Compiled from the Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam, Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli, and Commentarii in Acta Apostolorum (Cologne: Antonius Hierat & Ioannes Gymnicus, 1612–1615 ed.). All passages are direct quotations from the OCR-scanned texts. Translations are provided immediately after each Latin original.
Preface: The Shape of the Corpus
Alfonso Salmeron (1515–1585), born in Toledo, was one of the original ten companions of St. Ignatius of Loyola and a founding member of the Society of Jesus. He served as a papal theologian at the Council of Trent across all three of its periods (1545–1563), was famed as a preacher in Italy and throughout Europe, and spent the last decades of his life composing his massive Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam and Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli, which together run to sixteen folio volumes. He died in Naples, where he had long served as Provincial Superior.
His exegetical works, grounded in the Pauline epistles, the Acts of the Apostles, and the four Gospels, are a primary source for the post-Tridentine Catholic adversus Judaeos tradition. Operating from within a rigorous scholastic and patristic framework, Salmeron addresses the Jewish question in at least seven registers:
- Deicide and collective guilt — the Crucifixion as the supreme crime wrought upon the God-man by the Jewish people in the fullness of perfidia.
- Supersessionism — the Synagogue explicitly described as the shadowy figure of the Church, now abolished; the Mosaic Law as obsolete; the privileges of Israel transferred to the Gentiles through faith.
- The Spiritual Blindness (Excaecatio) of the Jews — the darkening of Israel‘s understanding attributed directly to its perfidia (treachery/unbelief), in accordance with St. Paul’s theology in Romans 9–11.
- The Reprobation of the Jews — the exclusion of Israel from salvation explained as arising from the Jews‘ own demerits, while the calling of the Gentiles arises from the pure mercy of God.
- The Synagogue of Satan — the explicit application of the Apocalyptic title to those who falsely claim the name of Israel.
- Talmudic traditions as fables — the post-biblical oral traditions of the Rabbis described as absurd inventions unworthy of credence.
- Paul’s turning from the Jews to the Gentiles — the paradigmatic scene of Acts 13, interpreted as the permanent judgment upon Jewish perfidia and the theological grounds of the Church’s universal mission.
Twenty-eight verified passages are presented below, ordered thematically. Each entry includes the Latin original, a literal English translation, the volume source, and a brief contextual note.
I. “Pessimiviri, vel potius Deicidii” — On Deicides
Source: Tomus XIV, Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli — In Priorem Epistolam ad Corinthios, Disputatio ultima
Latin
“pessimiviri, vel potius Deicidii”
Translation
“worst of men, or rather murderers of God [deicides]”
Note
The passage occurs at the climax of Salmeron’s discussion of heretics who resist the authority of the Church and the Ecumenical Council. He categorises such resisters first as pessimiviri (“the worst of men”) and then escalates the charge: vel potius Deicidii — “or rather deicides.” The term Deicidium (the killing of God) is the classical Catholic designation for the crime of the Crucifixion as committed against the Second Person of the Trinity; by applying it as a category of person (Deicidii, in the genitive of quality), Salmeron invokes the full weight of the adversarial tradition.
II. “In cruce, ubi summa perfidia contradictum erat ei, & insultatum” — Supreme Treachery at the Cross
Source: Tomus XIII, Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli — In Epistolam ad Romanos, Disputatio XXXIV, on Rom. 10:21
Latin
“hancexpansionem interpretantur Origenes, & Augustinus de illa, quae facta est in cruce, ubi summa perfidia contradictum erat ei, & insultatum: Si Filius Dei es, descende de Cruce.“
Translation
“Origen and Augustine interpret this stretching-out of hands as that which was done on the cross, where by supreme treachery they contradicted Him and mocked Him: If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.“
Note
The verse under discussion is Romans 10:21: “All day long I have stretched out my hands to a disobedient and gainsaying people.” Salmeron, following Origen and Augustine, reads God’s outstretched hands as the cruciform posture of Christ on the cross — extended in infinite generosity to a people whose response was the summa perfidia (supreme treachery) of mockery and contradiction. The phrase summa perfidia here carries its full double meaning in ecclesiastical Latin: both extreme faithlessness (unbelief) and extreme treachery.
III. “Excaecationis Iudaeorum propter perfidiam” — The Blinding of the Jews on Account of Their Treachery
Source: Tomus XIII, Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli — In Epistolam ad Romanos, Disputatio XXV, on Rom. 9:1
Latin
“In hoc igitur Capite causam aperit vocationis Gentium per fidem, & excaecationis Iudaeorum propter perfidiam: decimo vero Capite deplorat [statum] Iudaeorum miserandum, & inexcusabilem.”
Translation
“In this chapter, therefore, [the Apostle] discloses the cause of the calling of the Gentiles through faith, and of the blinding of the Jews on account of their treachery: while in the tenth chapter he bewails the Jews‘ condition as both pitiable and inexcusable.”
Note
Salmeron is summarising St. Paul’s argument across Romans 9–11. The key term is excaecatio — the spiritual blinding or darkening of the Jewish people — which Salmeron explicitly attributes to their perfidia. Chapters 9 and 10, on this reading, form a diptych: the calling of the Gentiles and the blinding of the Jews are two faces of the same providential act. The eleventh chapter then offers limited consolation, forecasting the eventual reintegration of a remnant.
IV. “Reprobationem Iudaeorum ex ipsorum meritis” — The Reprobation of the Jews Arises from Their Own Merits
Source: Tomus XIII, Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli — In Epistolam ad Romanos, Disputatio XXXII, on Rom. 9:30–31
Latin
“reprobationem Iudaeorum ex ipsorum meritis, vocationem vero Gentium ex misericordia vocantis existere.”
Translation
“The reprobation of the Jews arises from their own merits, while the calling of the Gentiles arises from the mercy of him who calls.”
Note
This is one of Salmeron’s clearest theological formulations on the Jewish question. The reprobation (reprobatio) of Israel is not arbitrary: it flows from Israel‘s own deeds — specifically, from its rejection of the Messiah. The calling of the Gentiles, conversely, is pure grace, dependent on no prior merit. The asymmetry is deliberate and theologically significant: the Jews earned their own condemnation; the Gentiles received their election as an unmerited gift.
V. “Praecisi sunt Iudaei per incredulitatem” — The Jews Are Cut Off Through Unbelief
Source: Tomus XIII, Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli — In Epistolam ad Romanos, Disputatio XVII, on Rom. 11:17–24
Latin
“Praecisi sunt Iudaei per incredulitatem: & reinserentur cum ad Christum redierint.”
Translation
“The Jews have been cut off through unbelief: and they will be grafted in again when they return to Christ.”
Note
The olive-tree allegory of Romans 11 (the natural branches cut off, the wild branches grafted in) is here given its standard Catholic exegetical reading. The cutting-off of the Jews is permanent so long as they remain in unbelief; reinsertion is conditional upon conversion. Note the future tense: reinserentur — “they will be grafted in.” Salmeron holds open the eschatological prospect of Jewish conversion, but this possibility in no way mitigates the present reality of their excision from the covenant people.
VI. “Mentiuntur, & sunt Synagoga Satanae” — The Synagogue of Satan
Source: Tomus XIII, Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli — In Epistolam ad Romanos, Disputatio X, on Rom. 2:17
Latin
“Ita Ioannes ait in Apocalypsi de quibusdam, qui dicunt se Iudaeos esse, & non sunt, sed mentiuntur, & sunt Synagoga Satanae.”
Translation
“Thus John says in the Apocalypse concerning certain ones who say they are Jews, and are not, but lie — and are the Synagogue of Satan.”
Note
Salmeron is commenting on Paul’s address to the nominal Jew who boasts in the Law but does not keep it (Rom. 2:17). He invokes the parallel text of Apoc. 2:9 (and 3:9) — Synagoga Satanae — to reinforce the point that the mere title of “Jew” or “Israel” confers no spiritual standing where fidelity to God is absent. The original Apocalyptic reference was to a specific local community; in the adversarial tradition, including Salmeron’s exegesis, it functions as a general designation for the post-Christian Jewish community that refuses Christ.
VII. “Nam ex incredulitate Iudaeorum clarissime Gentes olim infideles [vocatae sunt]” — The Jews‘ Unbelief as the Occasion of the Gentiles’ Calling
Source: Tomus XIII, Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli — In Epistolam ad Romanos, Disputatio XXXV, on Rom. 11:30–32
Latin
“Nam ex incredulitate Iudaeorum clarissime Gentes olim infideles [vocatae sunt]. A Iudaeis autem recedit Dominus, ut aemulatione ita Gentes provocati recognoscant quem deseruerunt.”
Translation
“For it is from the unbelief of the Jews that the Gentiles, once unbelievers, were most clearly called. The Lord withdraws from the Jews so that the Gentiles, provoked to emulation, might acknowledge the one they had abandoned.”
Note
The argument is classically Pauline (Rom. 11:11–12): Israel‘s stumbling is the riches of the world; their diminishing is the riches of the Gentiles. Salmeron sees in this a double providential logic: the Jews‘ rejection of Christ became the occasion of the Gentiles’ vocation; and the Gentiles’ flourishing in faith is meant to provoke the Jews to salvific jealousy. Yet the priority of causality here lies firmly with Israel‘s failure: ex incredulitate Iudaeorum — “from the unbelief of the Jews.”
VIII. “Sequuntur deuteroses, & traditiones Talmudicas, in quibus multa traduntur fabulosa, & ridicula” — Talmudic Traditions as Fables and Absurdities
Source: Tomus XV, Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli — In Epistolam ad Titum, Disputatio I, on Tit. 1:14
Latin
“sequuntur deuteroses, & traditiones Talmudicas, in quibus multa traduntur fabulosa, & ridicula, de quibus Marc. 7. & Matth. 15.”
Translation
“They follow the deuteroses and the Talmudic traditions, in which many fables and absurdities are transmitted — concerning which [see] Mark 7 and Matthew 15.”
Note
Deuteroses (from Greek δευτέρωσις, “second exposition”) is the standard patristic and scholastic term for the post-biblical oral traditions of the Rabbis, particularly those codified in the Mishnah and Talmud. Salmeron, following Jerome (cf. his note on Tit. 1:14), classifies these as essentially fabulosa and ridicula — fabulous and ridiculous — aligning Talmudic tradition with the “Jewish fables” (Iudaicis fabulis) condemned by Paul in the very verse under discussion. The cross-references to Mark 7 and Matthew 15 invoke Christ’s own denunciation of the traditions of men that nullify the commandment of God.
IX. “Per summam iniustitiam crucifixo” — Crucified by Supreme Injustice
Source: Tomus XII, Commentarii in Acta Apostolorum, Tractatus VII, on Acts 2:23–36
Latin
“a Christo exaltato a Deo, & ab eis inique per summam iniustitiam crucifixo.”
Translation
“of Christ, exalted by God, and crucified by them with supreme injustice.”
Note
Salmeron is commenting on the conclusion of Peter’s Pentecost sermon (Acts 2:36): “God hath made this same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” The phrase per summam iniustitiam — “with supreme injustice” — is Salmeron’s own gloss, amplifying the bare scriptural crucifixistis (“you crucified”). The collective subject (ab eis) is the Jewish audience of Peter’s sermon; the phrase places the Crucifixion explicitly within a framework of moral culpability, not mere providential instrumentality.
X. “Magna auctoritate Paulus Iudaicam confutat perfidiam… atque in ipsos Iudaeos omnem damnationis culpam retorquet” — Paul Confutes Jewish Treachery and Turns the Full Weight of Condemnation upon the Jews Themselves
Source: Tomus XII, Commentarii in Acta Apostolorum, Tractatus XXXVII, on Acts 13:46
Latin
“oportebat primum loqui verbum Dei, sed quoniam repellitis illud, & indignos vos iudicatis aeternae vitae: ecce convertuntur ad Gentes. Magna auctoritate Paulus Iudaicam confutat perfidiam, ac iustitiam, & clementiam ab illorum vindicat calumnijs, atque in ipsos Iudaeos omnem damnationis culpam retorquet.”
Translation
“‘It was necessary that the word of God should first be spoken to you: but since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life: behold, we turn to the Gentiles.’ With great authority Paul confutes the treachery of the Jews, and vindicates [God’s] justice and clemency from their calumnies, turning the full weight of the guilt of damnation back upon the Jews themselves.”
Note
This is perhaps the most concentrated and polemically powerful passage in Salmeron’s treatment of the Jewish question. The exegete comments on the scene in Acts 13 where Paul and Barnabas, after being contradicted by the Jews of Antioch in Pisidia, formally declare their mission transferred to the Gentiles. Salmeron frames this as paradigmatic: Paul’s turning to the Gentiles is not a tactical adjustment but a theological verdict. His phrase omnem damnationis culpam retorquet — “turns the full weight of the guilt of damnation back upon the Jews themselves” — is among the sharpest formulations in the entire corpus. The same commentary also observes that after the Jews‘ rejection, “Nam sublata Hierosolyma, ac templo, totaque Iudaica gente, aut extincta, aut per universum orbem dissipata” — “For when Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed, and the entire Jewish people either exterminated or scattered throughout the whole world” — which Salmeron presents as the providential consequence of this rejection.
XI. “Crimen Iudaeorum crucifigentium Christum” — The Crime of the Jews Who Crucified Christ
Source: Tomus X, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — De Passione et Morte Domini, on Matt. 26
Latin
“crimen Iudaeorum crucifigentium Christum gravius, quam Adae peccantis; nec tamen sequitur, peccatum illud Christi morte non posse expiari. Nam adeo placuit Deo Patri obedientis, ac amantis Christi patientis meritum, ut idoneum extiterit ad diluendum flagitium populi se in necem dantis.”
Translation
“The crime of the Jews who crucified Christ is graver than the sin of Adam; yet it does not follow that that sin cannot be expiated by the death of Christ. For so greatly did the merit of the obedient and loving Christ in His suffering please God the Father, that it proved adequate to washing away the outrage of the people who delivered Him to death.”
Note
Salmeron is engaged in a comparative theology of sin, ranking the collective crime of the Crucifixion above even original sin in gravity — greater ratione extensionis (by reason of its scope) because it was directed against the God-man Himself. Yet his characteristic Catholic balance asserts that even this gravest of crimes falls within the reach of Christ’s redemptive merit. The phrase flagitium populi se in necem dantis — “the outrage of the people who delivered Him to death” — assigns collective moral agency to the Jewish people as a whole.
XII. “Iudaica perfidia aliter quam de Messia interpretari” — Jewish Treachery Interprets Isaiah Otherwise Than of the Messiah
Source: Tomus X, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — De Passione et Morte Domini, on Isa. 53
Latin
“plané est caecutire, ac in media luce ca ligare, iudaica perfidia aliter quam de Messia interpretari.”
Translation
“it is plainly to be blind, and to grope in the middle of broad daylight, for Jewish treachery to interpret [Isaiah 53] otherwise than of the Messiah.”
Note
This is Salmeron’s verdict on the Jewish exegetical tradition that reads Isaiah 53 — the Servant Songs — as applying to the Jewish people collectively rather than to the Messiah. He invokes the standard patristic argument from the Chaldean Targum of Jonathan (which he earlier cited as ancient evidence that even Jewish tradition once read the passage Messianically) and dismisses the Rabbinic counter-reading as caecutire — moral and intellectual blindness. The term iudaica perfidia here combines its two senses: treacherous malice and faithless rejection of truth.
XIII. “Adversus Iudaicam perfidiam nullo magis adminstro Spiritus Sanctus uti debuerit, quam Paulo” — Against Jewish Treachery the Holy Spirit Could Use No Better Instrument Than Paul
Source: Tomus XIII, Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli — Prolegomena
Latin
“aduersos Iudaicam perfidiam nullo magis adminstro Spiritus Sanctus uti debuerit, quam Paulo, qui illas res tanti ponderis veritates, nimirum de aduentu Messiae promissi, de abrogatione, & cessatione legis Mosaicae, de Gentibus ad Euangelium vocatis.”
Translation
“Against Jewish treachery the Holy Spirit could use no better instrument than Paul, who [set forth] those truths of such great weight — namely, concerning the coming of the promised Messiah, the abrogation and cessation of the Mosaic Law, and the Gentiles called to the Gospel.”
Note
Salmeron is explaining in the Prolegomena to his commentary on Paul’s epistles why Paul, above all the Apostles, was selected by the Holy Spirit as the primary agent of the anti-Jewish polemic. The argument is structural: Paul had been himself a Pharisee, a persecutor, and a zealot of the Law; his conversion is therefore the greatest possible testimony against Jewish unbelief. The three truths he lists — the Messiah’s arrival (already accomplished), the abolition of the Mosaic Law, and the universal vocation of the Gentiles — constitute the precise points on which Iudaica perfidia resisted.
XIV. “Populum reprobatum & excaecatum… Iudaeorum Synagogam, vera [per] Ecclesiam astrueret” — To Call the Reprobate and Blinded People’s Synagogue True Would Be to Supplant the Church
Source: Tomus I, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — Prolegomenon III, De Veritate Hebraicae Lectionis
Latin
“quid aliud esset quam dicere, populum reprobatum & excaecatum habere puras & germanas Scripturas, populo vero electo ac sanctificato tribuere falsas, & vitiatas interpretationes? Qui autem hoc assereret; & diuinam prouidentiam, quae illos deseruit, & eorum libros, & nos, nostrásque Scripturas assumpsit, negaret; & Iudaeorum Synagogam, vera per Ecclesiam astrueret.”
Translation
“what else would this be than to say that the reprobate and blinded people possess the pure and genuine Scriptures, while to the elect and sanctified people one would attribute false and corrupted interpretations? And whoever asserted this would deny the divine providence which deserted them and their books, and which took up us and our Scriptures; and would establish the Synagogue of the Jews as true, by supplanting the Church.”
Note
The argument is from providential logic: if the Hebrew text as preserved by the Jews were held superior to the Septuagint and Vulgate, then the divine abandonment of the Jewish people would be contradicted, and the Church’s claim to be the true Israel would collapse. Salmeron uses the loaded pairing populum reprobatum & excaecatum — “the reprobate and blinded people” — as his designation for Israel after Christ, contrasting it pointedly with populo electo ac sanctificato — “the elect and sanctified people,” i.e., the Church. This passage is also a direct argument against granting exegetical authority to the Masoretic tradition.
XV. “De perfidia Iudaeorum, qui contentiosissimi sunt & pertinaces, si sua Biblia corruperint” — On the Treachery of the Jews Who Are the Most Contentious and Obstinate
Source: Tomus I, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — Prolegomenon III, De Veritate Hebraicae Lectionis
Latin
“quid mirum igitur de perfidia Iudaeorum, qui contentiosissimi sunt, & pertinaces, si sua Biblia corruperint?”
Translation
“What wonder then at the treachery of the Jews, who are the most contentious and obstinate of all, if they have corrupted their own Scriptures?”
Note
Salmeron advances this as a reductio ad rationem: given that even heretics like Marcion mutilated Scripture for tactical advantage, why should it surprise anyone that the Jews — whom he characterises with the double superlative contentiosissimi and the adjective pertinaces (obstinate) — have done the same or worse to their own Biblical text? The argument is part of a sustained defence of the Septuagint’s superiority over the Masoretic text for Christian exegesis. The characterisation of the Jews as the most contentious of all human groups (contentiosissimi) is notable for its superlative force.
XVI. “Haec omnia ob perfidiam amiserunt” — All These Things They Lost on Account of Their Treachery
Source: Tomus I, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — Prolegomenon VI
Latin
“Sed haec omnia ob perfidiam amiserunt. Nam mensa sacrae Scripturae, qua pasci soliti erant, in scandalum sive ipsorum vitio, & culpa reddita est. Deinde eius veram amiserunt intelligentiam, ita ut spirituales illorum oculi legentes, & videntes Prophetica oracula, non viderent; & audientes non audirent voces Prophetarum.”
Translation
“But all these things they lost on account of their treachery. For the table of Sacred Scripture, at which they were accustomed to be nourished, was turned into a stumbling-block by their own fault and guilt. Then they lost the true understanding of it, so that their spiritual eyes, reading and seeing the Prophetic oracles, did not see; and hearing, they did not hear the voices of the Prophets.”
Note
A passage of major supersessionist force. The “table of Sacred Scripture” — Israel‘s distinctive gift as the people of the Book — is here shown to have been turned against them by their own perfidia. The triple loss Salmeron itemises (the Scripture itself as nourishment, its true understanding, and finally political sovereignty, lost to the servitude of the nations) constitutes a comprehensive dispossession. The language deliberately echoes Psalm 68:23 (Fiat mensa eorum coram ipsis in laqueum) as interpreted by Paul in Romans 11:9.
XVII. “Iudaeos fuisse reprobatos ut infructuosos” — The Jews Were Reprobated as Unfruitful
Source: Tomus I, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — Prolegomenon VII
Latin
“Gentes steriles docet substitútas in locum Iudaeorum, & Iudaeos fuisse reprobatos ut infructuosos.”
Translation
“He [the Prophet] teaches that the barren Gentiles have been substituted in the place of the Jews, and that the Jews were reprobated as unfruitful.”
Note
The context is Salmeron’s commentary on the typological reading of Isaiah, where Israel is the fig tree or vine stripped of its fruit and the barren Gentiles become unexpectedly fruitful. The substitution language (substitútas in locum Iudaeorum) is a direct supersessionist formula: the Church does not merely supplement Israel but occupies its place. The Jews are not merely absent from salvation but positively reprobated — a technical theological term indicating not merely being passed over but being actively excluded by divine judgment.
XVIII. “Non libros Talmudicos aut Caballisticos… post Christum a Rabbinis quibusdam excaecatis… conscripti sunt” — Not the Talmudic or Kabbalistic Books, Written After Christ by Certain Blinded Rabbis
Source: Tomus VIII, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — In Evangelium Ioannis, on John 5:39
Latin
“non libros Talmudicos, aut Caballisticos, quos Ioannes Reuchlin & quidam alij, cupidi magis quam solidi nostri seculi Scriptores, suis tradatores, nobis commendarunt: nec enim huiusmodi libri Scripturarum nomine veniunt; neque eo tempore, quo Christus loquebatur, scripti erant, sed post Christum a Rabbinis quibusdam excaecatis, & veri Messiae luce destitutis conscripti sunt; nec in eis Iudaei vitam aeternam, sed mortem praesente(a)neam habent.”
Translation
“Not the Talmudic or Kabbalistic books, which Johannes Reuchlin and certain other scholars of our age — more eager than solid — recommended to us as useful commentators: for such books do not pass under the name of Scripture; nor were they written at the time when Christ was speaking, but were composed after Christ by certain blinded Rabbis, destitute of the light of the true Messiah; nor do the Jews find eternal life in them, but present death.”
Note
A sweeping condemnation of the Talmud and Kabbalah in a single sentence. Salmeron targets not only the texts themselves but the Renaissance Christian Hebraists — specifically naming Reuchlin — who had commended them as tools of Biblical interpretation. His verdict is unambiguous: these books are not Scripture; they were composed by blinded men (excaecatis, the same term used for Israel‘s spiritual condition elsewhere); they contain not life but death. The attribution of blindness to the Rabbis is consistent with Salmeron’s broader typology of post-Christian Judaism as a spiritually sightless community.
XIX. “Perfidum in suo corpore Iudaei, neque trahi ad Christum, neque duci possunt” — Treacherous in Their Own Nature, the Jews Can Neither Be Drawn Nor Led to Christ
Source: Tomus VIII, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — In Evangelium Ioannis, on John 8:52–53
Latin
“Perfidum in suo corpore Iudaei, neque trahi ad Christum, neque duci possunt: & nemo potest corrigere, quem Deus despexit. Verba Christi sinistre interpretantur, dum spiritualem eius doctrinam ad corpus transferunt.”
Translation
“Treacherous in their own nature, the Jews can neither be drawn nor led to Christ: and no one can correct him whom God has despised. They interpret the words of Christ perversely, transferring His spiritual teaching to the body.”
Note
One of Salmeron’s most concentrated statements on the theological condition of the Jewish people as a whole. The phrase perfidum in suo corpore is remarkable: perfidia is not incidental behaviour but is described as constitutive of the Jewish nature (corpus). The further statement — nemo potest corrigere, quem Deus despexit (“no one can correct him whom God has despised”) — grounds this incorrigibility in a divine judgment. The passage concludes by specifying the mechanism: the Jews reduce Christ’s spiritual teaching to carnal meaning, a charge consistent with the patristic tradition of carnalis intelligentia as the defining defect of Jewish exegesis.
XX. “Iudaei hodie… currunt Talmudicis & Caballisticis figmentis” — The Jews Today Run After Talmudic and Kabbalistic Fabrications
Source: Tomus VIII, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — In Evangelium Ioannis, on John 8:47
Latin
“Iudaei enim hodie sine veritate, & sine Christo sunt; redunt suis quae porcorum, vel currunt Talmudicis, & Caballisticis figmentis; incendunt fabulis, & genealogijs interminatis: denique verbum Euangelicum non audiunt, quia ex Deo non sunt.”
Translation
“For the Jews today are without truth and without Christ; they return to their husks of swine, or run after Talmudic and Kabbalistic fabrications; they are kindled by fables and endless genealogies: in short, they do not hear the Evangelical word, because they are not of God.”
Note
The extraordinary force of this passage lies in its accumulation of damning images. Salmeron draws on three New Testament topoi simultaneously: the Prodigal Son’s swine-husks (Luke 15), the Pauline condemnation of fabulae & genealogiae interminatae (1 Tim. 1:4; Tit. 1:14), and the Johannine verdict ex Deo non estis (“you are not of God,” John 8:47). The Talmud and Kabbalah are characterised not merely as wrong but as figmenta — fabrications, fictions. The phrase sine veritate, & sine Christo (“without truth and without Christ”) presents the two terms as synonymous, anticipating the Johannine Ego sum via, veritas, et vita.
XXI. “Gente Iudaeorum nulla sub caelo natio existit aut miserabilior… poenasque luere atrocissimas, gravissimi criminis, nempe Deicidii” — No Nation Under Heaven More Wretched Than the Jews, Paying the Most Atrocious Penalties for the Most Grievous Crime, Namely Deicide
Source: Tomus X, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — De Passione et Morte Domini, on Matt. 27:25
Latin
“gente vero Iudaeorum nulla sub caelo natio existit aut miserabilior, aut deploratior, aut maioribus gentium odijs, calumnijs, expilationibus, ac depraedationibus exposita, vt certo conicere possimus in vnam Iudaeorum gentem magnam Dei iram accensam, & poenas luere atrocissimas, & gravissimi criminis, nempe Deicidii.”
Translation
“of the Jewish people, no nation under heaven exists that is more wretched, more deplorable, or more exposed to the hatreds, calumnies, plunderings, and depredations of the nations — so that we can certainly conjecture that against the single people of the Jews there is a great wrath of God kindled, and that they pay the most atrocious penalties for the most grievous crime, namely deicide.”
Note
This is among the most concentrated passages in the whole corpus. Salmeron presents the visible misery of the Jews in his own day — their universal persecution, hatred, and spoliation — not as an accident of history but as direct and proportionate divine retribution for the crime of Deicidium. The argument is from empirical observation (in historiis legimus, & oculis nostris perspicimus) to theological inference: what is visible to the naked eye confirms what theology teaches. The Jews‘ condition of permanent, universal wretchedness is offered as proof that God’s wrath is upon them.
XXII. “Perfectus homicida animo, & Deicida re ipsa” — Perfect Murderer in Will and Deicide in Deed
Source: Tomus X, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — De Passione et Morte Domini, on John 19:11
Latin
“Nam consequetur mors mea, ex quo constituitur perfectus homicida animo, & Deicida re ipsa: quod non esset, si hanc potestatem permissam non haberes.”
Translation
“For my death will follow, from which he is established as a perfect murderer in will and a deicide in deed: which would not be, if you did not have this permitted power.”
Note
Christ is here speaking to Pilate. Salmeron reads the Johannine verse (“He who delivered me to you has the greater sin”) as establishing a precise taxonomy of guilt: Pilate is the proximate cause but the Jews, specifically Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin, are the ultimate cause — constituting them formally as homicida animo (a murderer in intention) and Deicida re ipsa (a deicide in deed). The distinction between will and act is used to maximise rather than limit culpability: the Jews bear both charges fully.
XXIII. “O perfidi Principes Sacerdotum… vos odio, invidia ac perfidia mortem Domini operati estis” — O Treacherous High Priests, You Brought About the Lord’s Death Through Hatred, Envy, and Treachery
Source: Tomus X, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — De Passione et Morte Domini, on Matt. 27:4
Latin
“At profecto, o perfidi Principes Sacerdotum, ad vos spectat, quod sanguinem innoxium redemistis: quod eum, quem iustum nouistis, condemnastis… vos odio, inuidia ac perfidia mortem Domini operati estis.”
Translation
“But truly, O treacherous High Priests, it falls upon you that you paid for innocent blood; that you condemned him whom you knew to be just… you brought about the Lord’s death through hatred, envy, and treachery.”
Note
An apostrophe — a direct rhetorical address — aimed at the High Priests of Jerusalem as a class. Salmeron, commenting on Judas’s remorse and the priests’ cold dismissal (“What is that to us? See thou to it”), pivots from exegesis to prosecution: the priests knew Christ was innocent and condemned him anyway. The triple motivation he names — odio, inuidia ac perfidia (hatred, envy, and treachery) — is the standard patristic analysis of the Sanhedrin’s culpability, here delivered in the second person as direct moral indictment.
XXIV. “Caeditur corpus propter eorum perfidiam, ieiunio, & caedicio afflictum” — The Body Is Beaten on Account of Their Treachery, Afflicted by Fasting and Scourging
Source: Tomus X, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — De Passione et Morte Domini, on the Scourging
Latin
“caeditur corpus propter eorum perfidiam, ieiunio, & caedicio afflictum, verberatur tenerrima, virginea, & Regia caro, atque adeo omnis carnis flos.”
Translation
“The body is beaten on account of their treachery, a body afflicted by fasting and wearying, the most tender, virginal, and Royal flesh is scourged — indeed the very flower of all flesh.”
Note
A meditative Passion commentary, framing the scourging of Christ as a direct consequence of Israel‘s perfidia. The contrast is between the physical perfection of Christ’s body — tenerrima, virginea, & Regia (most tender, virginal, and Royal) — and the gross moral deformity of those responsible. The attributive propter eorum perfidiam assigns causality unambiguously to the Jews.
XXV. “Factum Magorum adducitur ad damnandam perfidiam Iudaeorum” — The Act of the Magi Is Cited to Condemn the Treachery of the Jews
Source: Tomus III, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — De Infantia et Pueritia Christi, on Matt. 2:1–2
Latin
“Adducitur praeterea hoc factum Magorum, qui sunt primitiae gentium, ad damnandam perfidiam Iudaeorum, quoniam non credebant, illi vero etiam Deum eum crediderunt.”
Translation
“Moreover, the act of the Magi, who are the first-fruits of the Gentiles, is cited to condemn the treachery of the Jews: for the Jews did not believe, whereas these Gentiles believed Him to be God.”
Note
Salmeron reads the Adoration of the Magi as an implicit adversus Judaeos argument embedded in the Matthean narrative itself. The Gentile Magi, coming from afar, recognise the God-child and adore Him; the Jews of Jerusalem, in possession of the prophecies and living at the very site of His birth, conspire against Him. This antithesis — pagan faith versus Jewish treachery — is a structural motif in the adversus Judaeos tradition from Justin Martyr onward. Salmeron makes it explicit.
XXVI. “Synagogam adulteram, quae repudiato viro suo legitimo… comedit panem mendacij” — The Adulterous Synagogue, Which, Having Repudiated Its Lawful Husband, Eats the Bread of Falsehood
Source: Tomus III, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — De Infantia et Pueritia Christi, on Prov. 30:20
Latin
“Vel secundo referri potest ad Synagogam adulteram, quae repudiato viro suo legitimo, hoc est, Messia, cui erat desponsata, & illo ante faciem Pilati negato, comedit panem mendacij, & vt fera pessima deuorauit Ioseph, & bibit eius sanguinem, dicens: Sanguis super nos, & super filios nostros.“
Translation
“Or secondly it can be referred to the adulterous Synagogue, which, having repudiated her lawful husband — that is, the Messiah, to whom she was betrothed — and having denied him before the face of Pilate, ate the bread of falsehood, and like a savage beast devoured Joseph and drank his blood, saying: His blood be upon us and upon our children.“
Note
This is Salmeron’s exposition of the via adulterae (the way of the adulterous woman) from Proverbs 30:20, applied typologically to the Synagogue. The bridal imagery (desponsata — betrothed) draws on the prophetic tradition of Israel as the unfaithful wife of Yahweh (Hos., Jer., Ezek.). Here it is translated into Christological terms: the Messiah is the bridegroom, the Synagogue the adulteress who repudiates him before Pilate. The subsequent blood-curse (Sanguis super nos) is cited as the Synagogue‘s own self-condemnation.
XXVII. “Synagoga Satanae… quia renuebantur doctrinam Apostolicam” — The Synagogue of Satan, Because They Rejected the Apostolic Teaching
Source: Tomus XVI, Disputationes in Epistolas Canonicas & Apocalypsim — In Apocalypsim, on Apoc. 2:9
Latin
“& sic fiunt Synagoga Satanae, non tam propter se, quam propter illos moerore afficiebantur. Hinc Paulus dicebat: Tristitia mihi magna est, & continuus dolor cordi meo.… renuebantur enim doctrinam Apostolicam, & eius professores a synagogis suis expellebant.”
Translation
“and thus they become the Synagogue of Satan — not so much on their own account as because of those who were cast out, they were afflicted with grief. Hence Paul said: Great is my sorrow, and there is continuous pain in my heart.… For they rejected the Apostolic teaching and drove its professors out of their Synagogues.”
Note
Salmeron is commenting directly on Apocalypse 2:9 (“I know the blasphemy of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are the Synagogue of Satan”). His exegesis defines the Synagogue of Satan by a precise theological criterion: the rejection of the Apostolic Gospel and the active persecution of its preachers. The grief of Paul cited alongside it frames this rejection not merely as Jewish obstinacy but as a tragedy of cosmic dimensions — a people that had every advantage spurning the truth brought to them first.
XXVIII. “Vanum est Iudaeorum commentum, qui scribunt in Talmud libro Batra” — Vain Is the Jewish Fable of Those Who Write in the Talmud Book Batra
Source: Tomus IX, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — De Sermone Domini in Coena, on John 14
Latin
“Vanum igitur est Iudaeorum commentum, qui scribunt in Talmud libr. Batra, quod Deus occiderit piscem magnum Leviathan, & salitum servet, vt dispenses Iudaeis edendum in alio saeculo. Figmentum etiam est Cherinti haeretici, quem secutus est impudentissimus Mahometus, promittentis in alio saeculo carnales & obscaenas voluptates in praemium virtutis.”
Translation
“Vain therefore is the Jewish fable of those who write in the Talmud book Batra, that God slew the great fish Leviathan and keeps it salted, to be distributed to the Jews as food in the world to come. Equally a fabrication is that of the heretic Cerinthus, whom the most shameless Mahomet followed, promising in another world carnal and obscene pleasures as the reward of virtue.”
Note
A double condemnation in a single sentence: the Talmud (Tractate Baba Batra 74b–75a on the eschatological feast of Leviathan) is placed on the same level of contempt as the Cerinthian heresy and Islamic paradise. By bracketing the Talmud between a condemned Christian heretic and Islam, Salmeron locates post-biblical Judaism outside the bounds of serious theology entirely. The word commentum (fable, fiction) echoes his earlier figmenta for Talmudic and Kabbalistic texts, establishing a consistent register of dismissal.
Sources
All passages are drawn from the Opera Omnia of Alfonso Salmeron, Coloniae Agrippinae (Cologne), apud Antonium Hierat & Ioannem Gymnicum, 1612–1615:
- Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — Tomus I (Prolegomena), 1612.
- Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — Tomus III (De Infantia et Pueritia Christi), 1612.
- Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — Tomus VIII (In Evangelium Ioannis), 1613.
- Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — Tomus IX (De Sermone Domini in Coena), 1613.
- Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam — Tomus X (De Passione et Morte Domini), 1614.
- Commentarii in Acta Apostolorum — Tomus XII (De Ecclesia Nascentis Exordijs), 1614.
- Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli — Tomus XIII (In Epistolam ad Romanos), 1614.
- Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli — Tomus XIV (In Priorem et Posteriorem Epistolam ad Corinthios), 1614.
- Disputationes in Epistolas B. Pauli — Tomus XV (In Epistolas ad Galatas, Ephesios, Philippenses, Colossenses, Thessalonicenses, Timotheum, Titum, Philemonem, et ad Hebraeos), 1615.
- Disputationes in Epistolas Canonicas & Apocalypsim — Tomus XVI, 1615.
Archive.org search for all Salmeron volumes: https://archive.org/search?query=Salmeronis&sort=-downloads