Prooemium
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/15/d/0/q/bon-eccl-prooem
----------------------------------------
### Prooemium of the commentary on Ecclesiastes.

#### General introduction.

1. *Blessed is the man whose trust is in the name of the Lord, and who hath not had regard to vanities and lying follies*. Since, as blessed Dionysius holds, the good is the first object of appetite; and since the good is twofold, namely temporal and eternal, according to that word of the second [epistle] to the Corinthians, the fourth chapter: *The things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal*: it generates in us a twofold love or appetite, namely of *charity* and of *lust*, so that charity is the love returning to eternal things, lust to earthly things. And because upon the agreement and difference of *appetites* there follows the agreement and disagreement of *manners*; and because the *unity of a city* consists in agreement in laws and manners: from this twofold love there arises a twofold *city*, namely the city of the heavenly Jerusalem and the city of Babylon. The foundation of the first is ordered charity, of the second, perverse lust. The heavenly city, therefore, because it is founded in charity, which raises to eternal things, rests in eternal things and places its beatitude in them. But the city of Babylon, which through lust is pressed down to earthly things, places its beatitude in these earthly things. — And so it follows from what has been said, that as the *good* is twofold, so *love* is twofold, so the *city* is twofold, so also *beatitude* is twofold, namely true in eternal things, false in temporal and perishable ones; the Psalm: *They have called the people blessed that hath these things* etc. — And as the love of charity and of lust so stand against each other that they cannot exist together, so do these two beatitudes; Matthew, the sixth chapter: *No man can serve two masters.* Therefore, if anyone wishes to be blessed, it is necessary that he love future goods and despise present ones. Therefore the Holy Spirit through the Psalmist describes the blessed man from this twofold act: from the love of things above, which make a man *blessed*, when he says: *Blessed is the man whose trust is in the name of the Lord*; and from the scorning of earthly things, which make a man *vain*, when he says: *And who hath not had regard to vanities and lying follies.* Truly *blessed is the man whose trust is in the name of the Lord.*

2. But the Lord alone makes blessed, nor is there any other name under heaven that makes blessed. For the Lord alone is blessed *by essence*; the first [epistle] to Timothy, the sixth chapter: *Keep the commandment without spot, blameless, unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, which in his times he shall shew who is the Blessed and only Mighty, the King of kings and Lord of lords.* In him alone, therefore, are beatitude and power by essence, but our beatitude is *by participation*; and according as a thing is by participation, it has its origin from that which is by essence: therefore we are blessed by participating in the fount of beatitude, which is God. Therefore the Apocalypse, the nineteenth chapter: *Blessed are they that are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb.* For first God by espousal communicates beatitude to the Lamb, and consequently to those who are called by the Lamb.

3. He alone also has *affluence*; because of Wisdom, which is God, it is said in a singular way in Proverbs, the third chapter: *She is more precious than all riches, and all the things that are desired are not to be compared with her.*

*Length of days is in her right hand, and in her left hand riches and glory.* But our beatitude is by *the gathering together of all goods*: therefore it is in him alone who has the affluence of all things. Therefore it is at once inferred: *She is a tree of life to them that lay hold on her, and he that shall retain her is blessed*; Wisdom, the seventh chapter: *Now all good things came to me together with her* etc.

4. He alone has *the rest of unchangeableness*, because all things vary, but he varies not; James, the first chapter: *With whom there is no change nor shadow of alteration.* But our beatitude is by the *tranquil possession* of goods gathered together, because without peace there can be no beatitude. Since therefore there is perfect tranquillity in nothing save in God, we cannot then be pacified nor beatified save in God; whence the Apocalypse, the fourteenth chapter: *Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord. From henceforth now, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours.*

5. He alone also has *the immortality of eternity*, as is said in the first [epistle] to Timothy, the last chapter: *Who only hath immortality and inhabiteth light inaccessible.* But our beatitude is by the *interminable duration* of the goods possessed. For a state which can be ended is not blessed, but lies open to misery. Since therefore no one can have interminability save from the fount of immortality, in him alone is he beatified; therefore it is said in the Psalm: *Blessed are they that dwell in thy house, O Lord; they shall praise thee for ever and ever*, because theirs will be everlasting joy; Isaias, the thirty-fifth chapter: *They shall come into Sion with praise, and everlasting joy shall be upon their heads; they shall obtain joy and gladness.* — *Blessed* therefore *is the man whose trust is in the name of the Lord.*

6. But he is not blessed, but rather assuredly *vain*, who hopes in the *world*; for he has regard *to vanities and lying follies*: therefore he becomes vain, according to that word of Jeremias, the second chapter: *Your fathers have gone far from me and have walked after vanity and are become vain*; after vanity, that is, after the world. — For the world with what is its own is vain, because it does not afford *a support to him that leans upon it*; whence Isaias, the thirtieth chapter: *Egypt shall help in vain and to no purpose*, in that it affords no support to him that leans upon it. For it is a staff of reed, upon which if a man lean, it will pierce both his hands; because the world and all worldly things render all who trust in them weak and infirm and unfit for every good work; therefore it is said to *pierce the hands.* Therefore the Prophet, despairing of the help of worldly men, asks of the Lord: *Give us help from trouble, for vain is the help of man.*

7. He is vain also, because he does not afford *fullness to him that contains him*; whence it is said in Ecclesiastes, the fifth chapter: *A covetous man shall not be satisfied with money.* And the reason of this is that all worldly things are vain, and vain things do not fill; whence it is said in Ecclesiasticus, the thirty-fourth chapter: *Vain hope and lying is for a senseless man, as one that catcheth at a shadow and followeth after the wind; so is he that giveth heed to lying visions*; whence, as the wind does not satisfy the belly, nor a shadow fill it, so neither do temporal things, which are the shadow of eternal things, for which the soul is created.

8. He is vain also, because he does not give *rest to him that labours*, and therefore he who labours for worldly things labours in vain; Ecclesiastes, the second chapter: *What profit shall a man have of all his labour, wherewith he laboureth under the sun? All his days are full of sorrows and miseries, neither doth his mind rest in the night; and is not this vanity?* — because he labours in vain, because he does not rest. This world cannot give rest, because it does not itself remain, but rather is ever going round: therefore they who cleave to it must needs go round. Therefore it is said in the Psalm: *The wicked walk round about.*

9. He is vain also, because he does not afford *fruit to him that loves him*; whence it is said in Ecclesiastes, the fifth chapter: *He that loveth riches shall reap no fruit from them; this also therefore is vanity.* He reaps no fruit, but rather loss, because by gaining the world he loses God and loses himself; and according to what is said in Matthew, the sixteenth chapter: *What doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul?*

10. Man, by gaining the world, suffers the loss of his soul. — For the world, by holding out *height*, raises up into *pride*, and through this makes a man become vain, according to that word of Job, the eleventh chapter: *A vain man is lifted up into pride, and thinketh himself born free like a wild ass's colt.* For while he is stretched out to vain things, he is lifted up into vain pride, according to what is said in Job, the thirtieth chapter: *Thou hast lifted me up, and set me as it were upon the wind, and thou hast mightily dashed me.* — The world also, by holding out *sweetness*, inflames to *luxury*, as wine by its sweetness draws to gluttony and through this to luxury; whence third Esdras, the third chapter: *Wine, which prevaileth over all who drink it, leadeth the mind astray. Likewise it maketh the mind of the king and of the orphan*

*vain*, and this by inflaming to luxury, according to that word to the Ephesians, the fifth chapter: *Be not drunk with wine, wherein is luxury.* To this vanity the world drew Solomon; Ecclesiastes, the second chapter: *I said: I will go and abound with delights and enjoy good things; and I saw that this also was vanity.* — The world also, by holding out *sufficiency*, draws to *cupidity*, and through this makes the heart of man vain, according to that word of Proverbs, the twenty-first chapter: *He that gathereth treasures by a lying tongue is vain and foolish.* Not only does avarice make a man *vain*, but even *without a heart*; for it is said in Ecclesiasticus, the tenth chapter, of the covetous man that *he hath cast away his own bowels*; because, according to what the Truth says in Matthew, the sixth chapter, *where thy treasure is, there is thy heart also*; but the treasure is outside: therefore the heart also is outside. — The world also, by holding out *wisdom*, allures to *curiosity*, and through this makes a man vain; whence the Apostle says in the first [epistle] to the Corinthians, the third chapter, drawing it from the Psalm: *The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain*; because, according to that word of Jeremias, the tenth chapter, *every man is become a fool for knowledge.* For this is human wisdom, which knows not *useful* things but *changeable* ones; and therefore the Lord has made it foolish, as is said in the first [epistle] to the Corinthians, the first chapter: *God hath made foolish the wisdom of this world.* Foolish wisdom is vain, because erroneous; whence it is said in Ecclesiasticus, the thirty-fourth chapter: *The divination of error and lying omens and the dreams of evildoers are vanity.*

11. From this fourfold *inward* vanity of the heart a man becomes vain *outwardly* in four ways. — For first the vanity of *pride* renders him *unfruitful*, according to that word of Ecclesiasticus, the sixth chapter: *Extol not thyself in thy thought like a bull, lest perhaps thy strength be quashed, and thou be left as a dry tree in the wilderness*, and so vain as regards the fruit of good work; whereof Jeremias, the tenth chapter: *Their works are vain and worthy to be laughed at; in the time of their visitation they shall perish.* — The vanity of *avarice* renders him *busy*, and through this liable to many labours; Ecclesiastes, the fourth chapter: *Considering I found also another vanity under the sun: there is but one, and he hath not a second, and yet he ceaseth not to labour, neither are his eyes satisfied with riches.* For riches are strange gods, of which Jeremias, the sixteenth chapter: *You shall serve strange gods, who will not give you rest day and night.* — The vanity of *luxury* renders a man *decked out*, because the luxurious are wont to adorn themselves outwardly; whence in their person it is said in Wisdom, the second chapter: *Let us crown ourselves with roses before they be withered*; and this indeed is vanity, because it is said in Proverbs, the last chapter: *Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain*; therefore vain, because *all the glory* and beauty *of flesh is as the flower of the field.* — The vanity of worldly *wisdom* renders a man a *vain talker.* For while the heart errs, the mouth utters vain things; the first [epistle] to Timothy, the first chapter: *The end of the precept is charity from a pure heart and a good conscience and an unfeigned faith, from which things some, going astray, are turned aside unto vain babbling, understanding neither the things they say nor whereof they affirm.* And because they are corrupted and deceived by worldly wisdom, they wish to seduce others by vain words; whence to Titus, the first chapter: *There are many disobedient, vain talkers and seducers, especially they who are of the circumcision, who must be reproved.* — So therefore from the vanity of outward things arises the vanity of hearts, and from this arises the vanity of outward works.

12. According to this, therefore, it is gathered that vanity is threefold, namely of *mutability*, of *iniquity* and of *penalty*, and according to what Hugh of Saint Victor says, « the first is natural and fitting, the second culpable, because perverse, the third penal and wretched »; and one has its origin from another, as has been seen. He therefore who wishes to withdraw from the vanity of *misery* should forsake the vanity of *fault*, and he who wishes to forsake this should not look to the vanity of *changeable* nature, but should hope in and cleave to the *divine*, and so he will be blessed. *Blessed* therefore *is the man whose trust is in the name of the Lord.*

13. Since therefore it belongs to the wise man to teach the way of coming into beatitude, this was the chief thing and worth the labour for the wise Solomon; but because, as is clear from what has been said, for the acquiring of beatitude it is necessary that eternal things be loved and present things despised, and further that one know how to converse fittingly *in the midst of a depraved nation*; therefore he published three books, namely *Proverbs*, in which he teaches the son to converse wisely in this world; *Ecclesiastes*, in which he teaches to despise present things; and the *Canticle of Canticles*, in which he teaches to love heavenly things, and above all the Bridegroom himself.

#### On the fourfold cause of this book.

14. So therefore it is clear what the *end* of the book of Ecclesiastes is. And since « the end imposes necessity on the things which are for the end »; the end being the contempt

of present things, he treats of them, not under the aspect by which they attract, but under the aspect by which they are despised: they attract under the appearance of good, but they are despised under the appearance of the vain. Therefore it follows from this that the *matter* of this book is the vanities of present things, or the things themselves in so far as they are vain, that it may be better put, because he proves vanity as a kind of property in things, first proposing, secondly proving, thirdly concluding. Whence he proceeds by persuading and proving it, namely the threefold vanity which has been spoken of above, namely of *nature, of fault* and *of misery.* — And from this the *manner of proceeding*, or form, is clear. For it has a manner of proceeding singular among the other books; for he proceeds as a preacher, setting out the opinions of divers men, now of a wise man, now of a fool, so that from the opinions of many one truth may shine out in the minds of the hearers. — From what has been said it is concluded who ought to have been the *efficient cause.* For in this book it is taught that pleasures, riches, honours and curiosities are to be despised as vanities. And because no one is believed about the contempt of such things unless he has had experience — for a poor man who has not had riches is not believed about the contempt of them, because *he has not had experience*, and therefore does not *recognize* them — it was fitting that he should be such a one as had experience of all these things, namely one who was powerful, rich, luxurious and curious or wise. We read of no other, nor have we heard of one, who had these things in such excellence as Solomon had them; therefore he above all others was the more fitting author of such a book. — It is clear therefore what the *material, formal, efficient* and *final* cause of this book is.

But alongside these four causes four particular questions may be asked.

### Question I. *On the end of the book of Ecclesiastes.*

First concerning the *end.* For it is said that the end of the book is *the contempt of the world.* That it is so determined,

1. is proved by that which is said in James, the fourth chapter: *The friendship of this world is an enemy of God*; but everything which is an enemy to God, it is good to despise.

2. Likewise, the first [epistle] of John, the second chapter: *Love not the world, nor the things which are in the world.*

**Sed contra:** 1. The praise of the work redounds to the craftsman; therefore the contempt of the work also redounds to the same; therefore he who despises the world despises God: either therefore this world was not made by God, or it is not to be despised.

2. Likewise, Proverbs, the sixteenth chapter: *The Lord hath made all things for himself*; therefore all things are ordered to God; but that which is ordered to an end is not to be despised, but to be accepted and loved: therefore this world, and the things which are in it, are to be loved.

**I respond:** it must be said that, as Augustine and Hugh hold, this world is as it were a certain ring given by the bridegroom to the soul herself; and the bride can love in two ways the ring bestowed upon her by the bridegroom, namely with a *chaste* love and with an *adulterous* one. Love is *chaste* by which she loves the ring in memory of the bridegroom and for love of the bridegroom; *adulterous*, by which she loves the ring more than the bridegroom; and this the bridegroom cannot but take ill. For as love is twofold, so is hatred or contempt twofold, because « as often as one of a pair of opposites is spoken of, so also is the other ». Contempt of the ring, as though it were a small and worthless gift, redounds to the bridegroom; but contempt of the ring, as though it were reckoned nothing in comparison with the love of the bridegroom, that is to the glory of the bridegroom; and of this contempt it is said in the Canticle, the last chapter: *If a man should give all the substance of his house for love, he shall despise it as nothing.* Of this contempt the discourse here is; and thus the objections are clear.

### Question II. *On the matter of the same.*

Afterwards it is asked concerning the *matter*, and it is said that here the subject treated is *vanity.*

**Sed contra:** 1. Every science is of the good and the true; but *the vain* takes away goodness and truth: therefore of it there is no science.

2. Moreover, it seems that there is no vanity in things, because it is said in Genesis, the first chapter: *God saw all the things that he had made, and they were very good*: therefore if all things are very good, nothing is vain.

3. Moreover, that is vain and to no purpose which is not ordered to an end, as, if someone were to bathe himself in order that the sun might fail, he would work in vain, because this is not orderable to that; but all creatures tend to the highest good in their own way, as Dionysius says,

and Boethius, that all things desire the good, and also the Philosopher: therefore nothing among all things is found to be vain.

4. Moreover, if the vain is found, this science too is founded upon it as upon its subject; and what is founded upon the vain is vain: therefore this science is vain.

**I respond:** for the understanding of the foregoing it can be said in one way thus, that *the vain* is spoken of in two ways: in one way *simply*, and so it takes away the true and the good, and such a thing is not in the universe. There is another way in which a thing is *vain* by *comparison with its initial term*, because it is from nothing; and in this way it is not repugnant to the good, but rather one and the same thing is good and vain: *good*, because from good and to good; *vain*, because from nothing and, left to itself, tending to nothing; and such vanity has goodness under science, and therefore of such a thing there can be science and doctrine. — And by this an answer can be given to all the objections, because they proceed as though they were about the vain taken simply.

But this solution does not solve, because Ecclesiastes does not treat of things according as they are from nothing, but rather according as they are desired by men; and moreover he treats of the vanity of *fault*, which is a privation: therefore it must be said otherwise.

It must therefore be answered otherwise, and it must be said that as *the true* is spoken of in three ways, so also is *the vain* which is opposed to it, by the rule stated above. In one way a thing is said to be *true* according as it *is convertible with being*, and so it is said that every being is true; and so *the vain* opposed to the true is called *non-being*, as we say that the chimaera is *non-being.* — In another way a thing is said to be *true* according as beyond entity it adds *an order to operation and to an end*, as *true wine* is said of what has the true operation of wine, so a *true man* of him who has the operation due to man, and this is the operation of virtue; and so *the vain* is spoken of by the privation of ordering to an end, and so all sins and abuses are vain. — In another way a thing is said to be *true* according as it adds over and above being *an unmixedness with non-being*, in that it has in no way a potency to it; and so that is said to have *true being* which has *immutable being*; and in this way *the vain* opposed to the true is that which is mutable and changeable. And so every *creature is vain, because subject to vanity*, that is, to mutability.

Since therefore the vain is spoken of in three ways: in one way by the privation of *being simply*, in another way by the privation of *being ordered*, in a third way by the privation of *being unchangeable*; of the first there is in no way science nor doctrine, unless perhaps it have *being in its cause* and according to that be *known* and *taught*; and so it is not vain; but according as it is *vain*, neither *per se* nor *per accidens* is there science of it. — Of the second way there is not science *per se*, but *per accidens.* For as medicine is the science of the healthy and the sick, of the healthy indeed *per se*, but of the sick *per accidens*, as the Philosopher holds; so of fault or sin there is a theoretical science, but by reason of virtue. — Of the third way, namely of the mutability of the creature, there is science *per se*, as is clear of the motion of the sun and of the spheres and of other things. — In this book, therefore, the subject treated is the vanity of *mutability* or of nature, because it is fair and fitting, and the vanity of *fault*; of the other vanity, namely of *utter privation*, the subject is not treated, because of it there is neither science nor doctrine.

1. As to what is objected first, that every science is of the good and the true; it is true *per se*, but of the vain there can also be science by reason of the true; and he who knows true principles knows false ones also; and it is likewise with the sick and the healthy, and likewise in the matter proposed.

2. 3. 4. As to what is objected, that creatures are not vain, because they are very good and ordered to an end; it must be solved that they are not called *vain* through a defect of good or of order, but through a defect of *unchangeable being*; and so every creature is vain, nor is it so vain but that it has truth and goodness; and therefore the science and doctrine concerning it is true.

### Question III. *On the manner of proceeding in the same.*

Likewise, it is asked concerning the *manner of proceeding*; for it has been said that he acts and speaks in divers persons, namely of a fool and of a wise man.

**Sed:** 1. As is said in Ecclesiasticus, the twentieth chapter, *a parable coming out of a fool's mouth shall be rejected*: therefore an opinion stated in the person of a fool is not to be heeded: therefore if the opinion of the sacred books is to be heeded, he ought not to speak in the person of a fool.

2. Likewise, the things which he says in the person of a fool and of a carnal man are to be rejected; but it is not known when he speaks,

whether he says this in his own person or in another's: therefore it is not known what is to be held in this book and what rejected: therefore this science is a way to error. But the canonical books ought to purge error: therefore this book is to be taken away from the canon.

**I respond:** it must be said that to say something in the person of a fool or of a carnal man is done in two ways: either to approve it, or to reject it and to show it to be vain. In the first way it does not befit the science of truth; in the second way it does befit it, as if someone wished to reject an error and first set it out and afterwards destroyed it. And in this way he speaks, not in the first; and therefore he is not to be reproved but rather commended, because he rejects things that are to be rejected.

2. As to what is objected, that it is not known when he speaks in his own person; it must be said that the other side of a disputation cannot be known until one comes to the opinion and to the determination, because in the solution it is known what is chosen and what rejected. So I say that Ecclesiastes proceeds as if disputing right up to the end of the book, and at the end gives the opinion, when he says: *Let us all hear together the conclusion of the discourse: Fear God, and know that for every error God will bring thee into judgement.* In which word he condemns all the opinions of the foolish, the carnal and the worldly. Whence what agrees with that opinion he says in his own person, but what disagrees, in the person of others: and therefore this book cannot be known unless it be heard entire.

### Question IV. *On the efficient cause of the same.*

It can also be asked, lastly, concerning the *efficient cause*; and it has been said that the efficient cause was Solomon. But that it is not fitting that such a one should be the author, seems so:

1. Because he himself was a sinner and carnal; but when a carnal man preaches spirituality, he rather scandalizes than edifies: therefore this book is rather apt to generate scandal than edification.

2. Likewise, in the Psalm it is said: *But to the sinner God hath said: Why dost thou declare my justices?* Therefore if Solomon was a sinner, then he sinned in declaring the divine justice.

3. Moreover, a good author produces faith, whence *the argument from authority* has its force; therefore a bad author produces no faith; but the books of sacred Scripture are for generating faith: therefore etc.

To this it must be answered that, as Jerome says, according to what the Hebrews hand down, this book was Solomon's while he was doing penance; and because God does not cast away the penitent but rather accepts them, according to this Solomon was not in a reprehensible state when he wrote this book.

Another answer can be given: that the Holy Spirit speaks true and good things not only through the good, but even through the wicked; whence the Lord himself in the Gospel says: *What they say, do ye; but what they do, do ye not*; whence he prophesied most expressly through Balaam also, and so through Solomon, carnal though he was, he said many good things.

2. As to what is objected, therefore, that he himself sinned; it must be answered that the gift of wisdom had been committed to him most especially among others; and because he was bound not to hide the talent of the Lord, he had to teach the people of the Lord both by word and by writing, especially since he had been appointed to their government. Whence he did not sin in this, that he taught, but in this, that he did not dispose himself as he ought.

3. As to what is objected, that the book is not to be believed, since the author is not worthy of faith; I respond: as we believe the Prophets, that they spoke not of themselves but through the Holy Spirit, so also in all the books of Scripture, that they were published at the dictation of the Holy Spirit; whence the goodness of the person makes for no greater or lesser faith, supposing this, that he spoke through the Spirit. And because it is established for us that Solomon was filled with the spirit of wisdom, as is clear from third Kings, the third chapter; therefore the Church without hesitation receives his books.

---