Monthly Archives: July 2012

Notes about Bede's works on the Book of Acts

Textual problems in translating Bede’s initial Commentary on Acts, and his later Reflection on the Book of Acts.

The goal of translating a small portion of both books into English is to discover Bede’s position on the doctrine of tongues.

The Commentary on Acts was written in 709 or 710, the second one is not known, but a number of years later.

It is found from comparing a section of Acts chapter 2 in both works that they seldom overlap in thought. Both can stand on their own without the necessity of the other. The initial commentary is directed to a lay audience and dealing with broad themes. The second one is very detailed, and gets into points of Latin grammar — because of this, translating into English became very difficult. The English language does not have the same grammatical components, and it forced me to switch into a mode of dynamic translation.

The Reflection on the Book of Acts does not the contain the same literary style that Bede used in the initial commentary on Acts, or other Latin works I am familiar with such as, De Temporibus Liber which is known in English as the The Book of Times and De Temporum Ratione, On the Reckoning of Time — but then these two books are considered heavily redacted and should not be used as a guide to Bede’s original works.

Although the thought in Reflection appears to be of Bede origin, the text may represent some editorial upkeep.

On the other hand, this may be incorrect. The progression between his two books; The Book of Times, and On the Reckoning of Time may indeed reveal that this is an unaltered Bede writing. The Reckoning of Time is a progression from his earlier work, The Book of Times. Bede was more technical, and concise in the structure of The Reckoning. His Reflection work may just be the same thing.

I would prefer that others would have already completed the textual criticism, and that it would be easily available for the public to find, requiring me to only build on such a thesis in order to complete my task. However, it demonstrates how Patristic writings have been understudied, that it forces me to do both.

In the case here on the doctrine of tongues, it can be supposed that Bede is indeed the author, but some of the literary features are later. Moreover, the alterations do not appear to change the intent of the text.

Bede's Initial Commentary on Acts 2:1-18

The Venerable Bede on the doctrine of tongues. An English translation of his initial commentary on the Acts of the Apostles chapters 2:1-18.

Translated by Charles A. Sullivan from MPL. Vol. 92 Bedæ Venerabilis: Super Acta Apostolorum Expositio. Col. 945-948


Bede’s Initial Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles

Chapter 2

“And when the days of Pentecost were completed, they were all together in the same place,” that they are being narrated to have been up high. For whoever longs to be filled by the holy Spirit, it is necessary that they should climb above the residence of flesh to the contemplative mind. Just like also the forty days, by which the Lord after His resurrection had dwelled with the disciples, they note the Church rising together of those who live abroad, so on the fiftieth day that the holy Spirit is being received, a completion of blessed peace, that the work of the temporary Church will be repaid in an eternal 10,(1)Latin:denario. Lidell and Scott, Perseus Version, wrote it meant a coin, whether silver or gold, with a specific value, or simple 10, but later could generally mean money. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=denario&la=la#lexicon He will suitably pronounce. For the calculated number 40 adds 10 more itself from its equal parts, and it makes 50. Half of 40 is 20, the 4th by that of five,(2)Latin:”em” I don’t know what this word actually means in this context, perhaps it is a manuscript error, but can’t think it could be anything other than 5 5th x 8, 8th x 5, 10th x 4, 20th x 2, 40th x 1. For 20,10, 8, 5, 4, 2, and 1 make 50.(3) He is adding up these consecutive numbers to equal 50. Bede was well versed in math, though his audience did not have such an ability, so he used very basic math. Was Bede dabbling in numerology here, or was it showmanship? It could be a little of both. For it is easy to figure-out the form of this calculation, seeing the present strife is the joy of the 50th(4)jubilæi: the year of Jubilee according to the Jews. Bede is being symbolic here using 50 to mean liberation, which can only happen through trial and struggle. to us,(5)awkward Latin: quoniam praesens conflictus gaudium nobis jubilæi. It is missing the verb, which I assume is suppose to have est as if secretly generating the imperishable, from which the Apostle teaches: “For that which is at the present moment and the trivialness of our trouble, works greatness in us, the eternal weight of glory above measure” [I Corinthians 4:17](6)My translation. The Douay-Rheims is not always best in communicating the Latin translation in contemporary English, and I am trying to translate as Bede understood the text to mean.

But the reality is our supreme happiness of the body and soul, we are the ones who pride ourselves in immortality that is being nourished in the eternal vision by the substance and blessing of the Trinity.(7)nos immortalitate gloriantes summæ et beatæ Trinitatis æterna visione satiari. for we exist in four well known distinguished parts of the body. In the inner man, from every heart, soul and mind together, we desire to love God. And this is the perfect 10 of life, that we are to be joyful in the present vision of divine glory. The truth is about to be observed adjoining history that is in the writings of the early authorities, the day of Pentecost, that is, the 50th, which the Law was given, was reckoned after the slaughter of the lamb. This is also not from the passion of the Lord, but as the blessed Augustine explained, 50 days from His resurrection, which the holy Spirit had been sent, it is being reckoned, that, with the evidence taking place of the long standing proof.(8)”qui, redeunte signi veteris exemplo” I am not sure exactly what he means here and my translation remains rough. He [the Spirit] Himself most evidently consecrated the day of the Lord with His arrival. In that critical moment of time, the Passover day of the Lord demonstrated that it must be celebrated. For as it is here, and as well as God appeared in a vision of fire, as it says in Exodus, “And all Mount Sinai was on a smoke: because the Lord was come down upon it in fire.”(9)Douay-Rheims. Exodus 19:18

“And suddenly a sound was made from heaven as if of a mighty wind coming” etc. The Lord indeed appeared by means of fire as the blessed Pope Gregory explains, but made through inner(10)per semetipsum locutionem interius fecit. It is important to both Bede and Gregory the use of interius. This is important. speech itself. And neither the God of fire, nor the sound made a noise but by that which was externally produced, this was expressed in respect to what was conducted on the inside. That it rendered within the disciples as ones who had come on fire, with zeal and skill in the word, the outside showed the fiery tongues. Therefore, the elements had been brought up in accordance with an outward sign, that the persons(11)corpora were experiencing the fire and the sound by the true invisible fire and the hearts were being taught by the voice without sound.

“And there appeared to them parted tongues, as it were of fire:”(12)Douay-Rheims That is to say the holy Spirit appeared in fire and languages, because everyone whom he filled are on fire together and these ones are producing phrases. Certainly these ones are on fire from it, and are speaking from it. At the same time it also demonstrates that the holy Church has opened wide the boundaries throughout the world. [The Church] is going to speak in the voice of all the nations.

“And it(13)The Latin clearly means “it” and not “they” as some English translations have sat upon each one of them.” What does it mean that it sat? It is the proof of royal power. Or also that his past labour(14)Vel certe quia requies ejus indicatur in sanctis.– Bede is connecting to a previous paragraph where current suffering brings on holiness. is to be publicly displayed in holiness.

“And they began to speak in various languages.” How the arrogance of Babylon scattered the unity of languages, [and] the humbleness of the Church gathers it back. Moreover, the variety of languages spiritually signifies the gifts of different graces. The holy Spirit is certainly not being inconsistently understood, for that reason the gift of tongues had been given to men before anything else, by which in the form of human wisdom on the outside and becoming learned, and being taught, that it was to demonstrate how easy it can be to make wise men by means of the wisdom of God which is inside them.

“Now there were dwelling at Jerusalem, Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.”(15)Douay-Rheims I think it is appropriate to seriously ask, who were at this place, and from where were the captive Jews? Seeing that those who had been in Egypt or Babylonia had already been freed. While the Jews had not yet come to the Romans in captivity, and clearly the revenge itself was to be imminent about the crime that was committed against the Saviour.(16) licet jam et ipsa immineret ultrix commissi de Salvatore piaculi – I have my doubts that this is actually the original part of Bede’s work. it appears to be a later insertion. Therefore it remains to be done, so that captivity is to be understood to have been done under Antiochus(17)Antiochus Epiphanes that he certainly destroyed not much time before.(18) Almost 200 years before.

“Because that every man heard them speak in his own tongue.”(19)Douay-Rheims. One should ask in this place why each one was hearing in their own language those speaking the great things of God?

Either [one of the two]: those that they were speaking such in the various words of every language generated what they spoke, that is, each of them here now, yet now again a different language being spoken, so that it was to proceed through every language.

Or rather(20)utrum… an — “Or rather” is from the Latin “an” which Whitaker’s Works says: “can it be that (introduces question expecting negative answer/further question)” which should then be interpreted as a hypothetical position that Bede did not agree. However, Lidell and Scott at Perseus “Sometimes the opinion of the speaker or the probability inclines to the second interrogative clause (cf. infra, II. E.). and this is made emphatic, as a corrective of the former, or rather, or on the contrary.” I think the context along with Lidell and Scott is the correct implementation here. was it more astonishing to this than their speech that whatever language was being spoken, these ones proclaimed in the hearing of each and every person, they were understanding according to their own language. That with the word of grace by whichever apostle in the Church teaches (In fact it was necessary to speak one [language] and one speech with leaving the rest silent in order to reach everyone who heard).(21)This parenthesis exists in the original Latin copy of MPL. I interpret this parenthetical text to be a later emendation by a copyist/editor The speech itself was to possess this in its own power, that while the hearers were of the diverse nations, each one according to their language coming from this one speech itself, which had been uttered by the Apostle, that it entered upon the hearer and seized the intellect. Except perhaps according to this, it seemed those who are hearing to be a greater miracle than those who speaking.

“And those who inhabited Mesopotamia, and Judaea and Cappodocia.” In this place it signifies Judaea not entirely gentile but part of those, this is the tribe of Judah and Benjamin, for one may see clearly the distinction Samaria, Galiliee, Decapolis, and of others in the same province concerning the regions. Although that everyone were speaking in the one language of Hebrew, nevertheless, the native style of each speaking had a distinctiveness. From where also Peter in the passion of the Lord with respect to a Galilean is being identified by that which is his speech.

“Jews also, and proselytes.”(22)Douay-Rheims. Proselytes, that is, they called them strangers, who, these ones derive origin from the gentiles, they were wishing rather to choose circumcision and Judaism, like Achior in the Book of Judith is described to have done. Then not only, do they say, are they Jews by birth that had visited from different regions, certainly too it is about those having been born with a foreskin, they adhere to the custom.(23)The uncircumcised. What exactly Bede means about the uncircumcised is not clear. It could mean the Jew who was born uncircumcised and continue to promote what Bede thinks is an unnecessary practice, which he frowns upon, or that those gentiles who have converted, ie: the uncircumcised, adhere to the custom too.

“But others mocking, said: These men are full of new wine.” Mocking although they were giving true witness to something belonging to the ancient mysteries. That not in old wine, while in the Church wedding, but they had been filled with the freshness of the spirit’s grace. Indeed, now it had come the new wine in new skins, while the Apostles not in the oldness of letter, but were to resound in the newness of the Spirit of God’s great work (Rom. 7).(24) Romans 7:6 “so that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.” Douay-Rheims

“For these are not drunk, as you suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.”(25)Douay-Rheims The holy Spirit is about to proclaim glory in the indivisible way of the Trinity, He conveniently descended in the third hour. And because what was written above, “They were persevering in prayer,”(26) amplified from Acts 1:14 they correctly feel the holy Spirit in the hour of prayer that it was to be pointed out by the readers(27) legentibus: organized community prayer in Bede’s time was associated with a reader(s). Lector is a better known synonym. that the grace of the holy Spirit is not easily to be felt. Neither can the mind, which is based on worldly senses, rise up in the thought of heavenly things. For three times to which Daniel in the day did he bow his knees, and it was chosen(28) legitur to worship at the third, sixth, and ninth hours, it is understood by the Church. Whereby also the Lord is the one who sends the holy Spirit in the third hour, sixth — rises to the cross, and the ninth — lays his own soul down. It has been deemed most worthy to recount and sanctify these same hours for the rest of us.

“I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh:”(29) Douay-Rheims The word of offering shows the abundance of excess, because the holy Spirit exists through the agency of grace which brings about pardon, not as formerly the power with the prophets and priests only, but in everyone everywhere in either sex within relations and persons. For that is to be in all flesh, it was explained in accordance with the prophet.(30) Joel 2:28

“And they will prophecy,” (it says) “your sons and daughters,” etc. . . . “and I will show wonders in heaven above, and a sign on earth below.”(31) portions of Acts 2:17 and 19, my translation. Wonders in heaven, a new star appeared with the Lord being born, while going up to the cross, the sun was darkened, and heaven itself was covered in darkness. A sign on the earth, because the earth trembled by Lord sending the Spirit, it uncovered tombs, moved stones, and brought up the many revived bodies of the saints who had gone to sleep.■


Need information on Bede and the subject matter? The following link may help: The Venerable Bede on the Doctrine of Tongues.

References   [ + ]

The Venerable Bede on the Doctrine of Tongues

The goal of this multi-article study is to find out and articulate Bede’s understanding of the Church rite of tongues.

The secondary purpose is to collate, digitize the Latin texts, and translate into English any works completed by the Venerable Bede relating to this doctrine.

There have been two discoveries so far. Bede’s initial commentary on the Book of Acts chapter 2:1-18, and Bede’s reflections on his commentary on the Book of Acts 2:1:18. The latter book done later on in his life.

Although it is only two books that have been discovered that has any substance to the topic, the results are rich. If more texts are found by Bede relating to the topic, it will be added to this multi-series.

The Venerable Bede was an 8th century monk, priest, astronomer, mathematician, historian, theologian, poet, and song writer. He lived in Northumbria, which is now Northern England/South-Eastern Scotland.

Bede’s works are a standard above most Christian authors, and this is why he is credited with being a ‘Doctor of the Church’ — a title rarely given.

The manuscript used for digitizing text, and the translations are from Migne Patrologia Latina. The text appears fairly straightforward. The presence of a few emendations of a later copyist/editor are noticeable. Word usage tends to be inconsistent, but then Bede is playing with an older language Latin text and is attempting to explain it in terms relevant to his audience. A closer look would be required to explain how much changes later copyists and editors have done to this work. However, it is safe to say the intent still belongs to Bede, and this work reflects a medieval mindset. Therefore textual criticism isn’t of serious consequence in this situation.

An initial translation and analysis of Bede’s initial commentary on the Book of Acts was originally published under The Neo-Tongues Movement: Part 3 which has been removed from circulation. It no longer fits in with the changes in the structure of the Gift of Tongues Project. This supersedes any account found in Google cache, any file repository, print-out, or download relating to the Venerable Bede on the topic of tongues done previously by me.

The commentary does not always follow verse-by-verse. Bede, or the copyist/editors, simply ignore some verses because of its irrelevance. This English translation is an exact reproduction of 2:1-18.

Here are the links to all his works related to the doctrine of tongues so far:

Take advantage of the footnotes. There are important notes and information in them.

Bede on the Dogma of Tongues: The Latin Texts

The Venerable Bede’s commentaries on the Acts of the Apostles, chapter 2:1-18, Latin only. For the English translations go to The Venerable Bede on the Dogma of Tongues and scroll down to the bottom for the links.

There are two commentaries written on the Book of Acts by Bede — the initial commentary on the Book of Acts, and a later reflections on his commentary on the Book of Acts. Both are provided below in the Latin as found in Migne Patrologia Latina.

The Initial Commentary on the Book of Acts

MPL. Vol. 92 Bedæ Venerabilis: Super Acta Apostolorum Expositio. Col. 945-948

Caput II

[Col. 945] Et cum complerentur dies Pentecostes, erant omnes pariter in eodem loco. Hoc est in coenaculo, quod superious ascendisse narrantur. Quicunque enim [Col. 946] Spiritu sancto adimpleri desiderant, carnis domicilium necesse est mentis contemplatione transcendant. Sicut autem quadraginta dies, quibus Dominus post resurrectionem suam cum discipulis conversatus est, conresurgentem Christo peregrinationis hujus designant Ecclesiam, ita dies quinquagesimus, quo Spiritus sanctus accipitur, perfectionem quietis beatæ, qua labor Ecclesiæ temporalis denario remunerabitur æterno, congruenter exprimit. Nam et ipse numerus quadragenarius æqualibus suis partibus computatus addit amplius ipsum denarium, et facit quinquaginta. Quadragenarii quippe numeri dimidium est viginti, quarta pars decem, quinta octo, octava quinque, decima quatuor, vigesima duo, quadragesima unum. Viginti autem, et decem, et octo, et quinque, et quatuor, et duo, et unum, quinquaginta faciunt. Cujus computi facillime patet figura, quoniam praesens conflictus gaudium nobis jubilæi, quasi latenter generat sempiternum, Apostolo dicente: Quod enim in praesenti momentaneum est et leve tribulationis nostrae. supra modum in sublimitate aeternum gloriae pondus operatur in nobis (II Cor. IV). Vera est autem nostra beatitudo corporis et animæ, nos immortalitate gloriantes summæ et beatæ Trinitatis æterna visione satiari. Nam corporis quatuor notissimis qualitatibus consistimus. In interiore autem homine, ex toto corde, tota anima, tota mente, Deum diligere jubemur. Et hoc est perfectum vitæ denarium, divinæ nos gloriæ præsenti visione lætari. Verum notandum juxta historiam quod apud antiquos, dies Pentecostes, id est, quinquagesimæ, quo lex data erat, ab occisione agni computabatur. Hic autem non a Domini passione, sed, sicut beatus Augustinus exponit, ab ejus resurrectione dies quinquagesimus, quo Spiritus sanctus missus est, computatur, qui, redeunte signi veteris exemplo, ipse ibi manifestissime diem dominicum suo consecravit adventu. Quo etiam temporis articulo, verum Pascha die Dominico monstravit esse celebrandum. Nam sicut hic, sic et illic in ignis visione Deus apparuit, dicente Exodo : Totus autem mons Sinai fumabat, eo quod descendisset Dominus super eum in igne (Exod. xix).

Et factus est repente de cœlo sonus tanquam advenientis Spiritus vehementis, etc. Per ignem quidem Dominus, ut beatus papa Gregorius exponit, apparuit, sed per semetipsum locutionem interius fecit. Et neque ignis Deus, neque ille sonitus fuit, sed per hoc quod exterius exhibuit, expressit hoc quod interius gessit. Qui enim discipulos et zelo succensos, et verbo eruditos intus reddidit, foris linguas igneas ostendit. In significatione igitur admota sunt elementa, ut ignem et sonitum sentirent corpora, igni vero invisibili et voce sine sonitu docerentur corda.

Et appareruent illis dispertitæ linguæ tanquam ignis. Spiritus enim sanctus in igne et linguis apparuit, quia omnes quos impleverit ardentes pariter et loquentes facit. Ardentes utique ex se, et loquentes de se. Simul et indicans, quia sancta Ecclesia per [Col. 947] mundi terminos dilatata, omnium gentium erat voce locutura.

Seditque super singulos eorum. Quod sedisse dicitur, regiæ est potestatis indicium. Vel certe quia requies ejus indicatur in sanctis.

Et cœperunt loqui variis linguis. Unitatem linguarum quam superbia Babylonis disperserat, humilitas Ecclesiæ recolligit. Spiritaliter autem varietas linguarum dona variarum significat gratiarum. Verum non incongrue Spiritus sanctus intelligitur ideo primum linguarum donum dedisse hominibus, quibus humana sapientia forinsecus et discitur, et docetur, ut ostenderet quam facile possit sapientes facere per sapientiam Dei quæ eis interna est.

Erant autem in Jerusalem habitantes Judæi, viri religiosi, ex omni natione quæ sub cœlo est. Conveniens puto perquirere quinam isti sunt, et ex qua captivitate Judæi. Quoniam quidem illa quæ in Ægypto fuerat vel in Babylonia, absoluta jam fuerat. Romanis autem nondum venerant Judæi in captivitatem, licet jam et ipsa immineret ultrix commissi de Salvatore piaculi. Superest ergo ut illa intelligatur captivitas quæ sub Antiocho facta est, quæ utique non multis ante temporibus acciderat.

Quoniam audiebat unusquisque lingua sua illos loquentes. Quæritur in hoc loco quomodo unusquisque audiebat lingua sua loquentes eos magnalia Dei : utrum ii qui loquebantur diversis sermonibus uniuscujusque linguæ hoc quod dicebatur proferebant, id est, ut unusquisque eorum nunc hac, nunc alia lingua loquens, sic per omnes curreret, an in eo potius erat mirabile, quod sermo eorum qui loquebantur qualibet lingua fuisset pronuntiatus unicuique audienti, secundum suam linguam intelligebatur, ut (verbi gratia) unoquocunque apostolo in Ecclesia docente ( necesse enim erat tacentibus reliquis unum loqui, et sermonem unum ad auditum omnium pervenire ), ipse sermo hanc in se vim haberet, ut cum diversarum gentium auditores essent, unusquisque secundum linguam suam illius ipsius unius sermonis qui ab apostolo fuerat pronuntiatus susciperet auditum, et caperet intellectum. Nisi forte secundum hoc magis videbatur audientium esse miraculum quam loquentium.

Et qui habitabant Mesopotamiam, et Judæam, et Cappadociam. Judæam hoc loco non totam gentem, sed partem illius, hoc est tribum Juda et Benjamin significat, ad distinctionem videlicet Samariæ, Galileæ, Decapoleos, et aliarum in eadem provincia regionum. Quæ licet omnes una lingua loquerentur Hebræa, domesticam tamen singulæ dicendi speciem habuere distinctam. Unde et Petrus in Domini passione quod Galilæus sit loquela sua proditur.

Judæi quoque et proselyti. Proselytos, id est, advenas nuncupabant eos, qui, de gentibus originem ducentes, circumcisionem et Judaismum eligere malebant, sicut Achior in libro Judith fecisse narratur. Non solum ergo, inquiunt, qui natura sunt Judæi [Col. 948] ex diverso orbe convenerant, verum et ii{(1)Actual copy from the MPG I am working from has “ii” but other versions have “hi” — I think the “hi” is correct. qui, de præputio nati, eorum adhæsere ritui.

Alii autem irridentes dicebant : Quia musto pleni sunt isti. Irridentes licet, mystice tamen vera testantur. Qui non vino veteri, quod in nuptiis Ecclesiæ defecit, sed musto sunt gratiæ spiritalis impleti. Jam enim vinum novum in utres novos venerat, cum apostoli non in vetustate litteræ, sed in novitate Spiritus Dei magnalis resonarent (Rom. VII).

Non enim, sicut vos æstimatis, hi ebrii sunt, cum sit hora diei tertia. Spiritus sanctus, gloriam individuæ Trinitatis modo prædicaturus, tertia hora convenienter descendit. Et quia supra dicitur : Erant in oratione perseverantes, recte Spiritum sanctum orationis hora percipiunt, ut ostendatur legentibus quia Spiritus sancti gratia non facile percipitur, nisi mens a carnalibus supernorum intentione elevetur. Tria enim tempora quibus Daniel in die flectere genus sua, et adorare legitur, tertia, sexta, et nona hora ab Ecclesia intelligitur. Quia et Dominus tertia hora Spiritum sanctum mittens, sexta ipse crucem ascendens, nona animam ponens, easdem horas nobis cæteris excellentius intimare et sanctificare dignatus est.

Effundam de spiritu meo super omnem carnem. Verbum effusionis ostendit muneris largitatem, quia non ut olim prophetis virtutem et sacerdotibus tantum, sed omnibus passim in utroque sexu coaditionibus et personis, sancti Spiritus esset gratia condonanda. Quæ sit enim omnis caro, propheta consequenter exposuit.

Et prophetabunt ( inquiens ) filii vestri et filiæ vestræ, etc. Et dubo prodigia in cœlo sursum, et signa in terra deorsum. Prodigia in cœlo, cum Domino nascente novum sidus apparuit, illo crucem ascendente, sol obscuratus est, et ipsum cœlum tenebris obductum est. Signa in terra, quia Domino Spiritum emittente terra contremuit, monumenta aperuit, saxa fregit, et multa quæ dormierant sanctorum corpora rediviva protulit.

Bede’s Reflection on the Book of Acts

MPL. Vol. 92. Bedæ Venerabilis: Liber Retractionis In Actus Apostolorum. Col. 998-1000.

CAPUT II

Et cum complerentur dies Pentecostes, erant omnes pariter in eodem loco. Male quidam Codices habent, Pentecosten. Nam Pentecoste nominativo casu, quinquagesima dicitur ; Pentecostes genitivo, quinquagesimæ : Pentecosten accusativo, quinquagesimam. Nulla autem ratio loquendi sinit ut dicamus Pentecosten, cum dici debeat : Cum compleretur dies quinquagesimæ ; vel certe sicut in Græco legitur numero singulari : Et cum complerentur dies quinquagesimæ. At vero in precibus ejusdem diei dicendum est : Et diem sacratissimum Pentecosten celebrantes, id est, quinquagesimam. A cujus verbi consuetudine putatur hujus diei solemnitas, a quibusdam qui Græcam linguam nesciunt, etiam nominativo casu Pentecosten appellari debere.

Et factus est repente de cœlo sonus, tanquam advenientis spiritus vehmentis, et replevit totam domum, ubi erant sedentes, etc. Et in ipsa datione legis et gratiæ apparet evidentissima veteris et novi testamenti [Col. 999] distantia. Ibi plebs longe stabat, timor erat, amor non erat. Nam usque adeo timuerunt, ut dicerent ad Moysen : Loquere in ad nos, et non ad nons loquatur Dominus, ne moriamur (Exod. 20). Descendit ergo Deus, sicut scriptum est, in Sinam in igne, sed plebem longe stantem territans, legem digito in lapide, non spiritu suo scribebat in corde. Hic autem quando venit Spiritus sanctus, congregati erant fideles in unum ; nec in monte terruit, sed intravit domum. De cœlo quidem factus est sonus subito, et quasi ferretur flatus vehemens sonuit ; sed expavit nullus. Audisti sonum, vide ignem, quia et in monte utrumque erat, et ignis et sonitus, sed illic etiam fumus, hic ignis, linguæ divisæ velut ignis. Nunquid de longinquo territans ? Absit. Nam insedit super unumquemque illorum, et cœperunt linguis loqui, prout Spiritus sanctus dabat eis pronuntiare. Audi linguam loquentem, et intellige Spiritum non in lapide, sed in corde scribentem.

Et apparuerunt illis dispartitæ linguæ tanquam ignis, seditque super singulos eorum, etc. Hujus ignis, non hic ignis. In Græco enim πυρὸς habetur, non πῦρ. Quæ distinctio facilius pateret, si, addito verbo, diceretur : Apparuerunt dispartitæ linguæ tanquam ignis ardentis, sive tanquam ignis fulgentis, ut intelligatur in speciem ignis linguas esse divisas.

Et cœperunt loqui variis linguis, prout Spiritus sanctus dabat eloqui illis. Erant autem in Jerusalem habitantes Judæi, viri religiosi ex omni natione, etc. In Græco non habetur in hoc loco variis linguis, sed aliis linguis. Dixerat namque Isaias : In aliis linguis, et labiis aliis loquar populo huic, et nec sic exaudient me, dicit Dominus. Quam nimirum prophetiam beatus Lucas ut hac datione Spiritus impletam esse admoneret, idem etiam verbum, quid in prophetia vidit, in hac sacra historia ponere curavit.

Quoniam audiebat unusquisque linguam suam illos loquentes. Stupebant autem omnes, et mirabantur, dicentes : Nonne ecce omnes isti qui loquuntur, Galilæi sunt, etc. ? Scio me reprehensum a quibusdam, quod hanc sententiam duobus modis posse intelligi dixerim, vel potius qualiter intelligenda sit quæsierim. Quibus breviter respondeo quod omne quidquid de eadem sententia in precedenti meo volumine scripsi, non hoc ex proprio sensu protuli, sed ex verbis sancti et irreprehensibilis per omnia magistri, hoc est, Gregorii Nazianzeni assumpsi. Et quidem constat quod repleti Spiritu sancto apostoli, linguis omnibus loquebantur, neque de hoc ulli dubitare fidelium licet. Sed quomodo loquerentur merito quæritur, utrum videlicet sermo apostolorum tantam habuerit virtutem, ut ab omnibus qui diversas linguas noverant, auditus æqualiter possit intelligi, an vero quicunque eorum loquebatur ; necesse enim erat unum in conventu tantæ multitudinis, tacentibus cæteris, interim sermonem proferre doctrinæ, ipse qui loquebatur primo Hebræis, Hebraice fecerit sermonem, nescientibus cæteris quid diceret. Deinde Græcis, Græce ignorantibus, et exspectantibus cæteris.

[Col. 1000] Deinde Parthis, post hæc Medis, ac sic Elamitis, et quæ per ordinem enumerantur gentibus, propria sit ipsorum lingua locutus, præstolantibus singulis ac silentibus, donec adveniente suo ordine, quid diceretur, intelligerent, et sic verbis docentium fidei assensum præberent. Refert autem Lucas loquentem ad turbas Petrum, et secundo vel tertio eadem quæ dixerat repetentem non refert, sed tantum eas accepto salutis consilio Christianæ fidei consecratas esse mysteriis. Non autem errasse reor illum, si quis utrumque fieri posse credat, et apostolos videlicet in Spiritu sancto omnium gentium linguas intelligere ac loqui potuisse, et ipsorum quoque verba majore miraculo quacunque lingua essent edita, ab omnibus qui audiebant æque potuissent cognosci.

Et qui habitant Mesopotamiam, et Cappodociam, Pontum et Asiam, Phrygiam et Pamphyliam. Hae quæ post Judæam nominantur provinciæ, vere omnes quidem Græce loquuntur, sed si nihil diversum patria consuetudine sonarent, nequaquam tam subtili distinctione linguarum commemorarentur. Unde mira in apostolis Spiritus gratia contuenda est, quæ non solum eos diversitatem omnium edocuit linguarum, verum etiam distantiam proprietatum in unaquaque lingua juxta numerum provinciarum, quæ hac utebantur, in eorum fecit loquelis agnosci.

Et advenæ Romani. Rectius haberetur in Græco Et peregrinantes Romani, id est, Judæi qui peregrinam Romæ vitam agebant, sicut alii alibi, de quibus supra dictum est. Nam quod advenæ ibi fuerint, qui Græce dicuntur proselyti, id est, hi qui ex gentibus ad Judaismum, relicto gentilitatis ritu, convenerant, sequente versu manifestatur, cum dicitur : Judæi quoque et proselyti.

References   [ + ]