Selections of Denis Pétau’s (Petavius) Writings on the Jews

Denis Pétau (Dionysius Petavius, 1583–1652) was a French Jesuit priest, theologian, and the most celebrated chronologist of the seventeenth century. His two principal works represented here are the Rationarium Temporum (“An Account of Times”), a comprehensive sacred and profane chronological history of the world, and the Dogmata Theologica (“Theological Dogmas”), his monumental eight-volume systematic theology. Together they constitute the most erudite Latin scholarly output of their era, acknowledged across all confessional lines. The passages below, drawn directly from the digitised originals held at the Internet Archive, address the Jewish role in the Passion of Christ, the theological meaning of Jewish rejection of the Messiah, the divine punishment of the Jewish nation in the destruction of Jerusalem, supersessionism and the termination of the Mosaic Law, the corrupt state of the Synagogue at the time of Christ, criticism of the Talmud, the ancient Church’s argumentation against the Jews, and the civil laws enacted to protect Christians from Jewish interference.

All Latin quotations are reproduced verbatim from the digitised originals. Long-s typography (ſ) and other archaic letterforms from the early-modern prints have been silently normalised. English translations are provided by the compiler and are marked [Trans.]. Where a quotation is taken from Petavius citing another authority approvingly, this is noted.

I. Deicide: The Jews Arrest, Accuse, and Demand the Death of Christ

Rationarium Temporum, Lib. XI, Cap. XXVII (De Doctrina Temporum, on the Passion Narrative)

“Captus a Judæis, proditori præcunte, ductus est ad Annam, Caiphæ socerum.”

[Trans.] “Arrested by the Jews, the betrayer going before, He was led to Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas.”

(On the arrest of Our Lord in the garden, narrating the chronology of the Passion)

“Accusantibus ergo Christum Judæis, et ut damnaretur instantibus, Pilatus initio restitit.”

[Trans.] “The Jews therefore accusing Christ, and pressing insistently that He should be condemned, Pilate at first resisted.”

(On Pilate’s initial refusal to yield to the demands of the Jews)

“Judæi Christum majestatis, ac perduellionis reum peragere omni ope studebant, adeoque Romanis damnandum, animadvertendumque tradere; quo et auctoritate majori res administraretur; et graviorem illi apud populum concitarent invidiam; atque, ut in eo criminum genere vitari contagio solet, si qui fautores illius ac studiosi forent, vehementius absterrerentur.”

[Trans.] “The Jews strove with all their power to prosecute Christ as guilty of treason and high treason, and consequently to hand Him over to the Romans to be condemned and punished; both that the business might be conducted with greater authority; and that they might stir up against Him a more serious hatred among the people; and, as in crimes of that nature the contagion is wont to be avoided, those who were His supporters and adherents might be the more forcibly deterred.”

(On the Jews‘ deliberate strategy in bringing Christ before the Roman governor)

“Quocirca instanti Pilato ut Christum ipsimet plecterent, negant sibi fas esse.”

[Trans.] “Wherefore, when Pilate pressed them to punish Christ themselves, they declared it was not lawful for them to do so.”

(On John 18:31, the Jews‘ answer to Pilate: “It is not lawful for us to put any man to death”)

“Sciendum est itaque Judæos a Romanis omni gladii jure privatos esse; quod et Maldonatus observat; et idipsum quadraginta circiter annis ante templi excidium Romanos instituisse, docent Hebræi.”

[Trans.] “It must therefore be known that the Jews were deprived by the Romans of all right of the sword; which Maldonatus also observes; and the Hebrews themselves teach that this very thing was established by the Romans about forty years before the destruction of the Temple.”

(Remarking that the Jews lost capital jurisdiction approximately at the time of the Crucifixion — a point the Hebrews‘ own tradition confirms)

II. The Perfidy of the Jews and the Destruction of Jerusalem as Divine Punishment

Rationarium Temporum, Lib. XII, Cap. XXXIII (On the Prophecy of Daniel’s Seventy Weeks)

“Quod subjicit de Romanorum incursione, et Urbis vastatione, non ἀπλῶς, neque incontinenti futurum significat; sed quis deinceps evolutis hebdomadibus, post Christi passionem, rerum sit futurus exitus ostendit; nimirum defectionem populi a Deo et a Christo, Judæorum perfidiam: tum cladem illam, et calamitatem: ac postremo sacrorum omnium internecionem. Quocirca venturum ducem Titum interpretamur.”

[Trans.] “What he adds concerning the Roman incursion and the devastation of the City does not signify it would happen immediately or all at once; but it reveals what would be the outcome of events after the passage of the weeks, following Christ’s Passion; namely the defection of the people from God and from Christ, the perfidy of the Jews: then that destruction and calamity: and finally the extermination of all sacred things. Wherefore we interpret the coming duke to be Titus.“

(Petavius expounding Daniel 9:26–27: the destruction of Jerusalem under Titus as the direct consequence of the Jews‘ rejection and killing of the Messiah)

“Et non erit ei, hoc est ejus; nihil ad eum pertinebit, sed alienus deinceps habebitur sceletatissimus ille Judæorum populus.”

[Trans.] “And it shall not be his, that is of him; nothing shall pertain to him, but that most wicked people of the Jews shall henceforth be considered aliens.“

(Petavius’s commentary on Daniel 9:26 — “et non erit ejus populus” — explaining that after the Crucifixion the Jewish people would be permanently estranged from the Messiah they had slain)

Rationarium Temporum, Lib. XII, Cap. XIX (The Capture of Jerusalem by Titus)

“Igitur Hierosolyma a Tito capta sunt anno Periodi Julianæ 4783… Vespasiano II. et Tito Coss… Idem annus quadragesimus fuit a Passione, ut Eusebius notat.”

[Trans.] “Jerusalem therefore was captured by Titus in the year of the Julian Period 4783… in the consulship of Vespasian II and Titus… This same year was the fortieth from the Passion, as Eusebius notes.“

(Petavius links the destruction of Jerusalem precisely to the fortieth year after the Crucifixion, in accordance with the patristic tradition of Matthew 23:38 — “Behold, your house is left to you desolate”)

III. Supersessionism: The Old Law Terminated by Christ’s Death; The New Testament Established

Rationarium Temporum, Lib. XII, Cap. XXXII (On the Seventy Weeks of Daniel, Ch. IX)

“Nostri non dubitant, quin Sanctus Sanctorum Christus sit Dominus… in ejus Passionem intervallum illud desinere: quoniam Christi potissimum morte vetus lex terminata est, et prophetia suppressa, ac demum sempiterna in humanum genus est invecta justitia.”

[Trans.] “Our [doctors] do not doubt that the Holy of Holies is Christ the Lord… that interval [of the seventy weeks] terminates at His Passion: since by the death of Christ especially the old law was terminated, and prophecy suppressed, and finally everlasting justice was brought upon the human race.“

(The definitive statement that the Mosaic Dispensation was closed by the Crucifixion of Christ, fulfilling Daniel 9:24)

Dogmata Theologica, De Lege et Gratia, Lib. I, Cap. VII

Petavius here cites approvingly the authority of the commentary attributed to St. Ambrose on the nature of the Old Law:

“Lex vetus, non criminis utique nomen est, sed temporis, vel ætatis. Senuit enim, quia cessavit.”

[Trans.] “The Old Law is by no means the name of a crime, but of time, or age. For it grew old, because it ceased.“

(Petavius endorsing the Ambrosian dictum on the supersession of the Mosaic Law)

Dogmata Theologica, De Lege et Gratia, Lib. I, Cap. VII (Petavius expounding Augustine)

“Educto autem populo in monte Sina divinitus acceptam tradidit legem, quod vetus dicitur Testamentum, quia promissiones terrenas habet; et per Jesum Christum futurum fuerat Testamentum novum, in quo regnum cœlorum promitteretur.”

[Trans.] “But when the people had been led forth, He delivered the law divinely received on Mount Sinai, which is called the Old Testament, because it has earthly promises; and through Jesus Christ there was to be the New Testament, in which the kingdom of heaven would be promised.“

(Petavius summarising the Augustinian theology of the Two Testaments, explaining the essential inferiority and provisional character of the Mosaic covenant)

IV. The Synagogue Before Christ: A State of Utter Corruption

Rationarium Temporum, Lib. XI, Cap. LVII (De Pontificibus ceteris ab Herode ad excidium Urbis)

“Perturbatissimus deinceps Synagogæ status, et sacrorum omnium fœdissima corruptela fuit; postquam legitima Pontificum vel successione vel electione labefacta, pessimis artibus, hoc est per ambitionem, et largitionem, summum sibi quisque Sacerdotium comparavit. Itaque plures brevi intervallo Pontifices, vel Pontificum potius specie ac larva subornati homines, tanquam e ripario in proscenium, Sacerdotes ludicri prodierunt; cum ab Regibus, aut magistratibus Romanis, identidem exauctoratis prioribus, novi subrogarentur. Sed in hac Pontificum miscella describenda ideo paullulum operæ collocabimus, quod in eorum tempora Christi natalis, et baptismus; prædicatio ipsa denique mors incurrit.”

[Trans.] “The state of the Synagogue was then most disturbed, and the corruption of all sacred things most foul; after the legitimate succession or election of the High Priests had been undermined, each man acquired the supreme Priesthood for himself by the worst arts, namely by ambition and bribery. And so, in a brief interval, several men adorned rather with the mask and appearance of High Priests than genuine ones, emerging as ridiculous priests from the wings onto the stage, as it were; being appointed in succession by Kings or Roman magistrates whenever the former were repeatedly deposed. We devote a little attention to describing this miserable succession of High Priests because into those very times fell the birth of Christ, and His baptism; His very preaching, and finally His death.“

(The moral and religious collapse of the Jewish priestly establishment in the era of Christ’s earthly life)

V. The Jewish Rejection of Christ as Messiah; Scripture Turned Against the Jews

Rationarium Temporum, Lib. VI, Cap. XI (On the Seventy Weeks and the Jews‘ Refusal to Accept the Messianic Evidence)

“Sacri scriptores argumentationem adversus Judæos, ut Jesum probarent Christum esse… necem illam Judaeo Pontifici, pro figura sive imagine quadam necis olim Christo vero Pontifici Judæorum ac gentium inferendæ.”

[Trans.] “The sacred writers’ argumentation against the Jews, to prove that Jesus was the Christ… that death [of Onias the High Priest] was for the Jewish High Priest a figure or image of the death once to be inflicted on Christ, the true High Priest of Jews and Gentiles.“

(The death of Onias as a typological prefiguring of the Crucifixion, used by Petavius in his argumentation against Jewish rejection of Jesus as Messiah)

“Oportet enim ex Scripturis probari argumentationem adversus Judæos, ut qui scrutantur scripturas, necem illam Oniae Judaeo Pontifici, pro figura sive imagine quadam necis Christo vero Pontifici inferendæ.”

[Trans.] “For it is necessary that the argumentation against the Jews be proved from the Scriptures — as those who search the scriptures — [namely] that the death of Onias the Jewish High Priest [was] a figure and image of the death to be inflicted on Christ the true High Priest.”

(On the use of the Hebrew Scriptures as testimony against the Jews in the matter of Christ)

“Contumaciores e Judæis possunt negare… Dicit non posse Judæos id in ista vaticination Danielis non perspicue agnoscere: cogi eosdem dicit ex hac prophetia probe intellecta, in morte Oniae summi Pontificis prædictam ac reprœsentatam Christi mortem fateri.”

[Trans.] “The more stubborn among the Jews can deny it… He says the Jews cannot fail to recognise this clearly in that prophecy of Daniel: he says they are compelled by this prophecy, rightly understood, to confess that the death of Christ was predicted and represented in the death of Onias the High Priest.“

(On the Jewish inability, on their own terms, to escape the Messianic argument from Daniel 9)

VI. The Jews Persecute the Apostles

Rationarium Temporum, Lib. XIII, Cap. XX (On St. Paul at Jerusalem)

“Ibi captus a Judæis, ac Romano Præsidi traditus est.”

[Trans.] “There he [Paul] was captured by the Jews, and handed over to the Roman Governor.“

(Acts 21:27–28: St. Paul arrested by the Jews at Jerusalem and delivered to the Roman authorities — the same pattern as Our Lord’s Passion)

Rationarium Temporum, Lib. XI, Cap. XIV (On St. Peter and St. Paul)

“Ipse Gentibus, Petrus Judæis prædicaret Evangelium.”

[Trans.] “He himself [Paul] would preach the Gospel to the Gentiles, Peter to the Jews.“

(Acts 15 / Galatians 2: The partition of the apostolic mission — Peter to the circumcision, Paul to the nations)

VII. Criticism of the Talmud

Rationarium Temporum, Lib. XIII, Cap. XIV (On the Calculation of the Sabbath)

“Consulantur Judæorum Talmudica Digesta; vel Tractatus de Sabbato in Misnaiotb, aut in I. Parte Iad R. Maiemonidæ, et id genus Commentarii: nihil istinc aliud afferes, quam Sabbatum, exempli causâ, nonnisi ab vespera, sive occasu Solis feriam sextam consequente procedere.”

[Trans.] “Let the Talmudic Digests of the Jews be consulted; or the Tractate on the Sabbath in the Mishnah, or in the First Part of the Yad of R. Maimonides, and commentaries of that kind: you will extract nothing from there other than that the Sabbath, for example, does not begin except from the evening, that is from the setting of the sun following the sixth day.”

(Petavius appealing to and critiquing the Talmud and Maimonides in the matter of the Jewish computation of the Sabbath)

Rationarium Temporum, Lib. IX, Cap. LX (On the Chronology of the Hebrew Kings)

“Illud Magistrorum in Talmudici commentariis celebre decretum: Annos regum Judæicorum, undecumque tandem inierint, a Nisan incipere, ab eoque procedere: ceterorum vero Regum a Tisri. Tum illud: anni partem pro anno integro usurpari.”

[Trans.] “That celebrated decree of the Masters in the Talmudic commentaries: the years of Jewish kings, from wherever they begin, start from Nisan, and proceed from it: but those of other kings from Tishri. And also: that a part of a year is reckoned as a whole year.”

(Petavius noting a distinctive and tendentious Talmudic chronological convention that creates complications for sacred history)

Rationarium Temporum, Lib. XIII, Cap. XI (Talmudic Evidence on the Passover)

“Tum ex Talmudico Perek rosh hashanah.”

[Trans.] “Then from the Talmudic tractate Perek Rosh Hashanah [the chapter on the New Year].”

(One of several places where Petavius cites the Talmud as a source for Jewish chronological and liturgical practice, in order to refute its calculations)

VIII. Peter of Blois Cited: Adversus Perfidiam Judæorum

Rationarium Temporum, Lib. VI, Cap. XI

Petavius, in the course of his exposition of Daniel’s seventy weeks, cites the medieval treatise of Petrus Blesensis:

“Protulit, inquam, Petrum Blesensem, libro 1. adv. perfidiam Judæor. cap. XII.”

[Trans.] “He cited, I say, Peter of Blois, Book I, Against the Perfidy of the Jews, Chapter XII.“

(Petavius’s reference to Petrus Blesensis’ [Peter of Blois, †c.1211] Contra perfidiam Judæorum as an authority on the messianic evidence from Daniel 9 — cited without disapproval as a standard patristic resource in the adversus Judaeos tradition)

IX. Constantine’s Laws Restraining the Jews

Rationarium Temporum, Lib. XI, Cap. XLVII (The Reign of Constantine)

“Constantinus legem tulit, ut si quis Judæorum Christianum mancipium, aut cujusvis sectæ mercatus circumcidisset, libertatis privilegio qui hoc sustinuisset poteretur. Cod. Theod. L. i. Ne Christ. mancip. &c. Item ne Judæis Christianos ex Judaismo conversos inquietare liceret. Lege v, CCXL de Judæis.”

[Trans.] “Constantine enacted a law that if any of the Jews had purchased and circumcised a Christian slave, or one of any other sect, he who had endured this should obtain the privilege of freedom. Cod. Theod., Law I, Concerning Christian Slaves, etc. Also that it should not be lawful for Jews to disturb Christians converted from Judaism. By Law V, CCXL Concerning Jews.”

(The first Christian emperor legislates to protect converts from Judaism against harassment by the Jewish community — a law Petavius records as a matter of historical fact in his annalistic chronicle)

X. The Theological Enmity Between Synagogue and Church

Dogmata Theologica, De Lege et Gratia, Lib. I, Cap. V (Refuting the Anomorum Heresy)

In this chapter Petavius refutes the Jansenist-Arminian school (the “Anomorum”) who claimed the Mosaic Law was intrinsically evil and that the Synagogue was never the true Church. In the course of his refutation he states his own position on the Synagogue‘s relationship to the New Church:

“Synagogam judaicam, quæ Christi antecessit adventum, et ad vetus Testamentum pertinuit, Dei Ecclesiam non fuisse, docet Apologeticus secundus, capite sexto libri secundi.”

[Trans.] “The second Apologeticus, in chapter six of its second book, teaches that the Jewish Synagogue, which preceded the coming of Christ and belonged to the Old Testament, was not the Church of God.“

(Petavius here reports the heretical claim he will go on to refute — but notably the mainstream Catholic position he defends is itself that the Church of God in the Old Testament was constituted not by the whole Synagogue, but only by the just and holy within it who looked forward in faith to the Messiah)

“Hanc illius sectæ mentem esse… Synagogam vero, sive Judaici populi cœtum, qui Mosaicæ legi, et Testamento veteri serviebat, extra veram Ecclesiam fuisse.”

[Trans.] “Such is the sense of that sect’s doctrine… that the Synagogue, or the assembly of the Jewish people, which served the Mosaic Law and the Old Testament, was outside the true Church.“

(Petavius’s summary of the Anomorum doctrine — a doctrine he proceeds to refute in detail, but whose premise — that the Synagogue as such was not the New Israel — he himself partly accepts, distinguishing the faithful remnant from the carnal mass)

Dogmata Theologica, De Lege et Gratia, Lib. I, Cap. VII

“Per Jesum Christum futurum fuerat Testamentum novum, in quo regnum cœlorum promitteretur.”

[Trans.] “Through Jesus Christ there was to be the New Testament, in which the kingdom of heaven would be promised.“

(The supersessionist principle: the New Covenant in Christ’s blood replaces the Old Covenant of Sinai, carrying with it heavenly rather than earthly promises)

Sources

All texts are in the public domain and are available in full at the Internet Archive. Latin texts cited from the following volumes: