believe, this book was Solomon's while he was doing penance and humbling himself⁵. And therefore in Proverbs he does not name himself from another, but rather makes manifest the power of his whole kingdom; here, however, he humbles himself; therefore, naming himself from another, he indicates not the whole power but a part, and therefore etc.

Another reason was on the part of the work, because in Proverbs he leads to the knowledge of things to be done, here to the contempt of things present. And because there are very many who would rather be wise than despise things present, therefore there he calls himself king of Israel, but here of Jerusalem, because the despisers of the world are citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem, who have not here a lasting city, but they seek one that is to come⁶.

V. And from this appears the solution of that question which can be raised: why here he does not express the end, as in Proverbs. Because the end of Proverbs is wisdom⁷, which attracts to hearing; the end of this book is the contempt of the world, which few are willing to hear about.

From these things it appears why he said words, why he said Ecclesiastes, why the son of David, why king of Jerusalem, why also he did not add anything about the usefulness of the doctrine of this book, as in Proverbs.

---