Job

JOB. - I. THE AUTHOR. - A wealthy and wise Idumean, a perfect worshipper of the true God, the type of the righteous sufferer, protagonist of the book that bears his name.

The name occurs in the letters of el-'Amārnah: A-ia-ab; the Hebrew 'Ijōbh could mean "persecuted," if it derived from a Hebrew root. His country is 'Uš, a region between Edom and northern Arabia, as can be deduced from Jer. 25:20-24; Lam. 4:21, and as the addition to the Greek version Job 42:17 explicitly affirms; the indications concerning Job's friends (Job 2:11) agree in this sense as well: Eliphaz (v.) of Theman, a region certainly Idumean (Gen. 36:11-15; Jer. 49:7), and Bildad of Shuah in northern Arabia (Gen. 25:2). But the traditions diverge; Gen. 10:23, which names 'Uš among the sons of Aram, contributed to having him sought in Syria and especially in the Hawrān.

Ezek. 14 recalls Job for his righteousness (v. 20; cf. Job 12:4; Gen. 6:9 for Noah), together with Noah and Daniel (cf. Ecclus. 49:9); James 5:11 recalls him rather for his patience: cf. Tob. 2:12-15 (only in the Vulgate). Such references do not settle the question whether Job is a real or a fictitious figure. Nothing prevents one from proposing a purely literary figure as a model (Ezekiel, James), as Jesus does when he recommends to his interlocutor that he imitate the good Samaritan (v. JONAH). Did the author draw inspiration from some real episode, from some traditional figure? Catholic exegetes are inclined to admit a historical basis for the great poem. Which is plausible.

II. THE BOOK OF JOB

The book is "one of the most wonderful poems in the world" (Vaccari); it has been compared to Dante's Divine Comedy and Goethe's Faust (Dennefeld). "A gripping theme, a drama at once profoundly human and divinely sublime, is treated there with such richness of colour, with such force of feeling, with so great a variety of forms, that language may well be said to have exhausted its eloquence and art its palette" (Vaccari).

The book consists of three parts: introduction and prologue (chaps. 1-2); the poem properly so called (chaps. 3-41); the epilogue (42). The central part is in verses of exquisite workmanship; the other two, very brief, are in prose.

Part 1 (1-2): Job, of blameless conduct, enjoys great prosperity; he has a numerous family, flocks and lands, and a host of servants. God permits him to be struck by calamity: he loses his possessions and his children; and, worn out by a repulsive disease, he is driven from his house and endures the contempt and mockery of people and of his wife... Even in his profound grief, Job resigns himself to the divine will. Three of his friends, Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar, come to console him, and with them begins the dialogue that will be closed by God's intervention.

Part 2: there are three disputes with Job, and they begin with an outburst of his lamenting his sufferings (3). The friends always speak in the following order: Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar, and Job replies each time to each one. The thesis maintained by those three is the traditional conception: every suffering presupposes a fault, as every favour presupposes a good act; God does not allow himself to be served or offended gratuitously. Therefore Job, instead of complaining and vaunting his innocence, should acknowledge himself guilty and do penance so as to implore mercy.

In the first dispute (4-14), Eliphaz (v.) sets out this thesis abstractly, so as to avoid an explicit condemnation of Job, and grounds it on a supernatural revelation in order to make it more docilely accepted (4-5). Job, while accepting his sufferings, cannot doubt his innocence; and his gaze, when it turns to the Lord, remains bewildered, not understanding the reason for his condition (6-7). Bildad intervenes, with the authority of tradition, applying the same thesis more directly to Job. The sufferer who displays his own innocence offends divine Providence as though it were unjust (8). Job sees even more clearly the opposition between the theory and the undisputed fact of his innocence, as well as the mystery of God's action (9-10). These words scandalize the young Zophar, who supports the same theory on the dictates of reason and on experience (11-12, 6). But experience, Job replies, demonstrates the other disconcerting fact of the prosperity of the wicked. His faith in God's sovereign justice is undisputed and deep; the mystery therefore remains all the more vivid (12, 7-14, 21).

In the second dispute (15-21), the three friends openly accuse Job of impiety, on account of which he had deserved so many evils. It is impossible that he should suffer as an innocent man. Eliphaz sees in Job's protests only pride; he adduces his own experience and the doctrine of the sages (15, 1-18). The other two add nothing new, except the violent tone and the acrimony of their replies (chaps. 18-20). Job, weary of these speeches that bring nothing new (15, 17-35), no longer hopes for understanding and comfort from men (16, 1-5), places his hope in God alone, invoking his just judgment before he descends into šē'ōl (16, 6-17, 16), and expresses his profound disgust for such a doctrine, contrary to the data of experience (21); God will be his avenger, and not even the nearness of death can make this hope of his doubtful (19).

In the third dispute (22-28), the friends show their impotent irritation by heaping insults on Job, to whom they impute the gravest sins. The doxologies do not supply
for the poverty of the arguments (22-25). Job replies
with irony; the happiness of the wicked is evident, and insults are not arguments. It is true that God delays in doing
him justice, but he does not cease to invoke his supreme judgment (27, 1-6). The speech of Zophar is missing in the present
text; and expressions are attributed to Job that one would
rather expect on the lips of his adversaries. The following
arrangement has therefore been proposed, supposing an error
of pagination (Dhorme): 24, 18-25;
25, 2-26, 4; 26, 5-14; 27, 2-12; 27, 13-23. Job's reply to
Eliphaz would end at 24, 17. Then Bildad would speak
(16, 5-14 + 25, 2-6), with Job's reply (26, 2-
4 + 27, 2-12). Finally Zophar (27, 13-23 + 24, 18-25),
or even better Job himself, without giving him time to
speak, would formulate Zophar's thought already expressed
in 20, 29 (= 27, 13); and before describing splendidly the divine power in the hymn to wisdom (28),
he develops not without irony the false thesis of his adversaries.
The hymn, already announced in 27, 11, closes the bitter discussion of the three friends, who have become fierce accusers.

At this point Job skilfully sets up his defence (29-31). He brings out the justice and prosperity
of his past (29), which therefore does not deserve the ignominy
with which they wish to cover him, and his present sufferings (30); he reaffirms finally his innocence and invokes God's judgment.
In that judgment, Job proposes to confront God, whom
he believes angered against him, and to refute his accusers (13, 18; 31, 35b-37). He desires therefore an arbiter,
an advocate to take up his defence (9, 33; 31, 35 a).
This arbiter is Elihu (v.), who intervenes (32-37): Job
should not say that God persecutes him; God sends evils not
only to punish, but also to preserve and purify.
He thus preludes to God's intervention (38-41). God appears
in a cloud that veils his majesty and sets forth his
omnipotence and his wisdom in the creation and government of the universe. Thus can Job say anything about these marvels of the physical order? And how therefore can he claim
to judge God's work, in the moral world? Job prostrates himself in the dust and professes his ignorance.

Part 3: in the epilogue (42) God pronounces (42, 42)
the sentence; Job has humbled himself; the three sages are condemned
and to Job, declared innocent, are restored as many and
greater goods than before.

We are before a didactic poem; among other things
the scene of the angels with Satan (imitated by Goethe
at the beginning of Faust) is entirely symbolic. The author, a
learned and versatile Jew, treats there the most human and the
most debated of problems: the origin and the teleology
of suffering. He demonstrates all the fallacy of the theory
hitherto commonly held, that only he who has sinned suffers,
with two easy data of experience: the prosperity of
the wicked and the suffering of the just. The problem is not
fully solved, but the essential points are set out
of what will be the full solution preached by
Christianity: a) sufferings test the just in
honour of God (cf. prologue); b) they preserve him from
pride, from sin and purify him (Elihu's speech);
c) man must entrust himself to divine Wisdom, to
its inscrutable designs, without having the audacity to
discuss them, submitting humbly to its providence (words of God).

From this appears the admirable unity of the most beautiful composition. Some wished to deny to the author the prologue and
the epilogue, because of their prosaic form; others the theophany
(38-42). But the prologue is required as foundation and
the epilogue as complement of the whole poem; there are
identities of concepts and expressions; cf. the angels = sons
of God (1, 6; 2, 1 and 38, 7). Thus God's intervention is strictly connected with Job's invocation (31, 35-37),
with that of Eliphaz himself (5, 8) and with Elihu's announcement (37,
14-24). Indeed it is the culminating point prepared and awaited
throughout the whole poem. The prologue itself demands it.

Above all, the critics (and Dhorme too) do not consider
Elihu's speeches original. They object: a) Elihu is named neither in
the prologue nor in the epilogue (but if Elihu is the advocate of G. and well preludes the sentence of God, he should not have entered into this; his intervention is prepared by the double invocation of G.); b) Elihu says nothing that the friends have not said or that God will say (but his discourses were meant precisely to be an examination of what had been said thus far and the preparation of the divine sentence [37:14-24]); c) diversity of style and vocabulary (but a careful examination ultimately establishes that Elihu's vocabulary is in general that of the other speakers [Szczygiel, Peters, Dennefeld]; nor can an artist be condemned for not varying according to the character and the role of the personage, or for not being always highly lyrical, without pauses or lowering of tone).

The author of the book is an unknown Jew of Palestine, a perfect connoisseur of the Law (Job 24:2-11; Ex. 22:21; etc.), of sacred literature, of Jewish social conditions, of the sciences, and also of the customs and literatures of foreign countries.

Pfeiffer and Dhorme consider him a sage of Edom, others (Jastrow) an imitator of the Babylonian poem of the "suffering righteous one," others an imitator of Egyptian literature (cf. Job 31 and the Egyptian negative confessions). It is out of place to speak of imitation: no valid proof can be adduced, as confirms, besides the content, the sublime poetry of G. The common ground of forms and motifs in the wisdom literature of the East suffices to explain the analogies.

On the other hand, the affinity and dependence of G. on the sacred books, and particularly on Jeremiah, is undeniable (cf. Jer. 12:1-4 with the argument of G.; Jer. 20:14-19 with Job 3:3-12; Jer. 9:3 with Job 7:15; etc.). The region of 'Uṣ is named only in Job 1:1; Jer. 25:20; Lam. 4:21. The author therefore wrote after Jeremiah, probably toward the end of the kingdom of Judah; the vigor of the style and the elegance of the language make the hypothesis that the book was written after the exile scarcely plausible (Vaccari, Szczygiel, Dennefeld, Gunkel, König, etc.). Nevertheless Bigot, Driver-Gray, Buhl, Dhorme hold for after the exile: Job 12:13-15; 37:7-12 has an evident allusion to the exile; and it seems still to depend on the second part of Isaiah, on Zechariah and perhaps on Malachi (Dhorme). But the earlier Assyrian deportations of the Israelites of the north (II Kings 15:29; 17:6) suffice to explain the tone of G.

Peters even places its composition in the 4th century, on account of an alleged influence on G. of Greek culture. Of the ancients, some placed it in the time of Moses (the description in the prologue presents G. as a patriarch), others attributed it to Solomon.

The Hebrew text, contrary to the misgivings of Merx, Torczyner and Ball, is better preserved than that of other books (e.g., of Jeremiah), as Budde, Dhorme, Peters and Vaccari demonstrate. The Greek version is rather free, to be used with caution; at times it departs too far from the sense of the text; it has some additions (e.g., the historical appendix, at the end); but in general it tends to abbreviate, and about a sixth of the Hebrew text is missing in it, supplied by the version of Theodotion. The Syriac is faithful, useful for criticism, less so for exegesis. More useful than usual is the Aramaic Targum (v.). Among all of them the version of St. Jerome (Vulgate) excels for understanding of the text, clarity and elegance (Vaccari).

With the exception of Theodore of Mopsuestia, no one ever called into doubt the divine authority of the book of G., cited as Sacred Scripture in I Cor. 3:19; James 5:13; cf. Rom. 11:35.

From it a complete theology of the Old Testament can be drawn. The whole book is dominated by the thought of the one God (5:9; 9:10; 37:5), variously named as in Genesis. G. sings his glory, in the style of the Prophets and the Psalms (9:6 = Is. 13:13; 9:8 = Am. 4:13...), in creation (9:4-13) and in the upheavals he works in society (12:13-25; cf. Ps. 106 [107]:40). Creator and sovereign of all things (28:24-27; 38:4-7; cf. Prov. 8:22-31), God preserves and governs them (12:13; cf. 3:4; 31:2). Inaccessible to our gaze (23:8 ff.), it is not possible to know his nature (11:8 ff.). He is surrounded by the angels (1:6; 37:7), his servants (5:1; 33:23 ff.), in whom his purity finds blemishes (4:18). The "adversary" is not a lost being like our Satan, but a minister of his (Job 1:2), like "the spirit of falsehood" seen by Micah (I Kings 22:19-23; cf. L. Desnoyers, Histoire du peuple hébreu, I, Paris 1922, p. 161 n.; II, ibid. 1930, p. 72 ff.). Before God stands the wretched and fleeting existence of man, who however righteous is impure before him (9:28-31; 25:4-6). His duties have as their foundation "the fear of God" (28:28; 1:1-8; 2:3), which includes piety and the practice of religious (4:6; 15:4) and moral (23:11 ff.; 21:7 ff.; 29:14; especially 31:13, 16-21, 29-32) duties. Alongside the righteous live sinners, who are wicked (8:20) and foolish (5:2 ff.). The principal attribute of God in relation to man is justice.

The whole Old Testament sees the rigorous connection between human acts and their reward or punishment, realized here below in a pragmatism with 4 terms: sin and punishment - penance and deliverance (cf. Job 4:7 ff.; 5:6). In G. this pragmatism is surpassed, even if a solution to replace it is lacking. In reality the concept of the afterlife remains in G. the traditional one of tē'ōl, a dark dwelling (17:13-16) in opposition to that of the living (14:21; 21:21), from which no one ever comes out (7:10; 10:21; 14). In G. death is no longer considered as a sign of divine judgment (16; 19; 21), and G. desires it as the beginning of his rest (5:17 ff.); but he places no hope in the beyond (17:13-16). He hopes that God will intervene before he dies; he is certain that he will see him with his own eyes, so great is his faith in divine justice (16:18-20; 19:25 ff.). Thus in ch. 16: although with one foot in the grave (17:11-16), G. is sure that God will intervene before the earth covers his blood.

Thus in 19:25-27 G. would wish that a record of his cause be drawn up in indelible writing (v. 23 ff.) because he is certain that God in person there on the dunghill is about to rise up against his accusers (v. 25); and he, with his skin eaten away, with his eyes reddened by tears, will witness his justification, the confusion of his friends (26 ff.). "Ah, I know; my gō'ēl is alive, and at the last he will rise upon this dust; and from behind my skin, and in my flesh I shall see God..." (25 ff.): the more probable version of the Hebrew text, confirmed in part by the Syriac version and by Theodotion. It is always a question of the same hope that the Lord will intervene before he dies. The Greek version, omitting wē'ōhar (v. 26) and placing jāqām first (v. 25), inserts the concept of the resurrection of the body: "I know that he who will deliver me is eternal, upon the earth my skin will rise again...". A concept that some Greek Fathers saw, was denied by St. John Chrysostom (PG 53, 565; 57, 396) and, with the support of the Vulgate, St. Augustine spread it (e.g., PL 41, 793) in the Latin Church.

Francesco Spadafora

III. ARCHAEOLOGY

The example of the prophet J., resigned in the sufferings of misery, is already held up to the faithful by Pope Clement at the close of the 1st century (I Cor. 26, 3). He was depicted in the cemetery frescoes toward the end of the 2nd century (Wilpert, Pitture, 351 ff.); to these three more found in the Cemetery "ad duas lauros" after that publication must be added, and the most expressive is the one published by Kirsch (Un gruppo di cripte dipinte inedite del cimitero dei SS. Pietro e Marcellino, in Riv. di arch. crist., 7 [1930], p. 225, fig. 13). In the paintings the prophet is always alone. A group of sarcophagi, namely five Roman ones, one from Brescia and three from Gaul, all of the 4th century, instead depict the prophet while his wife comes to visit him (Wilpert, Sarcofagi, t. 14, 2, 159, 2, 187, 6); in some cases she holds out a flat cake to her husband, as in a sarcophagus of Arles, or else she stops her nostrils, as in the sarcophagus of Junius Bassus (F. Gerke, Der Sarkophag des Innins Basins, Berlin 1936, fig. 10). In some cases the friends also appear.

In ancient prayers of the ordo commendationis animae "prayer is addressed to the Lord "sicut liberasti Iob de passionibus suis". The famous passage "scio quod Redemptor meus vivit" (Iob. 13, 25) of J. himself was received into the funeral liturgies and repeated also in Christian sepulchral inscriptions, as in that of Bishop Flavianus of Vercelli, and others of Naples, Rimini and Comacchio.

J. is a symbol of the resurrection according to St. Jerome (Contra Iohannum Hierosolymianum, 30); St. Ambrose points to him as the one who knew how to overcome patiently all the injuries and adversities of life, promising himself a recompense in the future resurrection. Thus he comes almost to symbolize the soul of the deceased freed by God from eternal punishments. The tribulations of J. were also represented in the 5th century in the basilica of St. Felix in Nola (St. Paulinus of Nola, Carm., 28, 25: PL 61, 663).

The prophet J. is also represented in gilded glass, as, for example, in the one found at Neuss, near Cologne; in manuscripts, as in the Syriac Cod. 341 of the National Library of Paris, of the 7th or 8th century.

Enrico Josi

IV. ICONOGRAPHY

In a symbolism of Christus patens, J. appears on the south portal of the cathedral of Amiens and on the north portal of the cathedral of Chartres, seated on a dung heap. The cycle of the events of J.'s life also appears in the fragments of a Book of J. in the Library of Naples, and finds rich illustration in the Catalan Bibles of S. Maria de Ripoli and of St-Père-de-Roda, in the National Library of Paris, as well as in another Bible of the Salzburg school. J. in misery is represented, as usual, in attitudes that attest to his sufferings, whereas, before and after his misfortune, he seems to bear royal rank and majesty.

Fresco painting also contributes to the iconography of J.: Bartolo di Fredi, in 1356, frescoed Stories of J. in the collegiate church of S. Gimignano, and a few years later, in 1371, Francesco di Volterra repeated the cycle in lost frescoes of the Camposanto of Pisa, with the episodes of the Banquet, of the Dialogue of God with Satan, of the Destruction of J.'s Palace, of his misfortune and of his return to prosperity.

Eugenio Battisti

V. TESTAMENT OF JOB

Apocryphal, proscribed in the Decretum pseudo-gelasianum. It is a midhrāsh on the Book of J. It rests in part on the amplifications of the Greek version of J. (after 2:9 and 42:17).

Thus J. is identified with Jobab (a confusion arising from Gen. 36:33 ff.); he has a brother Nachor, to whom the "Testament" is attributed; J.'s wife is called Sitis and a long speech is attributed to her. More sober is the legend about J.'s sons and daughters, who are gathered around their dying father. J. recounts how he suffered so much from Satan for having destroyed an idolatrous temple; but the Lord restored everything to him. Before the daughters who sing heavenly hymns, the angels come to take the soul of J., who would have lived 255 years.

It was probably written in the 2nd century A.D., by a Jew; Tertullian (De patientia, 13: PL 1, 1270 ff.) alludes to the Testament of J., 20.

Francesco Spadafora