Proverbi 22:28 Commento

Here are two things which are more valuable and which we should covet more than great riches: - 1. To be well spoken of: A name (that is, a good name, a name for good things with God and good people) is rather to be chosen than great riches; that is, we should be more careful to do that by which we may get and keep a good name than that by which we may raise and increase a great estate. Great riches bring great cares with them, expose men to danger, and add no real value to a man. A fool and a knave may have great riches, but a good name makes a man easy and safe, supposes a man wise and honest, redounds to the glory of God, and gives a man a greater opportunity of doing good. By great riches we may relieve the bodily wants of others, but by a good name we may recommend religion to them. 2. To be well beloved, to have an interest in the esteem and affections of all about us; this is better than silver and gold. Christ has neither silver nor gold, but he grew in favour with God and man, Luk 2:52. This should teach us to look with a holy contempt upon the wealth of this world, not to set our hearts upon that, but with all possible care to think of those things that are lovely and of good report, Phi 4:8.

1. We are here taught not to invade another man's right, though we can find ways of doing it ever so secretly and plausibly, clandestinely and by fraud, without any open force. Let not property in general be entrenched upon, by robbing men of their liberties and privileges, or of any just ways of maintaining them. Let not the property of particular persons be encroached upon. The land-marks, or meer-stones, are standing witnesses to every man's right; let not those be removed quite away, for thence come wars, and fightings, and endless disputes; let them not be removed so as to take from thy neighbour's lot to thy own, for that is downright robbing him and entailing the fraud upon posterity. 2. We may infer hence that a deference is to be paid, in all civil matters, to usages that have prevailed time out of mind and the settled constitutions of government, in which it becomes us to acquiesce, lest an attempt to change it, under pretence of changing it for the better, prove of dangerous consequence.

A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches,.... The word "good" is not in the text, but is rightly supplied, as it is by the Targum, Septuagint, and Vulgate Latin versions; for it is not any name that is more eligible than riches; nor is it a need name among any sort of persons; for to have a good name with some turns to a man's reproach rather than to his credit; but a good name among good men, a name in the house of God, which is better than sons and daughters; a new name, the name of the children of God, which no man knoweth but he that receiveth it; this is to be preferred to a multitude of riches: it is not to be procured by them, and is where they are not, or are lost, but this continues; see Ecc 7:1; and loving favour rather them silver and gold; favour with God and man, especially with God, whose loving kindness is better than life, and all the enjoyments of it: or, as it may be rendered, "grace is better than silver and gold" (p); the grace of God through Christ, the grace of Christ, in whom all fulness of it dwells, the grace of the Spirit of Christ; faith is more precious than gold that perisheth; and if a man would give all the substance of his house for love it would be contemned; the Spirit and his grace are not to be purchased for money. (p) "gratia melior", Munster, Tigurine version, Junius & Tremellius, Michaelis; so Schultens.

Remove not the ancient landmark which thy fathers have set. Or, "the ancient border" or "boundary" (n); by which lands, estates, and inheritances, were marked, bounded, and distinguished; set by ancestors in agreement with their neighbours; which to remove was contrary to a law, and a curse is denounced upon those that did it, Deu 19:14; and was always reckoned a very heinous crime in early times; See Gill on Job 24:2. This was so sacred a thing among the Romans, that they had a deity which presided over those bounds, and had its name from them. Some apply this, in a political sense, to laws of long standing, and customs of long prescription; and others interpret it, in a theological sense, of doctrines and practices settled by the fathers of the church; which, if understood of Christ and his apostles only, will be allowed; but if of the ancient fathers of the church that followed them, it should not be received; since they were but fallible men, and guilty of many errors and mistakes, both in doctrine and practice. (n) "terminum antiquum", Pagninus, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Michaelis, Schultens.

Nonetheless, it is clear that many examples, which we never read in those Scriptures that we deem canonical but nonetheless are found in the apocryphal books and are shown clearly to have been taken from them, have been brought forth and inserted into the New Testament either by the apostles or the Evangelists. But we must not give credence to the apocryphal books even in this way, for the eternal boundaries, which our fathers erected, must not be moved. It could be that the apostles or the Evangelists, filled with the Holy Spirit, knew what had to be taken from those writings and what had to be refuted. But it is not for us to presume some such ability without danger, when we do not have such abundance of the Spirit.

Consider whether it would not be well to remember the words, “You shall not remove the ancient landmarks which your fathers have set.” Nor do I say this because I hesitate to examine the Jewish Scriptures, comparing them with ours and noticing their differences. This, if it is not arrogant to say it, I have already to a great extent done to the best of my ability, laboring hard to get at the meaning in all the editions and various readings. I paid particular attention to the Septuagint translation, lest I might be found to accredit any forgery to the churches which are under heaven and give an occasion to those who seek such a pretext for gratifying their desire to slander prominent persons and to bring forth some accusation against those who are outstanding in our fellowship. And I make it my endeavor not to be ignorant of their various readings, so that in my controversies with the Jews I may not quote to them what is not found in their copies and that I may make some use of what they accept, even if it is not found in our Scriptures. For if we are so prepared for them in our discussions, they will not, as is their manner, scornfully laugh at Gentile believers on the grounds that we do not know the true readings recorded in their texts.

We do not permit the faith or the symbol of the faith defined by our holy fathers assembled in their day in Nicea to be shaken by anyone, and we do not trust ourselves or others to change a word of what was laid down there, or to depart from a single syllable of it. For we remember the one who said, “Do not alter the everlasting boundaries which your fathers set.”

The one who moves the boundaries of piety demonstrates either superstition or impiety. And the one who moves the boundaries of courage changes it into either audacity or cowardice. In the same manner, this applies to other virtues as well as to dogmas and other matters of faith. This especially pertains to the doctrine of the holy Trinity. Thus, whoever rejects the divinity of the Holy Spirit rejects baptism; and whoever names some others as gods introduces a whole pantheon of gods.

We reject all the doctrines introduced recently either through letters or through pamphlets as confusing the common people, since we are content with the ancient legislation of the fathers and obey the one who said, “Remove not the ancient landmarks which your fathers set up.”

I cannot help wondering about such madness in certain people, the dreadful impiety of their blinded minds, their insatiable lust for error that they are not content with the traditional rule of faith as once and for all received from antiquity but are driven to seek another novelty daily. They are possessed by a permanent desire to change religion, to add something and to take something away—as though the dogma were not divine so that it has to be revealed only once. But they take it for a merely human institution, which cannot be perfected except by constant emendations, rather, by constant corrections. Yet, the divine prophecies say, “Pass not beyond the ancient bounds which your fathers have set,” and “Judge not against a judge,” and “he that breaks a hedge, a serpent shall bite him.”

Do not remove the ancient landmarks, etc. Do not transgress the boundaries of faith established by the Catholic teachers from the beginning.

He has revealed to us what it was expedient for us to know, whereas that which we were unable to bear he has withheld. With these things let us be content, and in them let us abide, and let us not step over the ancient bounds or pass beyond the divine tradition.

(Pro. 22:1-29) A good name-- (Job 30:8, Hebrew); "good" is supplied here from Ecc 7:1. loving favour--kind regard, that is, of the wise and good.

(Compare Pro 23:10). Do not entrench on others (Deu 19:14; Deu 27:17).

A fourth proverb - a distich - beginning with the warning אל: 28 Remove not the perpetual landmark Which thy ancestors have set up. 28a = Pro 23:10. Regarding the inviolability of boundaries established by the law, vid., at Pro 15:25. גּבוּל עולם denotes "the boundary mark set up from ancient times, the removal of which were a double transgression, because it is rendered sacred by its antiquity" (Orelli, p. 76). נסג = סוּג signifies to remove back, Hiph. to shove back, to move away. אשׁר has the meaning of (ὅριον) ὅ, τι, quippe quod. Instead of עולם, the Mishna reads, Pea v. 6, עולים, which in the Jerusalem Gemara one Rabbi understands of those brought up out of Egypt, another of the poor; for "to rise" (in the world) is a euphemism (לשׁון כבוד) for "to come down" (be reduced in circumstances). (Note: As an analogical example, סגּי נהור, seeing clearly = blind.)