Lecture 5 Lectio 5 Isaiah’s prophecy Prophetia Isaiae ^1:22 Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled what the Lord spoke by the Prophet, saying: [n. 139] ^1:22 Hoc autem totum factum est, ut adimpleretur id quod dictum est a Domino per Prophetam dicentem: [n. 139] ^1:23 behold a virgin will be with child, and bring forth a son, and they will call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. [n. 140] ^1:23 ecce virgo in utero habebit, et pariet filium, et vocabunt nomen eius Emmanuel quod est interpretatum, nobiscum Deus. [n. 140] 139. The Evangelist had set out before that the mother of God was found with child of the Holy Spirit, and above he confirmed this by the angelic revelation. Here he confirms it by the prophet’s foretelling it; hence he says, now all this was done that it might be fulfilled what the Lord spoke by the Prophet. 139. Praemiserat Evangelista, quod mater Dei inventa est in utero habens de Spiritu Sancto, et hoc supra probavit per angelicam revelationem, hic probat per prophetiae praenuntiationem; unde dicit hoc totum factum est ut adimpleretur quod dictum est a Domino per Prophetam. And it should be known that this little part can be brought in here in two ways. For Chrysostom would have it that the angel said all this and brought in the prophecy, too. And the reason is that he wished to show that it had been foretold from of old, lest it seem that he was suddenly foretelling something new; who makes now what is to come (Isa 48:3), according to another translation. Et sciendum quod ista particula dupliciter potest introduci hic. Chrysostomus enim vult quod totum hoc dixerit angelus et prophetiam introduxerit. Et ratio est, quia ipse, ne quod praenuntiabat videretur novum, subito voluit ostendere quod ab antiquo praenuntiatum erat; Is. XLVIII, 3: qui fecit iam quod futurum est, secundum aliam translationem. Others say, and I believe better, that these words, namely all this was done, are the Evangelist’s words. For the words of the angel are ended at for he will save his people from their sins (Matt 1:21). And the Evangelist brings them in for the sake of three things. First, to show that the Old Testament is about Christ; to him all the prophets give testimony, that by his name all receive remission of sins, who believe in him (Acts 10:43). Second, so that they might more easily believe Christ; for if you did believe Moses, you would perhaps believe me also; for he wrote of me (John 5:46). Third, to show the conformity of the Old and New Testaments; which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ (Col 2:17). Alii dicunt, et credo melius, quod istud, scilicet hoc totum factum est etc., sunt verba Evangelistae. Nam ibi terminantur verba angeli: et ipse salvum faciet et cetera. Et inducit ea Evangelista propter tria. Primo, ut ostendat quod Vetus Testamentum est de Christo; Act. c. X, 43: huic omnes prophetae testimonium perhibent, remissionem peccatorum accipere per nomen eius omnes qui credunt in eum. Secundo ut facilius Christo credant: Io. V, 46: si crederetis Moysi, crederetis forsitan et mihi: de me enim ille scripsit. Tertio ad ostendendum conformitatem Veteris et Novi Testamenti; Col. II, 17: quae sunt umbra futurorum, corpus autem Christi. 140. But that you may know what is contained in this prophecy, you should know that the angel announced three things. For first he said, for he who is born in her (Matt 1:20); second, she will bring forth a son (Matt 1:21); third, and you will call his name Jesus (Matt 1:21). These things are contained in the prophecy in order. And first he confirms what he says, ‘behold a virgin’; second, ‘will be with child’; third, ‘they will call his name’. Therefore it was of the Holy Spirit that she conceived while still a virgin. And this is what is said in the prophecy: behold a virgin will conceive (Isa 7:14); it will bud forth and blossom, and will rejoice with joy and praise (Isa 35:2). And similarly the ‘virgin will bring forth a son’, because her virginity was not harmed in any way by giving birth; and there will come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and a flower will rise up out of his root (Isa 11:1). Christ is certainly the flower. Therefore in no way is her virginity harmed. 140. Sed ad hoc quod sciatur quid in ista prophetia contineatur, sciendum quod tria annuntiat angelus. Primo enim dixit quod in ea natum est etc.; secundo pariet filium; tertio vocabitur nomen eius Iesum. Ista per ordinem in prophetia continentur. Et primum probat quod dicit ‘ecce virgo’; secundo ‘pariet autem’; tertio ‘et vocabitur’. Ergo de Spiritu Sancto erat, quod per virginitatem concepit. Et hoc est, quod dicitur in prophetia, ecce virgo concipiet; Is. XXXV, 2: germinans germinabit, et exultabit laetabunda, et laudans et cetera. Item ‘virgo pariet filium’, quia in pariendo in nullo laesa est virginitas; Is. XI, 1: egredietur virga de radice Iesse, et flos de radice eius ascendet et cetera. Christus quidem flos est. Ergo in nullo laesa est virginitas. 141. There follows ‘and they will call his name Emmanuel.’ 141. Sequitur ‘et vocabitur nomen eius Emmanuel.’ But it is asked, why does not this agree with the angel’s words, by saying, and you will call his name Jesus? Sed quaeritur, quare non consonat hoc cum verbis angeli, dicendo et vocabitur Iesus? One should say that this promise had been made to the Jews, who would have salvation from Christ’s coming. And Jesus is interpreted as ‘savior’, which is the same as ‘Emmanuel’, God with us. Dicendum, quod ista repromissio facta fuit Iudaeis, qui ex adventu Christi salutem haberent. Et Iesus ‘salvator’ interpretatur, quod idem est quod ‘Emmanuel’, nobiscum Deus. For God is with us in four ways: through the assumption of nature, and the Word was made flesh (John 1:14); through the conformity of nature, and in habit found as a man (Phil 2:7); through bodily interaction, afterwards he was seen upon earth, and conversed with men (Bar 3:38); and through spiritual interaction, I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world (Matt 28:20). Est enim Deus nobiscum quatuor modis: per naturae assumptionem, Io. I, 14: Verbum caro factum est, per naturae conformitatem, quia in omnibus similis, Phil. II, 7: in similitudinem hominum factus, et habitu inventus ut homo, per conversationem corporalem, Bar. III, 38: post hoc in terris visus est, et cum hominibus conversatus est, per spiritualem conversationem, infra ult., 20: ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus usque ad consummationem saeculi. 142. But one should ask, concerning the letter, why the Evangelist does not use the same words as the prophet, but rather uses the name Jesus. 142. Sed quaerendum, circa litteram, cur Evangelista non utitur eisdem verbis cum propheta, sed utitur nomine Iesu. But one should say that he spoke in the same spirit. Still, Jerome says that the Evangelist said, will be with child, because he was speaking of something already accomplished. Sed dicendum, quod eodem spiritu loquebatur. Tamen Hieronymus dicit quod ideo Evangelista dixit habebit, quia iam de facto loquebatur. 143. Similarly, one should ask why it says in Isaiah, his name will be called (Isa 7:14), while it says here, and they will call. 143. Item quaerendum, cur in Isaia dicitur et vocabitur, hic autem dicitur et vocabunt. But Jerome says that it says here, they will call, because what the angel first named by announcing (Luke 2:21), the apostles afterwards named by preaching and magnifying. That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow (Phil 2:10). Sed Hieronymus dicit, quod hic dicitur vocabunt, quia quod primo angeli vocaverunt annuntiando, Luc. II, 21, postea apostoli vocaverunt praedicando et magnificando. Ut in nomine Iesu omne genu flectatur etc., Phil. c. II, 10. 144. Which is interpreted as, God with us. But it is asked, who added this interpretation of the prophecy God with us, the prophet or the Evangelist? And it seems that it was not the Evangelist, because he did not need this, since he wrote in Hebrew. 144. Quod est interpretatum nobiscum Deus. Sed quaeritur, quis apposuit hanc interpretationem prophetiae nobiscum Deus, propheta, an Evangelista? Et videtur quod non Evangelista, quia hac non indiguit, quia scripsit in Hebraeo. But one should say, in one way, that ‘Emmanuel’ is a composite name, so the Evangelist interpreted it even in Hebrew. Or one should say that the one who first translated this Gospel from Hebrew interpreted it. Sed dicendum, uno modo, quia ‘Emmanuel’ est nomen compositum, ideo Evangelista illud etiam in Hebraeo interpretatus est. Vel dicendum, quod ille, qui primo transtulit de Hebraeo, interpretatus est. 145. And one should note that the Gloss says that there are three species of prophecy: namely that of predestination, that of foreknowledge, and that of threatening; and these differ. 145. Et notandum, quod in Glossa dicitur quod triplex est species prophetiae, scilicet praedestinationis, praescientiae et comminationis; et differunt. For prophecy names a foretelling of those things which are distant, i.e., in the future; but there are some things in the future which only God does; some things which, although God does them, still they come about through us and through other creatures as well; further, there are some things which God in no way does, such as evil. The foretelling of those things which only God does is called the prophecy of predestination, such as the conception of the Virgin; hence behold a virgin will conceive (Isa 7:14) is a prophecy of predestination. But those things which come about by secondary causes can be considered in two ways. First, according as they are in the foreknowledge of God, e.g., concerning Lazarus; for if someone were to consider the natural causes, he would say that Lazarus would never rise, and he would speak truly; while nevertheless he was to be raised up according to the order of divine foreknowledge. Therefore, when a prophecy foretells according to what is in the divine foreknowledge, it is always fulfilled; but when it foretells according to inferior causes, it is not always fulfilled, as is clear when Isaiah said to Ezechias, take order with your house, for you will die, and not live (Isa 38:1). Prophetia enim dicitur praenuntiatio eorum, quae sunt procul, idest futurorum; sed futurorum quaedam sunt quae solus Deus facit; quaedam vero, etsi Deus facit, tamen fiunt per nos et per alias etiam creaturas; quaedam autem sunt quae nullo modo Deus facit, ut mala. Praenuntiatio illorum, quae solus Deus facit vocatur prophetia praedestinationis, sicut conceptus Virginis; unde illud Is. VII, 14: ecce virgo concipiet, est prophetia praedestinationis. Sed ea quae fiunt a causis secundis, possunt dupliciter considerari. Primo, secundum quod sunt in praescientia Dei, verbi gratia de Lazaro; si enim aliquis consideret causas naturales, diceret quod numquam surgeret, et verum diceret: cum tamen deberet resuscitari secundum ordinem divinae praescientiae. Ergo quando prophetia est praenuntiatio secundum quod est in praescientia divina, semper impletur; quando autem secundum ordinem causarum inferiorum, non semper, sicut patet Is. XXXVIII, v. 1, quando Isaias ad Ezechiam dixit: dispone domui tuae, quoniam morieris tu, et non vives et cetera. 146. But does not a prophecy of foreknowledge impose necessity? 146. Sed numquid prophetia imponit necessitatem praescientiae? And one should say that it does not, because a prophecy is a particular sign of God’s foreknowledge, which foreknowledge does not impose necessity on the things foreknown, because he considers future things in his own presentiality. For whatever is done is present to God, since his gaze extends to every time; for if I see something present, my gaze does not impose necessity, as when I see someone sitting. And we have understood the prophecies which are brought into this book in this way. Et dicendum quod non; quia prophetia est quoddam signum divinae praescientiae, quae non imponit necessitatem rebus praescitis, quia considerat futura in sua praesentialitate. Quicquid enim agitur, est Deo praesens, quia eius intuitus se extendit ad omne tempus; si enim video aliquid praesens, non imponit necessitatem meus intuitus, sicut quando aliquem sedere video. Et hoc modo istas prophetias, quae in isto libro inducuntur, intelleximus. 147. For one should consider that there have been three errors. 147. Considerandum est enim tres errores fuisse. One is that of the Manichees, who say that no prophecies about Christ are found in the Old Testament; and whatever has been brought into the New Testament from the Old is wholly by corruption. Unus Manichaeorum dicentium, quod in toto Veteri Testamento non invenitur prophetia de Christo: et quicquid inductum est in Novo Testamento de Veteri, totum est ex corruptione. This is against what is said, Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the Gospel of God, which he had promised before, by his prophets, in the holy Scriptures (Rom 1:1–2). And what is said about the prophets of the Jews is clear below: whose are the fathers, and of whom is Christ, according to the flesh (Rom 9:5). Contra quod Rom. I, 1: Paulus servus Christi, vocatus apostolus, segregatus in Evangelium Dei, quod ante promiserat per prophetas suos et cetera. Et quod loquatur de Iudaeorum prophetiis, patet infra c. IX, 5: quorum patres, ex quibus est Christus secundum carnem et cetera. 148. Another error was that of Theodore of Mopsuestia, who says that none of those things which are brought in from the Old Testament are literally about Christ, but are made to fit, as when they bring in that line from Virgil: 148. Alius fuit Theodori dicentis, quod nihil eorum quae inducuntur de Veteri Testamento, sunt ad litteram de Christo, sed sunt adaptata, sicut quando inducunt illud Virgilii he hung remembering such things, and remained pierced talia pendebat memorans, fixusque manebat For this is made to fit with Christ. And then that it might be fulfilled should be explained in this way, as though the Evangelist had said: and this can be made to fit. hoc enim adaptatum est de Christo; et tunc illud ut adimpleretur, debet sic exponi, quasi diceret Evangelista: et hoc potest adaptari. But against this: that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me (Luke 24:44). And one should know that in the Old Testament there are certain things which are referred to Christ and are said only of him, as this line, behold a virgin will conceive, and bear a son (Isa 7:14); and this one: O God my God, look upon me: why have you forsaken me? (Ps 21:2). And if someone were to set down another literal sense, he would be a heretic, and heresy is accursed. But since not only the words of the Old Testament, but even its deeds signify things about Christ, sometimes some things are said literally about others, but are referred to Christ insofar as they bear a figure of Christ, as it is said about Solomon: and he will rule from sea to sea (Ps 71:8), for this was not fulfilled in him. Contra quod Lc. ult., 44: oportet impleri omnia quae scripta sunt in lege Moysi, et prophetis, et Psalmis de me. Et sciendum quod in Veteri Testamento aliqua sunt quae referuntur ad Christum, et de eo solo dicuntur, sicut illud ecce virgo in utero concipiet, et pariet filium, Is. VII, 14; et illud Ps. XXI, 2: Deus, Deus meus, respice in me, quare me dereliquisti? et cetera. Et si quis alium sensum litteralem poneret, esset haereticus, et haeresis damnata est. Sed quia non solum verba Veteris Testamenti, sed etiam facta significant de Christo, aliquando dicuntur aliqua ad litteram de aliquibus aliis, sed referuntur ad Christum, inquantum illa gerunt figuram Christi, sicut de Salomone dicitur: et dominabitur a mari usque ad mare etc.; hoc enim non fuit impletum in eo. 149. The third error is that of the Jews. 149. Tertius error fuit Iudaeorum. One should know that the Jews especially object to this Scriptural text, because in Hebrew there is not virgin, but alma, which is the same as young woman. Hence literally these things are not said of Christ, but of Emmanuel, or of a certain son of Isaiah, according to others. Sciendum autem, quod Iudaei specialiter obiiciunt contra istam auctoritatem, quia in Hebraeo non habetur virgo, sed alma, quod idem est quod adolescentula. Unde ad litteram non sunt dicta de Christo sed de Emmanuel, vel de quodam filio Isaiae, secundum alios. But Jerome objected against these men, and proved that it could not be said of the son of Isaiah, because he was already born when this was said. Likewise, no famous person who was called Emmanuel is found to have lived at that time. Again, that a girl should conceive is not a sign. Hence Jerome says that alma is an equivocal word, and sometimes indicates age, and sometimes a thing hidden, and then it means a virgin zealously guarded; and thus it means here. Sed contra hos obiicit Hieronymus: et quod de filio Isaiae non potuerit dici, probatur, quia iam erat natus, quando hoc dictum fuit. Item non invenitur aliquis famosus fuisse tempore illo, qui vocaretur Emmanuel. Item non est signum quod iuvencula pariat. Unde dicit Hieronymus, quod alma est aequivocum, et significat quandoque aetatem, quandoque absconditam, et tunc significat virginem studiose conservatam; et sic significat hic. Again, the Jews objected that this was given as a sign. Two kings came out against Achaz (Isa 7:3), and by giving this sign to Achaz the prophet promised that they would be freed from these kings. Item obiiciunt Iudaei, quod illud datum fuit ut signum. Is. VII, 3: venient duo reges contra Achaz etc., et promisit quod liberarentur ab his dando hoc signum ad Achaz. But one should say that he gave this sign not only to Achaz, but also to the house of David, because he says, hear therefore, O house of David (Isa 7:13); as though the Prophet had said, the Lord will help you against this king, because he will do much greater things, since there will be not only the liberation of this man, but of the whole world. Sed dicendum, quod dedit hoc signum non solum ad Achaz, sed etiam ad domum David, quia dicit audite ergo, domus David; quasi dicat Propheta: Dominus adiuvabit te contra istum regem, quia ipse multo maiora faciet, quia non solum ipsius liberatio erit, sed totius mundi. 150. But let us return to the text. Now all this was done. 150. Sed revertamur ad litteram. Hoc totum factum est. On the contrary, the angel had promised many things, namely he who is born in her, is of the Holy Spirit (Matt 1:20), and she will bring forth a son (Matt 1:21), and again, you will call his name. But this had not all been done. Sed contra. Angelus multa praemiserat, scilicet quod in ea natum est etc., pariet etc., et iterum, vocabitur et cetera. Hoc vero non totum factum erat.