Benedictus Pererius (Benito Pereira), S.J. (1535–1610) was a Spanish Jesuit theologian, philosopher, and exegete from Valencia. He is best known for his monumental Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim (4 vols., 1589–1598), as well as his commentaries on the books of Daniel, Exodus, and the Gospel of John, and on Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. A prolific controversialist in the Scholastic tradition, Pererius engaged extensively with the Hebrew and Rabbinical sources while defending Catholic orthodoxy against both Protestant and Jewish interpretations of Scripture.
The passages below are drawn from across his major works and are presented in the original Latin with English translations. They cover the themes of Jewish deicide, supersessionism, the rejection and perpetual punishment of the Jewish people, the theological opposition between the Synagogue and the Church, criticism of the Talmud, and related subjects.
I. On the Jews as Enemies of the Holy Trinity
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. I, on Gen. 1:26 (“Let us make man”)
Sed impij Sanctæ Trinitatis hostes, Iudæos dico & quosdam alios hæreticos, quò clarissimæ luci veritatis tenebras offunderent, varias, sed omnes planè frivolas & absurdas commentis sunt rationes, cur Deus dixerit pluraliter, Faciamus hominem.
“But the impious enemies of the Holy Trinity — I mean the Jews and certain other heretics — in order to cast darkness over the most brilliant light of truth, have fabricated various, but altogether frivolous and absurd reasons why God said in the plural, ‘Let us make man.'”
Quomodo mihi iam conspicitur loco Iudæus, qui in ijs quæ ante dicebantur quasi per fenestras ingrediente & intermicante luce Theologiæ, personámque secundam innuente, nondum autem perspicuè inclarescente eadem, veritati repugnabat: ipsumque Deum secum differere, féque alloqui dicebat.
“How the Jew now appears before me, who, in those things spoken previously — where the light of Theology was as it were entering through windows and glimmering, hinting at the Second Person though not yet shining forth clearly — was fighting against the truth and was saying that God was speaking with Himself and addressing Himself alone.” (quoting St. Basil, Hom. IX in Genesin)
Audis, ô tu qui bellum indixisti perpetuum Christo, Deum ipsum suum in creandis rebus socium alloqui, per quem fecit & sæcula, qui portat omnia verbo potentiæ suæ. At non cum silentio & quiete, religionis rectæ sententia perfidus Iudæus acceptat. Sed ut ferarum ea quæ summo persequuntur hominem odio, cum vinariis includuntur circumfuse illius caucæ sepiméta frendunt dentibus & circumfremunt, amarutentiamque feritatémque naturæ ostendentes, cùm non quéat conceptum explere furorem: Sic & inimicans veritati, Iudæi in angustis intrufi, Multa sunt, inquiunt, personæ & non una, ad quas oratio Dei dirigitur, Angelis enim adstantibus, Faciamus hominem dicit. Iudaicum profectò hoc est figmentum & ex illorum odio in Christum delira istius, & fatilis fabula excogitatio derivata est.
“Hear, O you who have declared perpetual war against Christ, that God Himself addresses His companion in the creation of things, through Whom He made the ages, Who upholds all things by the word of His power. But the perfidious Jew does not accept the truth of right religion in silence and calm. Rather, as wild beasts that pursue man with supreme hatred, when enclosed in the pens surrounding their cage, gnash their teeth and roar around it, displaying the bitterness and ferocity of their nature, since they cannot satisfy their conceived fury — so also the Jews, enemies of truth, hemmed into a corner, say: ‘Many are the persons and not one, to whom God’s speech is directed, for He says “Let us make man” with the Angels standing by.’ This indeed is a Jewish invention, and a foolish, worthless fable devised out of their hatred of Christ.” (quoting St. Basil)
II. On the Wicked as the Seed of the Serpent — and the Jews
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. I, on Gen. 3:15 (“I will put enmity between thee and the woman”)
Et è contrario sicut per serpentem diabolus, ita & per semen serpentis, omnes iniqui & maligni homines imitatores eius recte intelliguntur, licèt neminemgenuerit, aut creauerit ille. Nam si iniqui & impy homines, serpentis, id est, diaboli semen non essent, nequaquam Dominus diceret Iudæis: Et vos quæ vidistis apud patrem vestrum, facitis: Itémque, Vos facitis opera patris vestri: profecto diabolum volens intelligi: sequitur enim protinus in eodem sermone, Vos ex patre diabolo estis, & desideria patris vestri vultis facere.
“And on the other side, just as by the serpent the devil is rightly understood, so also by the seed of the serpent all the wicked and malignant men who imitate him are rightly understood, even though he has begotten or created no one. For if wicked and impious men were not the seed of the serpent — that is, of the devil — the Lord would never have said to the Jews: ‘You also do what you have seen with your father’; and likewise, ‘You do the works of your father’ — clearly meaning the devil; for immediately in that same discourse it follows: ‘You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you wish to do.'”
III. On the Perpetual Captivity and Dispersion of the Hebrews
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. I, on prophecies embedded in the patriarchal histories
De mundi Salvatore ab Hebræis occidendo, de futura Hebræorum captiuitate perpetua, & per omnes gentes dispersione.
“[The prophets spoke] of the Saviour of the world Who was to be slain by the Hebrews, of the future perpetual captivity of the Hebrews, and of their dispersion among all nations.”
Et leguntur in sacris litteris, postea iam videri proptereà reiectam, ficut & cæterà ferè, quæ Christum sonant. Nec vt iquemirum hoc, si Scripturas aliquas non receperunt de eo locutas, quem & ipsum coramloquentem non erant recepturi.
“And it is seen from sacred letters that thereafter [the Jews] rejected [certain writings] for the very same reason [they reject most others] — namely, whatever savours of Christ. Nor is it at all surprising that they did not accept certain Scriptures that spoke of Him, since they were not going to receive Him even when He spoke to them face to face.” (quoting Tertullian)
IV. The Allegory of Cain and Abel: The Jews as Slayers of Christ
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. I, on Gen. 4:10–12, citing Rupert of Deutz
Cæterum quoniam Abel occisus à fratre Cain, illustris figura fuit Christi Domini à Iudæis occisi, & maledicta, quæ acciderunt Cain, præsignificabant mala, quæ Iudæis eventura erant: quemadmodum Abel, secundùm allegoricam interpretationem declaret Rupertus.
“Moreover, since Abel who was slain by his brother Cain was a distinguished type of Christ the Lord Who was slain by the Jews, and the curses that befell Cain pre-signified the evils that were to come upon the Jews — Rupert explains this according to the allegorical interpretation as follows.”
Et illius, de eiusque auctore, quo hæc historia texitur, stultitia simul & procacitas, quantam nemo verbis consequi valeat, denotatur: dignáque pœna scelus fratricidia percutitur; & præter mysterium, quod nunc palam omni mundo factum est, ex Iudæis interfectoribus Christi præsignatur. Nam re vera quod dixit tunc uni perdito Cain: Vox sanguinis fratris tui clamat ad me de terra, nunc illi populo recte dici, est nemo qui nesciat. Quæ est enim terra, de qua non figurata, sed propria locutione recte dicatur, quod aperuit os suum, & susceperit de manibus Judæorum sanguinem fratris eorum?
“And the folly and insolence of that [murderer], the author around whom this history is woven — folly and insolence that no man can express in words — is laid bare; and a fitting punishment strikes the fratricide; and beyond the mystery which is now made plain to the whole world, [this history] pre-figures [what comes from] the Jews, the slayers of Christ. For in truth what was then said to the single lost man Cain — ‘The voice of thy brother’s blood crieth to me from the ground’ — everyone knows is rightly said now to that people. For what land is there of which it can be rightly said, not figuratively but in the literal sense, that it opened its mouth and received from the hands of the Jews the blood of their Brother?” (citing Rupert of Deutz, Comm. in Gen., Bk. III, ch. 6)
Porro quòd vagus & profugus sit super hanc terram, id est, propter Christi Ecclesiam, manifestum est, impleto quod de illo populo loquens ipse: Et cadent, inquit, in ore gladij, & captiui ducentur in omnes gentes.
“Moreover, that [this people] should be a wanderer and a fugitive upon the earth — that is, on account of the Church of Christ — is made manifest by the fulfilment of what He Himself said of that people: ‘And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations.'” (Luke 21, citing Rupert)
V. On the Greater People Serving the Lesser: The Jews Subject to Christians
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. IV, on Gen. 25:23 (“The elder shall serve the younger”), citing Augustine and Rupert
Quod autem dictum est (inquit Augustinus) Maior seruiet minori. nemo ferè nostrum aliter intellexit, quàm maiorem populum Iudæorum minori populo Christiano serviturum.
“‘And what was said’ (says Augustine) ‘The elder shall serve the younger — scarcely any of us has understood it otherwise than that the greater people of the Jews would serve the lesser people of the Christians.'” (De Civitate Dei, Bk. XVI, ch. 25)
Ideo enim per totum orbem Iudæi dispersi sunt, vt cum aliquem Paganum ad fidem Christi volumus invitare, Christum Dominum ab omnibus Prophetis prænuntiatum esse testantes, & ille resistens dixerit, à nobis potius quàm à Spiritu sancto libros diuinæ legis, & propheticos esse conscriptos; nos habemus vnde eum redarguere certa ratione possumus, dicentes: Si de meis libris tibi dubitatio nascitur, ecce Iudæorum libros, vtique inimicorum nostrorum, quos certum est, si ego conscribere vellem, mutare non potui; ipsos relege, & cum in ipsis hoc ipsum quod in meis libris inueneris, noli esse incredulus, sed fidelis. Hoc igitur ordine maior populus minori servire cogitur, dum etiam per illorum libros, ad credendum in Christum Gentium populus inuitatur.
“For this reason the Jews have been dispersed throughout the whole world: so that when we wish to invite some Pagan to the faith of Christ, bearing witness that Christ the Lord was foretold by all the Prophets, and he resists, saying that the books of the divine law and of the prophets were composed by us rather than by the Holy Spirit — we have from this source a sure means of refuting him, saying: ‘If doubt about my books arises in you, behold the books of the Jews — who are indeed our enemies — which it is certain that, had I wished to compose them, I could not have altered. Read them yourself, and when you find in them the very same things that you find in my books, do not be unbelieving but faithful.’ By this arrangement, therefore, the greater people is compelled to serve the lesser, since through their books too the Gentile people is invited to believe in Christ.” (citing Augustine, Enarr. in Ps. 58)
Non modò iuxta istum sensum mysticum, & secundum potentiam & gloriam spiritualem; sed etiam temporali potentia & dominatione, Christianus populus Iudaicum superauit, & maior ille servit minori: quia Christiani principes in plerisque regionibus Iudæos servitutem etiam corporalem & civilem servire sibi cogunt: immò inferioris sunt conditionis, viliorésque quàm fuere Idumæi subiecti Iudæis; nam illi etiam tunc proprios habuere Principes, propriámque regionem possederunt, quod Iudæis post excidium illud Titi & Adriani, ad hæc tempora, nunquam datum est.
“Not only according to this mystical sense and according to spiritual power and glory, but also in temporal power and domination, the Christian people has surpassed the Jewish, and the greater serves the lesser: because Christian princes in most regions compel the Jews to serve them in civil and even bodily servitude. Indeed, they are in a more inferior condition and more abject than were the Idumaeans who were subject to the Jews; for the Idumaeans even then had their own princes and possessed their own region — which has never been granted to the Jews from that destruction by Titus and Hadrian down to the present day.”
VI. Esau as the Jewish People; Jacob as the Christian People
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. IV, on Gen. 25, citing St. Thomas Aquinas
Tertio modo possunt ea ipsa verba intelligi figuratè & allegoricè, vt per Esau præfiguratus sit populus Iudæorum, per Iacob populus Christianus ex Gentibus collectus. Ille maior dici potest, quia prior ad fidem & cultum Dei vocatus & ascitus est, immò vocatur, Exodi 4, primogenitus Dei: hic verò minor dicitur, quia novissimè ad fidem Christi vocatus & conversus est.
“In a third way, these same words can be understood figuratively and allegorically, so that Esau prefigures the people of the Jews, and Jacob the Christian people gathered from the Gentiles. The former can be called the greater because it was first called and admitted to faith in and worship of God — indeed, it is called in Exodus 4 the firstborn of God. The latter, however, is called the lesser, because it was called and converted to the faith of Christ last of all.” (citing St. Thomas Aquinas)
Iudæi autem dicuntur servire Christianis, quia nobis ipsi custodiunt sacram Scripturam, non in suam utilitatem, sed in usus nostros atque eorum qui ex Paganismo convertuntur ad Christianismum, vt ob id Iudæi tanquam Capsarij Christianorum recte appellari queant.
“The Jews, however, are said to serve the Christians, because they themselves preserve the Sacred Scripture for us — not for their own benefit, but for our use and the use of those who are converted from Paganism to Christianity. On account of this the Jews can rightly be called the satchel-bearers [capsarii] of the Christians.” (citing St. Thomas Aquinas)
VII. The Robe of Esau Given to Jacob: The Old Testament Stripped from the Jews and Given to the Church
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. IV, on Gen. 27, citing St. Ambrose
Iacob stolam accepit Esau, quia senili præstabat sapientia. Ideo iunior frater seniorem fratrem exuit, quia fidei emicuit dignitate. Hanc stolam, Ecclesiæ typo, Rebecca protulit, & dedit filio iuniori, stolam scilicet veteris Testamenti, stolam propheticam, & sacerdotalem. Hæc stola data est populo Christiano, qui vti amictu sciret accepto, quoniam populus Iudæorum, eam sine usu habebat, & proprios nesciebat ornatus. Iacebat hæc stola in vmbra, abiecta atque neglecta. Obscurabatur enim tenebrosa impietatis caligine, nec in augusto corde populi Iudaici, latius poterat explicari. Induit eam Christianus populus, & refulsit, illuminauitque eam suæ fidei claritate, & piorum luce factorum.
“Jacob received the robe of Esau because he excelled in the wisdom of an elder. Therefore the younger brother stripped the elder brother, because he shone with the dignity of faith. This robe — as a type of the Church — Rebecca brought forth and gave to the younger son: the robe, that is, of the Old Testament, the prophetic and priestly robe. This robe was given to the Christian people, who would know how to make use of the garment received — since the Jewish people held it without use and did not know their own adornments. This robe lay in the shadow, cast aside and neglected. For it was obscured by the dark fog of impiety, and could not be unfolded at greater breadth in the narrow heart of the Jewish people. The Christian people put it on, and it shone forth, and they illuminated it with the brightness of their faith and the light of their pious deeds.” (citing St. Ambrose, De Iacob et Vita Beata, Bk. II, ch. 2)
VIII. On the Law and the Prophets Ceasing to Profit the Perfidious Jews
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. IV, on Gen. 25 (death of Sarah as allegory), citing Rupert of Deutz
Ergo tribus annis ante nuptias Rebeccæ, Sara defuncta erat. Sic proculdubio ante passionem Christi, qua prædicationis Euangelicæ gratiam ille copulauit, tribus annis, à diebus, vel baptismo Ioannis, mortua est lex, & propheti æ, non sibi, sed Iudæis, testante ipso Domino, cum dixit: Lex & Prophetæ usque ad Ioannempropheta uerunt. Nam ex quo præsentem, & testimonio Ioannis declaratum Christum filium Dei viui blasphemare cœperunt; reliquit omnis sanctitas omniſque vita iniquos cœtus eorum, eoquòd essent Concilium vanitatis, & Ecclesia malignantium.
“Therefore, three years before the marriage of Rebecca, Sara had died. Thus, without doubt, three years before the Passion of Christ — by which He joined to Himself the grace of the Gospel preaching — from the days of John’s baptism, the law and the prophecies died, not for themselves, but for the Jews; the Lord Himself bearing witness when He said: ‘The Law and the Prophets prophesied until John.’ For from the moment they began to blaspheme the Christ who was present before them and declared to be the Son of the living God by the testimony of John, all holiness and all life departed from their wicked assemblies, because they had become a council of vanity and a church of the malignant.” (citing Rupert of Deutz)
Significat igitur tantùm Rupertus, incredulis & perfidis Iudæis, qui Dominum Iesum, & testimonio Ioannis, & tot tantísque miraculis verum Messiam testatum atque declaratum recipere noluerunt; ex eo tempore, nec legem, nec prophetias quicquam profuisse.
“Rupert therefore merely means that for the unbelieving and perfidious Jews, who refused to receive the Lord Jesus as the true Messiah confirmed and declared both by the testimony of John and by so many and such great miracles, from that time forward neither the law nor the prophecies were of any profit.”
IX. How Christian Princes Ought to Treat the Jews Subject to Them
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. IV, on Gen. 42, citing Rupert of Deutz
Rupertus hoc exemplo Ioseph fratres suos asperè tractantis, quo in sui criminis cognitionem & detestationem venirent, docet Principes Christianos quemadmodum & ipsi Iudæos suo imperio subiectos tractare debeant: non quidem eos occidendo, sed durè tractando, & vexando, si fortè talis vexatio det illis intellectum suæ cæcitatis, & parricidij Maiorum suorum, quo tanta impietate ac crudelitate Dominum occiderunt: atque ea ratione resipiscant, & convertantur ad Dominum. Ruperti verba sunt huiusmodi: Hoc exemplo, hodiéque dignum est vti Principes Christianos erga fratres Christi Iudæos. Id autem est, non occidere eos, auctoritate Spiritus Sancti per Psalmistam ex persona Christi protestantis, Deus ostendit mihi super inimicos meos, ne occidas eos, ne quandò obliuiscantur populi mei: sed disperge illos in virtute tua. Non ergo illos occidere debent, sed ad cognitionem sui reatus hoc exemplo Ioseph reuocare.
“Rupert, from the example of Joseph treating his brothers harshly so that they might come to knowledge and detestation of their crime, teaches Christian princes how they too should treat the Jews subject to their rule: not indeed by killing them, but by treating them harshly and vexing them — so that perhaps such vexation may give them understanding of their own blindness and of the parricide of their Fathers, by which with such great impiety and cruelty they slew the Lord — and that in this way they may repent and be converted to the Lord. The words of Rupert are as follows: ‘This example is even today worthy of use by Christian princes toward the brothers of Christ, the Jews. That means: not to kill them — the Holy Spirit bearing witness through the Psalmist in the person of Christ: “God hath shown me over my enemies: slay them not, lest at any time my people forget; scatter them by thy power” — therefore they ought not to kill them, but rather lead them back to knowledge of their guilt by this example of Joseph.'”
Nam vt illi tunc adorauerunt Principem Aegypti, nescientes esse Ioseph quem vendiderant: sic hodie Iudæi Christianis Principibus subiecti sunt, nescientes hoc modo se esse subiectos pedibus Christi, quem negantes patres eorum crucifixerunt. Ergo sicut Ioseph illos in vltione sui non occidit, sed pia tortura ad pœnitentiam compulit, vt dicerent: Merito hæc patimur, quia peccauimus in fratrem nostrum: Sic & hodie Christianos Principes non decet, vt captiuos, vinctósque Christi Iudæos occidant; sed vt multùm ad pœnitentiam compellant.
“For just as they then worshipped the Prince of Egypt, not knowing that it was Joseph whom they had sold — so today the Jews are subject to Christian princes, not knowing that in this way they are subject to the feet of Christ, Whom their denying fathers crucified. Therefore just as Joseph did not kill them in revenge for himself, but by a holy affliction compelled them to penitence, so that they said ‘We are suffering this deservedly, because we have sinned against our brother’ — so too it does not befit Christian princes today to kill the captive and bound Jews of Christ, but to compel them greatly unto penitence.” (citing Rupert of Deutz, Comm. in Gen., Bk. IX, ch. 4)
X. The Leprosy of Moses’ Hand as a Figure of the Synagogue
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Exodum, on Ex. 4:6–7 (the leprous hand), citing Augustine and Rupert
Alterum porro signum, manus primum leprosæ, tunc mundæ, interpretatur ibidem Augustinus, de Synagoga, & Ecclesia Christi. Quod autem, inquit, misit manum suam Moses in sinum suum, & protulit leprosam, & iterum misit, & protulit sanam, & carni reliquæ similem: non otiose debemus accipere. In manu illa typus Synagogæ, vel Ecclesiæ gerebatur. Sicut prior fuit populus Iudæorum, posterior autem Gentium, ita prior fuit Synagoga, quàm Ecclesia. Sed quia Ecclesia eligitur, & Synagoga repudiatur, ideo primum manus Mosis leprosa efficitur, & postea carni reliquæ similis redditur; sic etiam Synagoga, propter infidelitatem, tanquam leprosa relinquitur; Ecclesia verò, quasi manus sana, ad omne opus apta eligitur.
“The second sign, moreover — the hand first leprous and then clean — Augustine interprets in the same place as referring to the Synagogue and the Church of Christ. ‘That Moses,’ he says, ‘put his hand into his bosom and brought it out leprous, and then put it in again and brought it out clean and like the rest of his flesh — this we ought not to receive as meaningless. In that hand was borne a type of the Synagogue, or of the Church. As the Jewish people came first and the people of the Gentiles second, so the Synagogue came before the Church. But because the Church is chosen and the Synagogue is rejected, Moses’ hand is first made leprous and afterwards restored to likeness with the rest of the flesh. So too the Synagogue, because of its unbelief, is left behind as leprous; but the Church, as a sound hand fit for every work, is chosen.'” (citing Augustine)
Poft deinde videamus, quo modo manus Mosis leprosa significauerit Synagogam. Nempe, manus protracta de sinu, Synagoga est à gratia Dei proiecta. Ex quo enim latus Salvatoris sui liccata retraxit, retracta est manus illa de sinu eius, peccatorum suorum lepra candente perfida.
“Let us then see how Moses’ leprous hand signified the Synagogue. Indeed, the hand drawn out of the bosom is the Synagogue cast away from the grace of God. For from the moment it dried up and drew back from the side of its Saviour, that hand was drawn out of His bosom — shining with the leprosy of its sins — perfidious.” (citing Rupert of Deutz, Comm. in Ex., Bk. I, ch. 17)
Ecce videmus populum illum à castris Dei segregatum, haud dubie ad arbitrium summi sacerdotis, lepræ condemnatum, habentem vestimenta dissoluta, caput nudum, os veste contectum, clamantem, id est, distingui non valentem, contaminatum se, ac fordidum. Nuda est lepra, facies autem velamine perfidiæ tect a. His duobus signis attestantibus, quifquis non credit, quod qui mittendus erat, iam venerit, ifque sit Iesus Christus, qui solus à Pharaone spirituali, id est, Diabolo, liberare nos poterit, restat, vt tertium contra illum impleatur signum, & quicquid hauserit de fluuio, vertatur in sanguine, id est, quicquid attingere tentauerit de Scripturarum fluentis, necessario male intelligat ad suam vtique damnationem.
“Behold, we see that people separated from the camp of God — condemned, no doubt at the decree of the high priest, to leprosy — with torn garments, bare head, mouth covered with a cloth, crying out, that is, unable to be distinguished [from the unclean], defiled and filthy. The leprosy is bare; but the face is covered with the veil of perfidy. To these two signs bearing witness: whoever does not believe that He Who was to be sent has now come, and that He is Jesus Christ Who alone can free us from the spiritual Pharaoh — that is, the Devil — it remains that the third sign be fulfilled against him, and that whatever he shall have drawn from the river be turned to blood; that is, whatever he attempts to draw from the streams of the Scriptures, he will of necessity understand wrongly — to his own damnation.” (citing Rupert)
XI. The Talmudists Confess That the Hebrew Scriptures Are Corrupted
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Exodum, on Ex. 32:28, citing Tostatus
Nam vel ipsimet Hebræi Talmudistæ (inquit Thostatus) fatentur Biblia Hebræa esse in quindecim locis corrupta per errorem scriptorum: quod autem ipsi de quindecim locis confitentur, idem de quibusdam aliis dici potest, quos illi vel non adverterunt, vel dissimularunt esse corruptos.
“For even the Hebrew Talmudists themselves (says Tostatus) confess that the Hebrew Bible has been corrupted in fifteen places through errors of scribes. And what they confess concerning fifteen places can also be said of certain others, which they either did not notice or pretended were not corrupt.”
XII. Against the Jewish Interpretation of “Let Us Make Man” — the Angels as Co-Creators
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. I, citing St. Basil
Consideraautem id quod continenter sequitur, Ad Imaginem nostram. Quid ad hæc dicere paras? Num vna & Dei & Angelorum imago est? Prorsus fili patrisque forma eadem vt sit necesse est, Formam hic ut intelligamus necesse est, quæ diuinam addeceat maiestatem: Quintú qui ex noua ista circumcisione es, audi: audi, inquam, tu qui Christianismi prætextu nihil habes, quod Iudaismo ducas carius.
“But consider what immediately follows: ‘After our image.’ What do you prepare to say to this? Is the image of God and of the Angels one and the same? It is altogether necessary that the form of the Father and of the Son be the same. The form here we must understand as befitting the divine majesty. And you who are of that new circumcision — hear! Hear, I say, you who under the pretext of Christianity hold nothing dearer than Judaism.” (citing St. Basil)
XIII. On the Church and the Synagogue: The Church Fruitful, the Synagogue Barren and Repudiated
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. III, on Gal. 4:27, “Rejoice, O barren”
OPPONIT B. Paulus legi Mosaicæ, & Iudaicæ Synagogæ, ac terreni illi Hierusalem; opponit inquam, legem Euangelicam & Nouum Testamentum. Et quatuor pulcherrimis epithetis, tanquam illustribus quibusdam notis insignitam describit Ecclesiam Christianam.
“Blessed Paul opposes to the Mosaic law and to the Jewish Synagogue, and to that earthly Jerusalem — opposes, I say, the Evangelical law and the New Testament. And with four most beautiful epithets, as so many illustrious marks, he describes and distinguishes the Christian Church.”
Gentilitas enim quæ multo maxima & præstantissima Ecclesiæ Christi pars est, ante Domini nostri adventum, plane sterilis erat, nullos Deo generans filios, sed diabolo potius: eratque deserta & quasi despectà à Deo propter ignorantiam veri Dei, fœdissimámque idololatriam. Sed postquam conversa est ad Christum, & Fidem eius ac legem amplexata, vsque adeo fecundata est, vt præ illa, fuerit effœta & sterilis facta Synagoga.
“For the Gentile world — which is by far the greatest and most excellent part of the Church of Christ — before the coming of our Lord was plainly barren, generating no sons for God but rather for the devil; and it was deserted and as it were despised by God on account of ignorance of the true God and most foul idolatry. But after it was converted to Christ and embraced His faith and law, it was so abundantly made fruitful that in comparison with it, the Synagogue became exhausted and barren.”
Iudæos fide Christi carentes, similes esse Ismaeli qui natus est secundum carnem ex ancilla; Christianos autem similes esse Isaac qui per promissionem & secundum spiritum natus est ex libera. Altera est, sicut tunc Ismahel persequebatur Isaac; ita nunc carnales filii Abrahæ, id est, Iudæi infectantur Christianos, spirituales Abrahæ filios. Tertia est, quemadmodum tunc Agar & Ismahel domo Abrahæ eiecti sunt, nec hæreditatis Abrahæ participes fuerunt; ita Synagogam & Iudæos Christi fidem & gratiam aversantes, eiici ex domo Dei, priuarique hæreditate filiorum Dei. Hoc autem eis denuntiauit Christus Dominus cum dixit: Auferetur à vobis regnum Dei, & dabitur genti facienti fructus eius.
“That the Jews who lack the faith of Christ are likened to Ishmael who was born according to the flesh of a handmaid; but Christians are likened to Isaac who was born through promise and according to the spirit of a free woman. The second [correspondence] is that just as Ishmael then persecuted Isaac, so now the carnal sons of Abraham — that is, the Jews — persecute the Christians, who are the spiritual sons of Abraham. The third is that just as Agar and Ishmael were then cast out of the house of Abraham and had no share in Abraham’s inheritance, so the Synagogue and the Jews who reject the faith and grace of Christ are cast out from the house of God and deprived of the inheritance of the sons of God. This Christ the Lord declared to them when He said: ‘The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a nation yielding the fruits thereof.'”
XIV. The Jews as Deicides
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Evangelium Ioannis, on Jn. 11 (the prophecy of Caiaphas), Disp. X
Iam luce meridiana clarius est, & verissima fuisse quæ de se Dominus Iesus prædicauerat, & ipsos summa impietate & crudelitate eum necando tanquam deicidas, grauissimis quidem, sed iustissimis iam à DEO suppliciis esse multatos.
“It is now clearer than the midday sun, and most true were the things that the Lord Jesus had foretold about Himself, and that they, by slaying Him with supreme impiety and cruelty, as deicides, have been punished with the most grave, yet most just, punishments already by God.”
Multa alia in huiusmodi tractatione argumentis ab antiquis doctoribus scripta sunt: ut à Iustino Martyre in Dialogo, quem habuit cum Tryphone Iudæo; à Tertulliano & Cypriano in his quæ scripserunt adversus Iudæos; à Chrysostomo in quinque orationibus, quas contra Iudæos scripsit; ab Eusebio in octo libris de demonstratione Euangelica; ab Augustino in libro decimo octavo de Civitate Dei.
“Many other arguments on this subject have been written by the ancient Doctors: by Justin Martyr in the Dialogue he held with Trypho the Jew; by Tertullian and Cyprian in their writings against the Jews; by Chrysostom in the five discourses he wrote against the Jews; by Eusebius in the eight books of his Demonstration of the Gospel; by Augustine in the eighteenth book of the City of God.”
XV. The Arrogance of the Jews and the Severity of Their Judgment
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Epistolam ad Romanos, on Rom. 2:12–13
Non solum, inquit Chrysostomus, Paulus inter Iudæum, & Gentilem æqualitatem indicat, sed ostendit Iudæum magis quam Gentilem grauari, & premi propter legem acceptam. Gentilis enim sine lege iudicatur, & perit; quod non seuerius sed remissius iudicium & supplicium denotat; quoniam non à lege scripta, vt Iudæus, sed tantum à naturali iudicatur, & damnatur. Iudæus verò præter legem naturalem, habebit & legem scriptam, quæ ipsum accusabit, & damnabit: quanto enim magis Dei dignatus est cura, tanto maiores pœnas persolvet.
“‘Not only,’ says Chrysostom, ‘does Paul indicate an equality between the Jew and the Gentile, but he shows that the Jew is more burdened and weighed down than the Gentile because of the law he received. For the Gentile is judged and perishes without the law — which denotes a less severe, not a more severe, judgment and punishment — since he is judged and condemned not by the written law, as the Jew, but only by the natural law. But the Jew, beyond the natural law, will also have the written law, which will accuse and condemn him: for the more he has been deemed worthy of God’s care, the greater penalties he will pay.'” (citing Chrysostom, Hom. V in Rom.)
Dominus noster Iudæis interminatus est, cum eis dixit: Nolite putare, quia ego accusaturus sim vos apud Patrem: est qui accusat vos Moyses, in quo vos speratis.
“Our Lord threatened the Jews when He said to them: ‘Think not that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom you trust.'”
XVI. On Jewish Boasting and the True Circumcision
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Epistolam ad Romanos, on Rom. 2:17–20, “If thou art called a Jew“
His verbis B. Paulus deprimcns arrogantiam Iudæorum, docere voluit, esse verum quod suprà dixerat: Non auditores legis, sed factores, iustos esse apud Deum: nec profuturam Iudæis legem scriptam, de qua tantopere gloriabantur; quin etiam plurimum eis nocituram, vtpote præcepta eius nequaquam exequentibus.
“By these words Blessed Paul, depressing the arrogance of the Jews, wished to teach that what he had said above is true: that not the hearers of the law, but the doers, are just before God; and that the written law of which they boasted so greatly would be of no profit to the Jews — indeed, would greatly harm them, since they by no means carried out its commandments.”
Per illam Iudæi terrenorum Dei promissorum participes & compotes fiebant; propter hanc, cælestium atque æternorum bonorum hæredes efficimur. In illa dabatur nomen quo quis nominaretur in terris; per hanc datur, nomen novum quod os Domini nominauit, & quod scriptum est in libro vitæ. Ad vltimum, illa, sigillum fidei & iustitiæ; hæc verò ipsam fidem & iustitiam continet, tuetur, auget, ac perficit. Merito igitur præ hac spirituali circumcisione, illa carnalis posthabita, abiecta, & exoleta est.
“Through [carnal circumcision] the Jews became partakers and possessors of the earthly promises of God; through [spiritual circumcision, i.e., Baptism] we are made heirs of the heavenly and eternal goods. In the former was given the name by which one was named on earth; through the latter is given the new name which the mouth of the Lord has named and which is written in the book of life. In sum: the former is a seal of faith and justice; but the latter contains, guards, increases, and perfects faith and justice itself. Rightly, therefore, in comparison with this spiritual circumcision, that carnal one has been set aside, rejected, and rendered obsolete.” (from the disputation on circumcision, citing Ambrose)
XVII. The Synagogue of Satan
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Apocalypsin, on Apoc. 2:9
Pererius cites verbatim the text of the Apocalypse, commenting on Christ’s words to the Church of Smyrna:
Scio tribulationem tuam & paupertatem tuam: sed diues es, blasphemantem ab his qui se dicunt Iudæos esse, & non sunt, sed sunt Synagoga Satanæ.
“‘I know thy tribulation and thy poverty: but thou art rich, [and thou art blasphemed] by them who say they are Jews, and are not, but are the Synagogue of Satan.'” (Apoc. 2:9)
XVIII. The Voluntary Blindness and Perfidy of the Jews: St. Jerome’s Indictment
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Danielem, Bk. X, on Dan. 9, citing St. Jerome, Ep. 129 to Dardanus
Multa, Iudæa scelera commisisti, cunftis arcà te serviisti nationibus: ob quod factum, vtique propter idololatriam. Cumque seruisses, crebrò tui miseratus est Deus & misit Iudices, & Saluatores, qui te de seruitute Moabitarum, Ammonitarum, Philistinorum, ac diuersarum gentium liberarent. His subinde subcumbens, offendisti Deum, & omnia tua prouincia: gente Babylonica vastante, deleta est. Per septuaginta annos, templi solitudo permansit. A Cyro rege Persarum, est laxata captiuitas: exstructum quoque est sub Dario templum.
“‘Many crimes thou hast committed, O Judaea, thou hast served all the nations around thee — on account of this, certainly on account of idolatry. And when thou hadst served, God frequently took pity on thee and sent Judges and Saviours who freed thee from the servitude of the Moabites, Ammonites, Philistines, and various peoples. Succumbing again and again to these, thou didst offend God, and all thy province was laid waste by the Babylonian nation. For seventy years the desolation of the temple endured. By Cyrus king of the Persians the captivity was ended; the temple was also rebuilt under Darius.'” (citing Jerome, Ep. 129 ad Dardanum)
Ad extremum, sub Vespasiano & Tito vrbs capta, templúmque subuersum est. Deinde, ciuitates, vsque ad Adrianum principem per quinquaginta annos manserunt reliquiæ: post illam euersionem, vsque ad hanc diem, paulo minus quam per quadringentos annos, & vrbis & templi ruina permanent. Ob quod tantum facinus? Certe non colis idola sed etiam seruiens Persis & Romanis, & captiuitatis pressus iugo, Deos ignoras alienos. Quomodo clementissimus quondam Deus, qui nunquam tui antea oblitus fuerat, nunc per tanta spatia temporum non adducitur, vt soluat captiuitatem, & vt verius dicam, expectatum tibi mittat Antichristum? Ob quod inquam facinus, & tam exsecrabile scelus, auertit à te oculos suos? Igne nosMemento vocis parentum tuorum: Sanguis eius super nos, & super filios vestros, & hic est hæres, venite occidamus eum, & nostra erit hæreditas. Et non habemus regem, nisi Cæsarem. Habes quod elegisti, vsque ad finem mundi seruiturum es Cæsari, donec gentium intret plenitudo, & omnis Israel saluus fiat, & qui quondam erat in capite, vertatur in caudam.
“‘At last, under Vespasian and Titus the city was taken and the temple overthrown. Then, the ruins of the cities remained until the Emperor Hadrian for fifty years; after that destruction, down to the present day — for nearly four hundred years — the ruins of both city and temple remain. On account of what great crime? Certainly thou dost not now worship idols, even serving the Persians and Romans and weighed down under the yoke of captivity, thou art ignorant of foreign gods. How is it that the most merciful God, Who had never formerly forgotten thee, is not moved even now, through such long spans of time, to dissolve the captivity, and — to speak more truly — to send thee the Antichrist whom thou expectest? On account of what crime, I say, and what so execrable wickedness, has He turned His eyes away from thee? Remember the voice of thy forebears: “His blood be upon us and upon our children”; and “this is the heir, come let us kill him, and the inheritance shall be ours”; and “we have no king but Cæsar.” Thou hast what thou didst choose: thou shalt serve Cæsar to the end of the world, until the fullness of the Gentiles shall enter, and all Israel shall be saved, and he who was once at the head shall be turned to the tail.'” (citing Jerome, Ep. 129 ad Dardanum)
Duplici enim pœnarum genere multati Iudæi pressi sunt: vnum fuit corporale, & hoc triplex, amissio regni ac dignitatis, perpetua vrbis ac templi desolatio, & sempiternum exilium, innumeris malis miseriísque refertum. Alterum pœnæ genus fuit spirituale, tanto sane grauius & exitialius priore, quantò & potioribus bonis eos spoliauit, & acerbioribus malis affecit. Et hoc duplex: excæcatio mentis & obduratio cordis, videlicet ad intelligenda credendáque atque amplectenda, quæ ad Messiam pertinebant.
“For the Jews have been crushed by a twofold kind of punishments. One was bodily, and this threefold: the loss of kingdom and dignity, the perpetual desolation of city and temple, and sempiternal exile, filled with innumerable evils and miseries. The second kind of punishment was spiritual — assuredly so much graver and more ruinous than the former as it despoiled them of more excellent goods and afflicted them with more bitter evils. And this [spiritual punishment] is twofold: blindness of mind and hardening of heart — namely, with respect to understanding, believing, and embracing those things which pertained to the Messiah.”
Exiliis vagus hinc illuc fluctuantibus errat Iudæus, postquam patriâ defedere vulsa, Supplicium pro cæde luit Christi negati.
“Wandering in exile, the Jew strays hither and thither on restless seas, after being torn away and cast from his homeland — paying the penalty for the slaughter of the Christ whom he denied.” (Prudentius, Apotheosis)
XIX. The Antichrist to Come as Punishment for the Jews‘ Rejection of Christ
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Danielem, Bk. X, on Dan. 11
Postremò, id permissum est Domino, ad redarguendam, & cohib endam perfidiam Iudæorum, qui verum Christum noluerunt recipere, vltrò recepturi Antichristum. Hoc prædixit Christus Iudæis apud Ioannem capite 5: Ego veni, inquit, in nomine Patris tui, & non recepistis me: veniet alius in nomine suo, & eum recipient. Illum alium, in nomine suo venturum, & à Iudæis recipiendum, ferè patres interpretatur Antichristum.
“Lastly, this [i.e., the permitted reign of the Antichrist] has been permitted by the Lord in order to rebuke and confound the perfidy of the Jews, who refused to receive the true Christ and will spontaneously receive the Antichrist. This Christ foretold to the Jews in John chapter 5: ‘I am come in the name of my Father, and you receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him you will receive.’ That other one who is to come in his own name and be received by the Jews, the Fathers almost universally interpret as the Antichrist.”
XX. The Arians Compared to the Jews in Their Perfidy
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Evangelium Ioannis, on Jn. 10:30 (“I and the Father are one”), Disp. XIX
Fuit profectò Arianorum perfidia in eo similis perfidiæ illorum Iudæorum, quod vtrique non credebant Christum esse verum, & naturalem Filium Dei: Sed in eo tamen mentis cœcitas maior in Arianis fuit, quam in Iudæis, quod hi audientes Christum dicentem illud: Ego & Pater vnum sumus, rectam illorum Domini verborum intelligentiam habuerunt, intellexerunt enim significatum esse illis verbis, Christum esse vnum secundum substantiam, & potentiam cum Deo, quapropter lapidare eum voluerunt, quia cum esset homo diceret se æqualem Deo.
“The perfidy of the Arians was indeed in this respect similar to the perfidy of those Jews, that both did not believe Christ to be the true and natural Son of God. But in this respect, the blindness of mind was greater in the Arians than in the Jews: that the Jews, hearing Christ say ‘I and the Father are one,’ had the correct understanding of the Lord’s words — for they understood that by those words was signified that Christ is one with God according to substance and power, and therefore they wished to stone Him, because being a man He was calling Himself equal to God.”
XXI. The Perfidy of Judas at the Paschal Supper
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Evangelium Ioannis, on Jn. 13, citing Pope Leo the Great
Beatus Leo Papa in sermone 3. de passione Domini cum ipso loquens Iuda, eique tantam eius adversus Dominum ingratitudinem & perfidiam exprobrans: Cum tuam, inquit, conscientiam tot Domini miracula & tot dona torquerent, illa saltem te à præcipitio tuo sacramenta reuocassent, quæ in Paschali cœna iam de perfidia tua signo diuinæ scientiæ detectus acceperas. Cur de eius bonitate diffidis, qui te à sui corporis & sanguinis communione non repulit?
“Blessed Pope Leo, in Sermon 3 on the Passion of the Lord, speaking to Judas himself and reproaching him with such great ingratitude and perfidy toward the Lord, says: ‘When so many miracles of the Lord and so many gifts were tormenting your conscience, those sacraments should at least have called you back from your precipice — you who received them at the Paschal supper, already detected by the sign of divine knowledge in your perfidy. Why do you distrust His goodness, Who did not repel you from the communion of His Body and Blood?'” (citing Leo the Great, Serm. 3 de Passione)
XXII. The Demon Would Not Have Impelled the Jews to Crucify Christ Had He Foreseen the Consequences
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. I, Bk. II, on Astrological Divination
Si enim futura omnia dæmon sciret, nunquam profectò impulisset Iudæos ad crucifigendum & occidendum Christum Dominum, quippè præuidisset per crucem & mortem Christi, imperium quod tamdiu habueratin homines, fore labefactandum & funditus euertendum.
“For if the demon had known all future things, he would certainly never have impelled the Jews to crucify and slay Christ the Lord — for he would have foreseen that through the cross and death of Christ, the dominion he had so long held over men would be shaken and utterly overthrown.”
XXIII. The Veil Upon the Jews in Reading the Old Testament
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Danielem, Bk. X, on Dan. 9, on the Jews‘ blindness to Scripture
In hodiernam vsque diem, velamen manet Iudæis in lectione veteris testamenti: quod tamen per Christum euacuatur. Itaque Iudæus sine fide Christi legens scripturam reperiet eam velatam, nec menti peruiam ad intelligendum. Accum primum hoc Christi imbibus est, velamen ex ipsa scriptura, & ex corde eius auferetur.
“‘Down to the present day, a veil remains upon the Jews in the reading of the Old Testament: which veil is nonetheless taken away through Christ. And so a Jew who reads Scripture without the faith of Christ will find it veiled and not accessible to the mind for understanding. But as soon as he is imbued with Christ, the veil will be lifted from the Scripture itself and from his heart.'” (citing 2 Cor. 3, with commentary)
XXIV. The Jews Hostile to Gentile Laws and to the Gospel
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Epistolam ad Romanos, on Rom. 11 and the Judaizers
Nec solum hoc ingenio & animo erant Iudæi adversus Gentilium leges, sed etiam recepto iam Euangelio, simul quoque legis Mosaicæ observantiam, contendebant ad consequendam salutem esse necessariam.
“Nor were the Jews only of this disposition and mind against the laws of the Gentiles, but also after the Gospel had been received, they at the same time contended that the observance of the Mosaic law was necessary for attaining salvation.”
XXV. On the Prophecy of Jacob: The Sceptre Shall Not Depart from Juda Until the Messiah Comes
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. IV, on Gen. 49:10
À Mose enim vsque ad Herodem, imperium Iudaici populi, non alij quàm qui ex stirpe ac gente Hebræorum erant, administrarunt; sub cuius [Herodis] autem imperio Herodes primus externæ gentis stirpe procreatus Iudæorum principatum à Romanis adeptus est; ad quem cum peruenisset regnum Iudæorum, pro foribus iam is adesse sentiebatur secundùm Prophetæ oraculum qui futurus esset gentium expectatio.
“For from Moses down to Herod, the government of the Jewish people was administered by none other than those who were of the stock and race of the Hebrews. Under the reign of Herod, however, who was the first of foreign stock to obtain the principate of the Jews from the Romans, when the kingdom of the Jews had come to him, it was felt that He was already at the door Who, according to the oracle of the Prophet, was to be the expectation of the nations.”
XXVI. Noah’s Vineyard as a Type of the Synagogue; Christ Slain by the Jewish People
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. II, on Gen. 9:20–24 (Noah’s drunkenness, allegorical interpretation)
Similitudine autem vineæ quam Noe plantauit, significari veterem illam Synagogam variis Scripturæ locis testatum est: Vineam de Ægypto transtulisti, inquit, Dauid; eiecisti Gentes, & plantasti eam. Quæ quidem vinea à primo egregia, decora, & præclara fuit, postea conversa est in amaritudinem vitis alienæ, pro expectatis uuis reddens labruscas. Hæc tandem à quo plantata fuerat, eum amaro mortis poculo potauit, & consummata amaritudine inebriauit, ita vt dormiret somno mortis, nudatus & suorum irrisioni, ludibrio & contemptui expositus. Christus enim à populo Iudaico, quem vt Deus innumerabilibus beneficiis antea cumulauerat, & factus homo ad eum redimendum & saluandum venerat, ignominiosa & atroci morte damnatus & peremptus est.
“Moreover, that by the vineyard which Noah planted the ancient Synagogue is signified is attested in various places of Scripture: ‘Thou hast brought a vine out of Egypt; thou hast cast out the Gentiles and planted it,’ says David. Which vineyard was at first excellent, beautiful and illustrious, but afterwards was turned into the bitterness of a strange vine, producing wild grapes in place of the expected fruit. This [vineyard] at last gave Him Who had planted it a bitter cup of death to drink, and having been brought to the fullness of bitterness, made Him drunk so that He fell into the sleep of death, stripped bare and exposed to the mockery, ridicule, and contempt of His own people. For Christ, Whom as God [the Jewish people] had before heaped with innumerable benefits, and Who had become man in order to redeem and save them, was condemned and put to death by the Jewish people with an ignominious and brutal death.”
Aversos autem nuditatem Noe proprio pallio tegere, est, in Christi nece aversari quidem immane facinus Iudæorum, sed ipsas Domini passiones venerando sacramentorum ordine operire, grate recolentes, pie venerantes, studiose imitantes.
“But to cover with their own garment the nakedness of Noah while turning away — this is, indeed, to recoil from the monstrous crime of the Jews in the slaying of Christ, yet to cover the very Passions of the Lord by the holy order of the Sacraments, recalling them with gratitude, venerating them with piety, and imitating them with diligence.”
XXVII. The Punishment of the Jews Through the Babylonian Captivity Was Graver Than the Punishment of Sodom
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. II, on Gen. 9:5, citing Jeremiah
Supplicium quod Deus sumpserat de Iudæis per captivitatem Babylonicam, gravius fuisse supplicio Sodomorum: nam calamitas Iudæorum lenta & diuturna fuit, excidium autem Sodomorum brevissimum: brevitas autem pœnæ, quantamlibet acerbitatem eius valde mitigat ac minuit.
“The punishment which God exacted from the Jews through the Babylonian captivity was graver than the punishment of Sodom: for the calamity of the Jews was slow and long-lasting, whereas the destruction of Sodom was most brief — and the brevity of a punishment greatly mitigates and diminishes however great its severity.” (citing Jeremiah, Lam. 4:6)
XXVIII. The Jews Lost the Tents of Shem Through Their Alienation from Christ
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. II, on Gen. 9:27 (“May Japheth dwell in the tents of Shem”), citing Jerome and Rupert
In hæc tabernacula intraverunt Gentes ad Christum conversæ, eaque perdiderunt Iudæi à Christo alienati. Audi B. Hieronymum: De Sem, inquit, Hebræi, de Iaphet populus Gentium nascitur: quia igitur lata est multitudo credentium, à latitudine quæ Iaphet dicitur, nomen invenit. Quod autem subditur: Et habitet in tabernaculis Sem: de nobis prophetatur, qui in eruditione & scientia Scripturarum eiecto Israël versamur.
“Into these tents entered the Gentiles converted to Christ, and they were lost by the Jews alienated from Christ. Hear Blessed Jerome: ‘From Shem,’ he says, ‘the Hebrews are born; from Japheth the people of the Gentiles — because therefore the multitude of believers is broad, it finds its name from the breadth that Japheth denotes. And what is added, “And may he dwell in the tents of Shem” — this is a prophecy concerning us, who occupy ourselves in the learning and knowledge of the Scriptures with Israel cast out.'” (citing Jerome, Hebraicæ Traditiones in Genesim)
Tabernacula Sem, ait ille [Rupertus], in quibus habitaturus esse dicitur Iaphet, privilegia sunt Iudæorum his verbis à Paulo numerata: Quorum est adoptio filiorum, & gloria, & testamentum, & legislatio, & obsequium & promissa, & Patres ex quibus Christus secundum carnem, qui est super omnia Deus benedictus. In his tabernaculis longo tempore solus habitavit Iudaicus populus Gentibus extra positis.
“‘The tents of Shem,’ says [Rupert], ‘in which Japheth is said to be about to dwell, are the privileges of the Jews enumerated by Paul in these words: “To whom belongeth the adoption of children, and the glory, and the testament, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises, and the fathers, of whom is Christ according to the flesh, Who is over all things God blessed.” In these tents the Jewish people dwelt alone for a long time, with the Gentiles placed outside.'” (citing Rupert of Deutz)
XXIX. The Gravity of the Jews‘ Impiety: God’s Inexorable Anger
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. II, on Gen. 9:5, citing Ezekiel 14
Simul exaggerat Deus inexpiabilem Iudæorum impietatem, & singularem sanctitatem atque gratiam qua Noe plurimum valebat apud Deum. Namque illorum verborum hæc est sententia: Tanta est Iudæorum impietatis & scelerum gravitas & acerbitas, & usque eo illis sum infensus & iratus, vt si Noe, ceteroqui vir apud me gratiosissimus, filium haberet in isto populo, mihique pro eo supplicaret, non essem tamen eum exauditurus.
“At the same time God magnifies the inexpiable impiety of the Jews, and the singular holiness and grace with which Noah was greatly in favour before God. For the meaning of those words is this: ‘So great is the gravity and bitterness of the Jews‘ impiety and crimes, and so provoked and angered am I by them, that if Noah — otherwise a man of the highest favour before me — were to have a son among that people and were to intercede before me for him, I would not grant his prayer.'” (from the commentary on Ezek. 14:14)
XXX. The Rabbinical Traditions Are Babble and Falsehood
From Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Vol. II, on Gen. 7:2–3 (clean and unclean animals)
Non est prætereundum id quod à quibusdam Rabbinis Hebræorum hoc loco est proditum, nec tamen verum est, ob idque à nobis obiter confutandum. Aiunt illi quæ per legem Mosis Iudæis præcepta sunt ea fuisse omnia ante legem à probis & piis Dei cultoribus observata… Sed hoc falsum esse, tribus in rebus planum faciam.
“It is not to be passed over in silence — what has been put forward in this place by certain Rabbis of the Hebrews — since it is not true, and must therefore be refuted by us in passing. They claim that all those things which were commanded to the Jews by the law of Moses had all been observed before the law by upright and pious worshippers of God… But that this is false I will make plain in three instances.”
Non igitur omnia quæ lege Mosis præcepta sunt Hebræis, ea fuere ante legem (vt isti Rabbini nugantur) à piis viris observata.
“Therefore not all those things which were commanded to the Hebrews by the law of Moses were observed before the law — as these Rabbis babble — by pious men.”
Nugantur more suo Hebræi, vt videre licet apud Rabinum Salomonem in secundum caput Hieremiæ, & in Seder Olam (quod est Chronicon Hebræorum, capite quinto), Deum septem præcepta post diluuium dedisse hominibus, quæ illi appellant præcepta filiorum Noe, & præcepta naturæ, quibus adstringi censent etiam Gentiles.
“The Hebrews babble in their customary fashion — as may be seen in Rabbi Solomon’s [commentary] on the second chapter of Jeremiah, and in the Seder Olam (which is the Chronicle of the Hebrews, chapter five) — that God gave seven precepts to men after the Flood, which they call the precepts of the sons of Noah and the precepts of nature, by which they consider even the Gentiles to be bound.”
Sources:
- Benedictus Pererius, Commentariorum et Disputationum in Genesim, Tomus I (Lyons: Officina Juntarum, 1594): https://books.google.co.in/books?id=ysRIAAAAcAAJ
- Benedictus Pererius, Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Tomus II: https://books.google.com/books/about/Commentarii_Et_Disputationes_in_Genesim.html?id=mA1EAAAAcAAJ
- Benedictus Pererius, Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Tomus III: https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_gXqrIomkU7kC
- Benedictus Pererius, Commentarii et Disputationes in Genesim, Tomus IV: https://books.google.com/books/about/Commentarii_Et_Disputationes_in_Genesim.html?id=XVI8AAAAcAAJ
- Benedictus Pererius, Commentariorum in Exodum: https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_s8XnHV-shnEC
- Benedictus Pererius, Commentariorum in Danielem: https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_-pb8X1__CtMC
- Benedictus Pererius, Commentariorum in Evangelium Ioannis (earlier books): https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_K3qdfOZHJnMC
- Benedictus Pererius, Commentariorum in Evangelium Ioannis (later books): https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_W6dy5yhA88IC
- Benedictus Pererius, Commentariorum in Epistolam Pauli ad Romanos: https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_z_Bsi6g_IG8C
- Benedictus Pererius, Commentariorum in Apocalypsin: https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_KQRcwguIUBcC