Hilary, Deacon of the Roman Church, who lived in the fourth Century, whose Work is printed, and generally cited under St. Ambrose’s Name, has made a Comment upon all St. Paul’s Epistles. Only it is to be observed, that he is not the Author of the Comment upon the Epistle to the Hebrews, for that is taken from St. Chrysostom. The whole is printed in the second Tome of the new Edition of St. Ambrose. He lived under Pope Liberius, and was an intimate Friend of Lucifer of Cagliari; as St. Jerom takes notice, in the 14th Chapter of Ecclesiastical Writers. It is not strange therefore that there should be something unorthodox in his Work, which is in some Places uncorrect, and in others manifestly erroneous.
We must not rob St. Chrysostom of the honour of having particularly excelled in his Comments upon St. Paul: As he abounded with the Spirit of this great Author, one would take him, in reading him, for another St. Paul, transported even to the third Heaven: He had the same Zeal, and spoke the same Language with as much force and eloquence.
He has written two and thirty Homilies upon the Epistle to the Romans, which are in Greek in the third Tome of the Edition in England, p. 1. in Greek and Latin, in the fourth Tome of the Paris Edition. Four and forty Homilies upon the first to the Corinthians, with a fine Preface; and thirty upon the second, in the third Tome of the Greek Edition, p. 243. and in the fifth of the Paris Edition. A Comment upon the Epistle to the Galatians, tom. 3. of the former Edition, p. 763. and the fifth of the other, p. 776. Four and twenty Homilies upon the Epistle to the Ephesians, tom. 3. of the first Edition, p. 763. the fifth of the second, p. 864. Fifteen Homilies upon the Epistle to the Philippians, tom. 4. of the first Edition, p. 1. and 5. of the second, p. 1. Twelve upon the Epistle to the Colossians, tom. 4. of the first, p. 89. and 5 of the second, p. 147. Eighteen upon the first Epistle to the Thessalonians, and five upon the second; in tom. 4. of the first Edition, p. 161. and the 6th of the second, p. 262. Eighteen upon the first to Timothy, together with a Preface. Ten upon the second, ibid. p. 149, and 402. Six upon the Epistle to Titus, ibid. p. 381, and 619. Three upon the Epistle to Philemon, ibid. p. 411, and 770. Four and thirty upon the Epistle to the Hebrews, ibid. p. 427, and 694. which are said to have been collected after his death by a Priest, who was his Friend. As for the two Homilies upon the first to the Corinthians, in tom. 3. of the Basil Edition, they are not his, but by some uncertain, tho very ancient Author. All that he has written on St. Paul, has been printed separately at Verona, in Greek only, in three Volumes in fol.
Theodoret has likewise signalized himself in what he has written upon St. Paul: His Comments are in the fourth Tome of F. Simond’s Edition, in Greek and Latin. Theophylact, and OEcumenius, generally follow St. Chrysostom, as their Master. Theophylact’s Comment in Greek, and in the Latin of Philip Montanus’s Translation, was printed at London, in 1636, in fol. and in Latin at Cologn, 1575, in 4to. at Rome, 1472, in fol. under the name of Athanasius of Alexandria.
That of OEcumenius, in Greek, at Verona, 1532, in fol. was printed both in Greek and Latin at Paris, 1631. in two Volumes in fol.
Primasius, Bishop of Adrumetum in Africk, who lived under the Emperor Justinian, and was a resolute Adherent to the Doctrine of St. Austin, has written upon all St. Paul’s Epistles. Gannai, who had the care of printing this Comment, has joined to it a long Preface, which he addresses to Francis I. M. Simon speaks of it in his Critical History of the New Testament, chap. 26. p. 365.
Venerable Bede’s Comments are composed in the very Words, as well as Sentiments, of St. Austin. Baronius in the Year 562. 15, and 16, asserts Bede not to be the Author of the Comment on St. Paul ascribed to him, but Peter, Abbot of Tripoli, mentioned by Cassiodorus, in chap. 8. of his Divine Lectures. Dom. Mabillon, in the Benedictine Acts of the third Century, Part the first, p. 560. shews that this Judgment is illgrounded; and restores that to Bede, which this Annalist would rob him of. It must be confess’d, however, that the Comment which goes under his Name in the fifth Tome of his Works, is not the true one compos’d by him. F. le Long believes it to be by Florus the Deacon. Dom. Mabillon had the Person’s Manuscript who made it; and has published something of it in the first Tome of his Analecta, p. 15, &c.
Sedulius Scotus, or the Irishman, has borrowed what he says from Origen, and St. Jerom; or rather from Pelagius, (expunging, however, his Errors) from St. Ambrose, or Hilary the Deacon, and St. Austin. His Comment is in the sixth Tome of the new Bibliotheca Patrum, p. 494. and had been before printed at Basil, in 1528. Usher and Trithemius confounded him with Sedulius the Poet, who lived long before him. For he whom we are speaking of, lived in the ninth Century; and may be the same whose Psalms we have in Greek, written with his own hand, in the Library of St. Mihiel. Dom. Montfaucon speaks of them in his Paleographia, p. 235.
Haymo of Halberstadt, who copies from Primasius, wrote a Comment, printed at Rome; in 1598. according to Du Pin, who says it was very different from that of Primasius. It had been printed before at Paris, in 1533, in 8vo. and 1550, in 4to.
Radulphus of Flay, or St. Germer, the same as Ralph the Black, mentioned by us upon Leviticus, wrote a Comment, which as yet is only in Manuscript in the King’s Library, and in that of St. Germain des Prez. He was not Monk of Fulda in Germany, as some have thought; but of Flay, Flaviacensis, in the Diocess of Beauvais, about 1157.
St. Anselm, or rather Hervæus. The Comment on St. Paul, in the Works of St. Anselm of Canterbury, of the Cologn Edition by Picard, 1612, in fol. is attributed to Hervæus of Limoges, a Benedictine Monk of Dole, in the Diocess of Bourges. Some suppose Anselm of Laon to have been the Author of it. Hervæus lived about 1130, towards the latter end of the 11th Century; as Dom. Mabillon says in his Annals, tom. 3. p. 357.
Lanfrank, Abbot of Beck, and afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury, has written upon all St. Paul’s Epistles. See the Bibliotheca Patrum, tom. 18. p. 621. and the New Edition of his Works, by Luke d’ Achery. It is very certain that Lanfrank has written upon St. Paul; but it is no less certain that the Comment which goes under his Name, both in his Works, and in the Bibliotheca Patrum, is not the true one, that being still in Manuscript only, as D. Mabillon, and D. Massuet, assure us: ibid. tom. 5. p. 260. See what M. Simon says of it in his Critical History of the New Testament, ch. 27.
Remy, Bishop, or perhaps Monk only of Auxerre, whose Comment is to be seen in the Bibliotheca Patrum, tom. 8. p. 883. where he is called only Remy of Reims, to whom likewise it is attributed, as well as to Remy of Lions; tho it certainly be by Remy of Auxerre. It was printed separately at Mentz, in 1614, and at Cologn, 1618, in fol. by John B. Villalpandus, says Lipenius, in his Bibliotheca Theologica. This Comment is only a Collection exracted from the Fathers. The Author lived in the ninth Age.
Theodulus, Priest in Celosyria, or some Author under his Name; in the same Bibliotheca. P. P. tom. 8. p. 587. There is only what he wrote upon the Epistle to the Romans: and he may, possibly, be Theodulus of Italy; who understood Greek and Latin. We are not certain in what time he lived. What he published, was only an Exposition, or Catena, which had been before printed at Basil, 1537, in 4to. and in the Orthodoxography. John Albert Fabricius says that it is the same with that Published under the Name of OEcumenius, in Greek and Latin, at Venice, 1556, in 8vo.
Rabanus Maurus, Archbishop of Mentz, has written thirty Books of Comments upon all St. Paul’s Epistles, wherein he cites the Fathers, who preceeded him; such as Origen, St. Ambrose, or Hilary the Deacon, St. Jerom, St. Austin, &c. St. Bruno, Founder of the Carthusians, or perhaps another Author under his Name, has also written upon all St. Paul’s Epistles. Dom. Massuet, in our Annals, shews very evidently that St. Bruno, the Carthusian, is Author of the Comment on St. Paul, which we find in his Works; not Bruno of Ast, or Signy, much less any other Author under his Name. See what we have said of him upon the Psalms.
Peter Lombard, Hugh de S. Victor, St. Thomas Aquinas, and Gregory of Rimini, are well known, and have each of them their particular merit. In all these Commentators there is little new. Peter Lombard’s bard’s was printed at Paris, 1535, in fol. and 1555, in 8vo. See ibid.
The Explanation of Gregory of Rimini, is lost, or is only in Manuscript. See their Title in the Index.
Pelagius’s Comment, printed often in St. Jerom’s Name, had led many into error. Sedulius Sestons, as we have said, has almost all along copied him; but has suppress’d what too manifestly favoured of Pelagianism. Abbot Rupert, Primasius, and even Rabanus Maurus, have also frequently followed him. St. Jerom’s great Reputation imposed upon them; and their Ignorance in the Rules of Criticism made them receive, without sufficient examination, whatever they found to be inscrib’d with his Name.
Pelagius’s Comment is only upon thirteen Epistles of St. Paul; printed in the fifth Tome of the new Edition of St. Jerom, p. 925. and in the Appendix of St. Austin’s Works by le Clerc, at Amsterdam, 1703, in fol. If it be not by Pelagius, it is certainly by some Pelagian.
Modern Catholick Commentators on St. Paul.
Of the Moderns, we have Thomas Cajetan, in the great Collection of his Works, elsewhere mentioned by us. Ambrosius Catharinus, printed with what he has written upon the Canonical Epistles, at Paris, 1566, in fol. the third Edition.
John Gannai, ibid. 1633, in 8vo. the sixth Edition, is with what he published upon the same Epistles, and the Revelations.
Catharinus endeavours principally to explain the Mystery of Predestination, and Grace. Benedict. Justiniani, before his Explanations, has inserted Prolegomena; wherein he treats of the Apostleship, of the Epistles of the Apostles, and in particular of St. Paul, in two Volumes in fol. printed at Lions, in 1612, 1613. He was an Italian, of Genoa, a Jesuit; and died in 1622. In the Preface to the Synopsis, he is styled a learned and copious Commentator.
Sebastian Schmid frequently commends him in his Comment upon the Epistle to the Hebrews; and sometimes, as he thinks, corrects him. M. Du Pin, and M. Simon, make the same Judgment of him; one in his Bibliotheque Ecclesiastique, the other in his Critical History of the New Testament.
Dionysius the Carthusian, Nicholas Lyranus, Cardinal Hugo, and Claude Guiliaud. The largest, and most correct Edition of what this last wrote upon St. Paul, is that of 1550. printed at Paris, in 8vo. We have spoken of him upon St. John.
Gaspar Contarini, a Cardinal, who died in 1542, has written Scholia upon all St. Paul’s Epistles; which are printed in the Collection of his Works, at Venice, 1589. the second Edition, in fol. He was of Venice, of a Patrician Family; studied at Padua under Pomponatius; was made Cardinal in 1536, by Paul 3. and died at Bologna, in 1542. being not quite sixty Years of Age. Paul Jovius, and several learned Men, have made his Elogium.
James le Fevre, his Comment was printed at Paris, 1531, in fol. the third Edition; at Basil, 1527, in 4to. and at Antwerp, 1540. with an Apology; wherein he shews, that the old Version of St. Paul’s Epistles is not by St. Jerom. We have spoken of him above.
Francis Titelman, besides his Comment upon all St. Paul’s Epistles, has written in particular upon the Epistle to the Romans; the whole printed at Paris in 1553. the fourth Edition; and at Antwerp, in 1529, in two Volumes in 8vo.
Peter Stevartius did not write upon all the Epistles of St. Paul. What he has perform’d on each Epistle, was printed in two Volumes in 4to. at Ingolstadt, between 1588, and 1611. He was a Fleming of Liege, Professor at Ingoldstadt; and died in 1621. of his Age 71.
The Prolegomena and Comments of Alphonsius Salmero upon St. Paul, make the 13, 14, and 15th Tomes of his Works upon the Scripture. We have set down the Edition of them elsewhere.
That of Cornelius à Lapide upon St. Paul, is particularly esteemed among his other Comments, tho very diffuse, according to his custom. It was printed separately at Lions, in 1683, in fol. the fourteenth Edition.
Laurentius Valla, Erasmus, Lucas Brugensis, and Estius, with what they wrote upon the New Testament. This last was Provost of St. Peter’s at Doway, and Chancellor of that University. He was of Gorcum in Holland; and died in 1613. at the age of 72. His Comment on St. Paul’s Epistles is thought to be the most complete one that we have: there is a great abundance of solid Learning in it; but, perhaps, he may be a little too diffuse. Estius died before he had finished his Work. He carried it on as far the 5th Chapter of St. John’s first Epistle; and the 7th Verse. The Edition of this excellent Comment was the care of Bartholomæus Petri, who from time to time made some Additions to it; and, at last, perfected what Estius could not finish. The last Edition of Estius’s Comment is of 1679. in two Volumes in fol. Fromond is, as it were, an excellent Abridgment of Estius; the last Edition whereof is of Louvain, 1663, in fol. See above.
The Analyses of F. Mauduit, at Paris, 1702, in two Volumes in 8vo. the second Edition, augmented; the Explanations of F. Carrieres, above-mentioned; Godeau’s Paraphrase, see the Article of French Versions; Erasmus, and D. Lewis Riclot’s Paraphrase on St. Paul, are in good repute. This last was a Benedictine, of the Congregation of St. Vanne; and his Work was printed at Paris, in 1718, in three Volumes in 12mo.
Joan. Bence Doct. Sorbon. Manuale in omnes Pauli Epistolas; Lugd. 1683, in 8vo. Vol. 2. We have already spoken of this Author. See his Title in the Index.
Joan. à Gorcum, Presbyteri, Epitome Commentariorum Guillelmi Estii, & Cornelii à Lapide, in omnes D. Pauli Epistolas; Antuerpiæ, 1619, and 1623, in 8vo.
F. Alexander, a Dominican, mentioned by us on the four Gospels, wrote a literal and moral Comment; printed at Paris; in 1710, in fol. It is not loaded, like many others, with an excessive deal of tedious Criticism; tho the Author produces the different Versions which are worth remarking, and the several Opinions of the ancient and modern Commentators. He prefers that Explanation 477 Text, explains and illustrates it; and a Comment, for the difficult Places. In the front of it is a Preface and an Introduction. This Work is generally esteemed by the Learned.
F. Nicolai, a Dominican, put out a new Edition of St. Thomas Aquinas’s Comment upon all St. Paul; printed at Lyons, in 1689, in fol. In this he corrected a great number of Faults which had crept into the first Editions, and added Notes of his own to it.
M. Himbert published Illustrations for the better understanding St. Paul’s Epistles in the literal Sense; at Paris, 1690, in 12mo. These Illustrations are reduced to three principal Heads. The first consists in relating the Occasion and Motives, which induced the Jews, who had embraced Christianity, to return to the mistake of Justification by the Works of the Mosaick Law. The second contains the Means made use of by them for establishing this Error. The third the Remedies put in practice by St. Paul to preserve the Faithful from it; and to cure those who were already infected by it.