Bonaventure, on Eccl 8:2

“I observe the mouth of the king, and the commandments of the oath of God.”

“The wise person is admirable not only with respect to appearance, but also with respect to speech through wisdom: in whose person he says: I observe the mouth of the king, says wisdom. This King is God, of whom 1 Timothy at the end says: "The blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords." The mouth of this King is the Son of God, through whom He speaks to us: Hebrews 1: "In these last days He has spoken to us in His Son." To observe therefore the mouth of the king is to attend diligently to the word of the Son of God: Luke 11: "Blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it." Wisdom therefore says: I observe, and I cause others to observe, according to that text of Deuteronomy 6: "Observe, that you may do what the Lord has commanded you, and it may be well with you." And he explains in what things he observes, namely in the commandments, therefore he says: And the precepts of the oath of God, which, namely, proceed from His mouth. And I observe, namely the precepts of the oath of God: precepts of the oath are so called because they are firm and inviolable; Matthew 24: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." Or: they are called precepts of the oath, because they were given with a covenant and an oath: Exodus 24: "Moses took the blood and sprinkled it upon the people, saying: This is the blood of the covenant of the Lord concerning all these words." A question is raised concerning what he says: I observe the precepts of the oath of God: therefore God swears. On the contrary: 1. Matthew 5: Let your speech be: yes, yes; no, no: therefore what is more than this is from evil. Therefore if it does not befit the perfect to swear, and nothing befits God except what is of the highest perfection, then to swear does not befit God. 2. Furthermore, it is shown that it would be superfluous: because God cannot lie, therefore the simple word of God is equally true as an oath. 3. Likewise, it seems that He cannot swear: because to swear is to call upon someone as witness and support: but God has no other by whom He could confirm: therefore neither can He swear. I respond: it must be said that an oath is the end of every controversy, and is a pure and firm assertion, than which none can be firmer, and this for the purpose of producing certain belief. Thus therefore, when we wish to produce certain belief in the hearer, we swear: so God, condescending to our weakness, swears indeed, in order to render our faith solid. 1. As to the objection, therefore, that it is from evil: it is explained that it is from the evil of punishment, not of the one swearing, but of the one to whom the oath is made, that is, on account of his doubt. Nevertheless, it must be said otherwise that the Lord does not there prohibit the oath as something evil: but because men are prone to speaking falsehood, He prohibits the proneness to swearing indiscriminately, lest at some point they fall simultaneously into lying and swearing to the contempt of God: and because God cannot lie, this reasoning has no place with respect to God. 2. As to the objection that He cannot lie: I say that although an oath in God does not add anything beyond a simple assertion according to the reality of the matter, it does nevertheless add according to our estimation, because our faith is made firmer thereby: and a wondrous condescension toward us is shown. 3. As to the objection that he cannot bring forward another witness: I say that just as he is his own witness, because he is his own truth, so he swears by himself; and this is the best testimony, because light manifests both itself and other things.”

Imported from an open dataset — not yet checked against the printed edition.