Eccl 1:1

“But we can also investigate these things before we even come to the very body of the book, such as why Solomon, who seems to have served the will of the Holy Spirit in those three books is called in Proverbs "Solomon, the Son of David, who ruled in Israel," but in the second book "Solomon" is not written, but it reads, "the words of Ecclesiastes, the son of David, king of Israel in Jerusalem." To be sure he writes that he is "Son of David" just as in the first book and also "king of Israel." But there he wrote "Proverbs" but here "words" and called himself "Ecclesiastes," when he had called himself "Solomon" there. And although there he mentioned only the country over which he reigned, here he both mentioned the nation and designated the place of his kingdom as "Jerusalem." …I do not think that anyone can doubt that Solomon in rather many respects bears the type of Christ, either because he is named "Man of Peace" or because "the Queen of the South came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon." This is also the case because he is called "the son of David" and reigns in Israel and because he rules over those kings, on whose behalf he himself is called "king of kings." And again the true "Ecclesiastes" is that very one "who although he was in the form of God, humbled himself, taking on the form of a servant" in order to gather an ecclesial body, for Ecclesiastes is called from his gathering a congregation.… Therefore in the first book of Proverbs, when he sets us in moral disciplines, he is said to be "king in Israel" but not yet in Jerusalem because, although we are said to be Israel because of our faith, we nonetheless have not yet arrived to this point so that we seem to have come to the heavenly Jerusalem. But when we will have made progress and will have arrived there so that we will share in the church of the firstborn, which is in heaven, and we know from the ancient and natural reasons we have discussed that the heavenly Jerusalem is our heavenly mother, then already Christ himself will be made our "Ecclesiastes" and will be said to reign not only "in Israel" but also "in Jerusalem."”

“These words speaks Solomon, the son of David the king and prophet, to the whole Church of God, a prince most honoured, and a prophet most wise above all men. How vain and fruitless are the affairs of men, and all pursuits that occupy man! For there is not one who can tell of any profit attaching to those things which men who creep on earth strive by body and soul to attain to, in servitude all the while to what is transient, and undesirous of considering anything heavenly with the noble eye of the soul. And the life of men wears away, as day by day, and in the periods of hours and years, and the determinate courses of the sun, some are ever coming, and others passing away. And the matter is like the transit of torrents as they fall into the measureless deep of the sea with a mighty noise. And all things that have been constituted by God for the sake of men abide the same: as, for instance, I that man is born of earth, and departs to earth again; that the earth itself continues stable; that the sun accomplishes its circuit about it perfectly, and rolls round to the same mark again; and that the winds in like manner, and the mighty rivers which flow into the sea, and the breezes that beat upon it, all act without forcing it to pass beyond its limits, and without themselves also violating their appointed laws. And these things, indeed, as bearing upon the good of this life of ours, are established thus fittingly. But those things which are of men's devising, whether words or deeds, have no measure. And there is a plenteous multitude of words, but there is no profit from random and foolish talking. But the race of men is naturally insatiate in its thirst both for speaking and for hearing what is spoken; and it is man's habit, too, to desire to look with idle eyes on all that happens. What can occur afterwards, or what can be wrought by men which has not been done already? What new thing is there worthy of mention, of which there has never yet been experience? For I think there is nothing which one may call new, or which, on considering it, one shall discover to be strange or unknown to those of old. But as former things are buried in oblivion, so also things that are now subsistent will in the course of time vanish utterly from the knowledge of those who shall come after us. And I speak not these things unadvisedly, as acting now the preacher. But all these things were carefully pondered by me when entrusted with the kingdom of the Hebrews in Jerusalem. And I examined diligently, and considered discreetly, the nature of all that is on earth, and I perceived it to be most various; and I saw that to man it is given to labour upon earth, ever carried about by all different occasions of toil, and with no result of his work. And all things here below are full of the spirit of strangeness and abomination, so that it is not possible for one to retrieve them now; nay, rather it is not possible for one at all to conceive what utter vanity has taken possession of all human affairs. For once. on a time I communed with myself, and thought that then I was wiser in this than all that were before me, and I was expert in understanding parables and the natures of things. But I learned that I gave myself to such pursuits to no purpose, and that if wisdom follows knowledge, so troubles attend on wisdom.”

“Before us for exposition lies Ecclesiastes, which requires labor in spiritual interpretation quite as great as the benefit to be obtained. The thoughts of Proverbs [have] already prepared the mind by exercise.… Then for those who have developed to the more advanced stages of learning there comes the ascent toward this truly sublime and Godinspired work of Scripture [i.e., the book of Ecclesiastes]. If then the exercise in expressions [from the book of Proverbs] which prepares us for these lessons is so painful and difficult to understand, how great an effort must be envisaged in these lofty thoughts which now lie before us for interpretation?… Nevertheless, since it is also one of the Master's commands that we must search the Scriptures, there is an absolute necessity, even if our mind falls short of the truth, failing to match the greatness of the ideas, that we should still ensure by all the zeal for the Word of which we are capable that we do not appear to disregard the Lord's command. Let us therefore search the Scripture lying before us to the best of our ability. For surely he who has given the command to search the Scriptures will also give us the ability to do so, as it is written, "The Lord will give a word to those who preach good news with great power."”

“Now the teaching of this book looks exclusively to the conduct of the church and gives instruction in those things by which one would achieve the life of virtue. For the object of what is said here is to raise the mind above sensation, to persuade it to abandon all that seems to be great and splendid in the world of existence, to catch a glimpse through the eyes of the soul of those things which are unattainable by sense perception, and to conceive a desire for those things to which sense does not attain. Perhaps the title of the book also envisages the one who leads the church (ekkl&#;sia). For the true Ecclesiast [is] he who collects into one body what has been scattered and assembles (ekkl&#;siazon) into one whole those who have been led astray in many ways by various deceits. Who else would he be but the true King of Israel, the Son of God, to whom Nathanael said, "You are the Son of God, you are the King of Israel"? If therefore these are words of the King of Israel, and this same one is also the Son of God, as the gospel says, then the same one is called Ecclesiast (Assembler). Perhaps we may not unreasonably give this sense to the expression used in the title, so that we may learn by this that the meaning of these words has reference to him who established the church forever through the gospel message. Words, it says, of the Ecclesiast, the Son of David. And Matthew so names him at the beginning of his gospel, calling the Lord "Son of David."”

“[The book of] Ecclesiastes is offered for our examination because it is especially useful and valuable for contemplation. When [the book of] Proverbs has exercised our minds by its obscure words, wise sayings, riddles and various twists of words as contained in the introduction, we find an ascent for those persons who have advanced to more perfect lessons with regard to this lofty, divinely inspired book. If a toilsome, arduous meditation on Proverbs prepares us for these lessons, how much more laborious and difficult must it be to now examine such sublime matters proposed for our contemplation!… Since one of the divine precepts bids us to search the Scriptures, it is indeed necessary that once our minds have pursued the truth even though we failed to attain the nobility of its thoughts, we are not perceived as despising the Lord's command in our effort to discharge our duty worthily. Therefore let us examine the Scripture before us as best we can, for he [God] who has bidden us to search will bestow the power [to preach]. As it is written, "The Lord will give a word to those who preach it with much power."”

“The teaching of Ecclesiastes pertains only to suitable behavior in the church, that is, how to direct a person in virtue. This book aims to elevate our minds above the senses, to abandon great, brilliant and noble appearances, to transcend the senses and to attain what transcends them.Perhaps this inscription refers to the leader of the church [ekklēsia]. The true Ecclesiastes [ekklēsiastes, Christ] gathers into one assembly those persons who often have been scattered and frequently deceived. Who could he be except the true king of Israel to whom Nathaniel said, "You are the son of God and the king of Israel"? If these words pertain to the king of Israel, the Son of God, as the Gospel says, then he is called Ecclesiastes. We will not deviate from the inscription's meaning provided that we learn about him who firmly establishes the church through the Gospel and to whom these words apply. "The words of Ecclesiastes, son of David": thus Matthew begins his gospel with the name David and calls him Lord.”

“Solomon, who here appears as Ecclesiastes, that is, who preaches what is appropriate for the church, is the son of David. He came after Saul, whose rule was destroyed and terminated. Solomon is son of this king David in two ways.… The first is according to nature and lineage; the second is according to his teaching. One has to understand Paul in this [second] way when he says, "For though you might have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers. Indeed, in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel." David thus was Solomon's father in both respects: according to nature—Solomon was his heir and "David begot Solomon"—but he was also his father in terms of instruction. David was wise as only few are—especially wise regarding God.…But Solomon also became wise in a way that few achieve: he became wise through the wisdom [he received] and through his human lineage. According to both ways Solomon thus was the son of David. But especially in terms of his words as Ecclesiastes is he the son of David, not so much according to nature as according to instruction. For the sons of the wise beget wise people, since they are wise themselves. But someone who is father of a son according to nature does not necessarily become a father again. Many were sons and did not become fathers. The sons according to the Spirit, however, become fathers themselves.”

“Question: [Are the] words of Ecclesiastes said by the author personally?Answer: Actually the Spirit is the author of the divinely inspired Scriptures. The Spirit inspires so that words are expressed, but the wise man is also involved. For the Spirit has not himself invisibly written the letter and put down the text, but he breathes it into the soul. Either the real author is Solomon, or some [other] wise men have written it. Maybe we should opt for the latter so that nobody may say that the speaker talks about himself.”

“The church is [the assembly] of pure souls. It is the true knowledge of the ages and worlds and about their judgment and provision. Ecclesiastes is Christ, the author of that knowledge. Or, Ecclesiastes is one who, having purified the soul by moral contemplation, leads his or her soul to the contemplation of the physical [world].”

“"The words of Ecclesiastes, son of David, King in Jerusalem." The Scriptures state very clearly that Solomon was known by three names: 'Peace-making', that is 'Solomon'; 'Yedidia', that is 'beloved of Yahweh'; and the name used here 'Qoheleth', that is Ecclesiastes. He is called Ecclesiastes in Greek because he gathered together a crowd of people, "a congregation", which we can call a demagogue because he spoke to the people and his sermon was not addressed specifically to one man but more usually to all men. Moreover he is called 'peace-making' and 'beloved of Yahweh' because there was peace during his reign and the Lord loved him. For also Psalms 44, and 71, are known by titles connected with love and peace-making. Although these psalms pertain to Christ and the Church they exhibit Solomon's joy and strength, and according to tradition were composed concerning Solomon. He also produced an equal number of titles to the three volumes: "Proverbs", "Ecclesiastes", and "Song of Songs". He teaches for children in "Proverbs" and gives instruction in the form of maxims almost with a sense of duty, and his sermons here are repeated continually to his son. In "Ecclesiastes" he teaches a man of mature age that he should not think anything in the world to be perpetual, but that all things that we perceive are in fact vain and fleeting. In "Song of Songs" he embraces an elderly man in the covenant, who has already been prepared in spurning his times. For unless we first abandon our moral failings and renounce the pomposity of our world, and prepare ourselves so we are ready for the arrival of Christ, we will not be able to say: "let him kiss me from the kiss of his mouth" [Cant. 1,1.]. Philosophers educate their followers in a manner similar to this type of instruction: first of all they teach ethics, then explain physics, and then anyone whom they see to excel in these first two they then go on to teach theology. Moreover even this should be examined more closely because Solomon is named differently in the three books. In "Proverbs" for example he is thus named: "The Proverbs of Solomon, the son of David, King of Israel." [Prov. 1,1.] But in Ecclesiastes: "The words of Ecclesiastes, son of David, King of Jerusalem. "'Israel' in fact is unnecessary here because it is not found in the Greek or Latin manuscripts. But in "Song of Songs" he is neither named 'son of David', not 'King of Israel' or 'King of Jerusalem', but only as "The Song of Songs of Solomon". This is just as the Proverbs and the crude arrangement pertain to the twelve tribes and to the whole of Israel. And although the contempt of the world only comes to city-dwellers, these are the inhabitants of Jerusalem, therefore Solomon intends "Song of Songs" particularly for those who desire spiritual enlightenment. To those readers just embarking on their education paternal honour and the authority of the king are claimed in their own merit, but to those who have completed their learning, and in the case where the disciple has been enlightened not by fear, but by love, his own name suffices. Then, he is equal to his teacher and he is unaware that he is a king. This is the case here. But in a more spiritual understanding Solomon was peace making and beloved of the Lord God, and Ecclesiastes can be seen as our Christ too, who destroying the inner wall and expelling evil from his flesh, makes each of them one, saying - "I give you my peace, I relinquish my peace to you" [John 14, 27.], about which the Lord says to his disciples "This is my chosen son whom I love: listen to him" [Matt. 3, 17.], and that is he who is father of the Church. Speaking by no means to the Synagogue of the Jews but to the crowd of people the King of Jerusalem (that which was built out of the living rocks, not that about which he says "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you that kill prophets" [Matth. 23, 37.], and "Look, let your empty house be left for us" [Matth. 23, 38.]), but that by which it is forbidden to swear because it is the city of a great king. This is the son of David, to whom the blind cried out in the Gospel: "pity us, son of David"; and the whole crowd sang out in unison: "Hosanna to the son of David". Then there is the fact that the word of God does not come to him as is the case with Jeremiah and the other prophets, but on account of his being rich, being a king, holding power, his wisdom and his other virtues, he speaks to the men of the church himself, and he speaks words to the apostles about which Psalm 18.5 tells us: "their sound went out to the whole world and their words went to the ends of the earth". Some scholars think wrongly, therefore, that we are tempted into desire and luxury by this book, when it teaches quite to the contrary: everything we perceive in the world is vain; nor is it fitting for us to seek those things eagerly which perish while we possess them.”

“This entire book is divided into three parts: into the title or proem and the treatise, which begins there: "Vanity of vanities" etc.; and the epilogue, which begins there: "And since Ecclesiastes was most wise." In the title the efficient cause is made manifest, in the treatise the material and formal causes, in the epilogue the final cause. In the title, therefore, the author is made manifest with respect to wisdom, with respect to goodness, and with respect to royal power. By reason of wisdom he says: "The words of Ecclesiastes," supply: what follows are the words of Ecclesiastes; because Ecclesiastes means "preacher," and one cannot be a preacher unless he is wise, because it is said in Proverbs twenty-six: "As if a thorn should grow in the hand of a drunkard, so unfitting is a parable in the mouth of fools"; whence Proverbs seventeen: "Eloquent words do not befit a fool." With respect to goodness it is made manifest when it says: "Son of David." For David was holy, and sons by imitation are holy; whence in Scripture it is a name of kindness and gentleness: Matthew fifteen: "Have mercy on me, Son of David." With respect to royal power, when it says: "King of Jerusalem," because Jerusalem was the most noble city and the capital of the whole kingdom, below: "I, Ecclesiastes, was king of Israel in Jerusalem," because there he chiefly dwelt. Here a question arises: since Solomon composed three books, why is it that he prefixes a title to the book of Proverbs and to this one, in which his name is expressed, but does not prefix one in the Song of Songs? I respond: it must be said that in the book of Proverbs Solomon himself is introduced speaking as a wise man to a disciple, whence he calls his hearer "son": similarly here he is introduced as a man who has experienced various things; but in the Song of Songs it is the bride and bridegroom who speak. Lest therefore it should seem that they were the words of Solomon to his wife, but rather they are of Christ to the Church, he does not prefix his name there. But here, because he was for the most part speaking in his own person, and in the book of Proverbs, therefore he prefixes a title in which his name is specified and disclosed. Likewise it is asked why in the book of Proverbs he says "parables," but here he says "words." If you say that there he speaks parabolically and figuratively, but here openly: then I ask, why here and there he employs a different manner of proceeding. I respond: it must be said that there is a certain mode of speaking that is proper and open, and another that is parabolic: and this latter is twofold: one through parables and open similitudes, another through hidden and profound ones. Since therefore Solomon in the book of Proverbs speaks to the little ones and the unlearned, he therefore speaks parabolically and openly: but since in Ecclesiastes he speaks to those who are advancing, therefore openly and properly: but in the Song of Songs, since he speaks to the perfect, whose food is solid food, therefore parabolically and hiddenly. The question is: why in the title of Proverbs does he call himself by his own name, but here he calls himself Ecclesiastes? I respond: it must be said that, as Jerome says, Solomon had three names, which indeed suited him according to the threefold scripture which he produced. For he was called Solomon, called Ecclesiastes, and Jedidiah. Solomon, the peaceful one, because he possessed the entire kingdom in peace: whence he also handed down the teaching of proverbs to all. Ecclesiastes, the preacher, because he speaks in the persons of various people. Jedidiah means the same as beloved of the Lord. Therefore he calls himself Ecclesiastes, because in this book he brings forward the opinions of various persons and accordingly persuades in diverse ways. He was called Jedidiah in the title of the Psalm Eructavit, which is about him according to the literal sense. Likewise it is asked: why here does he call himself "son of David" and "king of Jerusalem," but in Proverbs he calls himself "king of Israel"? I respond: one reason is taken from the side of the author, because, according to what the Hebrews believe, this book was written by Solomon when he was doing penance and humbling himself. And therefore in Proverbs he does not name himself from another, but rather manifests the power of his entire kingdom: here however he humbles himself: therefore, naming himself from another, he indicates not the whole power but a part. Another reason was from the side of the work, because in Proverbs he leads to the knowledge of things to be done, but here to the contempt of present things. And because very many are those who wish more to be wise than to despise present things: therefore there he calls himself king of Israel, but here king of Jerusalem, because despisers of the world are citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem, who do not have here an abiding city, but seek the future one. And from this the solution to that question which can be raised is clear: why here he does not express the end, as in Proverbs. Because the end of Proverbs is wisdom, which attracts one to listen: the end of this book is contempt of the world, about which few wish to hear. From these things it is clear why he said "words," why he said "Ecclesiastes," why "of the son of David," why "king of Jerusalem," and why he also did not add anything about the usefulness of the teaching of this book, as in Proverbs.”

“Concerning the efficient cause: it has been said that the efficient cause was Solomon. That it is not fitting, however, for such a person to be the author, appears from the following: Because he was a sinner and carnal: but when a carnal man preaches spirituality, he causes scandal rather than edification: therefore this book is more apt to generate scandal than edification. Likewise, in the Psalm it is said: "But to the sinner God said: Why do you declare my justices?" Therefore if Solomon was a sinner, then he was sinning by declaring the divine justice. Furthermore, a good author produces credibility, whence the argument from authority has its force; therefore a bad author produces no credibility: but the books of Sacred Scripture are for generating faith. To this it must be responded that, as Jerome says, according to the tradition of the Hebrews, this book was written by Solomon while doing penance: and because God does not reject the penitent, but rather accepts them, accordingly Solomon was not in a blameworthy state when he wrote this book. It can also be responded otherwise, that the Holy Spirit speaks true and good things not only through the good, but indeed also through the wicked: whence the Lord himself says in the Gospel: "Do what they say, but do not do what they do": whence also through Balaam he prophesied most expressly, and so also through Solomon, even though carnal, he said many good things. As to what is objected, therefore, that he was sinning: it must be responded that to him the gift of wisdom was entrusted most especially among all others: and because he was bound not to hide the talent of the Lord, he was obliged to teach the people of the Lord both by word and by writing, especially since he was appointed to their governance. Whence he was not sinning in this, that he taught, but in this, that he did not duly dispose himself. As to what is objected, that the book is not to be believed, since the author is not worthy of credence: I respond: just 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 produced at the dictation of the Holy Spirit: whence the goodness of the person does not contribute to greater or lesser credibility, presupposing 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 3 Kings 3; therefore the Church without doubt receives his books.”