Wisdom (5)

5. WISDOM is put for the Eternal Wisdom, the Word, the Son of God. ‘Twas Prov. iii. 19.by Wisdom that God established the Heavens, and founded the Earth; ‘twas this Wisdom that the Lord possessed from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the Prov. viii. 22, 23.earth was. It existed before God created any thing, and was present with the Creator at his Production of sensible Beings. It was established over all the Creatures, &c. See also the Book of Wisdom,¹ and of Ecclesiasticus,² where are found magnificent Commendations, not only of Wisdom as a Virtue, but also as the Word, the only Son of God, begotten before all Worlds.

James iii. 14, 15, &c.6. St. Paul³ speaks of the Wisdom of the Flesh, of the Wisdom of this World, of Human Wisdom, as opposed to true Wisdom, to the Wisdom of Jesus Christ, to the Wisdom of the Spirit. And St. James speaks of an earthly Wisdom, that is sensual and devilish, opposite to the Wisdom that is from above, which is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. It judges not, it dissembles not, &c.

The Book of Wisdom, or, as the Greeks read,⁴ The Wisdom of Solomon, is quoted by some of the Ancients by the Greek Name Panaretos; which is as much as to say, a Collection, or Treasury of all Virtue, or Instructions to bring us to Virtue. The principal End that the Author of this Work proposes to himself, is, to instruct Kings, to teach the Great ones, and the Judges of the Earth.⁵ He directs his Discourse to them, and accommodates his Rules to their Occasions. To incline them the more effectually to the Study of Wisdom, he borrows the Name of Solomon, he speaks to them in the Name of this great Prince, and proposes him to them as a Pattern: He shews them the Methods of attaining Wisdom, and proves that the Means of arriving at it are not out of their Reach. He threatens the Wicked with the Judgments of God, he shews the Despair they will express, in another Life, at seeing the Happiness of the Just: He proves the Advantages that Men obtain by Wisdom; he gives the Character, not only of Wisdom, as a Virtue, but also of the Eternal and Uncreated Wisdom. Lastly, in no other Book of Scripture do we find nobler and greater Conceptions of the Deity, than in this Book.

The original Text of this Work is in Greek; and it does not appear that it was ever extant in Hebrew, notwithstanding what some Authors have thought to the contrary.⁶ We find none of those Hebraisms, or Barbarisms, which are hardly to be avoided by those who translate a Book from the Hebrew. The Author wrote Greek very well: He had read Plato, and the Greek Poets. He even borrows Expressions which are peculiar to the Wisd. xix. 20. Gr. Wisd. vii. 13. Wisd. i. 14.Greek Poets, as Ambrosia, the River of Forgetfulness, or Lethe, the Kingdom of Pluto, or Hades, &c. His Style abounds with Epithets, is swelling, obscure, poetical, and figurative. The Jewish Authors had some Knowledge of him, and have quoted him sometimes; but what they cite from him is taken out of the Greek. He always quotes the Scripture according to the Septuagint, even when they depart from the Hebrew; which is a Proof that this Book was written originally in Greek. The Latin Translation that we have of this Book is not of St. Jerome. ‘Tis the ancient Vulgate, made use of by the Church at the Beginning, and made from the Greek long before St. Jerome. This holy Doctor acknowledges, that he did not meddle with the Translation of this Work.⁷ The Translation is very ancient, and keeps very close to the Text. But tho’ he lived in an Age, wherein the Latin Tongue was in its Purity, yet he often makes use of Words that are not used by the best Authors in that Sense. For example, he puts Honestas for Riches, Honestius for a rich Man, Respectus, or Visitatio, for the Punishment which God inflicts upon wicked Men; Supervacuitas, for Vanity, or Vain-glory; Animalia supervacua for dangerous or noxious Animals.

The Author of this Book is entirely unknown. Some ascribe it to Solomon,⁸ and imagine that this Prince first wrote it in Hebrew, and that it was afterwards translated into Greek: And that the first Original being lost, the Greek has since been esteemed as an Original. They observe, that in this Work Solomon shews himself, if not more clearly, at least as conspicuously, as in any other of his Works that are not disputed; that the Book is not unworthy of this wise Prince; that the Fathers have often quoted it under his Name; and that in the Title it bears the Name of Solomon. But if this Book really belongs to this Prince, how comes it that the Jews never admitted it as canonical? How comes it not to be found in the Hebrew? that no one has ever seen it in this Language? that the Translator says nothing of it, and that the Style shews no Tokens of the pretended Original? See St. Jerome, in Prolog. Galeatus.

St. Austin⁹ once thought, that the Book of Wisdom, and that of Ecclesiasticus were owing to the same Author; but it was not long before he discovered his Mistake: He does not declare himself concerning the Author of the Book of Wisdom,¹⁰ but he acknowledges, that learned Men are of opinion it is not Solomon’s; nor is it probable that it can belong to Jesus the Son of Sirach, the Author of Ecclesiasticus. St. Jerome¹¹ says, that some of the Ancients imputed it to Philo the Jew: Nonnulli scriptorum veterum hunc esse Judæi Philonis affirmant: Which Words have afforded much Matter of Dispute. Some have thought,¹² that Philo the Jew of Alexandria, whose Works are extant, and who lived under the Empire of Caius, was the Author of the Book of Wisdom. Others¹³ look upon this Opinion as very dangerous, because Philo was never looked upon as an inspired Writer. Lastly, others¹⁴ pretend, that the Philo mentioned by St. Jerome is more ancient than the Alexandrian Jew.

And indeed, we hear of three Philo’s. The first, (as they say) lived under Ptolemy Philadelphus. The second, is Philo of Biblos, who is cited by Eusebius and by Josephus. The third is Philo the Jew, who lived in the Time of the Emperor Caius. The first Philo is unknown, nor has any Author mentioned him. The second was a Pagan, who wrote the History of Phœnicia, in Greek. Philo the Jew is well known. The Book of Wisdom could not be composed by the first; because, probably, he never existed: Nor by the second, because he was a Heathen: Nor by the third; because he was never received as an inspired Author; nor was so much as a Christian, tho’ he lived at a Time when Christianity was the only true Religion. Besides, the Style of Philo and that of this Writer are very different. Lastly, we know none of the Fathers, either before St. Jerome or since, that have ascribed this Work to Philo; nor does St. Jerome himself ascribe it to him.

Grotius¹⁵ will have it, that this Book must belong to some Jew, who wrote it (as he thinks) in Hebrew, after the time of Esdras, and before the Pontificate of the High-Priest Simon. He thinks for this Reason it was placed before the Book of Ecclesiasticus. It was translated, as he says, by some Christian Author, who understood Greek well enough, but who took a great deal of License in his Translation, and without confining himself to the Words of his Original. He there adds some Strokes, and some Sentiments derived from Christianity. Thence it proceeds, that the universal Judgment is taken Notice of there, the Happiness of the Righteous, the Punishment of the Wicked, in a manner more distinct and express than we observe generally in the Books of the ancient Hebrews. These are the Sentiments of Grotius, which it were to be wished he had given some Proofs of; for an Hypothesis so singular required the Confirmation of Reasons and Arguments.

Cornelius à Lapide¹⁶ believes this Book to have been written in Greek by a Jewish Author, after the Captivity of Babylon, and about the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus King of Egypt. He even suspects that it might be one of the Seventy Interpreters that writ it; for Aristæus relates, that this Prince proposed to every one of these Interpreters some Question concerning the good Government of his Dominions. This Book, being an Instruction for Princes, might have been written upon this occasion. He adds, that the Opinion which ascribes it to Philo, might easily have obtained by the following equivocal Terms. Solomon had two Names, Solomon and Jedidiah; the last of which signifies The Friend of God, and in Greek the Word Philo, or Philos, signifies a Friend. The Rabbins, when they quote Philo, give him the Name of Jedidiah. It was imagined, that because the Title of this Book was The Wisdom of Philo, that this signified Philo the Jew, whereas it stood for Solomon. This is the Conjecture of this Author, which must be acknowledg’d to be ingeniously imagin’d.

The Book of Wisdom was not always received by the Church as Canonical. The Jews never acknowledged it: Several of the Fathers,¹⁷ and several particular Churches, left it out of their Canon: Even Lyranus,¹⁸ and Cajetan,¹⁹ did not admit it as indisputably Canonical. But many of the ancient Fathers have own’d it, and quoted it as Holy Scripture. The sacred Authors of the New Testament have sometimes alluded to it. The Councils of Carthage, in 397; of Sardis, in 347; of Constantinople, in 692; of Toledo, in 675; that of Florence, in 1438; and, lastly, that of Trent, Sess. IV. have expressly received it into the List of Canonical Books. The Reader may consult such Authors as have commented upon this Work; and particularly Lorinus, Cornelius à Lapide, and our Preface to the Book of Wisdom.

The Book of Wisdom is ascribed by the Mussulmans to their Locman. See the Article LOCMAN, before. They tell us, this famous Writer was not a Nabi, or Prophet, but only a Hakin, or a Wise-Man. The Author of Wisdom often

VOL. III. puts The Word of God, for God himself; and I doubt not but that St. John the Evangelist had him in view. Philo has used it in the same Sense, which might easily have given occasion to suspect, that Philo was the Author of the Book of Wisdom.

Read this article in its place on the printed pages