Job 38:2

“Who is this that involves sentences in unskilful words? As we have said also in the former part, an interrogative of this kind, in which it is said, Who is this? is the beginning of a reproof. For Eliu had spoken arrogantly. And we say not, Who is this, excepting expressly of him whom we know not. But knowledge on God's part is approval; His not knowing is rejection. Whence He says to certain whom He rejects, I know you not whence ye are; depart from Me, all ye workers of iniquity. [Luke 13, 27] What then is the enquiring about this haughty man, Who is this? except saying openly, I know not the arrogant: that is, I approve not of their life in the loftiness of My wisdom. Because while they are puffed up by human praise, they are deprived of the true glory of eternal retribution. But in that He said sentences, and added not of what kind, we certainly understand them to be good. And He asserts that these were involved in unskilful words, because they had been brought forward with language of boasting. For it is a fault of unskilfulness, to hold what is right in a wrong way, that is, to pervert the heavenly gift to a desire for earthly praise. For as it often happens that good things are stated badly and bad things properly, so the arrogant Eliu brought forward right truths not rightly, because, in defence of God he uttered humble sentiments unhumbly. Whence he deservedly serves as a type of those who within the Catholic Church are studious of vain-glory: for while they believe themselves to be skilful beyond others, they are in the Divine judgment convicted of unskilfulness; because, as the Apostle said, If any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know. [1 Cor. 8, 2] For since the original folly of the Angel was pride of heart, humility in his own estimation becomes the true wisdom of man. And whoever abandons this by even thinking great things, is the more outrageously foolish, the more he knows not himself. Whence Eliu both uttered sentences, and those involved in unskilful words, because he both knew the truth which he was speaking about God, and yet his silly pride was making foolish the things he said of himself. Having then glanced with contempt on this man, His words are directed to the instruction of Job.”

“Once a dispute has been determined by the opinion of the judge, nothing else remains to be said unless the statement of the determination is rejected. So the Lord first rejects the determination of the question which Eliud had made. He rejects it because Eliud had enveloped the true opinions which he had proposed with many false and frivolous words, and so the text continues, "He said: Who is that man who envelops his opinions with inept arguments?" In his arguments Eliud had accused Job of saying he wanted to dispute with God and said that he was just so vigorously that he seemed to detract from the justice of the divine judgment. But Eliud enveloped these opinions with many presumptuous and even false statements, as should be clear already, which are called here inept arguments because every lack of order proceeds from a defect of reason.”