Abdias
Prophetia AbdiæIntroductions
Enciclopedia Cattolica
ABDIAS (Hebrew 'servant of Yahweh'; Masoretic text 'Obadyāh, form used by Jews and by Luther and followers). - Fourth of the minor prophets of the biblical canon, author of the shortest book of the Old Testament (21 verses), containing an oracle against Edom.
The Lord invites the nations to join in battle against Edom (1), whose villages nestled among the rocks they will destroy, plundering its treasure, while its former friends will withdraw, leaving it prey to slaughter (2-9). Such punishment is its due because Edom acted broadly against Judah, joining with "the foreigners who carried off all its goods, laid hands on its possessions and massacred its fugitives" (10-14). All the nations will drink on the day of the Lord the cup of punishment and will vanish, while Judah and Israel will regain salvation by destroying Edom, will extend their borders and will celebrate the return of the prisoners (15-21).
Haydock
Abdias, whose name is interpreted the servant of the Lord, is believed to have prophesied about the same time as Osee, Joel, and Amos: though some of the Hebrews, who believe him to be the same with Achab's steward, make him much more ancient. His prophecy is the shortest of any in number of words, but yields to none, says St. Jerome, in the sublimity of mysteries. It contains but one chapter. (Challoner) --- He foretells the destruction of Edom, for its pride and enmity against the Jews: whose return and the redemption of mankind are also announced. (Worthington) --- Abdias seems to have prophesied after the destruction of Jerusalem, and before Nabuchodonosor attacked Edom, etc., which took place within five years. (Calmet)
Douay 1582/1609
ABDIAS borne in Sichem, of the tribe of Ephraim, prophecied the S Epiph. same time with Amos; so briefly that his prophecie is not parted into chapters: I. against the Idumeans; foreshewing their destruction; 10. for their perpetual emnitie against the lewes, and confederacie with the Chaldees. 17. The captiuitie and relaxation of the lewes. 19. And redemption of the whole world by Christ.
Cornely
S 24. — De Prophetia Abdiae.
306. — Visio Abdiae , omnium scripturarum propheticarum brevissima, unico vaticinio contra Idumaeos constat. Qui, licet posteri essent Esau ac proin « fratres » filiorum Iacob, non tantum de Iudaeorum exercitu ab hostibus capto et de civitate sancta expugnata et direpta erant gavisi, sed etiam illa occasione usi se hostibus adiunxerant, ut fratres suos impugnarent et infestissimo animo insectarentur. Quapropter propheta Idumaeis completum interitum , domui Iacob autem futuram restaurationem et salutem praedicit. Tres vaticinii partes apte distinguuntur :
Continue reading 13 paragraphs
1. Idumaeae ruina praedicitur (4-9). Annuntiat propheta consilium Dei, qui Idumaeam, non obstantibus praeruptae altitudinis castellis, quibus confidat, destruendam decrevit (1- 4), atque futuram decreti exsecutionem vividis coloribus describit. Hostes depopulabuntur terram, quae ab amicis derelicta et illusa atque proprii consilii inops prorsus interibit (5-9).
2. ftuinae causa declaratur (10- 16). Iniurias intulit Edom fratri suo Iuda, de cuius calamitate gavisus erat et cuius hostibus se adiunxerat (10- 11); ideo fiet ei, quod aliis fecit; prope enim est dies Domini, in quo Deus omnes gentes propter iniurias populo electo illatas puniturus sit (45. 16).
3. Restauratio regni Iuda (4-21). Quando Deus iudicabit gentes, in monte Sion salus erit. Iuda et Israel uniti Idumaeam destruent finesque regni sui extendent (17-19), atque milites et incolae Ierusalem ex captivitate reduces terras expugnatas possidebunt el « erit Deo regnum » (20. 24).
Consueto nostro relicto ordine argumentum divisionemque vaticinii praemisimus, ut in eius auctorem et aetatem accuratius inquiramus. De eius autem auctore praeter nomen nihil nobis esse traditum videbimus, atque de eius aetate tantus est interpretum sive antiquorum sive modernorum dissensus, ut magis minusve probabilia dumtaxat proponere possimus. Alii enim ineunti vel medio saec. 9. vaticinium Abdiae attribuunt, alii aut initio exsilii babylonici aut tempore Esdrae, immo exeunte saec. 4. illud compositum esse censent; probabiliorem vero eorum esse sententiam arbitramur, qui ad ordinem, quem in serie Prophetarum Minorum occupat, attendentes Abdiam primis tribus (Osee, loel, Amos) dicunt fuisse aequalem vel paullo antiquiorem, ita ut ineunte saec. 8. sub initiis regni Oziae vixerit.
Nomen Aódiae (nvrà$ vel sn*T32, servus Domini, apud Alex. 'ÀGSuxc vel 'O68&, in Vulg. Abdias, Obdias, Obedias) satis frequens non tantum inter levitas, quibus singulari modo convenire videtur (1 Par. 9, 16; 2 Par. 3,19; 2 Esdr. 19,25), sed etiam in aliis tribubus 1 Par. 71,3; 8,38; 9,54 etc.), duo viri celebriores ineunte saec. 9. gesserunt: unus in regno luda, quem una cum aliis principibus, levitis, sacerdotibus rex Iosaphat (897.-872.) misit, ut populum Legem Dei doceret (2 Par. 17,7 sqq.), alter in regno Israel, qui praefectus domus regiae, quum Achab (898.- 875.) et lezabel prophetas persequerentur, centum ex eis abscondit et servavit (3 Reg. 18,8 sqq.). Priori vaticinium attribuendum esse, moderni nonnulli non improbabile esse censent!; alteri teste S. Hieronymo Hebraei olim illud attribuerunt, quos secuti sunt multi ex antiquioribus interpretibus?. Utraque autem sententia identitate nominis sola fulcitur, quae in tanta nominis frequentia argumentum ne leviter quidem probabile suppeditat. Atque altera eam quoque ob causam dicenda est erronea, quia Abdiam ex regni Iuda incolis fuisse, integrum vaticinium demonstrat; de regno enim luda solo loquitur (11. 12. 13. 16. 17. 19-21).
Qui initio exsilii babylonici aut post exsilium libellum nostrum exortum esse tenent, duo afferunt argumenta : auctorem nostrum civitatem sanctam a Chaldaeis captam et destructam describere vel supponere, eumque nonnulla ex Ieremiae vaticinio contra Idumaeos in suum transumsisse?. Quae parum recte asseri videntur. De ultimo quidem urbis excidio, quando Nabuchodonosor eam plane delevit templo destructo et toto populo in exsilium abducto, in vaticinio nostro sermonem esse, antiqui quoque interpretes plerique arbitrati sunt, sed illud non velut praeteritum supponi aut describi, sed velut futurum praedici statuerunt*. At recte monent alii, Abdiae descriptionem (11-14. 20) ultimae illi calamitati non convenire; illa enim, quae recentiores scriptores sacri (cfr Thren.; Ps. 136 etc.) maxime conqueruntur, plenam urbis destructtonem, templi eversionem, totius populi captivitatem in vaticinio nostro plane praetermitti , quin etiam urbem supponi non deletam (11. 13), aperte distingui inter domum lacob, quae sedes suas retinuerat, et inter exercitum et incolas lerusalem e captivitate reduces, qui novas terras interea expugnatas sint possessuri (19. 20), templi destructi aut profanati ne mentionem quidem fieri; prophetae igitur obversari anteriorem quandam urbis expugnationem, in qua opes tantum sint direptae atque militum incolarumque parsin captivitatem abducti 5. Prius ergo argumentum fundamento caret; ad alterum autem quod attinet, tantam esse inter nostrum vaticinium et Jerem. 49,7-99 affinitatem , ut alteruter alterius verba sit mutuatus, negari non potest; at leremiam ab Abdia, non vero Abdiam a leremia dependere hisce argumentis tantum non certum redditur : a.) leremias uti in aliis, ita maxime in suis valiciniis contra gentes oracula antiquiorum prophetarum recolere iisdemque fere verbis adhibitis in memoriam revocare et denuo confirmare solet (Ierem. V1. et Is. 15,28-32; Ierem. &8. et Is. 15. 16; lerem. &9,1-6; ct Am. 1,13-16; Jerem. &9.23-9'1 et Am. 1,3-5 etc. 9); unde contra Ieremiae prioritatem grave exoritur praeiudicium. b.) At gravius est, quod ea, quae uterque communia habet, in Abdiae vaticinio una serie aptissimo nexu cohaereant (45d. 1-9), apud Ieremiam vero omnino sint dispersa (hac scilicet ratione : Jerem. 49,1. 15-16. 9. 10. 7. 22. 17); mirum autem profecto esset, si Abdias ex tam disiectis membris aptum corpus constituisset. c. Quibus accedit, quod dicendi modi leremiae proprii in Abdiae vaticinio non deprehendantur, e contra expressiones illae, quas Abdias et Ieremias communes habent, in reliquo leremiae libro non amplius adhibeantur?. Quare pro certo asserere licet, Abdiam leremia esse antiquiorem; quod enim nonnulli statuerunt, coaevi prophetae vaticinium leremiam repetiisse, id omni probabilitate caret; ad quid enim vaticinium vix & Deo datum et populo manifestatum leremias repetiisset? Ceterum Abdiam de ultimo urbis excidio non loqui iam diximus; ergo tempore exsilii non vixit.
Quibus extremis sententiis exclusis ostendamus oportet, quibus argumenüUs innitatur sententia, quam probabiliorem diximus, Abdiam scilicet tribus praecedentibus prophetis (Osee, loel, Amos) paullo antiquiorem exeunte saec. 9. et ineunte saec. 8. sub Amasia et Ozia esse vaticinatum. Atque praeprimis notandum est, loelem nostrum vaticinium iam allegasse; Abdiae (v. 17) enim verba « Et in monte Sion erit salvatio » Ioel (2,32) tamquam iam antea a Domino annuntiata et populo cognita affert hac formula : « sicut dizit Dominus », neque aliae desunt allusiones, quibus libellum nostrum a Ioele adhibitum esse demonstrari videtur?. Ante Ioelem igitur ac proinde ante Amos (303 p. 550) vaticinatusest Abdias; difficillimum autem est dictu, quanto eis sit antiquior. Moderni interpretes ex urbis direptione, quam velut praeteritam describi (Aód. 10 sqq.) iure admittunt, prophetae aetatem accuratius definire volunt. Ter enim ante Oziae aetatem lerusalem ab hostibus capta et direpta legitur : tempore Roboam (958.-941.) ab Aegypti rege Sesac (3 Reg. 15,291 sqq.); sub loram (872.-864.) ab Arabibus et Philisthaeis (Par. 21,16 sq.); sub Oziae patre Amasia (817.- 189.) a Ioa rege Israel (4 Reg. 15,8 sqq.; 2 Paral. 25,17 sqq.). De prima expugnatione sub Roboam non esse sermonem omnes concedunt, quia ea aetate Idumaei regno Iuda subiecti illa perpetrare non potuerunt, quae Abdias (l. c.) eis obiicit. Neque de tertia sermonem esse consentiunt plerique, quoniam hostes cum emphasi quadam a/zent, extranei (pv, a22 v. 11.) vocantur in oppositione ad Idumaeos « fratres »
(v. 10); evidens autem est, Israelitas, qui sub Amasia lerusalem occuparunt, in hoc contextu non potuisse appellari alienos et extraneos. Restat igitur secunda expugnatio tempore regis Ioram ; atque fatendum est prophetae descriptionem illi direptioni sanctae civitatis satis respondere. Paralipomena quidem solis Arabibus et Philisthaeis nominatis Idumaeos inter expugnatores non enumerant, at noster quoque eos inter ipsos expugnatores non fuisse indicat (« tu quoque eras quasi unus ex eis » v. 11.); facile autem concipitur, Idumaeos, qui sub rege Ioram iugum iudaicum excusserant (4 Reg. 8,20 sqq.) , statim victoribüs se adiunxisse eaque perpetrasse, quae Abdias (10 sqq.) reprehendit. Recte igitur illos interpretes vidisse censemus, qui prophetam de secunda hac urbis expugnatione locutum esse tenent, sed eos a vero aberrasse, quum ulterius progressi Abdiam eodem tempore vixisse dicerent!?. Quamvis enim vivida sit eius descriptio, nullo verbo docet, se ipsum illam cladem vidisse aut illam esse recentem; ad summum cum aliqua probabilitate ex v. 20. colligitur eius sequelas tempore prophetae perdurasse; at hinc non sequitur, direptionis istius commemoratione et descriptione aetatem vaticinii definiri. Difficile nobis persuademus, prophetarum collectorem, qui Esdra non est recentior, Abdiae si plus dimidio saeculo ante Oziae aetatem vixisset quartum (Mass.) vel quintum. (A/ez.) locum inter Minores attributurum fuisse; in omnibus enim aliis disponendis ad ordinem chronologicum satis attendit (296) !!. Neque quidquam arbitramur obstare, quominus Abdiam illo tempore ruinam Idumaeae praedixisse statuamus, quo Amasias illam regno luda iterum subiicere incepit eiusque filius Ozias eam plane subiugavit (& Reg. 14,6. 7; 2 Paral. 95,11; 26.2). Ex Paralipomenis enim constat, Amasiam secundum Dei voluntatem expeditionem hanc suscepisse atque in ea complenda consilio prophetae alicuius esse adiutum ; annon coniicere licet, « hominem Dei » anonymum, quo exhorlante Amasias israeliticos auxiliares, quos conduxerat, remisit, ut Dei auxilium obtineret (2 Paral. 25,1), ipsum nostrum Abdiam fuisse, qui illa in occasione Idumaeis iniurias regno Iuda iam antea illatas in memoriam revocavit, ut iustam esse eorum poenam demonstraret? Nonne ad easdem iniurias etiam alludere videntur Joe/ (3,19) et Amos (1,11), ut Idumaeis poenas annuntient? Neque tamen totum vaticinium impletum esse asserimus, quando Amasias et Ozias Idumaeam sibi subiecerunt; eadem enim ratione, qua alii prophetae aliorum populorum, Abdias Idumaeae completam ruinam una visione vidit et uno vaticinio visa comprehendit, licet interitus ipse non nisi decursu temporis esset complendus; quare etiam recentiores prophetae inde a lIoele, Amos, Isaia usque ad leremiam et Ezechielem, immo usque ad Malachiam eandem ruinam praedixerunt. Quae initium sumsit per Amasiam et Oziam; sub Achaz quidem iugum iterum excusserunt Idumaei (2 Par. 28,17; & Reg. 16,6), immo in ultimo Ierosolymorum excidio insultarunt devictis Iudaeis (Ps. 136,7 ; TAren. 5,91 sqq. etc.), at eandem sortem, quam Iudaei, habuerunt (Jerem. 27,3 sqq.), immo peiorem; nam saec. &. ex pristino suo territorio eiecti sunt a Nabathaeis; eorum reliquias, quae meridionalem Iudaeae partem incolebant, loannes Hyrcanus, exeunte saec. 2. plane devicit et circumcisionem recipere iussit!?; nomen eorum lerosolymis per Romanos captis ex historia prorsus disparet.
Probabile igitur esse censemus, Abdiam ante edomiticum Amasiae bellum vaticinium suum condidisse, sed prophetico munere etiam sub Ozia esse functum ??, atque ita explicatur, cur prophetarum collector eius libellum posuerit inter alios, qui Oziae tempore exorti sunt.
Nec authentia nec integritas libelli a quoquam addubitatur ^; eius autem d?vina auctoritas, quamvis Novi T. allegationibus demonstrari nequeat, loelis et leremiae testimoniis iam allatis extra dubium ponitur.
eum proselytum Idumaeum fuissc tradiderunt cfr Huet. Demonstr. evang. Prop. IV. P. 311 sq.; Wolf Biblioth. hebr. 1I. p. 171; Carpzov. Introd. II. p. 171.
9. Meyrick (Spcaker's Comm. VI ad Ioel 2,32) aliique explicare volunt : « sicut Dominus dixit per me prophetam » (« as the Lord hath said by me His prophet ; Ioel declare the promise to emanate not from himself but from God »); attamen ut verba non sua scd Dei esse declarent, prophetae saepe quidem vaticiniis suis inserunt « ! DNJ
(« dixit Dominus »), aut illis addunt « ?* 327 *2 (« quia Dominus locutus est » Ioel 8,3); sed nusquam legitur ** 3DN ÜN2 (« sicut dizit Dominus »). — Cum Abd. 10-18 in codd: phrasibus nonnullis consentit Ioel 1,15; 2,1. 32; 3,3. 4. 7. 8. 12. 14. 17. 19, quae licet non omnes urgeri queant, tamen dependentiam quandam innuere videntur.
Cornelius a Lapide
Argument 7 paragraphs
Dorotheus, bishop of Tyre, who lived under Constantine the Great, and under Julian the Apostate died a martyr at the age of 107 years amid torments, in his book On the Life and Death of the Prophets, says: "Obadiah, he says, was from the land of Shechem in the region of Bethacaram, was a disciple of Elijah, and although he suffered much on account of his name, he was preserved. He was the third of the fifty-commanders, whom Elijah spared, and who had gone down to Ahaziah; and after abandoning the service of his king, he acquired the grace of prophecy, and died, and was buried with his fathers." St. Epiphanius has the same in the Life of Obadiah. Hear also St. Jerome here: "This Obadiah, they say, was a Hebrew, who under the king of Samaria Ahab, and the most impious Jezabel, III Kings XVIII, 12, fed a hundred prophets in caves, who did not bend the knee to Baal. He therefore, because he had nourished a hundred prophets, received the grace of prophecy, and from a commander of the army became a commander of the Church." And he adds: "His tomb is venerated even to this day in Sebaste (where also Elisha and John the Baptist are buried), which was formerly called Samaria. Herod called this city Sebasten in honor of Augustus Caesar, in the Greek language," that is, Augusta. Where note that St. Jerome does not say this from himself, but from the opinion of the Hebrews: from which it follows that Obadiah lived and prophesied in the time of Elijah, under Ahab king of Israel and Jehoshaphat king of Judah, and was the first of all the Prophets who wrote down their oracles. This opinion of the Hebrews is followed, or rather cited by St. Dorotheus, St. Epiphanius, St. Isidore, Eusebius in the Chronicle (but erroneously through scribal error, as St. Augustine says in book XVIII of the City of God, chapter XXXI), Clement of Alexandria, I Stromata, Rupertus, Hugo, Lyra, Sanchez and a Castro in the Proem, book IV, chapter III. Mariana adds from the Hebrews that this Obadiah was the third fifty-commander, whom Ahaziah sent to summon Elijah; to whom as a suppliant Elijah spared, IV Kings I, 13. For from this it appears that he renounced the court, adhered to Elijah, and gave himself entirely to God, and therefore obtained the gift of prophecy. Indeed some think Obadiah to be Obdiah, whom King Jehoshaphat sent, II Paralipomenon XVII, 7, with Micaiah and others, to teach in the cities of Judah. Whence the Septuagint there reads Obadiah for Obdiah. But that Obdiah is said to have been a prince, not a prophet: whence he appears to have been different from this our Obadiah.
The entire foundation therefore of this opinion, namely that Obadiah was a fifty-commander of King Ahab of Israel, rests on the tradition of the Hebrews. But this tradition is uncertain and doubtful. For Rabbi David and Rabbi Abraham say it is not established at what time Obadiah prophesied.
More probably therefore others think that Obadiah lived and prophesied much later, namely under Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah kings of Judah, and was contemporary with Hosea, Joel, Amos and Micah the prophets, as St. Jerome asserts at the beginning of his commentary on Hosea; Theodoret, Cyril here, Ribera in the Proem, prelude 2, and others. This opinion is proved, first, because Hosea is commonly placed as the first of the Prophets, according to that: "The beginning of the Lord's speaking in Hosea," chapter I, 2. But Hosea began to prophesy under Uzziah and Jotham, as is said there. Therefore Obadiah was not the first, nor did he prophesy under Jehoshaphat, but under Jotham. Second, because Obadiah says verse 1: "We have heard from the Lord," namely I and Isaiah chapter XXI, and Amos chapter I, 11, of the destruction of Edom. Therefore Obadiah did not precede Isaiah and Amos, but was contemporary with them. Third, if Obadiah the prophet had been a fifty-commander of King Ahab, surely Scripture would not have passed over this, nor would Josephus, when they narrate that history of Ahab and Obadiah at length. Fourth, if Obadiah had prophesied under Jehoshaphat, he would have predicted a nearer destruction of Edom, namely that which was made by Amaziah king of Judah, IV Kings XIV, 17. But now he does not predict that, but only that which was made by the Chaldeans. Therefore he prophesied after Amaziah, under Jotham; especially since not long before the time of Jehoshaphat, the Edomites were laid waste and subdued by David, III Kings chapter XI, 15, so that they would not have needed a Prophet, and a new destruction.
Fifth, because the prophecy of Obadiah is almost the same as the prophecy of Jeremiah against the Edomites, chapter XLIX, 24. Therefore he seems to have prophesied in the times not of Elijah, but of Jeremiah. Sixth, because from the time of Elijah and Jehoshaphat until the destruction of Judah and Edom by the Chaldeans, three hundred years elapsed. Who would believe that Obadiah, passing over other nearer calamities, prophesied the destruction of Edom to come after three hundred years? God therefore seems to have wished to chastise the Edomites through David, Amaziah and others: but when He saw that they were not amended by these scourges, through Obadiah He threatened them with complete and final destruction by the Chaldeans. Moreover, he assigns the same cause of their destruction which Amos and Jeremiah assign, namely the inveterate and mutual hatred of the Edomites against the Jews, so much so that they killed or plundered those fleeing from enemies, indeed they even aided the Chaldeans with wealth and arms in the assault on Jerusalem. Wherefore he threatens them with the same destruction from the same Chaldeans by the law of retaliation: but to the Jews he promises a return from Babylon, and happiness both temporal and spiritual under Christ. Thus St. Jerome, Theodoret, Remigius, Rupert, Albert, Vatablus, Hugo and others. That this happened thus is evident: for Nebuchadnezzar in the fifth year after Jerusalem was destroyed, which was the twenty-third year of his reign, invaded and laid waste Edom, as Josephus relates in book X of the Antiquities, chapter XI. Again, that the Edomites aided the Chaldeans in the destruction of Jerusalem, and therefore were themselves destroyed, is evident from III Esdras, IV, 45: "And thou, he says, hast vowed to build the temple which the Edomites burned, when Judah was destroyed by the Chaldeans." And Psalm CXXXVI, 7: "Remember, O Lord, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem, who say: Lay it bare, lay it bare, even to the foundation thereof." Rabbi Solomon adds that Obadiah was an Edomite, and therefore was sent to the Edomites, that he might more freely reprove the crimes of his own nation: "The Rabbis say, he says, that Obadiah was a proselyte Edomite. The Lord therefore said: From them themselves I will bring against them. Obadiah will come, who lived among two wicked men, Ahab and Jezebel, and did not imitate their ways, and will take vengeance on the wicked Esau, who lived among two just men, Isaac and Rebecca, and did not imitate their works." The same Rabbi David relates here, and therefore applies to Obadiah that Hebrew proverb: "The very spoon which the craftsman carved, burns his mouth with sharp mustard;" which they are accustomed to say of craftsmen who suffer damage or trouble from their own work. Thus indeed Obadiah, although he was an Edomite and a prophet, nevertheless predicted the destruction of the Edomites, that is, of his own nation; whence from his own craft, namely from prophecy, he seems to have suffered damage.
But St. Dorotheus, Epiphanius and others cited at the beginning relate that Obadiah was a Jew, namely a Shechemite, just as the other Prophets were Jews. St. Jerome writes in the Epitaph of St. Paula that she herself saw in Samaria, or Sebaste, the tomb of Elisha, Obadiah and John the Baptist, "where, he says, she trembled, struck with wonder at many miracles: for she beheld demons roaring in various torments, and before the tombs of the saints men howling like wolves (let our opponents of the saints note this) barking with the voices of dogs, roaring like lions, hissing like serpents, bellowing like bulls; others rolling their heads, and touching the ground behind their backs with their heads, and with feet suspended women's garments falling down over their faces." Obadiah was inscribed in the catalogue of Saints on the nineteenth day of November.
Moreover Obadiah in Hebrew is the same as servant of God, so that by name he represents Christ, who took the form of a servant, and is called the servant of God in Isaiah XLII, 1, as St. Jerome says, who also in the Preface asserts that he wrote on Obadiah as a young man before thirty years of age, and expounded him mystically; which he refutes, because the literal sense of the Prophet ought first to be handed down, and then the mystical sense ought fittingly to be built upon it. "I was an infant, he says, and did not yet know how to write, my hand wavered, my joints trembled. Now if I have made no other progress, at least I have this Socratic thing: I know that I know nothing." And soon after: "I will freely confess, both that it was the work of a childish mind, and this of a mature old age."
Again, of all the Prophets, Obadiah is the briefest and the smallest, "in the reckoning of verses, not of meanings," as St. Jerome says, and Ribera after him. Small men, he says, excel so much in wit and art that a proverb has arisen from it, ἀνοὺς ὁ μακρός, that is, foolish he who is tall. Aristotle, in the Physiognomics: "The very small," he says, "are very acute, for since the motion of blood is contained in a small space, the motions also arrive very swiftly at wisdom. But those who are very large are slow: for since the motion of blood is contained in a large space, the motions arrive slowly at wisdom." From which rightly Ecclesiasticus, chapter XI, 2: "Praise not a man for his beauty, neither despise a man for his look. The bee is small among flying creatures, and her fruit surpasseth in sweetness." What shall I say of silkworms, what of flies and bees? Indeed, St. Augustine, in the book On Two Souls Against the Manichees, chapters III and IV, does not hesitate to assert that a fly is more excellent than the sun: because it has a soul, life, motion, and all the organs of living things, which the sun lacks. Thus small things have more life and vigor than large ones. Why should I recount the remora, which, though it is a small fish, stops and delays huge ships driven by strong wind, if it attaches and fixes itself to them? Thus God on high shows His power, wisdom and greatness in small things. Obadiah, says Hugh of St. Victor (who wrote on Obadiah in his manner acutely and cleverly, but mystically), "is simple in speech, and manifold in meaning: rare in words, but copious in thoughts, according to that saying in Ecclesiasticus XX: The wise man is known by few words. He directs his prophecy literally against Idumea, allegorically against the world, tropologically against the flesh he sharpens his style. Bearing the type of the Savior, he subtly introduces His coming, through whom the world is destroyed, through whom the flesh is worn away, through whom liberty is restored." Wherefore rightly Isidore in the book of Allegories of Holy Scripture: "Obadiah," he says, "that is, servant of the Lord, among all the Prophets briefer in the number of words, but equal in the grace of mysteries." Whence Obadiah is imitated almost word for word by Jeremiah, chapter XLIX, 23 and following.
Machine translation from the Latin, not reviewed.