Theodore Beza's Reading of the Old Testament Poetic Books in Service of the Church, 1579-1589 PDF Free Download
1 / 260/260
100%
o Me
''
Copyright by
Eunjin Kim
2024
iv
ABSTRACT
This dissertation examines Theodore Beza’s reading of four Old Testament poetic
books – the Psalms, Job, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs – to demonstrate his
contribution in the history of biblical interpretation. While previous scholarship has
largely focused on Beza’s contributions to the New Testament, highlighting his role as a
text critic, this present study of his works on the Old Testament books sheds light on
political and religious dynamics within Beza’s interpretive approach beyond his text
critical influences. This study portrays Beza as a pivotal figure in the Reformed faith
during the political and religious upheavals of the late sixteenth century, analyzing the
ways in which he utilizes biblical exegesis to comfort persecuted churches and cultivate
proper piety amongst afflicted believers. In doing so, Beza employs the Old Testament
biblical characters – David, Job, and Solomon – as teachers of Reformed doctrines and
paragons of Christian piety, particularly in their steadfast patience and unwavering trust
in divine providence amidst adversity. His writings on these poetic biblical texts reflect
his commitment to promoting a specific theological agenda for the church through the
practice of biblical exegesis.
This study explores each of Beza’s interpretations of the four poetic books with
special attention to his exegetical method, principal themes, and pastoral applications. In
his paraphrases of the Psalms, Beza draws parallels between David’s history (Christ’s
history in certain psalms) and sixteenth-century believers, highlighting themes of godly
kingdoms and righteous rulers, while also offering practical guidance on applying
imprecations for contemporary Christians. In his commentary and paraphrases on Job,
Beza focuses on Job’s history and his particular place as a member of the true church,
v
laying the ground for using this biblical figure as a positive example for the afflicted
believers of his time. In his paraphrases of Ecclesiastes, Beza conveys lessons on divine
providence and the highest good through the lens of Solomon’s experience as a king.
Furthermore, in his sermons on the Song of Songs, Beza employs allegorical
interpretation to underscore the nature and identity of the true church throughout
salvation history, from the Old to the New Testaments, on which he grounds the authority
and succession of the Protestant churches over against the false churches of his time.
An analysis of Beza’s approach to these poetic books reveals consistent patterns
in his emphasis on literal and historical exegesis, his focus on themes of divine
providence and God’s care for God’s people as an overarching theological framework,
and his reading for the edification of the persecuted church through the lens of David,
Solomon, and Job. Beza’s use and application of his Old Testament readings within his
political and religious milieu underscore the important role that biblical interpretation
played in promoting his theological program. Consequently, these findings demonstrate
Beza’s place as a consolidator of Reformed confessional identity in his exegetical and
theological commitments. This study offers an understanding of Beza as an exegete
dedicated to reinforcing Reformed exegetical practices, while adeptly applying his
interpretations to address the specific political and religious challenges of the late
sixteenth century, thereby offering comfort to churches and believers enduring
persecution.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract ............................................................................................................................. iv
Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... ix
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... x
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1
What is Beza’s Exegetical Contribution to the Reading of Old Testament Poetic
Books?........................................................................................................................... 5
Beza as an Interpreter of the Old Testament Poetic Books, 1579-1589 ..................... 10
Method, Scope, and Outline of the Present Work ...................................................... 17
Chapter 1: Beza’s Reading of the Psalms (1579): From David of the Old Testament
to the Church of the Sixteenth Century ........................................................................ 24
1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 24
1.2 Beza’s Reading of the Psalms as Histories of David and Christ .......................... 29
1.3 Ecclesial Reading of the Psalms in the Context of the Sixteenth Century ........... 41
1.3.1 David’s Psalms and the Church of the Sixteenth Century ........................... 44
1.3.2 Beza’s Reading of the Psalms in Reference to Earthly and Heavenly
Kingdoms .............................................................................................................. 48
1.4 Beza’s Lessons on Prayer: The Case of Imprecatory Psalms ............................... 57
1.5 Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 63
Chapter 2: Beza’s Reading of Job (1589): Human Righteousness Defended and
God’s Vindication Proclaimed ....................................................................................... 67
2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 67
2.2 Reading Job as a Tragedy: Beyond a Literary Genre ........................................... 74
2.3 The Search for the Literal Meaning of Job ........................................................... 78
2.3.1 Job’s History ................................................................................................ 82
2.3.2 The Unity of the Two Testaments ............................................................... 86
vii
2.4 The Main Thrust of the Story: God’s Justice and Human Righteousness ............ 90
2.4.1 Human Righteousness: Satan’s Assaults on the Righteous ......................... 92
2.4.2 God’s Justice: Divine Vindication of the Righteous.................................. 102
2.5 Beza’s Use of Job as a Teacher and an Example ................................................ 105
2.5.1 Job as a Teacher of Divine Providence ...................................................... 108
2.5.2 Job as an Example of Patience and Constancy .......................................... 113
2.6 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 118
Chapter 3: Beza’s Reading of Ecclesiastes (1588): Solomon as Teacher of Divine
Providence and Eternal Happiness ............................................................................. 122
3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 122
3.2 Solomon the King as the Author and Context of Ecclesiastes............................ 128
3.3 Solomon as the Teacher of God’s Providence and the Highest Good ................ 137
3.3.1 God’s Providence ....................................................................................... 139
3.3.2 The Highest Good ...................................................................................... 144
3.4 Solomon’s Wisdom for Churches of the Sixteenth Century ............................... 148
3.5 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 158
Chapter 4: Beza’s Reading of the Song of Songs (1586): Allegory, Prophecy, and
History in the Union between Christ and the Church ............................................... 161
4.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 161
4.2 Beza on Allegorical Reading in the Song of Songs ............................................ 169
4.2.1 Sebastian Castellio and Gilbert Génébrard ................................................ 170
4.2.2 Four Guiding Principles ............................................................................. 175
4.3 Prophet and Prophecy in Beza’s Reading of the Song of Songs ........................ 189
4.4 History, Christ, and Church in Beza’s Reading of the Song of Songs ............... 200
4.5 Exhortation and Comfort for the Church ............................................................ 209
viii
4.6 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 220
Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 223
Beza’s Patterns in Reading the Old Testament Poetic Books ................................... 224
Beza as an Exegete in the Era of Confessional Distinctions .................................... 229
Beza as an Exegete: Precritical or Modern? ............................................................. 232
Select Bibliography ....................................................................................................... 235
Biography....................................................................................................................... 248
ix
ABBREVIATIONS
CB Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze. 43 vols. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1960-
2017.
CTS Commentaries of John Calvin. 46 vols. Edinburgh: Calvin Translation Society,
1844-1955. Reprint. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979.
LW Luther’s Works. American Edition. 55 vols. Edited by Jaroslav Pelikan and
Helmut T. Lehman. Philadelphia: Muehlenberg and Fortress, and St. Louis:
Concordia, 1955-86.
NRSV New Revised Standard Version Bible. National Council of the Churches of
Christ in the United States of America, 1989.
RCP Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Genève. Edited by Olivier Fatio
and Olivier Labarthe. 14 vols. Geneva, Librairie Droz, 1962-2012.
RCS Reformation Commentary on Scripture. 21 vols. Downers Grove, IL: IVP
Academic, 2011-.
x
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am deeply grateful to numerous individuals whose unwavering support
and encouragement have accompanied me throughout the arduous journey of writing my
dissertation. Foremost among them are my esteemed teachers, whose generosity in
sharing their time and knowledge has been invaluable in guiding me through this process.
My deepest appreciation goes to my supervisor and mentor, Sujin Pak. Her support
extended beyond expectations when she facilitated my transfer to Duke by accepting me
as her doctoral student. She was always generous with her time and accessibility. She
always offered wise advice and practical guidance to help me move forward with my
dissertation. Even when I submitted drafts close to deadlines, she promptly read them and
provided feedback within a few days. Without her erudition, kindness, patience, and
encouragement, I would not have reached this point in my academic journey. I am also
grateful to Warren Smith for his Latin classes and continuous support of my work since
my Th.M. years, and to Curtis Freeman for graciously agreeing to be part of my
committee and offering helpful insights. I owe special thanks to Scott Manetsch who has
helped me understand so much about Beza’s historical background and theology. He has
consistently supported my work on Beza and has always been generous with his time and
knowledge, reading my early drafts and asking helpful questions to improve my
dissertation. I also express my deep appreciation to Carl Trueman who taught me
everything about how to think as a historian. His mentorship and friendship over the
years have been instrumental in navigating the challenges I faced as a doctoral student.
xi
My sincere gratitude also goes to Hapdong Theological Seminary and my Korean
professors – Byung-Soo Cho, Doug-Kyo Oh, Young-Jae Kim, Byung-Hoon Kim, Seung-
Goo Lee, and Sang-Hyuk Ahn – for their invaluable support, especially in the formative
years of my theological studies. Additionally, I am also grateful to the GATE Institute for
offering me the opportunity to engage with missionaries worldwide that kept me
cognizant of the wider theological horizon, helping me place my studies into perspective.
Jubilee Presbyterian Church has also provided me with supportive community and has
walked with me throughout my writing phase. I especially thank my senior pastor, Steve
Park, and many friends at Jubilee for asking how the writing is going, checking on me
occasionally, and showing continuous support and care.
I owe my utmost appreciation to my family who have been an indispensable part
of my journey. My parents, Byunghoon and Miyoung, with their unceasing and
immeasurable support, have always been the first in their care and love for me. They
never burdened me with the question, “How much longer?” but instead, with unwavering
patience and confidence, always provided emotional support and loving guidance for me
in all matters. I also extend my heartfelt gratitude to my parents-in-law for their
encouragement and prayers, and for being proud of me despite the long years it took me
to finish. My brother, Eunchan, generously allowed me to spend countless days in his
apartment in Grand Rapids, MI, providing a conducive environment when I needed a
place to focus on writing. Not only did he borrow books for me from Calvin Theological
Seminary, where he is a doctoral student, but shared many of his theological insights that
were helpful for clarifying my own thoughts. Finally, my greatest debt is to my best
friend and husband, Jang Won, who stood by my side throughout my academic pursuit,
xii
joyfully embracing the role of a doctoral student’s spouse. He endured a stressed out and
grumpy wife over the years, patiently reassuring me and cheering me up whenever I
encountered self-doubt and despair. Without his patience, comfort, and love, I would not
have been able to finish. Thank you, my dear husband, for your steadfast belief in me and
your constant prayers. You are not only my beloved husband but also my most cherished
friend, a constant reminder of God’s goodness and love in my life.
1
INTRODUCTION
In 2006, Alain Dufour published a biography on Theodore Beza (1519-1605)
titled Théodore de Bèze: Poète et Théologien.
1
The fact that Dufour used these two
particular words as representative of Beza’s career denotes the significant weight that
both aspects played in shaping his identity and influence. In this work, Dufour tells the
story of Beza’s life as a man who was first and foremost a theologian but also a poet all
his life in the social, political, and religious contexts of the sixteenth century. Throughout
the biography, Dufour weaves together Beza’s theological career with his love for poetry,
highlighting the ways in which both were intimately tied in his life and teachings.
Building upon this perspective of a reformer who applied his literary skills in service of
the church with great theological maturity, this dissertation explores Beza’s readings of
the Old Testament, in particular the poetic books, to shed light on the reformer and his
significance in the field of biblical interpretation.
Poetry was a lifelong passion of Beza. In his early years, he published a collection
of Latin love poems entitled Poemata (1548) to make his name as a young humanist
among the French elite circles. That same year, however, Beza’s conversion to
Protestantism completely transformed the ways that he would employ his poetic talents –
that is, not for his own name’s sake but for Christ’s name’s sake. He comments on this
remarkable transition in the preface to his Abraham Sacrifiant (1550), in which he
1
Alain Dufour, Théodore de Bèze: Poète et Théologien (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2009). Other
significant biographical literature on Theodore Beza include Paul F. Geisendorf, Théodore de Bèze
(Geneva: Alexandre Jullien, 1967), and Henry Martyn Baird, Theodore Beza: The Counsellor of the French
Reformation, 1419-1605 (New York: Burt Franklin, 1970).
2
expresses his past regrets for misusing his talent for ungodliness and future desire to use
his literary gifts for “holier matters.”
2
This work on Abraham’s tragedy, Jill Raitt notes,
was the “first of Beza’s endeavors to turn his poetic talents to God’s service.”
3
Beza
retained his keen interest in poetry throughout his career, seen in many of his writings
and letters. Not only did he continue to revise his Poemata until the final edition of 1598;
he also published his versification of the Psalms in French (1562), Emblemata (1580),
and Cato Censorius Christianus (1591), evidencing his prolonged delight in poetry.
4
His
letters also provide abundant examples of Beza’s uses of poetry for describing daily
matters, expressing significant life moments, and offering pastoral advice.
Beza’s love for poetry spilled into his exegetical writings, as well. His
commentaries, paraphrases, and sermons exhibit a particular interest in the poetic books
of the Old Testament: The Latin Psalm Paraphrases (1579), Sermon on the Song of Songs
(1586), Paraphrases on Ecclesiastes (1588), and Commentary and Paraphrases on Job
2
CB 1:200: “Car je confesse que de mon naturel j’ay tousjours pris plaisir à la poesie, et ne m’en
puis encores repentir, mais bien ay-je regret d’avoir employé ce peu de grace que Dieu m’a donné en cest
endroict, en choses desquelles la seule souvenance me faict maintenant rougir. Je me suis doncques
addonné à telles matieres plus sainctes, esperant de continuer cy apres …” See also Abraham Sacrifiant, ed.
Keith Cameron, Kathleen Hall, Francis Higman (Geneva: Droz, 1967), 46.
3
Jill Raitt, “Beza, Guide for the Faithful Life,” Scottish Journal of Theology 39 (1986), 84.
4
For Beza’s use of poetry throughout his career and the reception of it from his contemporaries,
see Scott M. Manetsch, “Psalms before Sonnets: Theodore Beza and the Studia Humanitatis,” in Continuity
and Change: The Harvest of Late Medieval and Reformation History, ed. Robert J. Bast and Andrew C.
Gow (Leiden:Brill, 2000), 400-416; Anne Lake Prescott, “English Writers and Beza’s Latin Epigrams: The
Uses and Abuses of Poetry,” Studies in the Renaissance 21 (1974): 83-117; Kirk M. Summers, Morality
after Calvin: Theodore Beza’s Christian Censor and Reformed Ethics (New York: Oxford University Press,
2016); Summers, “Theodore Beza’s Classical Library and Christian Humanism,” Archiv für
Reformationsgeschicte 82 (1991): 193-207; and Summers, “The Classical Foundations of Beza’s Thought,”
in Théodore de Bèze (1519-1605): Actes du colloque de Genève (septembre 2005), ed. Irena Backus
(Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2007), 369-380.
3
(1589).
5
Besides his highly influential Annotationes of the New Testament, only two
other exegetical writings appeared in print: Sermons on the Passion of Christ (1592) and
Sermons on the Resurrection of Christ (1593). Given this list, it is surprising that the only
Old Testament writings Beza ever published were from the poetic books of the Bible.
This leads one to ask, why were these books in particular? Why was Beza attracted to the
poetic books over against the Pentateuch or the historical books or the prophetic
literature? One might simply assert that Beza enjoyed reading, meditating, and translating
poetry, all the more when they came from the Scripture. At times, his poetic boldness and
experimentation of these books became a target of criticism by his enemies such that the
Genevan pastors had to intervene to resolve the problem on his behalf.
6
While this
dissertation does not assess his skills as a poet or translator of the Old Testament, Beza’s
engagement with poetry throughout his life offers a fascinating background to
understanding his particular interest in the poetic books of the Old Testament and his
choice for expounding them at his particular time and place. After all, Beza did not study
these books for his own enjoyment but first and foremost, for comforting the persecuted
churches and instilling a heart of godly piety in suffering believers. Thus, in this study I
5
For bibliographical information on these works, see Frédèric Gardy, Bibliographie des Oeuvres
Théologiques, Littéraires, Historique et Juridiques de Théodore de Bèze (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1960).
Beza never published a work on Proverbs.
6
Hebraist Gilbert Génébrard criticized Beza for translating the Song of Songs in trochaic verse.
See my chapter on the Song of Songs for more detail. Also, for a historical account of Génébrard’s critique
and the response from the Company of Pastors, see Max Engammare, “Licence Poétique versus Métrique
Sacrée: La Polémique entre Bèze et Génébrard au Sujet des Psaumes et du Cantique des Cantiques (1579-
1685) – Première Partie,” in Théodore de Bèze (1519-1605): Actes du colloque de Genève (septembre
2005), ed. Irena Backus (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2007), 479-499.
4
focus on this historical significance and Beza’s use of Psalms, Job, Ecclesiastes, and Song
of Songs for his theological program.
This dissertation investigates Beza’s writings on the four Old Testament poetic
books and their significance in the context of their publications between 1579 and 1589.
My primary goal is to illustrate Beza’s contributions as a biblical exegete of his time,
giving special attention to the ways in which he interpreted each of the four books in
respect to his political and religious contexts and employed biblical interpretation to
promote his theological program – namely, to comfort the persecuted churches and
cultivate piety among afflicted believers for the strengthening and advancement of
Reformed churches. I analyze Beza’s methods, themes, and uses of his biblical
interpretation in his exegesis of Old Testament poetic books for the edification of the
church in his sixteenth-century context, demonstrating the crucial role they played in
Beza’s life and ministry. Beza exercised his humanistic interests in his scriptural studies,
analyzing the literary and historical features of the text, aligning themes of his textual
study with the needs of his context, and making contemporary applications to the
persecuted churches, religious exiles, and suffering believers of his time. All these aspects
of his exegetical endeavors were not separate enterprises but one exercise for Beza.
Biblical interpretation was where his humanistic education, theological acumen, pastoral
sensitivities converged in service of the church. This is especially significant when
considered within the theological climate of Beza’s time, in which biblical exegesis was
at the center of various theological debates and spiritual formation across confessional
divides. His appeal to Psalms, Job, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs served exactly that
purpose, providing him the ammunition to strike down his enemies while also the
5
grounds for consolidating Reformed identity. Through this study, I argue for Beza’s place
within the history of interpretation, which I show is consistent with Reformed distinctions
– namely, his commitments to literal and historical exegesis for the edification of the
church – as well as the unique ways in which he employs David, Job, and Solomon to
reflect the pressing political and religious concerns specific to his sixteenth-century
context. In this introduction, I first address the question, “What is Beza’s exegetical
contribution to the reading of the Old Testament poetic books?” Next, I provide a brief
background to his approach to the Old Testament in general, particularly in the context of
the period between 1579 and 1589. Finally, I conclude with the scope, method, and
outline of this research.
What is Beza’s Exegetical Contribution to the Reading of Old Testament Poetic
Books?
The topic of Beza’s exegetical contribution is not completely unknown in Bezan
scholarship.
7
The most notable study is perhaps Irena Backus’s The Reformed Roots of
7
Much of the early scholarly interest in Theodore Beza centered on the theory that Beza had
distorted Calvin’s christo-centric theology by giving Aristotelian logic a primary place in his system of
thought. For example, see, J. Dantine, “Les Tabelles sur la Doctrine de la Prédestination par Théodore de
Bèze,” Revue de Théologie et de Philosophie 16 (1966): 365-77; Basil Hall, “Calvin against the
Calvinists,” in John Calvin, ed. Gervase Duffield (Abingdon: Sutton Courtenay, 1966), 19-37; B. G.
Armstrong, Calvinism and the Amyraut Heresy: Protestant Scholasticism and Humanism in Seventeenth-
Century France (Madison: University of Wisconsin, 1969); R. T. Kendall, Calvin and English Calvinism to
1649 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979). These scholars advocated a predestinarian system to be
central in Beza’s thought.
Other more nuanced approach to Beza’s theology of predestination and other topics in his
theology followed in an attempt to analyze Beza’s relationship to Calvin in his own historical context. For
examples, see J. Raitt, The Eucharistic Theology of Theodore Beza: Development of the Reformed Doctrine
(Chambersburg: American Academy of Religion, 1972); I. McPhee, “Transformer or Conserver of Calvin’s
Theology? A Study of the Origins and Development of Theodore Beza’s Thought,’ (PhD diss., Cambridge
University, 1979); T. Maruyama, The Ecclesiology of Theodore Beza: The Reform of the True Church
(Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1978); John Bray, Theodore Beza’s Doctrine of Predestination (Nieuwkoop: B. de
Graaf, 1979).
Most groundbreaking was Richard A. Muller’s Calvin against the Calvinists thesis, in which he
depicted Beza not as a distorter of Calvin’s theology, but rather a figure who consolidated and clarified it
6
the English New Testament published in 1980, in which she traces the nature and extent
of Beza’s influence from the Geneva Bible to the King James Version, noting the textual
variations in his translations.
8
She concludes that his influence was significant in the
English Bibles in matters not only of text and style but also of meaning and theology. Jan
Krans’s work also provides a helpful perspective to Beza’s exegesis. Krans carefully
analyzes his role as a text critic based on the five editions of his New Testament
according to the demands of the time. Most representative of this argument can be found in Muller, Christ
and the Decree (Durham, NC: Labyrinth Press, 1987); “The Use and Abuse of a Document: Beza’s Tabula
Praedestinationis, The Bolsec Controversy, and the Origins of Reformed Orthodoxy,” in Protestant
Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment, ed. Carl R. Trueman and R. S. Clark (Carlisle: Paternoster, 1999),
33-61; After Calvin: Studies in the Development of a Theological Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2003); and Calvin and the Reformed Tradition: On the Work of Christ and the Order of Salvation
(Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012).
In the recent two to three decades, scholars have made considerable efforts to present more diverse
facets and influences of Beza within his social, political, theological, and pastoral contexts. For a sample
representation of these studies besides those which I have already mentioned, see Hervé Genton, “Théodore
de Bèze and Geneva,” in A Companion to the Reformation in Geneva, ed. Jon Balserak (Leiden: Brill,
2021): 93-117; Jeffrey Mallinson, Faith, Reason, and Revelation in Theodore Beza (1519-1605) (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2003); Scott M. Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace in France,
1572-1598 (Leiden: Brill, 2000); Manestch, “The Journey Toward Geneva: Theodore Beza’s Conversion,
1535-1548,” in Calvin, Beza, and Later Calvinism (Grand Rapids: Calvin Studies Society, 2006): 38-57;
Jill Raitt, “Lessons in Troubled Times: Beza’s Lessons on Job,” in Calvin and the State: Papers and
Responses Presented at the Seventh and Eighth Colloquia on Calvin and Calvin Studies, ed. Peter De Klerk
(Grand Rapids: Calvin Studies Society, 1993): 21-45; John F. Southworth Jr., Theodore Beza,
Covenantalism and Resistance to Political Authority in the 16th Century (Ann Arbor, MI: UMI, 2004); Kirk
Summers, A View from the Palatine: The Juvenilia of Théodore de Bèze (Tempe, AZ: Arizona State
University, 2001); Summers, “Consoling the Huguenot Refugees in Late Sixteenth-Century Geneva,”
Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 110 (2019): 237-267; Summers, “Theodore Beza’s ‘Bare-Breasted
Religion.’ Liturgical Mystery and the English Vestments Controversy,” in Calvinus frater in Domino:
Papers of the Twelfth International Congress on Calvin Research, ed. Arnold Huijgen and Karin Maag
(Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht): 337-351; and Shawn D. Wright, Our Sovereign Refuge: The
Pastoral Theology of Theodore Beza (Carlisle: Paternoster, 2004).
Also, two excellent collections fully devoted to Beza need are worth mentioning: A volume edited
by Irena Backus in commemoration of the 400th anniversary of Beza’s death and a volume edited by
Summers and Manetsch in commemoration of the 500th anniversary of Beza’s birth. See Irena Backus (ed.),
Théodore de Bèze (1519-1605): Actes du colloque de Genève (septembre 2005) (Geneva: Librairie Droz,
2007), and Summers and Manetsch (eds.) Theodore Beza at 500: New Perspective on an Old Reformer
(Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2021).
8
Irena D. Backus, The Reformed Roots of the English New Testament: The Influence of Theodore
Beza on the English New Testament (Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1980).
7
annotations.
9
Comparing him to Erasmus who, Kran argues, treated the Bible in the same
way as any other classical literature, he highlights Beza’s approach to text criticism
grounded on his theological commitments to the infallibility and authority of Scripture.
Indeed, both studies provide invaluable insights to Beza’s exegetical contributions in
connection to England, on one hand, and in comparison to Erasmus on the other; yet their
studies paint only a partial picture of Beza and his exegetical contributions. Both scholars
focus on Beza as a text critic and use his annotations of the New Testament as their
primary source of research.
The purpose of this dissertation is to analyze other sources of Beza’s exegesis –
his writings on the Old Testament poetic books – and explore their significance to his
engagement with his sixteenth-century context. I focus on the ways in which he interprets
and draws applications for the edification of the church against the political and religious
conflicts of his time. The Annotationes can be understood as a scholarly-exegetical work
in which Beza presents the culmination of his text critical and philological studies to
engage in the world of biblical scholarship. His commentaries, paraphrases, and sermons
on the Psalms, Job, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs are, on the other hand, his
pastoral-exegetical works, through which he engages with the church amid the religious
threats and political situations of his immediate context. This dynamic of his biblical
interpretation is crucial to understanding Beza’s overall approach to these four books and
his role as a biblical exegete. Historians Edward Gosselin and Jill Raitt started to provide
9
Jan Krans, Beyond What is Written: Erasmus and Beza as Conjectural Critics of the New
Testament (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 195-332. For a study on Beza’s text criticism, see also, Theodore Letis,
“Theodore Beza as a Text Critic: A View to the Sixteenth-Century Approach to New Testament Text
Criticism,” in The Majority Text: Essays and Reviews in the Continuing Debate, ed. Theodore Letis (Grand
Rapids: Institute for Biblical Textual Studies, 1987), 113-144.
8
such perspective by exploring Beza’s use of David in his Psalms interpretations and his
reading of Job as a guide for the faithful life, respectively.
10
Yet their studies focus on
Beza’s use of a single book and do not explore methodological considerations. There is
no study to date on Beza’s Old Testament writings that ties together explorations of
exegetical methods, theological goals, and pastoral applications in a coherent way. While
this work is not a comprehensive and definitive study on these matters, it sheds
significant light on place and significance of his biblical interpretation of the Old
Testament books upon his theology and ministry.
Emphasis on biblical exegesis for the edification of the church was a shared
vision amongst the Reformed exegetes. Beza expresses this commitment in engaging his
contemporary contexts to inform his interpretation so that the life and experiences of the
Old Testament figures of the poetic books – David, Job, and Solomon – become the lens
through which he interprets and reads his political and religious contexts. For Beza, the
distance between the biblical characters and the church of the sixteenth century is not so
large. At times, he employs christological readings to act as the mediating link between
the church of the Old Testament period and his current times. At other times, he does not
hesitate to make direct applications from one period to another. Undergirding this
approach are his understandings of the unity of the two Testaments, the nature of the true
10
Edward A. Gosselin, “David in Tempore Belli: Beza’s David in the Service of the Huguenots,”
Sixteenth Century Journal 7, no. 2 (October 1976): 31-54; Jill Raitt, “Beza, Guide for the Faithful Life,”
Scottish Journal of Theology 39, no.1 (1986): 83-107; and Raitt, “Lessons in Troubled Times: Beza’s
Lessons on Job,” in Calvin and the State: Papers and Responses Presented at the Seventh and Eighth
Colloquia on Calvin and Calvin Studies, ed. Peter De Klerk (Grand Rapids: Calvin Studies Society, 1993),
21-45. For a helpful study on Beza’s exegesis of the New Testament in his political context, see Richard A.
Muller, “Calvin, Beza, and the Exegetical History of Romans 13:1-7,” in The Identity of Geneva: The
Christian Commonwealth, 1564-1864, ed. John B. Roney and Martin I. Klauber (Westport, CT:
Greenwood, 1998), 39-56.
9
church, authority of the Scripture, prophet and prophecy, Christ as the substance of two
covenants, and salvation history. Each of these are themes to be explored throughout this
study. In short, Beza seeks to expound the Old Testament poetic books with the goal to
encourage, exhort, and instruct the church in the context of their immediate political and
religious challenges through the examples of David, Job, and Solomon. In doing so, he
endeavors to bring together his exegetical, theological, and pastoral concerns into his
exegetical writings, which he considers to be the battleground to fight his enemies but
more significantly, the place of utmost comfort and instruction for the afflicted church.
Consequently, this study adds new emphasis to Beza’s contribution as an exegete beyond
his text critical influences. For Beza, biblical exegesis is more than just philology,
translations, and linguistic studies. His theological program warrants edifying readings
for the church, particularly as they reflect the concerns of his sixteenth-century context.
Furthermore, this dissertation answers questions related to Beza’s relationships to
pre-critical and modern exegetical practices and his place within the history of biblical
interpretation. His commentaries and paraphrases on Psalms, Job, Ecclesiastes, and Song
of Songs offer excellent sources for examining different facets of his approach – his
literal and historical emphases, typology, allegorical reading, christological thrust, view
of prophet and prophecy, and church as the central subject. Beza practices each of these
in continuity and discontinuity with past and contemporary exegetes. By analyzing these
different aspects of exegetical principles as they appear in Beza’s four writings on the
biblical poetic literature, I demonstrate that his practices solidify the contours of
Reformed practices of exegesis. Building upon the argument that biblical exegesis was
formative in establishing confessional divides, I argue, in the end, that Theodore Beza not
10
only maintains Reformed distinctions, continuing the emphases of his predecessor; he
further consolidates Reformed confessional identity as a biblical interpreter in the
precritical era of exegesis.
11
Beza as an Interpreter of the Old Testament Poetic Books, 1579-1589
12
Before mapping out the plan of this study, it is helpful to present a brief survey of
Beza’s approach to Old Testament Hebrew and questions of translation, as well as his
understanding of the broader exegetical and theological vision shared across the four Old
Testament writings. While differing methodological and interpretive uses are evident in
each of the four works, Beza nevertheless had a common goal that he sought to achieve
through these writings.
First, although Beza was a professor of Greek, he showed great enthusiasm in
promoting the learning of Hebrew language. As a prodigy of humanistic curriculum, he
was exposed to Hebrew as early as 1539, during which time he writes to Popon that he
11
For example, G. Sujin Pak argues that “the lines of confessional identity were not merely
doctrinal lines; the lines were also drawn around issues of biblical exegesis – most notably, differing
methods of biblical interpretation – that directly shaped their differing exegetical outcomes.” Pak, The
Reformation of Prophecy: Early Modern Interpretations of the Prophet and Old Testament Prophecy (New
York: Oxford University Press, 2018), 336. On the formation of confessional identity in the sixteenth
century, see also the following studies: Irena Backus, Historical Method and Confessional Identity in the
Era of the Reformation (1378-1615) (Leiden: Brill, 2003); Bruce Gordon (ed.) Protestant History and
Identity in Sixteenth-Century Europe, 2 vols. (Aldershot, UK: Scholar, 1996); and John M. Headley, Hans J.
Hillerbrand, and Anthony J. Papalas (eds.) Confessionalization in Europe, 1555-1700: Essays in Honor and
Memory of Bodo Nischan (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2004).
12
For the historical background of this period, I mainly consulted among other works, Philip
Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed: A Social History of Calvinism (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 2002); Robert K. Kingdon, Geneva and the Consolidation of the French Protestant Movement 1564-
1572 (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1967); Mack P. Holt, The French Wars of Religion,
1562-1629 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1995); E. William Monter, Calvin’s Geneva (New
York: Wiley, 1967); Scott M. Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace in France, 1572-1598
(Leiden: Brill, 2000); and Jill Raitt, The Colloquy of Montbéliard: Religion and Politics in the Sixteenth
Century (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993).
11
was devoting a few hours a day to studying Hebrew in Paris.
13
He often praised God for
restoring the knowledge of Hebrew in his day. The three languages of Hebrew, Greek,
and Latin were the “springs” of sacred truth from which “pure streams” flowed into all
regions.
14
As the rector of Genevan Academy, Beza also endorsed the primary place of
Hebrew learning in its curriculum. The Hebrew professors who taught at the Academy
from 1560 to the end of the century – Antoine Rodolphe Chevalier (c. 1522-1572),
Bonaventure Corneille Bertram (1531-1594), Pierre Chevalier (1544-1594), and
Giovanni Diodati (1576-1649) – were required to offer at least eight hours of Hebrew
instruction per week, which consisted of grammar and study of rabbinic commentaries on
the Old Testament.
15
Not only that, but in his Icones, Beza included icons of several
Christian Hebraists, celebrating their contributions to the recovery of the gospel.
16
Further, around the time he was working on Job, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, he
expressed interest in writing a book on correct Hebrew pronunciation.
17
Furthermore, he
13
Beza to Popon, 7 December, 1539, in CB 1:35. For humanists’ relationship to Hebrew language,
see Max Engammare, “Humanism, Hebraism and Scriptural Hermeneutics,” in A Companion to Peter
Martyr Vermigli, ed. Torrance Kirby, Emidio Campi, and Frank A James III (Leiden: Brill, 2009), 161-174.
14
Beza, Psalmorum Davidis et aliorum prophetarum libri quinque; argumentis et Latina
paraphrasi illustrati ac etiam carminum genere Latine expressi (Geneva, 1579), *3r. See also Stephen G.
Burnett, Christian Hebraism in the Reformation Era (1500-1660): Authors, Books, and the Transmission of
Jewish Learning (Leiden: Brill, 2012), in which he argues that Protestants’ emphasis on learning the
Hebrew was grounded on the humanist ideal to go back to the original sources but also on their principle of
sola scriptura.
15
G. Lloyd Jones, The Discovery of Hebrew in Tudor England: A Third Language (Manchester:
Manchester University Press, 1983), 77-78.
16
Beza, Icones, id est verae imagines virorum … quibus adiectae sunt nonnulae picturae quas
Emblemata vocant (Geneva: Jean de Laon, 1580). Some of the Christian Hebraists he includes are Johann
Reuchlin, Johann Förster, Sebastian Münster, Paul Fagius, Immanuel Tremellius, and Francois Vatable.
17
Manetsch, “Psalms before Sonnets,” 406.
12
had plans to publish a copy of the Pentateuch in Hebrew, with parallel translations in five
different languages, although it never came to see the light of day.
18
With his knowledge of Hebrew, Beza hoped that he could provide a better Latin
translation of the Old Testament from the original Hebrew text.
19
In his dedicatory letter
to the Latin Psalm Paraphrases, he points to poor translations as one of the key causes of
inaccurate and allegorical interpretations that have “contaminated” all books of the Old
Testament.
20
Ten years later, as he dedicates his commentary on Job to Queen Elizabeth,
he mentions again the problematic poor Greek and Hebrew translations that have been
passed down to his current day. These insufficient renderings, far removed from the “pure
Hebrew text,” have caused interpreters to deviate from the authorial intent and pervert the
“genuine sense” of the sacred text with allegories.
21
Thus, he indicates that he had
18
Beza to Georges Sigismond, 16/26 July, 1600, in CB 41:99-103. In this letter, Beza tries to
solicit support from the Zastrisell family for publishing a six-column Pentateuch in Hebrew, Chaldean,
Arabic, Persian, Greek, and Spanish. Beza hopes that this project will open up the opportunities to lead
people of those languages to Chris, not to the Pope: “Unde fortasse Christianis earum linguarum notitiam
adeptis, aliquis aditus ad illas quoque gentes erudiendas patebit, idque consilio et successu, si Deus volet,
prorsus alio quam antea fuit ab jusuitis sive pseudojesuitis illis propositum, qui simili occasione arrepta
remotissimas illas gentes non a Mahonete ad Christum, sed ad Papal, id est ab uno, ut aiunt, Diabolo ad
alterum traduxerunt (101).”
19
The bibliography reference of the Genevan Academy library records several different versions
of the Hebrew Bible, all of which followed the Masoretic tradition seeking to translate from the “Hebrew
Truth”: the three editions of the Bomberg Rabbinic Bible (1517, 1518, 1524/1527), Münster’s Hebraica
Biblia (1534/1535), Hebrew Concordances of Isaac Nathan ben Qalonymos (1523) and Rabbi Mordecai
Nathan (1555/1556), and the Vatable Bible (1545). See Alexandre Ganoczy, La Bibliothèque de l’Académie
de Calvin (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1969), 36, 160, 166, 176. It is likely that Beza had these copies at hand
when studying the Old Testament Hebrew. The Münster’s Hebraica Biblia was especially influential among
the reformers. Also, it is worth noting that Beza’s emphasis on the original Hebrew text took place within
the broader context of Protestant-Catholic polemics, in which the Catholics had declared the Vulgate to be
the official authentic Bible of the Church. See Jared Wicks, “Catholic Old Testament Interpretation in the
Reformation and Early Confessional Eras,” in Hebrew Bible/Old Testament: The History of Its
Interpretation, vol. 2, ed. Magne Saebø (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008), 617-648.
20
Beza, Psalmorum Davidis, *2v-*3r.
21
Beza, Jobus Theodori Bezae partim commentariis, partim paraphrasi illustratus (Geneva,
1589), A3v-A4r. Beza, however, does not dismiss all old Greek and Latin translations. Rather, he
encourages readers to return to the sources themselves and make their own judgments on them: “… nullus
13
initially approached the Old Testament books with the desire to produce a work similar to
his Annotationes. As he had published a new Latin translation of the New Testament by
consulting original sources with ancient and modern commentaries, which he revised
over five different editions, his hope had been to do the same for the Old Testament. He
regrets, however, that “insufficient tools” have prevented him from doing so.
22
Yet, he
takes solace in having accomplished this goal for the most difficult books of the Old
Testament – the Psalms, Ecclesiastes, and Job.
23
These statements notably frame his
exegetical efforts concerning his work on the Old Testament poetic books. Beza had a
clear purpose in mind: to produce an “accurate” and “clear” translation from the original
Hebrew as much as possible and offer “solid” and “clear” explanations of the text, which
avoid the pitfalls of false interpretations and allegories.
24
While conducting a comparative
research of different translations is not an interest of this study, the following chapters
analyze how Beza sought to accomplish this aim of providing a plain meaning of the text
by highlighting his commitments to literal and historical approaches. His writings on the
Old Testament poetic books hold an important place in the project to provide an Old
Testament equivalent to his New Testament Annotationes.
aspernetur, omnes autem cum judicio legant, ita videlicet ut quibus id concessum est, ad fontes ipsos
recurrant, quibus vero datum istud non est, eorum commentarios consulant, et diligenter in timore Domini,
tum veterum, tum recentiorum diversae interpretationis argumenta et raiones expendant. Hoc enim certe
dissimulari nec potest, nec debet, sacrarum literarum versiones illas plerasque partim matricum illarum
linguarum imperitia, partim librariorum negligentia sic extare depravatas, atque adeo tam multis modis
inquinatas, ut illis everrendis nullus adhuc eorum theologorum, quos hoc nostro feliciore, hac ex parte,
seculo, Deus ad repurgandum templum suum excitavit, nec eruditio maxima, nec indefatigabilis diligentia
par esse potuerit (A4v).”
22
Beza, Jobus Theodori Bezae, A4v.
23
Beza, Jobus Theodori Bezae, A4v-A5r.
24
Beza, Jobus Theodori Bezae, A5r.
14
In addition to Beza’s exegetical goal that held the Old Testament writings
together, his theological and political visions also motivate his efforts. Theologically,
Beza views the undeserved sufferings of David and Job as sharing a message of
assurance of final victory for God’s people. Job and Ecclesiastes share the theme of
divine providence. Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs share the same author, Solomon.
In arguing for an intimate connection between the three books of Solomon, he likens the
relationship to three different stages of spiritual instruction: students learning the true
direction of life on earth from a master (Proverbs); congregation looking down from a
high place be to instructed on the true way to happiness (Ecclesiastes); and the church
being taken above the clouds to contemplate the heavenly goods (Song of Songs).
25
Moreover, Beza associates these stages to an image of Solomon’s temple, where the
believer enters the general courtyard in Proverbs, then is brought to the entrance of the
inner place in Ecclesiastes, and finally arrives at the gate of the sanctuary ready to enter
after Jesus Christ in Song of Songs.
26
Consequently, there is an image of a continuous
spiritual movement in Solomon’s three books. Although Proverbs is the missing piece in
Beza’s corpus of poetic biblical books (for he never published a work on it), he
emphasizes a theological continuity across the rest of the four books.
Most significant for the purpose of this study is the shared political vision
overarching these four writings, evident in the names to whom Beza dedicates each of his
work, and their geographical locations: Henry Hastings, the Earl of Huntingdon (Psalms);
25
Beza, Sermons sur les trois premiers chapitres du cantique des cantiques de Salomon (Geneva:
Jean le Preux, 1586), 17-18.
26
Beza, Sermons … du cantique des cantiques de Salomon, 18.
15
Queen Elizabeth of England (Job); Jean Casimir, Count Palatine of Rhine, and his
nephew (Ecclesiastes); and the ministers of Geneva (Song of Songs). The variety of
people and locations presented in these dedicatory epistles is exemplary of the European-
wide nature of Beza’s correspondence and his diplomatic vision in promoting the
Reformed faith and securing protection for persecuted Protestants. Although stationed in
Geneva, his influence was not confined to this one location but extended across European
nations, as is evident in his vast number of letters collected in the Correspondance and
his activities recorded in the Registres.
27
In England, he had become an outspoken
supporter of the Puritan cause.
28
Maintaining a cordial relationship with a Puritan nobility
like Henry Hastings was thus necessary in overseeing a successful reform in England.
Further, England was a strategically important place for Beza’s pressing concerns for the
Huguenots and the religious wars in France and against the threats from the Catholic
Duke of Savoy in Geneva. He recognized that Elizabeth’s financial and military support
was crucial for the protection of Protestants and the survival of Reformed faith in both
regions against an international Catholic conspiracy.
29
In fact, by the time that he was
dedicating his Job commentary to the Queen in 1589, Beza was fully convinced that she
27
Aubert, Hippolyte, Alain Dufour et al., ed., Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, 43 vols.,
(Geneva: Droz, 1960-2017); and Olivier Fatio, Olivier Labarthe (eds.), Registres de la Compagnie des
Pasteurs de Genève, 14 vols. (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1962-2012). For a brief sketch of Beza’s life and his
influence across Europe, see Jill Raitt, “Theodore Beza,” in Shapers of Religious Traditions in Germany,
Switzerland, and Poland, 1560-1600, ed. Jill Raitt (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981): 89-104.
28
For a detailed study on Beza’s relationship to England, see Scott M. Manetsch, “Theodore Beza
in England,” in Theodore Beza at 500: New Pespective on an Old Reformer, ed. Summers and Manetsch
(Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2021): 97-136.
29
Manetsch, “Theodre Beza in England,” 120-125. Beza believed that the Tridentine reforms were
a declaration of militant war against the Protestants. See Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace
in France, 119-121.
16
was the “most worthy heroine” for the preservation of the gospel.
30
He also found some
crucial allies in Germany who were willing to continue their allegiance to the Reformed
faith against the enforcement of Formula of Concord in German territories and provide
military support for the French Huguenots. Given Jean Casimir’s staunch support for the
Reformed cause, it is not surprising that he dedicated his paraphrases on Ecclesiastes to
this German prince in the aftermath of the Montbéliard Colloquy (1586).
31
According to
Eugénie Droz, Beza’s dedication was also a gesture to offer advice and consolation to
Casimir who had suffered a military failure in the winter of 1587.
32
In short, these
political and religious struggles formed the background to Beza’s meditation, teaching,
preaching, and writing on the Old Testament poetic books, published in the decade
between 1579 and 1589. These contextual factors - the political situations of France,
England, and Geneva; religious struggles against the Catholics and Lutherans; the
experiences of persecuted churches and religious refugees; and the need to purify
Reformed faith and piety – all profoundly informed his biblical interpretations. The
following chapters examine the ways in which Beza’s contexts shaped his exegesis and
thematic emphases of each of the books.
30
See “Triumphalis ad Elizabetham, Angliae Reginam, de Clade Hispanicae Classis,” in CB
29:284-289, as quoted in Manetsch, “Theodore Beza in England,” 123.
31
The Montbéliard Colloquy (1586) had been an important debate between the Reformed and the
Lutherans. Underlying the debates concerning the Lord’s Supper, however, was a more complicated
political and religious tensions surrounding the events of the wars in France. For Beza, the colloquy
represented his effort to secure Reformed worship for the French refugees in the city and gain military
support of the German princes for the Huguenots in France. See Raitt, The Colloquy of Montbéliard (New
York: OUP, 1993); and Raitt, “The Emperor and the Exiles: The Clash of Religion and Politics in the Late
Sixteenth Century,” Church History 52, no. 2 (1983), 145-156.
32
Eugénie Droz, “L’Ecclésiaste de Théodore de Bèze et ses éditions allemandes (1599 et 1605),”
Revue d’histoire et de philosophie religieuses 47, n. 4 (1967): 338-346.
17
Method, Scope, and Outline of the Present Work
This present study analyzes Theodore Beza’s readings of the Old Testament poetic
books, particularly the ways in which he employed exegetical methods, theological
insights, and pastoral applications to comfort the persecuted church and cultivate piety
among believers amid political and religious struggles of his sixteenth-century context.
Such historical investigation entails two methodological tasks: interpreting the text and
interpreting the context. On the former, this research pursues an in-depth analysis of
Beza’s primary texts – mainly, his Latin Psalm Paraphrases, commentary and paraphrases
on Job, paraphrases on Ecclesiastes, and sermons on the Song of Songs. While each of
these texts may yield different interpretations based on the perspective of the interpreters,
I approach this study with the understanding that “texts have a field or range of
meanings.”
33
Carl R. Trueman states, “these readings [of history] take place within a
frame of reference that is itself limited by certain intrinsic qualities of the text.”
34
My
research is not an attempt to probe into Beza’s mind in search for an exhaustive meaning
of these texts; rather, it is an attempt to discern and bring to expression the “implicit
meanings” exhibited in Beza’s exegetical writings.
35
My focus is thus on his use of these
texts. And yet, to determine the “intrinsic quality” or the “implicit meaning” of Beza’s
texts, I also consider in my research the contextual factors that have shaped his thought in
his time and place on his own terms. Studying these contexts includes examining his
33
Susan E. Schreiner, Where Shall Wisdom Be Found?: Calvin’s Exegesis of Job from Medieval
and Modern Perspectives (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1994), 17.
34
Carl R. Trueman, Histories and Fallacies: Problems Faced in the Writing of History (Wheaton,
IL: Crossway, 2010), 57.
35
David C. Steinmetz, Luther in Context (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986), 43-44.
18
background, his family relations, his education, his conversion, his friendships, his
enemies, etc., within the social, cultural, and political contexts of the time. Historians
identify such an approach as a study in intellectual history – that is, a study in the history
of ideas in its social context.
36
Given this method, this study focuses upon Beza’s
interpretation of the Old Testament poetic books in his political and religious contexts on
one hand, and the ways that the contexts themselves inform his readings of the texts on
the other. Thus, Beza’s exegetical endeavors – demonstrated in his commitments to literal
and historical exegesis, his use of typology, his christological readings, his emphasis on
the church, and his rendering of allegories – are all intimately tied to his theological
program, through which he sought to comfort, instruct, and exhort the church through his
readings of the Old Testament poetic books. In the end, for Beza, these books are not his
own words; they are the Word of God, which the Holy Spirit uses as a means for the
salvation and edification of God’s people.
37
The method of studying ideas in their historical contexts poses a question on the
issue of scope. How broad do contexts have to be in order to discern the best meaning of
the text? For example, Beza’s readings of the Old Testament poetic books can be
examined in their sixteenth-century context but also against the background of ancient
and medieval interpretations or in the context of reception in the next generations. To
36
See these helpful books on historical methods, Quentin Skinner, Visions of Politics: Regarding
Method, vol. 1 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002); and James E. Bradley and Richard A.
Muller, Church History: An Introduction to Research, Reference Works, and Methods (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1995).
37
Beza, Confession de la foy chrestienne, contenant la confirmation d’icelle, & la refutation des
superstitions contraires (Conrad Badius, 1559), 92: “Tiercement, quand nous disons que l’Evangile, ainsi
escrit & enregistré que Dieu le nous a donné, est le seul moyen ordinaire dont l’Espirit de Dieu se sert pour
sauver les hommes, a raison de quoy ceste parole est appelee Parole de vie & de reconciliation, ...”
19
what extent did past interpretations influence Beza’s thoughts? What were Beza’s
sources? How did the next generation receive Beza’s interpretations? The questions of
influence and reception are arguably important to the study of intellectual history. While
not completely neglecting these aspects, my main area of interest is to examine Beza’s
interpretations as he interacts with his immediate political and religious contexts, which, I
demonstrate, considerably shaped his emphases in biblical exegesis. Hence, I do not
engage in a verse-by-verse comparison of Beza’s reading to any theologian in particular.
Nevertheless, I note his similarities or differences to Calvin, recognizing that as Calvin’s
successor, the responsibility of continuing Calvin’s legacy had fallen on Beza’s shoulders
from his post in Geneva. Making comparisons to Calvin also offers a vantage point for
evaluating Beza’s contributions in the formation of Reformed identity in the
confessionalization era. As there is no study to date on Beza’s readings of the Old
Testament in the context of his political and religious struggles, it is this lacuna in Bezan
scholarship that I aim to fill.
Correlating to Beza’s four writings on the Old Testament, my analysis is divided
into four chapters. In each chapter, I highlight distinct aspects of his exegetical
methodology, theological themes, and contextual applications. Instead of following a
chronological order (in which case, it would be Psalms, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, and
Job), I proceed in the order of Psalms, Job, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs due to two
considerations. Given Beza’s ambitions to produce an Old Testament version of his
Annotationes, it might seem that examining his writings in their canonical order best
reflects the blueprint of his project. Yet, I place the Psalms first and group the other three
afterward because of the style and nature of the latter three books as Old Testament
20
wisdom literature. A few of the psalms belong to this category, but because of the various
uses of the book of Psalms in liturgies and worship throughout history, I approach it in its
own category. Secondly, ordering each of the four writings from his shorter summaries
and paraphrases to longer sermons takes into consideration questions of audience and
style. His Latin Psalm paraphrases with short summaries (argumentem), and works of
commentary and paraphrases on Job and Ecclesiastes were intended for ministers and
educated laity, as revealed by their publications in Latin.
38
The sermons, however, were
prepared in French for a general audience. As studies on Calvin’s work on biblical
interpretation demonstrate, the differences in genre determined his exegetical style and
principles.
39
The same applies to Beza’s approach to Scripture. In the first three writings,
he invests greater interest in the literary form, the original Hebrew, and translation issues.
In contrast to this, the sermons exhibit a greater interest in theological applications and
pastoral concerns. His sermons therefore serve as a rich source for exploring the ways
that he applies his interpretations to the polemics of his time and engages his context,
which is the culmination of my argument. Placing the sermons last accentuates this
purpose.
The first chapter analyzes Beza’s Latin Psalm Paraphrases, giving attention to his
historical and christological exegesis through a comparison of his readings in David’s
38
Beza’s first published paraphrases on the Psalms, entitled Les Pseaumes mis en rime françoise
(1562), were in French to be used for worship in the French Reformed churches. He later revised these
paraphrases, translating them to Latin to provide a better Latin translation of the Psalms. This Latin version
was intended for a more erudite audience.
39
Susan E. Schreiner, “Calvin as an Interpreter of Job,” in Calvin and the Bible, ed. Donald
McKim (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 55-56; and see also Richard A. Muller, The
Unaccommodated Calvin (New York: Oxford University Press, 200), 140-158.
21
history and Christ’s history. This chapter investigates his practice of literal and historical
readings to illuminate authorial intention, as well as his uses of Hebrew, Greek, and
Protestant sources from which he draws his literal and historical meanings. The chapter
turns next to a focus on Beza’s emphases of the earthly and temporal kingdoms, and the
proper role of a godly ruler as examples of the ways in which context shaped his
emphases. Beza uses these themes to edify and comfort the church amid persecutions and
political struggles, as well as to instruct the church toward cultivating a heart of patience
and a desire for pure worship. For Beza, David’s life and experiences of suffering and
betrayal are exemplary for the experiences of the sixteenth century believers. The chapter
concludes with a case study on his reading of the imprecatory psalms, which reveals his
surprising emphasis on patience rather than a call for immediate action.
Chapter two analyzes Beza’s commentary and paraphrases of Job with continued
examination of his literal and historical approaches evident in his attention to the words
of the text, scriptural references, Job’s history, and the unity of the two Testaments. These
emphases ground Beza’s explanation of the story of Job in terms of God’s justice and
human righteousness – themes he then relates to the life and experiences of the
persecuted and suffering Reformed churches. I argue that his attention to the political and
religious struggles of his time informs his emphasis on Job as a positive example. While
Calvin views Job as an inadequate example, deserving reproof for his sin of arrogance,
Beza highlights Job as a true member of the church, exemplary teacher of God’s
providence, and a positive example for godly virtues of patience and constancy.
Chapter three extends the discussion to Beza’s reading of Ecclesiastes. It
demonstrates the central role that Solomon’s authorship and kingship play in his literal
22
and historical exegesis, particularly in his emphasis on the authorial intention. Examined
here as well, are Solomon’s teachings on divine providence and the highest good, which
Beza draws from the plain meaning of the text. Given Solomon’s place as a king, Beza
views Ecclesiastes as especially instructive for his modern-day kings and princes,
instructing them in what it means to trust in God’s providence and to seek the highest
good. He applies these themes to comfort and instruct the church as well, echoing his
consistent applications to his immediate political and religious contexts.
Chapter four analyzes Beza’s sermons on the Song of Songs. This chapter calls
attention to an interesting aspect of Beza’s biblical exegesis of this text: his allegorical
reading of the Song. I argue that even as he highlights the need to interpret the book
allegorically, he employs methods that are consistent with his literal and historical
exegetical commitments by grounding his readings upon authorial intent, literary
features, grammatical constructs, and scriptural references. This chapter explores Beza’s
understandings of prophet and prophecy, as well as history as it unfolds in the
relationship between Christ and the church, on which he builds his arguments for the
authority and succession of pastoral and teaching office. Beza views the entire history of
God’s church as the history of God’s one covenant in Christ. At the heart of his
controversy against contemporary Roman Catholics concerning the nature and identity of
the true church, he highlights the centrality of Christ and the authority of Scripture in the
Song. I argue that this polemical context shapes his readings toward emphasizing the
superiority of Christ in a way that distinguishes him from Calvin’s tendency to downplay
christological readings. This chapter concludes by illustrating the ways in which Beza
applies the Song of Songs to comfort and exhort the churches of his day – particularly
23
regarding refugee experiences, true worship, and God’s care and preservation of God’s
church.
Finally, in my conclusion I draw upon my analyses and arguments to expound
upon Theodore Beza’s contributions to biblical exegesis. Although each chapter
accentuates different aspects of his exegetical approach, in all, they point to Beza’s
consistent attention to literal and historical readings in order to draw themes and
applications that engage with his immediate political and religious contexts. Beza shares
with Calvin many similar emphases and doctrinal commitments, but he embraces both a
more positive view of Job and at times a more traditional christological reading to meet
the pressing concerns of his time and reflect the political and religious struggles suffered
by the church and the faithful. The differences are not in their exegetical methods or
ecclesial goals but in the ways that Calvin’s successor uses and applies the Old Testament
poetic books to his immediate context. On the basis of these conclusions, I demonstrate
Beza’s place within the history of biblical interpretation and the role of his interpretation
in the confessional formation. Beyond his text critical influences exemplified in his
Annotationes, Beza’s exegetical writings on the Old Testament illuminate his significance
in theological, literal, and historical applications of the text to his contemporary church
and thus, in the continued consolidation of Reformed practices and identity around
Scripture.
24
CHAPTER ONE
Beza’s Reading of the Psalms (1579):
From David of the Old Testament to the Church of the Sixteenth Century
1.1 Introduction
The Psalms have been recognized throughout church history as one of the most
beloved books of the Scripture. Its influence across intellectual, cultural, and spiritual
spheres was evident in forms of church liturgies, lectures, prayers, sermons, and moral
instructions.
1
The Psalter was especially useful in shaping Christian spirituality as it
offered ways for believers to participate in thanksgiving, praise, and even lament in the
midst of life struggles before the good and merciful God. Through the recitation and
singing of the psalms, the experiences and emotions of the psalmists became expressions
of faith for all believers. Augustine identified with the words of the Psalms so closely that
he wrote, “If the psalm prays, you pray; if it laments, you lament; if it exults, you rejoice;
if it hopes, you hope; if it fears, you fear. Everything written here is a mirror for us.”
2
Echoing Augustine’s sentiments, sixteenth-century theologians including Luther and
Calvin also highly prized the Psalms as an essential book for Christian reflections. For
Luther, the Psalter was “a little Bible,” in which all saints can find “the words that fit
their situation.” He goes on to say that in the Psalms “you have a fine, bright, pure mirror
1
See Nancy van Deusen (ed), The Place of the Psalms in the Intellectual Culture in the Middle
Ages (Albany: State University of New York, 1999) for a helpful overview on the use of the Psalms in the
Middle Ages as they were appropriated and used in monastic, church, family, and social settings.
2
Augustine, Expositions of the Psalms, Psalm 30(2).3. Augustine scholars have recognized that
the Psalms was the guiding structure for his entire Confessions. For studies on this topic, see Jeffrey S.
Lehman, “’As I read, I was set on fire’: On the Psalms in Augustine’s Confessions,” Logos vol. 16, no. 2
(Spring 2013), 160-184 and also, Euntaek D. Shin, “Psalms for Restless Memory: The Logic of Grace and
Rest in Augustine’s Confessions,” Scottish Journal of Theology vol. 75 (2022), 250-261.
25
that will show you what Christendom is.”
3
Likewise, Calvin called this book “An
Anatomy of all the Parts of the Soul” because “there is not an emotion of which anyone
can be conscious that is not here represented as in a mirror.”
4
For these theologians, and
many others, there was no better place in the Scripture than the Psalms that reflected, as
the mirror analogy shows, the affections and emotions of believers whether in times of
joy or sorrow. The Psalter was a living confession of the church at the center of all public
and private practices of spirituality as a means for repentance, supplication, thanksgiving,
and praise to the Almighty God.
Standing within the long tradition of reading the Psalms, Theodore Beza also kept
this book very close at the heart of his life and theology. Already at a very early stage of
his career, he was drawn to studying the Psalms. In 1550, he published Abraham
Sacrificiant, his first substantial work as a Protestant, in which he indicated that singing a
psalm to God is far better “than to write sonnets in the style of Petrarch.”
5
Following his
conversion to the Protestant faith, he came to realize that the poems of the Bible far
superseded those of the ancient authors whose writings he had indulged himself as a
young humanist. Likewise, the older Beza wished that he could devote the remainder of
his career to studying the Psalms and the Scripture instead of engaging in “Aristotelian
3
LW 35:255-57.
4
CTS 8:xxxvi.
5
Beza, Abraham sacrifiant, ed. Keith Cameron, Kathleen Hall, Francis Higman (Geneva:
Librairie Droz, 1967), 47-48: “A la verité il leur seroit mieux seant de chanter un cantique à Dieu, que de
petrarquiser un Sonnet …” It is from this remark of Beza that Scott M. Manetsch takes the title of his
article, “Psalms before Sonnets: Theodore Beza and the Studia Humanitatis.”
26
things.”
6
In the dedicatory letter to his Latin paraphrases on the Psalms, addressed to
Henry of Huntingdon (1535-1595), he again reflected on how he had been so captivated
by reading and meditating the Psalms that his desire had been to put his studies into
writing.
7
For Beza, meditating on these divine songs of the Scripture was a lifelong
endeavor in which he consistently found great pleasure, peace, and comfort.
Beza’s first major work came at Calvin’s request when the death of a French
Renaissance poet, Clément Marot, had left the French Psalter project unfinished. Under
Calvin’s guidance, Marot had been working to create versified paraphrases of the Psalms
in vernacular French to be sung in public worship services.
8
When Marot died, the task
was handed over to Beza who was at the time a young scholar with great poetic talent and
training in the studia humanitatis. Together with translations completed by Marot and a
few by Calvin, Beza’s paraphrases were published in 1562 under the title Les Pseaumes
mis en rime françoise.
9
It was hugely successful within the French Protestant
communities as about thirty to fifty thousand copies were printed, and it became the
official Psalter for the Huguenots and for the Genevans playing a significant role in
6
“Nam haec etiam aetas ac valetudo mea postulant, ut vel istas scribendi partes aliis resignem, vel
certe ad placidius aliquod scriptionis genus me totum convertam, unde consolationem maiorem capiam,
peri thj analusewj, non illa aristotelica, sed christiana cogitans. Itaque me superioribus mensibus in
scribenda brevi psalmorum paraphrase exercui …” Beza to André Dudith, 2 June 1579, Paris, Bibliothèque
Ste, Geneviève, ms. 1456, fols. 247-29. As cited in Manetsch, “Psalms before Sonnets,” 413 n. 48.
7
Beza, Psalmorum Sacrorum Libri Quinque, vario Carminum genere Latine expressi, &
argumentis, atque Paraphrasi illustrati (Geneva, 1581), ã.4.
8
For an analysis of Marot’s Psalm Paraphrases, see Dick Wursten, Clément Marot and Religion: A
Reassessment in the Light of his Psalm Paraphrases (Leiden: Brill, 2010).
9
For more details on this work, see Dufour, Théodore de Bèze, 23-25. See also, for stylistic
analysis, Michel Jeanneret, Poésie et tradition biblique au XVIe siècle. Recherches stylistiques sur les
paraphrases des psaumes de Marot à Malherbe (Paris: Librairie Jose Corti, 1969).
27
solidifying a French Protestant identity throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries.
10
Following its huge success, Beza continued to revise his Psalms paraphrases,
eventually providing a Latin translation, in which he supplanted the French versifications
with supplementary materials intended for a more erudite audience.
11
The first Latin
version was published in 1566 and contained paraphrases to only six Psalms (1, 2, 6, 15,
18, 104). Each subsequent edition added more Psalms to its previous publication until
finally the complete 150 Psalms paraphrases appeared as a set in 1579.
12
From this
edition onward, Beza attached short summaries (argumentum) to explain the content and
interpretation of each psalm.
13
Regarding his method of interpretation, his aim was to
provide the most “succinct” and “perspicuous” paraphrases possible on the basis of other
theologians’ works, most notably Johannes van Campen and Henrich Möller.
14
He further
revealed that he took every effort to provide the primary points of each psalm – namely,
10
For an in-depth critical study of the French Psalter paraphrased by Marot and Beza, see Les
Pseaumes mis en rime françoise (Volume I: Texte de 1562), edited by Max Engammare (Geneva: Droz,
2019). This study offers Engammare’s annotations on the text with an analysis of the poetic languages and
sources used by Marot and Beza.
11
For a detailed study on the variations of supplementary materials for each version of Beza’s
Latin Psalm Paraphrases that were published from 1566 to 1581, see Margaret Duncumb, “The Latin Psalm
Paraphrases of Théodore de Bèze,” in Théodore de Bèze (1519-1605), ed. Irena Backus (Geneva: Librairie
Droz, 2007), 381-400.
12
Beza, Psalmorum Davidis et Aliorum Prophetarum libri quinque, argumenti & Latina
Paraphrasi illustrate, ac etiam vario carminum genere latine expressi (Geneva, 1579).
13
Duncumb notes only two editions of the eight published between 1579 and 1581 that do not
include the argumentum. Nevertheless, Duncumb argues that the texts of Beza’s Latin Psalm paraphrases
were pretty much established with the first publication of 150 psalms in 1579, although there are a few
minimal adjustments in later versions. See Duncumb, “The Latin Psalm Paraphrases,” 386-387. In this
project, I have used Beza’s Paraphrasi published in 1581, which was published under the title, Psalmorum
sacrorum libri quinque, vario carminum genere Latine expressi, & argumentis, atque Paraphrasi illustrati.
[Hereafter abbreviated Psalmorum]
14
Beza, Psalmorum, ã.5.r
28
its main theme, the use, and the method – in the argumentum.
15
In addition to the
paraphrases, Beza also published a meditative work on the Seven Penitential Psalms.
16
As
Pierre-Olivier Léchot has noted, both the paraphrases and the meditations were the fruits
of Beza’s study of the Psalms that spanned over two decades.
17
In the end, they played an
important role in bringing to surface Beza’s role as a biblical interpreter and the
theological program he sought to achieve through these writings during the period of
1550s to early 1580s.
In this chapter, I seek to provide an analysis of Beza’s reading of the Psalms and
his exegetical methods therein, primarily through the arguments of his Paraphrasi with
three particular foci of interest. First, I discuss the historical and christological readings
of Beza’s interpretation in an attempt to answer in which history Beza identified the
literal meaning. Although his arguments only offer a brief summary of each psalm, it is
evident that when he regards a psalm to be speaking mainly of Christ, he follows certain
exegetical rules in a manner similar to that of Calvin’s. Second, I explore the main thrust
15
Beza, Psalmorum, ã.5.v.
16
Beza, Chrestienes Meditations sur Huict Pseaumes du Prophete David (Geneva, 1583). Alain
Dufour called this work the “summit” of Beza’s writings. See Dufour, Théodore de Bèze. Poète et
théologien (Geneva: Droz, 2006), 200. While this is an important work in Beza’s exegetical studies, I have
narrowed my focus to his Paraphrases in this chapter because of the differences in genre and nature
between the two writings. For further studies on Beza’s Meditations, see Clare Costley King’oo, “From
Penance to Politics,” in Misere Mei: The Penitential Psalms in Late Medieval and Early Modern England
(Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2012), 129-156; Pierre-Olivier Léchot, “Théodore de
Bèze spirituel: À propos des Chrestiennes meditations (1582),” Revue d’histoire du protestantisme Tome 4
(Geneva: Octobre-Décembre 2019, Droz), 617-626; and Olivier Pot, “L’invention d’un Genre: Les
Chrestiennes Meditations sur Huict Pseaumes,” in Théodore de Bèze (1519-1605), ed. Irena Backus
(Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2007), 449-467.
17
Léchot, “Théodore de Bèze spirituel: À propos des Chrestiennes meditations (1582),” 618.
Léchot suggests that Beza’s study on the Psalms dates to when he began his French paraphrases. Beza had
briefly paused working on his meditations but then resumed them in 1560 during his stay at the court of
Nerac, possibly at the request of Jeanne d’Albret until they were published in 1582.
29
of Beza’s Psalm Paraphrasi – namely, his focus on the church within the larger
understanding of Christ’s kingdom. His purpose in writing on the Psalms was to comfort
and encourage the church through the life and experiences of David, especially the
suffering churches of his time that were facing persecutions. This study of Beza’s
ecclesial reading reveals the impact of historical context on shaping the content of his
exegesis. Finally, I explore the applicatory aspect of Beza’s reading through a few
selected psalms of prayer, in particular the imprecatory psalms, through which is
demonstrated the theological program he wished to promote for the Christian community
of his time. My goal is not to present a complete study of Beza’s exegesis of the Psalms,
as studies on his translations or metrics of the Psalms will also prove to be valuable.
Rather, my aim is to identify certain aspects of Beza’s exegetical tendencies and the
theological program he sought to achieve. Overall, this chapter illuminates Beza’s place
in the history of interpretation of the Psalms as well as the ways that he employed the
Psalms as a spiritual guide to Reformed churches and believers amid their hardships and
struggles.
1.2 Beza’s Reading of the Psalms as Histories of David and Christ
In her study on Calvin’s exegesis of the Psalms, G. Sujin Pak summarizes the
point at issue with these following words:
It is precisely the question of history that is at issue here – more
specifically, which history identifies the literal sense of the text. Is it the
history of Christ that fulfills the prophecies of these texts? Or is it the
history of the human author? Or is it some kind of combination of both?
18
18
G. Sujin Pak, The Judaizing Calvin: Sixteenth-Century Debates over the Messianic Psalms
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 133.
30
Pak answers these questions by demonstrating Calvin’s emphasis on the human authorial
intent and his significant shift from the previous traditions of reading the Messianic
psalms primarily as prophecies of Christ.
19
Pak further argues that Calvin promoted a
particular exegetical practice that helped to shape an emerging Reformed confessional
identity.
20
As Calvin’s closest colleague, it is no surprise then that Beza follows a similar
exegetical approach, continuing the tradition of his predecessor. First and foremost, he
reads the prophecies as fulfilled in the history of the human author. The life and
experience of David becomes an important context in which Beza interprets and applies
the psalms. He often shies away from traditional christological readings of the text, only
referencing Christ when he believes such a reading is warranted by the text itself and is
useful for the benefit of the church. Christ is revealed by means of spiritual and
typological readings, but surprisingly, also by an allegorical reading for one particular
psalm. In addition, Beza makes every effort to read each psalm in the context of the
whole Scripture, referring frequently to relevant Old Testament and New Testament texts.
The historical and canonical contexts serve as significant exegetical tools to his approach,
which then guides the content of his interpretations.
Beza’s attempt to read the Psalms first in their historical context is clearly evident
in his explanations of each psalm. Beza often begins with a note on the historical
19
For a study on Bucer’s exegesis of the Psalms, see also R. Gerald Hobbs, “How Firm a
Foundation: Martin Bucer’s Historical Exegesis of the Psalms,” Church History 53 (1984), 477-91 and
idem, “Bucer’s Use of King David as mirror of the Christian Prince,” Reformation and Renaissance Review
5 (2003), 102-28.
20
G. Sujin Pak, The Judaizing Calvin, 127.
31
occasion on which a psalm was written by referring to Hebrew inscriptions.
21
For
example, as he interprets Psalm 3, he references its Hebrew inscription to situate the
psalm in David’s history, indicating that the psalm was sung at the time when David was
driven out of the city by the conspiracy of Absalom.
22
In another example, writing on
Psalm 30, where David gives thanks to God for restoring him from a deprived state, Beza
writes, “it is very probable that David composed this Psalm when, having killed Absalom
and Sheba, he returned to the city (as narrated in 2 Samuel 20), and wished to cleanse his
house polluted by the incest of his son and other sins, and to consecrate it entirely to God,
as indicated in the Hebrew inscription.”
23
Again, on Psalm 34, Beza comments, “This
psalm, according to Hebrew inscription, was written by David of his remarkable
deliverance by which he escaped from the hands of King Achish, feigning madness, as is
written in 1 Samuel 21.”
24
Following a similar pattern, he begins Psalm 60: “The Hebrew
inscription declares that the occasion for this psalm was provided by the history which is
narrated in 2 Samuel 8 & 1 Chronicles 18, that is the war waged against the Assyrians
and King Sophenes, whom David defeated as well as all the neighboring peoples.”
25
As
such, Beza often uses the Hebrew inscriptions as reference points for determining the
historical situation of each psalm.
21
For references to Hebrew inscription, see Beza’s arguments on Psalms 3, 18, 30, 34, 45, 51, 52,
56, 59, 60, 63, 73, 81, 88, 100, 102, 111, 118, 127, 131, 133, 142.
22
Beza, Psalmorum, 6.
23
Beza, Psalmorum, 89.
24
Beza, Psalmorum, 106.
25
Beza, Psalmorum, 214.
32
Beza does not, however, employ Hebrew inscriptions uncritically. A Hebrew
inscription is only valid when it aligns with other indicators, such as the content of the
psalm itself or other scriptural texts. An example of Beza’s critical use of the inscription
can be seen in his remarks on Psalm 88:
A Hebrew inscription testifies that the author of this psalm was Heman of
the Korahite family, surnamed Ezraite by his country, a relative and
colleague of Asaph, whose great honor is mentioned in 1 Chronicles 6:33,
and also in 25:5, where it is said that the king was a prophet and a
remarkable singer and whose singular wisdom is celebrated 1 Kings 4:31,
so that I think those who refer this psalm to the time of Jehoiakim, the
penultimate King of Judah, during the Babylonian captivity, are
mistaken.
26
Here, Beza observes that there are various opinions concerning to whom this psalm
belongs. He approves the idea presented in the Hebrew inscription, not uncritically, but
on the basis of Scriptural references that he finds in Chronicles and Kings. For Beza, it is
important that the validity of each Hebrew inscription is tested against other parts of the
Bible. Thus, in instances where the Hebrew inscription does not seem to agree with what
Scripture testifies, he does not hesitate to question its accuracy. One example is Psalm 56,
in which he contends,
The Hebrew inscription signifies that David took the subject of writing
this psalm when captured by the Philistines: which story is narrated in 1
Samuel 21. However, it appears from the context of the psalm that it
should be understood not as if David was among the Philistines and
pretending madness while pouring out these prayers, or as if the words
spoken here were directed against the Philistines. Rather, it conveys that
having been being delivered from such great danger, David lamented
26
Beza, Psalmorum, 329: “Inscripto Hebraica testatur scriptorem huius Psalmi fuisse Hemanem
ex Coritatum genere, Ezraitam a patria cognominaturm, Asaphi cognatum ac collegam, cuius
honorificentissima fit mentio 1 Paralip. 6:33, item 25:5, ubi dicitur fuisse Regi a prophetia & insignis
cantor & cuius singularis sapientia celebratur 1 Reg. 4:31, ut eos falli existimem qui ad Joakimi
antepenultimi Regis Juda apud Babylonem captivi tempora hunc psalmum referunt.”
33
before God about Saul and the cruelty of the servants, whose violence and
plots had put him in so much trouble in order to avoid them.
27
In this example, Beza takes a different approach from the previous one, choosing to
disagree with what is indicated in the Hebrew inscription based on the content of the
psalm itself. Since the Scripture is God’s inspired Word whereas the Hebrew inscription
is not, the former takes greater weight when there seems to be a disagreement between
the two. Furthermore, in some instances, the Hebrew and Greek inscriptions are
compared. Commenting on Psalm 96, he argues that although the Hebrews do not
provide the author or the occasion of this psalm, the Greeks have correctly noted it to be a
psalm of David. Then he makes scriptural references – in this case to the Chronicles – to
support his preference for the opinion of the Greeks.
28
At other times, Beza sides with the
opinions of other Protestant theologians rather than of the Hebrew rabbis. He writes on
Psalm 91 that “the Hebrew rabbis attribute this psalm to Moses, as well as the ten others
immediately following, but without any valid reason.” While refuting the Hebrew
sources, he states his agreement with Dr. Heinrich Möller’s opinion “that the dreadful
pestilence mentioned in 2 Samuel 24 has provided an opportunity for this writing” whom
Beza calls “the excellent and most learned man.”
29
These examples demonstrate not only
27
Beza, Psalmorum, 202: “Inscriptio Hebraica significat Davidem a Philistaeis interceptum inde
huius Psalmi scribendi argumentum sumpsisse: quae historia narratut 1 Sam. 21. Sed hoc apparet ex Psalmi
contextu sic accipiendum, non quasi inter Philistaeos versans & insaniam simulans has interea preces
effuderit, aut quasi quae hic dicuntur adversus Philistaeos torserit, sed potius quod ab hoc tanto periculo
liberatus, apud Deum sit conquestus de Saule & ipsius saevitiae administris, quorum vim & insidias ut
vitaret, in tantum discrimen incidisset.”
28
Beza, Psalmorum, 364.
29
Beza, Psalmorum, 347; Beza had great appreciation for Heinrich Möller’s paraphrase on the
Psalms. Beza writes in his introductory letter, “Huic autem paraphrasi opposita est e regione Latina versio,
qualis est presertim a doctissimo viro D. Henrico Mollero nuper edita: pauculis tantum a me immutatis &
interdum emollitis.” (Beza, Psalmorum, ã.5v).
34
Beza’s appeal to the historical reading as primary but also Beza’s expansive knowledge
regarding the various sources that were available to him, ranging from Hebrew to Greek
to Protestant literatures. His words from the introduction affirm this. After praising God
for restoring the original languages of the Bible, especially the Hebrew, Beza surveys the
history of writings on the Psalms from Origen to Augustine to some of his
contemporaries, including Hebraists Johannes van Campen and Heinrich Möller, John
Calvin, George Buchanan, and many unnamed theologians in between, demonstrating his
immense knowledge in biblical studies and languages.
30
This allows Beza to draw on
various sources for writing his own Psalm Paraphrasi, whether they be the Hebrew
inscription or Greek or Protestant resources.
Although he considered the historical sense of the text to be primary, it was not
the only sense Beza found in his readings of the Psalms. Beza, at times, turns to interpret
certain psalms in reference to Christ’s ministry and kingdom. He does this by employing
three exegetical criteria that point toward a christological reading, sometimes even at the
expense of David’s history and authorship. First, Beza finds warrant to offer
christological references when such reading is called forth by the inspiration of the Holy
Spirit, the divine author of the Psalms. These instances are signaled by Beza’s use of
expressions such as “inspired by the Holy Spirit” or “David speaks with a prophetic
spirit.” His expositions of psalms 8, 16, 18, and 72 provide examples of these spiritual
readings. In Psalm 8, Beza begins with an introduction that there are “two greatest
blessings bestowed upon humankind: the creation of Adam and the restoration through
30
Beza, Psalmorum, ã.3-ã.5v.
35
Christ.” Then, without much discussion on David, he explains that this psalm is about the
eternal Son of God assuming human nature so that the human nature of all believers may
also be elevated through participation in Christ’s own dignity. “This,” he writes, “is the
true purpose of this psalm, as indicated by the Holy Spirit Himself.”
31
For Beza, the Holy
Spirit is able to teach Christ beyond what the human author can perceive or foresee, for
the Spirit is the divine author. In Psalm 16, Beza starts out with the historical occasion
that spurred David on to write this psalm but soon shifts the focus to David speaking
under “the inspiration of prophetic spirit.” This spiritual foresight enables David to
foretell the resurrection of Christ through which the promise of eternal kingdom will be
fulfilled. Thus, Beza writes, David’s use of the word “anointed one”(די ִסָח) in verse 10 is
a reference to the Messiah, which captures the essence of the Gospel.
32
Similarly, it is in
the same prophetic spirit that David foresees the eternal kingdom of the Messiah in Psalm
18: “He is certain by the prophetic spirit that this kingdom, however flourishing, is only
an example, and that the likeness of that eternal kingdom of the Messiah will be born
from him.”
33
Again, in Psalm 72, David describes the flourishing state of Solomon’s
kingdom in a way that foresees the actual reality of it in Christ “by the prophetic spirit.”
34
The authorship and the intention of the Holy Spirit in these psalms are what leads Beza to
read them concerning Christ’s work and kingdom. In these examples, Beza appears to
follow traditional christological readings more comfortably than Calvin who prefers to
31
Beza, Psalmorum, 19. [Emphasis added]
32
Beza, Psalmorum, 36. [Emphasis added]
33
Beza, Psalmorum, 43. [Emphasis added]
34
Beza, Psalmorum, 260. [Emphasis added]
36
place greater emphasis on David’s historical context even in the psalms where he agrees
David to be a prophet foreseeing Christ.
35
According to Beza, David’s words, while they
are significant at historical and literal levels, are transformed by the Holy Spirit and by
the “prophetic spirit” to lead him to foresee Christ’s history beyond what a human author
can imagine often at the expense of David’s history.
Beza’s second exegetical tool for christological reading occurs by a way of
typology. Beza sees various elements of the Old Testament represented in the Psalms as
types for Christ’s ministry and kingdom. To put it simply, the life of David is developed
and comes to its full fulfillment in the life and work of Christ. Commenting on Psalm 2,
Beza declares that this psalm is “truly prophetic under the type of David.” David’s
attainment of the promised kingdom signifies the Messiah who will be designated as the
king of the entire world after overcoming death through resurrection.
36
His exposition of
Psalm 41 further reveals this typological method. Taking into account David’s historical
context, Beza begins with describing David’s afflictions after being betrayed by
Ahithophel and his own son. Here, he draws a typological connection between David and
Christ:
In this matter, type is remarkable, both between David and Christ, and
between Ahithophel and Judas, in which sense verse 9 of this Psalm is
quoted in John 13:18. For just as David was betrayed and driven away by
his son, yet regained his kingdom, so Christ, betrayed by his disciple and
35
For Calvin’s christological readings of the Messianic Psalms (2, 8, 16, 22, 45, 72, 110, and 118),
see Pak, Judaizing Calvin, 79-82: “Calvin often does not follow the traditional christological readings of
these eight psalms – either in not giving a reading in reference to Christ or, more frequently, in the lack of
prominence he gives to the christological reading. … Furthermore, even on those Psalms that he agrees are
more fully completed in Christ, the weight of his exegesis falls upon a reading for the church through the
example of David (79).”
36
Beza, Psalmorum, 3.
37
led to the cross by his own people, truly entered into his kingdom, and the
outcome of both betrayers was the same.
37
Here, the theme of betrayal in David’s history is picked up as a type that signifies Christ’s
betrayal. Taking this idea further, Beza reads certain psalms to be more relevant to Christ
than David, Psalm 69 being one example. “It is certain,” Beza notes, “that the Holy Spirit
guided the mind and hand of the Prophet [David] in such a way that he looked at those of
whom he was the type rather than himself ... And so Christ the Mediator is portrayed as
lamenting before God about the cruelty of his own people, which could not be overcome
by any good deeds of his, rather than David lamenting about his enemies.”
38
Again, it is
the Holy Spirit as the divine author who directs the human author David to prophesy
about Christ’s work. The typology develops, expands, and fulfills the meaning of David’s
experience in the life and ministry of Christ. In these instances, although Beza regards
David’s history as a significant part of his interpretation, the divine author’s intention
takes priority in revealing the meaning of the text. In Psalm 40, Beza writes that “these
attributes of the person of Christ are to be applied very differently to Christ than to
David, that is, to the Truth itself than to the type.”
39
His emphasis on prominence of
Christ’s history over David’s suggests a distinction from Calvin with whom he shares the
same principles for christological readings but provides more christological details in a
way that Christ comes to the forefront of his interpretation. From all these examples, it
37
Beza, Psalmorum, 143: “Est autem admirabilis hac in re typus, tum Davidis cum Christo, tum
Achitophelis cum Juda comparati, quo sensu citatur versiculus huius Psalmi 9, Johan 13:18. Nam sicut
David a filio proditus & fugatus, regnum tamen recepit, ita Christus a discipulo proditus, a populo suo in
crucem actus, regnum suum vere iniit, & idem proditoris utriusque exitus fuit.”
38
Beza, Psalmorum, 245-6. [Emphasis added]
39
Beza, Psalmorum, 138.
38
can be seen that Beza regards the historical context and the experiences of David to be
sufficient grounds for interpretation and application, but when he does aim to teach about
the work of Christ as the mediator, that reading eclipses any other reading in its
significance. In other words, Beza employs typological readings in reference to Christ
when he finds such a christological reading to be directly applicable to and reflective of
the experiences of believers.
40
While Beza mainly employs spiritual and typological tools to offer christological
readings, he also, interestingly and rather surprisingly, uses an allegory to read one
particular psalm, Psalm 45. He comments at the outset that this love song must be
interpreted in a “purely allegorical” sense, for the psalmist draws images from a common
marriage to describe “the spiritual union of Christ and the Church.”
41
The result is an
interpretation that looks very different from the rest of his exegesis. He describes that the
two elements of betrothal and wedding in human marriage correspond to Christ’s
weakness and resurrection respectively. This psalm, in particular, is about the wedding.
Christ, having fulfilled the work of resurrection, has entered into a marriage relationship
as the true husband of the church. According to Beza, the husband is the victorious King
who arrives riding on “a chariot pulled by three horses named truth, meekness, and
40
It is interesting to note that the psalms that Beza interprets christologically are all psalms used
by the New Testament authors. In this sense, it can also be argued that the New Testament serves as a guide
to Beza’s christological readings.
41
Beza, Psalmorum, 158. Beza is not unique in reading this psalm as referring to the spiritual
union of Christ and the Church. For example, Calvin writes, “… the subject here treated of is not some
obscene or unchaste amours but that, under what is here said of Solomon as a type, the holy and divine
union of Christ and his church is described and set forth” (CTS 9:173). Calvin, however, makes great effort
to read the psalm within Solomon’s history first, depicting Solomon as the primary “king” of this text. It is
only after making his comments up to verse 7 that he begins to mention christological readings: “Hitherto, I
have explained the text in the literal sense. But it is necessary that I should now proceed to illustrate
somewhat more largely the comparison of Solomon with Christ” (CTS 9:179).
39
righteousness” (v. 4). He compares that image to kings and princes who ride “the most
savage beasts” of “ambition, pride, ferocity, cruelty, luxury, and the horrendous
oppression of their subjects.”
42
His interpretation of the king’s robes is particularly
interesting. The true King wears “robes,” meaning partly “the voice of the Father” that
says “in whom I am well pleased” and partly “the aroma of Christ.” And this aroma is
poured out from the heavenly dwellings, the “ivory palaces” (v. 8).
43
Then, to this king is
married “the queen” who is joined by all “daughters” and “ladies” (v. 9). This queen
represents “the holy Israelites” who were the first partakers of the marriage, and through
them, other “daughters” and “ladies” are “also brought into the King’s chamber.”
44
To
Beza, the fact that they are married to the same one husband implies that there is only one
Catholic Church. Beza concludes that while this marriage is eternal, until that time of
final fulfillment comes, this queen will continue to bear children for her husband (v.
16).
45
Beza draws on rich imagery to interpret this psalm and finds in it theological
significance regarding Christ and the life of the church. The result is an exegesis that
looks different from what he had employed in his spiritual and typological methods of
discerning Christ in the text. Taking into account his love for poetry, this psalm perhaps
best reveals Beza’s poetic imaginations and sensitivities at work as they converge with a
scriptural poem. Nevertheless, his allegory is not like Origen’s or Augustine’s nor is his
christological references similar to those of Lefèvre or Luther. They are much more
42
Beza, Psalmorum, 159.
43
Beza, Psalmorum, 160.
44
Beza. Psalmorum, 160.
45
Beza, Psalmorum, 161.
40
restrained. The interpretations are ruled by other scriptural texts and the doctrinal purpose
of this psalm to demonstrate the doctrine of the union of Christ and the church. Thus,
Beza’s use of imagery becomes merely helpful tools for explaining the doctrine but with
more poetic sentiments. Beza achieves this by his way of allegorizing the text, which
aspect will be further investigated in the chapter on Beza’s interpretation of the Song of
Songs.
46
To summarize, Beza’s exegesis of the Psalms was very much in continuation with
Calvin in his understanding of the literal sense of the text and even consolidated the
principles in the shaping of the Reformed confessional identity. He took great care in
trying to properly place each psalm in the original context of which it had been composed
with great emphasis upon the intention of the human author by consulting Hebrew,
Greek, and Protestant resources. He read them as first being fulfilled in the history of the
psalmist. Beza also placed much effort into biblical textual studies, demonstrated by his
comparing of the content of each psalm to other passages of Scripture. Certainly, the
historical and canonical contexts served as guides to his exegesis. At the same time, he
employed spiritual, typological, and even allegorical tools to read certain psalms in
46
While both Beza and Calvin agree on rendering Christ as the king and highlighting the beauty of
Christ’s eternal kingdom in this psalm, Beza more comfortably explains each image as allegories
representing Christ and Christ’s kingdom, whereas Calvin hesitates to apply certain images to Christ. Cf.
CTS 9:187-88: “Let us now return to Christ. And, in the first place, let us remember that what is spiritual is
here described to us figuratively; even as the prophets, on account of the dullness of men, were under the
necessity of borrowing similitudes from earthly things. When we bear in mind this style of speaking, which
is quite common in the Scriptures, we will not think it strange that the sacred writer here makes mention of
ivory palaces, gold, precious stones, and spices; for by these he means to intimate that the kingdom of
Christ will be replenished with a rich abundance, and furnished with all good things. The glory and
excellence of the spiritual gifts, with which God enriches his Church, are indeed held in no estimation
among men; but in the sight of God they are of more value than all the riches of the world. At the same
time, it is not necessary that we should apply curiously to Christ every particular here enumerated; as for
instance, what is here said of the many wives which Solomon had. If it should be imagined from this that
there may be several churches, the unity of Christ’s body will be rent in pieces.”
41
reference to Christ’s ministry and kingdom, in a way that Christ’s history at times
overshadowed David’s history, giving christological reading a more prominent place. He
made this move only when such a reading was warranted by the text and when he found
it to be edifying for the church. This idea of usefulness for the church appears to have
driven and governed all of Beza’s interpretations of the Psalms as an important guiding
principle. Such reading for the edification of the church was indeed a shared principle
between Calvin and Beza, which contributed in forming a significant part of Reformed
practices of exegesis. Yet Beza approached his interpretations with a greater impetus to
comfort suffering believers in the midst of persecutions. Beza’s readings according to
David’s history or Christ’s history were not in themselves the end goal. Beza had a
theological agenda in mind when he composed his Psalm Paraphrasi, that is, to offer
readings, whether in reference to David or Christ, that are beneficial and useful for
building up Christ’s church in the context of Protestant persecutions. Beza’s such
concerns shaped the emphases of his interpretation that prompted a particular way of
reading the text. It is to this purpose and application aspects of Beza’s Psalm Paraphrasi
that I now turn to.
1.3 Ecclesial Reading of the Psalms in the Context of the Sixteenth Century
In the background to Beza’s reading of the Psalms is his key concern for the
church.
47
When Beza interprets certain psalms in reference to Christ, it is never to diverge
47
See Tadataka Maruyama, The Ecclesiology of Theodore Beza: The Reform of the True Church
(Genève, Librairie Droz, 1978). Maruyama’s study is very helpful in tracing the development of Beza’s
ecclesiology from his very early years to his mature writings at the end of the sixteenth century. He offers
the most comprehensive and systematic study on this topic to date. His research, however, is based mostly
on Beza’s doctrinal and polemical writings, although he looks at Beza’s Sermons on the Song of Songs as
an important work on Beza’s ecclesiology.
42
into explaining doctrines or make theological arguments but rather it is always for the
purpose of encouraging and edifying believers. Thus, in the example where he mentions
the incarnation and the two natures of Christ (Ps. 8), his emphasis is not on teaching the
doctrine itself but on the very benefits that Christ’s taking on human nature brings to all
faithful believers, the church. He writes,
But that other state, into which that eternal Son of God, assumed into the
unity of the person, raised up our nature after depositing the same
infirmity, that he might make all believers partakers of his dignity (to
whom also he grants this, that in this life they may be endowed with the
light of true compassion, and enjoy with a good conscience the things they
have acquired in this world), this is the true purpose of this psalm, as
interpreted by the Holy Spirit himself, Matt. 21:15, 1 Cor. 15:27, & Heb.
2:8.
48
According to Beza, the purpose of Christ’s incarnation is to restore the dignity that
humanity had lost by inviting all believers to partake in Christ’s dignity. Beza does not
bother to explain or teach the doctrine itself but rather it is the benefit that Christ’s
incarnation brings that is his primary concern. Likewise, David’s life and experiences are
examples for believers through which Beza seeks to edify and encourage the church, an
emphasis he shares with Calvin. On Psalm 56, Beza writes that “this psalm provides us
[the believers] with a remarkable example of faith and steadfastness, especially when we
consider David’s own person and how he was brought down into such a wretched
condition.”
49
The believers are exemplified by David on the literal level and at the same
time united to Christ as one body on the spiritual level. Both meanings are significantly
48
Beza, Psalmorum, 19. [Emphasis added]
49
Beza, Psalmorum, 202.
43
applicable and useful for uplifting believers, which are abundantly expressed in the Book
of Psalms.
The sixteenth century was a dangerous period for many Protestant communities,
especially for the French Huguenots. The religious wars, and especially the events that
followed the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre (1572), devastated any kind of hope that
had existed among the Huguenots for transforming France into a Protestant kingdom.
Beza involved himself actively in the political and ecclesiastical situation in France
during the second-half of the sixteenth century as he once wrote in a letter that he can no
longer be “a spectator but an actor in this horrible tragedy.”
50
He was not only present as
a chaplain and fundraiser for the Huguenots but also paid personal visits to France to
meet with Huguenot leaders, such as Condé, Coligny, and Henri de Navarre, and on one
occasion to preside over a national synod.
51
In Geneva, he trained students at the
Academy to become leaders and pastors of the Huguenot churches while also taking care
of the refugees who had fled from persecutions. Although the Edict of Nantes (1598)
eased some of the tensions between the clash of political and religious powers at the end
of the century, the sixteenth century was overall a brutal time for the French Huguenots.
Beza’s ministry, however, was not just limited to the churches of France. With Geneva
being an international center for Reformed training, Beza’s concerns for the well-being
and preservation of the Reformed churches throughout Europe against theological and
political enemies dominated his ministry and thoughts. Writing in such contexts, Beza
50
CB 4:76, Beza to Calvin, 28 March 1562.
51
See Scott M. Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace in France, 1572-1598 (Leiden:
Brill, 2000). This well-researched and helpful book offers an in-depth study on Beza’s role in the French
Reformed churches.
44
found the psalms to be the very place where believers find comfort and encouragement.
Beza located the greatest value of the Psalms in the fact that they give the church the
proper words to speak to God in times of good and bad, including perplexity, adversity,
extremity, prosperity, and thanksgiving.
52
1.3.1 David’s Psalms and the Church of the Sixteenth Century
Throughout the Psalm Paraphrasi, Beza alludes to some of the complex situations
that the churches of the time were facing in parallel to David’s historical context. First,
there were those enemies of the church who had been seeking to disrupt the church order
and its worship. One example is Psalm 52, a psalm written by David after Doeg’s
betrayal and Saul’s subsequent slaughter of priests. For Beza, this painful and horrible
experience of David resonated with the experiences of the churches of his own time:
This psalm is of the greatest use even now, since there will never be a lack
of rulers who persecute the pious, especially the pastors of the churches
with every kind of cruelty, and there has always been a great number of
sycophants who would inflame their rage with various accusations, as we
have seen in recent years in the Kingdom of France the most lamentable
example of this wickedness, even more cruel than that of old.
53
It is very likely that as Beza was writing these comments, he remembered the massacre at
Vassy (1562) and of St. Bartholomew’s Day during which thousands of French
Protestants were killed, the consequences of which the churches in France were still
battling. The wickedness of Doeg was still very much active in Beza’s time in the rulers
52
Beza, Psalmorum, ã.2-2v: “nemo tamen, judicio meo, satis multa dixit, quod infinita sit eorum
utilitas, sive consilium in difficultatibus, sive praesidium in periculis, sive consolationem in adversis
petamus, sive denique Dei laudes celebrare eique gratias sicuti par est, agere studeamus.”
53
Beza, Psalmorum, 189.
45
who were seeking every opportunity to destroy the Huguenot communities and break up
their worship.
54
Moreover, there were those sycophants or counselors who inflamed in
the hearts of their kings and princes even greater violence and hatred against Protestant
believers. Such cruelty against the people of God was not just confined to France but was
pervasive all over Europe. Beza describes that “the principal kingdoms of Europe today
furnish a horrendous example of the savagery and impiety” by those who “rise up against
the righteous.”
55
As examples, Beza particularly names the Turks and Scythians as
representing the modern-day Babylonians and Persians who with their cruelty have
forced the pious “to flee to the ends of the earth.”
56
In the context of these tribulations, Beza finds many similarities between the
times of David and the believers of the sixteenth century. He employs David’s
experiences at the court to draw parallels with the French Protestants. This is
demonstrated in Beza’s comments on Psalm 26:
It is extremely difficult to maintain sincere religion and moral integrity in
the courts, especially under tyrannical rulers and their flatterers, who
openly or through slanderous means oppress and undermine. Some
willingly abandon their callings, disregarding the welfare of their country.
Others gradually conform to the ways of others. There are also those who,
due to the corrupt behavior of some, either refrain from sacred assemblies
or establish their own gatherings, like the Cathari, Novatians, and many
monks in the past, as well as the Anabaptists in our time. However, as this
psalm testifies, David, despite his circumstances in Saul’s court,
54
Beza would often hear of unfortunate news of pastors being persecuted and killed. One of the
most tragic moments was when Beza received news that his students, who had just departed Lausanne to
pastor churches in France, were captured and burnt at the stake. See Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the
Quest for Peace, 15. See also Kirk Summers, “Theodore Beza’s Elegy on the Five Martyrs of Lyon:
Wonder and Consolation,” in Theodore Beza at 500: New Perspectives on an Old Reformer, ed. Kirk
Summers and Scott M. Manetsch (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2021), 241-260.
55
Beza, Psalmorum, 357.
56
Beza, Psalmorum, 501.
46
perseveres in his position, diligently attending sacred assemblies untainted
by idolatry until he is forcibly expelled.
57
This short paragraph reflects the various Protestant responses to their hostile
environment. Some fled to other countries, some compromised their faith, and some
established their own way of gathering and worship taking radical measures to
completely separate themselves. David, however, persevered in his calling to fulfill his
duty and to worship despite Saul’s persecutions. Beza finds in this example of David a
perfect illustration of what Protestants, especially their leaders, should do under
tyrannical rulers, that is, diligently to carry out their civic and religious duties at all costs.
This is quite significant when read in light of Beza’s own experiences at the court, to
which he had been invited several times to give counsel and preach regularly to the noble
families.
58
As evidenced by the shared experience of enemies in both David’s and Beza’s
lives, Beza reminds his readers that these sufferings and persecution are inevitable, in
fact, the very fate of the true church. Beza notes that “there is a perpetual war between
the world and the saints.”
59
Similarly, on Psalm 83 where David is waging wars against
many nations, Beza comments that “enemies, both foreign and domestic, will never cease
to threaten the church.”
60
According to Beza, an unregenerate world persecutes the
57
Beza, Psalmorum, 76.
58
In 1560, Beza was invited to the house of Bourbon, where he preached regularly at the court and
formed political ties with those who would become important supporters of French Protestant movement.
Then, in 1561-62, he was again invited, this time by Catherine de Médicis, to preach and defend the
Reformed cause at the court. See Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace, 18-29.
59
Beza, Psalmorum, 217.
60
Beza, Psalmorum, 314.
47
church with perpetual hatred out of its corruption of their understanding and will (Ps. 14).
This had been true in the history of David, as well as in the story of Christ, and now in
the time of Beza and the sixteenth-century believers. As long as churches exist in this
world, Satan will always seek opportunities to fiercely assault the church and its
leaders.
61
Beza knew this better than anyone else as his entire career had been devoted to
defending and securing the safety of the Reformed churches.
If the wicked rulers were causing damage to the church from the outside, there
were also challenges that came from within. Beza interprets David’s experiences of many
betrayals as clear representations of the internal struggles similar to his day. One example
is Psalm 54, which was written when the Ziphites had betrayed David and told Saul about
his hiding place. Beza warns that experiences like this can be expected to happen in the
churches of the current time as well. He remarks, “the faithful shepherds should expect
the same struggles from their own household, as we are experiencing in this present
age.”
62
Furthermore, Beza presents a similar argument in Psalm 71. In this incident,
Ahithophel, whom David had loved as a son, had betrayed him, and David is being
forced to step down from the throne. Beza notes that it is beneficial to meditate on this
psalm frequently “since the condition of God’s faithful servants is often not different.”
63
Who would Beza and the Huguenots have been reminded of in this story? Beza
does not name a specific person, but all Huguenots would most likely have identified the
Ziphites or Ahithophel with Antoine of Navarre, who had once sided with the Huguenot
61
See Beza’s comments on Psalms 71, 46, and 38.
62
Beza, Psalmorum, 194-5.
63
Beza, Psalmorum, 254.
48
cause but then turned away to become an ally of the Catholic Guise family, thus, earning
the name of ‘Julian the Apostate.’
64
It is also possible that the church would have
recognized Catherine de Médicis, as well as Charles IX and Henry III, in the stories of
Doeg and Ahithophel. Most significantly, however, in the time of the 1570s, Beza became
increasingly concerned with the coalition between the Guise family and Catholic
loyalists, suspecting a Tridentine Conspiracy aimed at the subversion of Protestantism.
65
As Beza saw it, the context that occasioned David to write these psalms was not very
much different from the context of the sixteenth century where fierce enemies continued
to attack the people of God through external and internal means. David’s experiences
were very much reflections of the same sufferings and persecutions that sixteenth-century
Protestants were facing. The words of the Psalms thus were not just ancient songs of
David but very relevant and meaningful for the believers of Beza’s time.
1.3.2 Beza’s Reading of the Psalms in Reference to Earthly and Heavenly Kingdoms
Beza finds David’s experiences of anger, frustration, betrayal, praise, and
thanksgiving to closely resemble the same experiences and emotions felt by French
Protestants. In order to comfort and encourage the church in such an environment, Beza
uses his theology of the kingdom as a primary tool for reading the Psalms. Building upon
the theme of kingdom, Beza reads the Psalms with the purpose of situating the church not
64
Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace, 24-5.
65
See Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace, especially 115-143.
49
only in this world but also as part of a divine goal to bring God’s people to worship and
glorify God.
The first part of Beza’s understanding of the kingdom in the Psalms is displayed
in his references to an earthly kingdom. According to Beza, God has providentially
instituted a system of governance and has chosen some to rule over this earthly kingdom
as kings, princes, and magistrates. Beza writes that these men are those “to whom the
Lord has subjected other men to rule.”
66
Their power and authority do not come from
themselves but from God who bestows upon them the right to rule. Thus, in Psalm 16,
David rightly acknowledges that the kingdom has been given to him undeservedly by
God; he recognizes that only with God’s help can he rightly rule and govern it.
67
Thus,
according to Beza, the greatest mistake for kings, princes, and magistrates would be to
“ascribe divine honors to themselves and think that they are permitted to do whatever
they please.”
68
The immense power of God, shown forth in Psalm 29 through the images
of thunderstorms, is incomparable to any sort of power that humans can possess. Thus,
Beza warns kings and princes to guard themselves from becoming proud, as if their
power is limitless and eternal. In fact, regardless of how powerful their earthly kingdom
may be, should they forget God and perform wicked deeds, they will not escape God’s
judgments. Beza states this most clearly in Psalm 82, in which God is called to judge the
world. He emphasizes the fact that the authority of the magistrates is not “something
inherent to their own essence” but only “a symbolic representation” of the divine majesty
66
Beza, Psalmorum, 86.
67
Beza, Psalmorum, 36.
68
Beza, Psalmorum, 86.
50
and authority.
69
Forgetting that their power is derived from God can lead to some serious
consequences:
This psalm discusses the errors of these magistrates, which are also
extremely serious, as it is almost impossible for a nation to avoid ruin
when the magistrates do not fulfill their duty, neither restraining the
wicked nor affirming the good. The Prophet opens and, at the same time,
condemns from the outset the source from which most of the evils
committed by magistrates originate, namely, their tendency to be solely
focused on those subject to their rule, forgetting the One who surpasses
them all and has placed them not on their own throne, but above certain
individuals, granting them not infinite power, but power limited by
specific laws and even times. God does not merely use their acts as
substitutes, with only present interest, but rather presides over their
judgments. When their time is completed, whether by death or other
means, God will hold them accountable for all their words and deeds, just
like any other mortal.
70
It is very clear that Beza repeatedly emphasizes the derivative nature of the authority of
civil rulers. Their power is not infinite but rather limited. God uses them with “only
present interest” as “substitutes” until their time is complete. If they do not fulfill their
duties in restraining the wicked and affirming the good, God will hold them accountable.
Thus, Beza emphasizes that the structures of this earthly kingdom are limited and only
established under God’s providence for his temporary purposes and interest in this world.
Furthermore, the earthly kingdom is to reflect the character and laws of God in its
governance. Kings, princes, and magistrates are to rule with this exact purpose in mind.
This instruction is most clearly laid out in Beza’s reading of Psalm 101. Often
categorized as a royal psalm, Psalm 101 is a song that David sings of his intent to
preserve purity in his heart, household, and land. While Beza’s contemporaries
69
Beza, Psalmorum, 311-12.
70
Beza, Psalmorum, 311-12.
51
commonly interpreted this psalm as teaching principles of Christian life,
71
Beza focuses
on the virtues and duties of a king from the example of David.
David, having accepted the promise of the kingdom, not considering it as a
great honor bestowed upon him, but rather as a weighty burden being
imposed upon him, and possibly observing the mistakes of Saul and the
disturbed order of the entire kingdom, wished to bind both himself and his
descendants before God with this psalm as a solemn vow, in which,
certainly the inimitable office of the king is explained accurately in brief.
72
Beza makes it clear from the outset that David did not take his kingship to be a position
of his own honor. It has been given to him for the time being by God. Thus, he must
affirm his royal duties as a solemn vow “before God.” This has implications for how a
king should rule. Beza further writes that royal responsibilities boil down to two main
virtues, namely, mercy and justice. According to Beza, “mercy causes kings to be loved
rather than feared while justice demonstrates the severity with which the rebellious are
restrained.”
73
These virtues reflect the character and governing laws of God. A king must
exercise his rule according to God’s rules and follow God’s directions. To properly do
this, a king must first set oneself on “the path of righteousness” and “govern one’s own
household properly.” Moreover, it is important that a king surrounds himself with those
who encourage him to properly carry out mercy and justice in accordance with God’s
will. Thus, Beza accentuates the importance for kings to reject evil counselors who use
their opportunities to fulfill their own desires and satisfy their own ambitions. A king
must not tolerate such people, sometimes to the point of sentencing them to capital
71
Johannes Bugenhagen, In Librum Psalmorum, 231; Jacques Lefèvre, Quincuplex, 145r; LW
13:198; and CTS 11:91.
72
Beza, Psalmorum, 379.
73
Beza, Psalmorum, 379.
52
punishment, as David’s declaration to destroy and cut off all the evildoers in verse 8
demonstrates. They are proud, ambitious, cunning, deceitful, and corrupted in their
morals. Rather, a king must surround himself with faithful advisors who are of good
integrity so that the righteous may be well protected and supported in this earthly
kingdom.
74
Ultimately, all these instructions for governing the earthly kingdom are directed
towards one goal. Beza states that a king must be “a merciful defender and benefactor to
his own people” in order that “Jehovah be worshiped purely and sincerely in his city.”
75
Every king, prince, and magistrate must exercise their power “before God” and according
to God’s laws and purpose to bring his people to worship him, recognizing that their
authority is only temporary and that they are only “symbolic representation” of God’s
own character and majesty in this world. Thus, an earthly kingdom is to display God’s
divine governance and lead people to cultivate piety and practice of worship. Beza
laments, however, that there is no such city on earth. Reading Psalm 127 as a beautiful
example of a restored city built upon true piety and worship, Beza asks, “but where can
such a city be found in this world?”
76
Thus, it is through the church in this world that
believers are able to anticipate and foretaste the eternal heavenly kingdom.
The church as a type of the heavenly kingdom undoubtedly is at the center of
Beza’s reading of the Psalms. Beza describes the relationship between the sanctuary and
74
Beza, Psalmorum, 379. Beza may have intended this for Henry of Navarre – that he should
follow the counsel of Beza.
75
Beza, Psalmorum, 380.
76
Beza, Psalmorum, 515.
53
the civil government as the two blessings that constitute a city in Psalm 122, where he
explains that the latter is a blessing shared with other secular nations while the former is a
distinctive and peculiar good of the church. But, he writes, the sanctuary clearly takes
precedence over the civil government.
77
There is a greater priority and meaning given to
the church over the governing structure of an earthly kingdom. This difference is obvious
when one examines the descriptions that Beza uses regarding the church. He identifies
the church as a type of “the city of Jerusalem” (Ps. 48), “temple” (Ps. 87), and “the
kingdom of heaven” (Ps. 93) but most importantly, the church is where God reigns
through Christ who is the head.
78
The fundamental nature of the church is that it is not a
human gathering but a spiritual assembly, for the church is spiritually united with Christ.
Hence, in explaining the imagery of the oil running down on the beard of Aaron (Ps.
133), Beza refers this to the Holy Spirit being poured on Aaron’s head to unite the entire
church to Christ.
79
The church is the most sacred governance on which Christ pours his
special blessings (Ps. 100). Christ daily bestows his “spiritual and eternal gifts upon the
church through the ministry of the Holy Gospel (Ps. 68)” and confirms his promises that
are revealed in “the knowledge of God’s salvific will” for his church (Ps. 147). It is
through the ministry of Christ that each member of the church is called to form one body
of Christ. These blessings, according to Beza, are eternal, spiritual, and divine. In his
comments on one of the psalms written by the Korahites, Beza again emphasizes the
spiritual nature of the church. He writes that the church is the spiritual temple of God
77
Beza, Psalmorum, 506.
78
Beza, Psalmorum, 355.
79
Beza, Psalmorum, 529.
54
built with living stones, which was typified by the earthly tabernacle or temple.
80
Echoing
the same theme in Psalm 102, he remarks that “the spiritual and eternal temple of the
church” is none other than “the gathering of the church under Christ as the head.”
81
Beza
repeatedly highlights the spiritual and eternal nature of the church that is derived from its
relation to Christ. Furthermore, in a world where so much idolatry and superstitions
prevail, the visible marks of the true church must be clearly defined:
We learn from this psalm [Psalm 132] the visible marks of the true
Church, namely, the sincere preaching of the divine Word and the proper
administration of the sacraments. We also learn what truly constitutes the
divine Word and the sacraments that are not adulterated, through which
the true and only Savior, Christ, is proclaimed to us.
82
The visible marks, Beza argues, are the preaching of the Word and the proper
administration of the sacraments with Christ being the very substance of both.
83
Participation in the act of worship through these means of grace is so important for the
identity of the believers that Beza comments “no one is exempt from the need to hear the
word and partake in the sacraments. (Ps. 42)” The church must be protected and
80
Beza, Psalmorum, 327.
81
Beza, Psalmorum, 382.
82
Beza, Psalmorum, 524-5.
83
See Maruyama, The Ecclesiology of Theodore Beza, 23-25, 47, and 209-211. It is interesting to
note here that Beza does not mention discipline as a third mark. According to Maruyama, Beza affirmed
three marks in his Confession de la foi and Confessio fidei but reduced them to two at the Colloquy of
Poissy (1561). Depending on the purpose of his writing, sometimes he preferred to mention just two, as the
example here demonstrates. See also Beza’s own treatise on the visible marks of the church, published in
the same year as his Psalm Paraphrases in 1579. The two writings present similar ideas and themes on the
marks of the church. Beza, De Veris et Visibilibus Ecclesiae Catholicae notis, tractatio (Geneva: Eustathius
Vignon, 1579).
55
preserved at all times so that the people of God as one body of Christ may gather to
glorify God at this holy place of worship.
84
The true church, however, is only a type of what is to come, that is, the eternal
heavenly kingdom. Beza consistently alludes to the contrasting differences between the
earthly and the heavenly kingdoms. If the nature of the earthly kingdom is temporary, the
nature of the heavenly kingdom is eternal and divine. David serves as an example of a
godly king who recognized that his kingdom on this earth is only a part of the larger plan
of God. Thus, according to Beza, David, writing Psalm 18 at a time when his kingdom
was flourishing, did not attribute even the slightest praise to himself but ascribed all
credit to God alone and recognized that his kingdom is merely “a symbol and image of
the eternal kingdom of the Messiah.”
85
In one of the Messianic Psalms as well, Psalm 72,
Beza mentions that “David’s earthly kingdom was a type of the heavenly and eternal
kingdom promised to the true Son of David, Jesus Christ.”
86
As these examples show, at
the center of Beza’s understanding of the heavenly kingdom is the saving work of Christ,
the promised son of David. Beza elaborates this point in Ps. 89:4 where God’s covenant
to establish David’s kingdom forever is explained: “[C]oncerning the eternity of his
[David’s] kingdom, and rightly so, the entire foundation of the faith of the saints rests
upon this eternal King, the Son of David. For if this King is eternal, then the church
(which is the kingdom of heaven) must also be eternal.”
87
Beza’s teachings concerning
84
See Beza’s comments on Psalms 26, 33, 42, 84, and 92.
85
Beza, Psalmorum, 43.
86
Beza, Psalmorum, 260.
87
Beza, Psalmorum, 332-3.
56
the kingdom, the church, the eternal nature of the heavenly kingdom, and the Son of
David are summed up in these two short sentences. The promise of David’s kingdom
rests upon the saving work of Christ who gives the true church, which typifies the
heavenly kingdom, its eternal nature by Christ’s own eternal virtue.
For Beza, such understanding of the temporal nature of the earthly kingdom and
the eternal nature of the heavenly kingdom has significant implications for comforting the
church. Because the church as a type of the heavenly kingdom has its foundation in the
work of Christ and is eternally in union with Christ, it is “beyond the danger of ruin.”
88
In
other words, nothing that is temporal can destroy what is eternal. Beza comforts the
church with these words in Psalm 61:
[T]he promise made by the prophet [David] regarding the eternal nature of
his kingdom, which, ... refers to the Messiah, the Son and Lord of David,
provides the church and its individual members with the utmost
consolation in all hardships, no matter how severe and extreme, for the
dignity of the King can only be maintained with those who are saved.
89
Beza’s theology of the kingdom is at the heart of his exhortation to comfort and
encourage the church. Beza emphasizes the eternal nature of the church against the
temporary nature of the earthly kingdom, encouraging believers to remain steadfast and
patient, for God who is in control and sovereign over all things will ultimately defeat the
wicked rulers for the sake of maintaining his dignity while also lead his people to the
eternal kingdom where worship will never cease.
88
Beza, Psalmorum, 332-3.
89
Beza, Psalmorum, 217.
57
1.4 Beza’s Lessons on Prayer: The Case of Imprecatory Psalms
Based on his understanding of God’s plan for the church in the larger framework
of the kingdom of Christ, Beza urges the church to continue praying even more fervently
in times of trouble. Of particular interest is Beza’s reading of the imprecatory psalms as
appropriate prayers for believers. It is known that before the Conspiracy of Amboise
(1560), which ended up being a failed Huguenot attempt to assassinate the Duke of
Guise, a Huguenot leader La Renaudie had visited Geneva to whom Beza handed a
translation of an imprecatory psalm.
90
Was Beza attempting to encourage some kind of
Huguenot political resistance by this action? While this is not the place to discuss Beza’s
resistance theory in full, an examination of how he reads the imprecatory psalms in the
Paraphrasi offers a glimpse into his thoughts on the topic.
91
His comments indicate that
Beza, writing in the late 1570s, is surprisingly passive in promoting any kind of active
resistance against the government. Rather, his interests primarily concern prayer,
patience, and trust in God’s benevolence and providence.
To Beza, the challenging political situations of his time are opportunities for the
church to pray even more fervently as David had done in the Psalms. Commenting on
90
Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace, 19. See also Philip Benedict, Season of
Conspiracy: Calvin, the French Reformed Churches, and Protestant Plotting in the Reign of Francis II
(1559-60) (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society Press, 2020). Benedict demonstrates detailed
evidence on the conspiracies of Protestants to overthrow King Francis II during this period and John
Calvin’s involvement in them.
91
See Edward A. Gosselin, “David in Tempore Belli: Beza’s David in the Service of the
Huguenots,” Sixteenth Century Journal vol. 7, no. 2 (October 1976): 31-45 and idem, “Two Views of the
Evangelical David: Lefèvre d’Etaples and Theodore Beza,” in The David Myth in Western Literature, ed.
Raymond-Jean Frontain and Jan Wojcik (West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 1980), 56-67.
Gosselin demonstrates the ways in which Beza found parallelism between the situations of David and the
Huguenots, and argues that Beza used David to justify Huguenot revolt against the Catholic monarchy. See
also Richard C. Gamble, “The Christian and the Tyrant: Beza and Knox on Political Resistance Theory,”
Westminster Theological Journal, vol. 46, no. 1 (Spring 1984): 125-139.
58
David’s cry “how long?” in Psalm 13, Beza writes, “the Prophet [David] teaches us that
the more distressing the state of the church is in the world, the more fervently we are to
call upon God, and place our unwavering trust in Him, never doubting that the prayers of
the saints will be in vain.”
92
The church is able to call out to God even in the midst of the
most devastating circumstances in full confidence because God certainly hears the
prayers of the faithful. Similarly, in Psalm 12, where David is questioning why the
wicked flourish while the faithful suffer, Beza provides these words:
The church is sometimes drawn up in dire straits, where it seems that
anyone who dares to do anything with impunity either by violence or by
deceit, that everything may appear to be deplorable: this psalm teaches us
nevertheless to call upon God with sure confidence. For since his will and
faithfulness are most certain, it is absolutely necessary for him that he
hears the groaning of his people, which he does opportunely, and on the
other hand, that he should know very well the crimes of the wicked, which
he will avenge in due time.
93
The fact that God knows the deeds of the wicked and hears the cries of the faithful gives
the church the full confidence to pray in the most deplorable state. Beza exhorts the
church to continue to pray, trusting that the all-knowing God finds the humble but
opposes the proud.
94
The difficult question, however, that arises from meditating on these psalms is
how far does one pray for God to intervene in the afflicted situations of the righteous?
Praying for God to rescue the righteous from evil entails calling for God’s actions to put
an end, or even destroy, the wicked. Beza’s comments on the imprecatory psalms reveal
92
Beza, Psalmorum, 31.
93
Beza, Psalmorum, 29.
94
Beza, Psalmorum, 542. See also ibid., 553: “In this Psalm, David, being most grievously
afflicted, prays to God with great confidence in his usual manner.” (Ps. 141).
59
his emphasis on patience, which has its trust in God’s promises to avenge the wicked
when the timing is appropriate. According to Beza, Psalm 5 teaches the proper rules of
prayer for someone who is unjustly afflicted, and he “cautions against impatience,” since
“the nature of God cannot tolerate the wicked going unpunished, and therefore, the more
hostile the enemies, the closer and more certain their destruction.”
95
In another
imprecatory psalm, Psalm 7, Beza similarly notes that even when we face the most
serious slanderers who seek after our fame and life, “we must retain control of our
minds,”
96
instructing people against taking immediate actions against those who have
wronged them. Furthermore, Psalm 59 teaches believers that God sometimes takes time
in bringing enemies to destruction rather than in a single moment to reveal his judgments
more clearly.
97
God sometimes tolerates evil for his good purposes, unknown to the
church at the time.
With his emphasis on patience, Beza then explains how one should read the
imprecations in the Psalms. The pronouncements of judgments upon the wicked are never
to be prayed against private individuals out of personal desire for revenge. Rather, David
is speaking in a prophetic sense with his imprecations. Beza notes that Psalm 55 was
written when David had suffered a betrayal from Absalom and had to flee Jerusalem. As
such, Psalm 55 describes his anguish and sorrow from being betrayed by “a companion”
who had been his friend, praying for God to cast David’s enemies down “into the pit of
destruction.” Beza remarks that David’s imprecations are not “from a personal desire for
95
Beza, Psalmorum, 10.
96
Beza, Psalmorum, 15.
97
Beza, Psalmorum, 210.
60
revenge on private injuries” but rather are “expressions of despair against these
individuals, whose ultimate outcome he himself verified as prophetic predictions.”
98
Beza
points out that the curses against one’s enemies are not to be prayed on a private level.
Psalm 58 is another example of an imprecatory psalm in which David cries out to God to
bring vengeance on the wicked, written at a time when Saul had condemned David as a
public enemy. Here again, Beza highlights that David is pronouncing “God’s judgment
upon them not as a private individual but as a prophet and a king designated by God.”
99
The idea of David speaking not in human terms but in a prophetic role is even more
evident in Psalm 109. Beza argues that “the terrifying and dreadful language” in this
psalm “should be read with great discernment and used in prayers but with certain
cautions.”
100
He warns against applying the words of this psalm “driven by a spirit of
vengeance or false zeal.”
101
Rather, praying this psalm should be driven by a good
purpose, that is, in anticipation of the coming of God’s kingdom.
It is evident from the fact that Christ Himself commands us to pray daily
for the coming of God’s kingdom: which certainly cannot be done unless
the kingdom of the Antichrist has been destroyed, and all the enemies of
the Gospel and the true Church have been destroyed. ... The ancient
church also poured out these prayers against Julian the Apostate and other
same individuals, which was proved to have been heard.
102
98
Beza, Psalmorum, 197.
99
Beza, Psalmorum, 207.
100
Beza, Psalmorum, 426.
101
Beza, Psalmorum, 426.
102
Beza, Psalmorum, 427.
61
It is interesting to note that among the evil individuals that deserve such imprecations,
Beza names Julian the Apostate from the ancient church, which had been the name used
to refer to the deceased Antoine of Navarre. The enemies of the church are not the Jews
nor the Roman Catholics as some reformers had argued; rather, for Beza, the real enemies
in the Paraphrasi are those who deter Protestants from their pure worship – namely, the
political enemies of his time.
One can also hear underneath these discussions an interplay between the stories of
David, Christ, and Beza, which is further demonstrated in this following explanation:
These things [imprecations] should not be taken as an example, and as I
said before, great caution must be exercised so that we do not sin against
either or both tablets of the divine law by indulging in a desire for
revenge, false zeal, or by recklessly employing these imprecations, turning
what we curse upon others onto our own heads. As for David and this
particular psalm, we can understand from his own history how much
bitterness he experienced and how cruelly Saul persecuted him unjustly
for many years. Yet it is evident that David was not driven by personal
hatred against Saul ... Furthermore, it is clear that David spoke
prophetically and as a type of Christ himself, ... which correspond
remarkably with the history of Christ’s death and the punishments that the
wretched Jews are still enduring today.
103
Beza again cautions against misusing these imprecations, for it can bring judgment onto
oneself. David serves as a perfect example as he did not pray out of revenge but “had his
eyes set on the glory of God and the restoration of God’s kingdom.”
104
David never
meant for this prayer to be employed against private individuals but he “spoke
prophetically and as a type of Christ.”
105
It is worth noting that the life and experiences of
103
Beza, Psalmorum, 427.
104
Beza, Psalmorum, 427.
105
Beza, Psalmorum, 427.
62
David provide an interpretive framework for Beza’s reading of the psalm. In light of
David’s historical context, the meaning of the psalm is applied to Christ and to the church
of Beza’s time. As David’s pronouncing of judgments has been fulfilled in the downfall
of Doeg, prophetically, so it has also been fulfilled in the punishments of the Jews who
persecuted Christ. As such, regarding the enemies of his time, Beza writes, “even if the
church does not directly employ these prayers against them, the same and perhaps even
harsher punishments await them in this very age.”
106
Thus, throughout his Psalm Paraphrasi, Beza encourages Christians to pray with
patience during the time of trials and sufferings, looking forward to the coming of
Christ’s kingdom and learning from the prophetic vision of David. The church is to have
its eyes fixed on Christ’s kingdom and pray for its well-being. Following the example of
David, kings and pious rulers must pray for the people of God: “David, not as a private
individual but as the one designated by God Himself to hold a public office as king, prays
with great confidence for himself and for the people of God (Ps. 28).” In another
example, Beza writes, “he [David] appeals to God, confidently praying for his own and
the kingdom’s well-being (Ps. 41).” While both examples show David praying for the
church and kingdom as a king, these prayers must be prayed by all Christians as well. In
Psalm 132, Beza reminds all believers “to pray earnestly for the propagation of Christ’s
kingdom and then for the well-being of those political structures that provide a dwelling
place for the Church.”
107
106
Beza, Psalmorum, 427.
107
Beza, Psalmorum, 524-5.
63
Overall, Beza’s unwavering confidence in God who protects and provides for the
faithful is evident throughout his Psalm Paraphrasi, particularly in the imprecatory
psalms. These psalms are not prayers for personal revenge but rather they are psalms that
can only be truly prayed when one’s full trust is in God to make things right and to punish
the wicked. Hence, Beza urges caution when praying these psalms, emphasizing that they
are to be employed not against specific individuals out of personal vengeance but in
anticipation of the coming of God’s kingdom. As God heard the innocent cries of David
and Christ, and brought punishments upon their enemies, God surely hears the innocent
cries of the righteous of Beza’s present age. Thus, Beza encourages that one should
follow the example of David to pray even more fervently during these challenging times
for the church, patiently waiting while placing one’s full confidence and trust in God’s
benevolence. For this task, Beza found the Book of Psalms to be most appropriate and
helpful not only for the church but also for his own life and ministry.
1.5 Conclusion
Beza’s reading of the Psalms is in much continuity with the exegetical approaches
employed by his Reformed predecessors. Similar to Calvin, Beza considers David’s
history to be sufficient for interpreting the Psalms. Thus, for Beza, canonical and literal
readings in search for the historical occasion on which each psalm was written precedes
all other tasks of exegesis. It is upon these canonical and literal conclusions that Beza
builds his readings in reference to Christ by employing spiritual, typological, and
allegorical methods. Such christological readings are thus restricted by their context in
the history of David, and only appear when the text warrants such readings and when
64
Beza finds them to be useful for the church – exegetical principles shared with Calvin.
Yet, as some of the examples have shown, Beza appears to provide more robust
christological readings than his predecessor in that Christ’s history takes superiority over
David’s history. Although Beza follows Calvin in exegetical principles and doctrinal
commitments, he maintains traditional christological readings in respect to his
applications of them for his particular sixteenth-century context.
Beza’s quest to find the most accurate historical account of each psalm draws
from his studies of Jewish, Greek, and Protestant resources. These sources are not
discussed explicitly in his comments, so it is difficult to trace how Beza made use of
them but his praise of the recovery of Hebrew language in biblical studies and the few
instances in his reading of the Psalms reveal his awareness and knowledge of the
available sources.
108
He also does not pay much attention to the place of Jews in his
exegesis. In the few places where he mentions the Jews in his Paraphrasi, they appear as
historical enemies of Christ who are still suffering punishments from crucifying Christ.
109
This is not necessarily evidence of Beza’s dislike of the Jews; yet, it reflects a retained
negative rhetoric in the larger context of traditional exegesis, even if this remains very
minimal for Beza, at least in his Psalm Paraphrasi. On the other hand, his frequent
references to the Hebrew inscriptions allude to his positive view of Jewish resources.
Moreover, Beza mentions his indebtedness to Calvin, Marot, van Campen, and Möller’s
108
Beza, Psalmorum, ã.3.
109
See Beza’s comments on Psalms 69, 109, and 110.
65
work on the Psalms who were all biblical interpreters who had positive regard for the
Jews and their exegesis.
Beza’s theological program in writing his Psalm Paraphrasi includes two main
goals: first, to edify and encourage the church in the midst of persecutions and political
struggles, and second, to instill in the church a heart of patience, the desire to pray
fervently, and the longing for true worship. Each of these aspects are to be firmly rooted
in one’s trust of God’s benevolence and providence, for God will not let the wicked go
unpunished but most surely restore his people from all enemies. To Beza, the church is at
the center of God’s ultimate plan that offers a foretaste of the great blessings of
restoration to come in the eternal and heavenly kingdom, incomparable to the earthly and
temporal kingdom. This emphasis and vision echoes throughout his interpretations of the
Psalms.
In conclusion, what can be said about Beza’s contribution to reading the Psalms?
First and foremost, Beza’s interpretation of the Psalms reflects and consolidates the
exegetical patterns and emphases put forth by Reformed predecessors, notably Bucer and
Calvin. His emphasis on David’s historical context, the restrained references to Christ,
the tendency towards more positive use of Jewish resources, and reading for the
edification of the church underscore his alignment with Reformed confessional identities
in his exegetical practices. At the same time, it is important to note the differences
between their political contexts. While Calvin predeceased the Saint Bartholomew’s Day
massacre (1572), Beza was deeply impacted by not only the tragic events of the massacre
but also the ongoing Catholic persecutions of Protestants in France during the latter part
of the century. From the late 1570s onwards, Beza feared that the growing influence of
66
the Guise family along with Catholic loyalists, who eventually come to form the Catholic
League after the death of the Duke of Anjou in 1584, might overthrow Protestantism
across Europe.
110
Consequently, Beza’s primary theological and pastoral tasks during this
period centered on providing comfort to persecuted churches and afflicted believers and
fostering Protestant piety in response to Catholic threats. In this sense, while Beza shares
Reformed practices of literal and historical exegesis and reading for the edification of the
church with Calvin, his unique contribution lies in his application of Scripture to address
the specific political challenges of his era, as exemplified in his emphases on the earthly
and spiritual kingdoms as well as the identity and work of a true, godly ruler in his Psalm
interpretation. The impact of the political context on Beza’s reading of the Scripture and
his use of biblical studies for comforting those who are suffering for the sake of the
gospel are consistent interests that drive his exegetical endeavors, particularly in his work
on the Old Testament poetic books published in the period of 1579 to 1589. The next
chapters further demonstrate how Beza applies his exegetical writings to engage with and
interpret contemporary events of his day through the lens of the Old Testament poetic
books and their characters.
110
On the historical background of Catholic League, formed by Catholic loyalists in France to
resist the succession of Henry of Navarre and thereby eradicate Reformed faith, see Manetsch,
Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace, 144-150.
67
CHAPTER TWO
Beza’s Reading of Job (1589):
Human Righteousness Defended and God’s Vindication Proclaimed
2.1 Introduction
The theological program that Beza sought to achieve through his paraphrases on
the Psalms – namely, to comfort churches in the midst of political struggles and cultivate
piety for believers in their response to spiritual challenges – also predominated in his
work on the book of Job. Given the context of the sixteenth century, it is not too difficult
to imagine how the themes of suffering, justice, and divine providence in Job’s story
would have struck a strong chord with Beza’s personal experiences and also with the
religious exiles and persecuted churches of the time. Why does God allow the righteous
to suffer while the wicked prosper? Is God always just, even when the righteous suffer?
Why does God permit Satan to pursue Job? Who are Job’s friends and what role do they
play in the unfolding of the story? For Beza, these questions were not abstract and
theoretical. Rather, they were very pertinent to understanding what Christian life on this
earth entails. Hence, not surprisingly, Jill Raitt uncovers at least twelve different topics
that Beza discusses in his work on Job: doctrine of God, identity of the elect, use of
creatures, church, preaching, sacraments, public prayer and fasting, penance, family life,
careers, good works, and virtues.
1
As the title of her article indicates, these topics were
practical lessons learned from Job as “a guide for the faithful life.” This chapter
investigates some of these major themes of Beza’s interpretation of Job and the exegetical
1
Jill Raitt, “Beza, Guide for the Faithful Life,” Scottish Journal of Theology 39 (1986): 83-107.
68
methods he used to develop certain ideas, which he desired to make relevant for the
suffering churches and believers of his sixteenth-century context.
To analyze Beza’s distinct contributions, it is first necessary to provide a brief
background to the history of Joban interpretation. Not surprisingly, the story of Job has
attracted extensive literature and interpretations in various traditions over the centuries.
2
Within the Christian spectrum, historians have generally agreed that there are two main
interpretive trajectories that came prior to the Reformation: an allegorical reading
influenced by Gregory the Great and a literal reading shaped by Thomas Aquinas.
3
Gregory emphasized Job’s suffering as a “moral and spiritual progress,” striving for
“purification, detachment, and ascent toward God,” whereas Aquinas considered Job to
be fundamentally about “the nature of divine providence.”
4
These two distinct approaches
became the main trajectories of reading Job in the history of the church.
By the time of the Reformation, a Lutheran interpretation developed through the
writings of Martin Luther, Johannes Brenz, and Johannes Bugenhagen. According to
Ronald Rittgers, Lutheran reformers, greatly influenced by the theology of late medieval
2
For a survey of the various literature and interpretive issues on Job in Judaism, Christianity, and
Islam from the premodern period to the 21st century, see Stephen J. Vicchio, “Part I: The History of
Interpreting the Book of Job,” in The Book of Job: A History of Interpretation and a Commentary (Eugene,
OR: Wipf & Stock, 2020), 1-45.
3
Cf. Lawrence Besserman, The Legend of Job in the Middle Ages (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1979). Besserman identifies three traditions of reading Job: the biblical, the apocryphal,
and the ecclesiastical.
4
Susan E. Schreiner, Where Shall Wisdom Be Found?: Calvin’s Exegesis of Job from Medieval
and Modern Perspectives (Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press, 1994), 4. She devotes one chapter to the
allegorical reading of Gregory and then another chapter to the literal readings of Maimonides and Aquinas
as serving the background to Calvin’s understanding of Job.
69
piety, used Job’s suffering to illustrate their soteriology and pastoral theology.
5
He
demonstrates that the Lutheran emphases on alien righteousness and justification by faith
functioned as the lens through which Job and his suffering were interpreted. The core of
their understanding consisted in the idea that those clothed with Christ’s righteousness
cannot be under divine wrath. Consequently, they read Job’s suffering not as “a
punishment for sin” but rather “a refinement of faith.”
6
Within this theological
framework, suffering for Christians served a divine purpose, acting as a means to “test
and purify their faith,” which brings them to recognize their “spiritual impotence and
poverty apart from God’s sustaining presence.”
7
As Rittgers claims, despite maintaining
certain continuities with late medieval piety, Lutheran reformers brought about a radical
shift in the understanding of affliction from their distinct theological standpoint.
8
As concerning Calvin’s reading of Job, Susan Schreiner’s thorough and
comprehensive study is particularly helpful.
9
She argues, in her analysis of Calvin from
the medieval perspective, that he inherited both traditions of Gregory and Aquinas by
placing Job’s sufferings within the larger context of God’s providence, more precisely, by
5
Ronald K. Rittgers, “Job in the German Reformation,” in A Companion to Job in the Middle
Ages, ed. Franklin T. Harkins and Aaron Canty (Leiden: Brill, 2016), 254-286.
6
Rittgers, 268.
7
Rittgers, 267, 272-273.
8
It is interesting to note that Luther took Job’s intercessory role for his friends as pointing to
Christ’s salvific work for humanity in a way similar to many medieval interpretations. Yet, the key
difference was that Luther framed his explanation in terms of alien righteousness. See Rittgers, 267.
9
Other notable studies on Calvin’s understanding of Job are Derek Thomas, Calvin’s Teaching on
Job: Proclaiming the Incomprehensible God (Geanies House, Ross-shire, Scotland: Christian Focus
Publications, 2004), and Marten H. Woudstra, “The Use of ‘Example’ in Calvin’s Sermons on Job,” in
Bezield Verband: Opstellen aangeboden aan Prof. J. Kamphuis, ed. M. Arntzen (Kampen: J. H. Kok,
1984), pp. 344-51, 456-58.
70
defining Job’s suffering as caused by the inscrutability of divine providence.
10
She
unravels Calvin’s thoughts within the sixteenth-century context, during which doubts
concerning divine providence were being fermented, in terms of human perception and
hiddenness of God.
11
Schreiner characterizes Calvin’s discussion of the main themes of
Job, which include “creation, providence, divine justice, and human suffering,” as a
“recurring tension between visibility and inscrutability, knowability and
unknowability.”
12
For Calvin, then, “Job personified the difficulty of trusting God in the
midst of highly ambiguous historical reality.”
13
Hence, drawing on the lessons from Job,
Schreiner notes that Calvin encouraged believers to endure, hope, and trust in God’s
providence “during times of God’s hiddenness.”
14
Yet, she argues that “explicitly
portraying Job as the forerunner or type of the suffering endured by the sixteenth-century
Reformed Church was clearly not the primary purpose” of Calvin’s exegesis.
15
In fact,
she observes that Calvin was reluctant to use Job as an example but much rather preferred
10
This is one of Schreiner’s main observations throughout her studies on Calvin’s reading of Job.
See note 3 and also Susan E. Schreiner, “‘Through a Mirror Dimly’: Calvin’s Sermons on Job,” Calvin
Theological Seminary, 21 (1986):175-93; idem., “Exegesis and Double Justice in Calvin’s Sermons on
Job,” Church History 58, no. 3 (Sep. 1989): 322-338; idem., “‘Why Do the Wicked Live?’: Job and David
in Calvin’s Sermons on Job,” in The Voice from the Whirlwind: Interpreting the Book of Job, ed. Leo G.
Perdue and W. Clark Gilpin (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1992), 129-143; and idem., “Calvin as an
Interpreter of Job,” in Calvin and the Bible, ed. Donald McKim (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2006), 53-84.
11
Schreiner, Where Shall Wisdom Be Found, 18-21; idem., “Exegesis and Double Justice,” 327-
328; and idem., “Calvin as an Interpreter of Job,” 64-65.
12
Schreiner, “Calvin as an Interpreter of Job,” 65.
13
Schreiner, “Calvin as an Interpreter of Job,” 67.
14
Schreiner, “Calvin as an Interpreter of Job,” 72.
15
Schreiner, Where Shall Wisdom Be Found, 7. [Emphasis mine].
71
David over Job, continually appealing to David in correcting Job.
16
Calvin’s ambivalent
approach to Job, as presented by Schreiner, suggests an interesting contrast with Beza’s
reading of the text, in which he makes references and specific applications to his
contemporary challenges, and particularly uses Job as a positive example for Christian
piety in the midst of his modern-day afflictions.
Such use of Job is not surprising when one considers the context that stirred up
Beza to meditate on this biblical book. Beza was drawn to Job during an extremely
challenging time of his career. He published his work on Job, partly commentary and
partly paraphrase, in 1589.
17
The work was a product of Beza’s lectures that he had given
at the Academy of Geneva in 1587 during the time when the Catholic Duke of Savoy had
besieged Geneva.
18
The survival of the Academy was at stake as the city became
bankrupt, and Beza was left by himself to keep the Academy alive.
19
Furthermore, as the
persecutions in France intensified, refugees were again crowding the streets of Geneva.
20
In the prefatory letter to his writing, dedicated to Queen Elizabeth of England, Beza
explains the context that led him to study this book in particular: “For it happened that the
16
Schreiner, “’Why Do the Wicked Live?’: Job and David in Calvin’s Sermons on Job,” 136-141.
17
This work is titled Jobus, Theodori Bezae partim Commentariis partim Paraphrasi illustratus
(London: Georgii Bishop, 1589). [Hereafter abbreviated as Jobus]. The English translation was published
the same year with the title Job Expounded by Theodore Beza, partly in manner of a commentary, partly in
manner of a paraphrase. [Hereafter abbreviated as Job].
18
RCP 5:144. “Bèze offrit à la Compagnie de faire 3 leçons en théologie depuis 9 iusques à dix en
la sepmaine de M. de La Faye, pour entretenir l’Eschole en ce temps si fascheux et lorsqu’il n’y avoit point
de professeur. La Compagnie l’accepta et le remercia. Suivant cela, il commença le mardi suivant le livre
de Job.” (20 January 1587).
19
For a historical account of this crisis, see Manetsch, Beza and the Quest for Peace in France,
133-134, and E. William Monter, Calvin’s Geneva, (Huntington, NY: Robert E. Krieger, 1975), 196-207.
20
Manetsch, Beza and the Quest for Peace, 150.
72
most ferocious enemy was attacking you, and the miseries of the French Churches greatly
troubled us, and the enemies hard at our gates barely allowed us to breath, I interpreted
the history of Job in this school, considering it most fitting for such miserable times.”
21
This expression depicts Beza’s concerns far beyond the immediate challenges of Geneva.
As he expounds the book of Job, he is cognizant of the wider European context,
especially of England and France – with the Catholic League tightening their control in
France, the Spaniards were threatening Protestantism in England culminating in the
Spanish Armada of 1588.
22
When Beza addresses Queen Elizabeth, he draws attention to
her action of “nourishing” the French, Dutch, and Italians who are in exile for the name
of Christ.
23
Further in the letter, he commends the Queen for her generosity towards and
acceptance of the exiles in a touching manner: “Indeed, beholding all these things that are
mentioned about Job, in the many calamitous exiles who fled to you for refuge, you have
perceived all their miseries as if they touched you personally, especially given your
consistent embrace of them; and not frightened by the conspiracies of those who seek to
harm you nor by the threats and attempts of foreigners, relying solely on divine
providence and the testimony of a clear conscience, you have endured as an imitator of
21
Beza, Jobus, A2v. All translations are my own from the Latin edition. I consulted and compared
my translations with the English version.
22
In this dedicatory letter, dated August 12, 1589, Beza congratulates Queen Elizabeth for
defeating the Spanish and dedicates a poem to commemorate England’s victory: “Straverat innumeris
Hispanus classibus aequor / Regnis iuncturus scpetra Britanna suis. / Tanti huius rogitas quae motus causa?
Superbos / Impulit Ambitio, vexit Avaritia: / Quàm bene te, Ambitio mer sit vanissima ventus: / Et tumidae
tumidos vos superastis aquae! / Quàm bene raptores orbis totius Iberos / Mersit inexhausti iusta vorago
maris! / At tu, cui venti, cui totum militat aequor, / Regina, ô mundi totius una decus. / Sic regnare Deo
perge, Ambitione remota, / Prodiga sic opibus perge invare pios, / Ut te Angli longùm, longùm Anglis ipsa
fruaris, / Quàm dilecta bonis, tam metuenda malis.” (Beza, Jobus, A5v)
23
Beza, Jobus, A2r.
73
our Job.”
24
Such sixteenth-century context of the religious refugees and the persecuted
churches, with Catholic threats closing in from France and Spain, dominated Beza’s
thoughts as he set himself to study and meditate on the book. From the very beginning,
Beza had his mind on interpreting the book of Job for the edification of the church.
Given this context, this chapter explores Beza’s approach to the book of Job with
particular interest in the methods, the content, and the use of his interpretations for
comforting the suffering and scattered churches. First, concerning method, I examine
Beza’s reading of Job as a tragedy, through which I suggest he implies something more
than just a literary genre. Also, regarding his method, I discuss his identification of the
literal meaning within Job’s history as well as within his understanding of the unity of the
two Testaments. Similar to his reading of the Psalms, Beza discerns the literal meaning of
the text by careful examination of words in their original context. He also uses references
from other parts of Scripture to bring the narrative within the broader sacred history.
Second, I demonstrate the main thrust of Beza’s reading of Job exhibited in his literal
approach – namely, God’s justice and human righteousness with the church at the center
of his focus. Beza highlights Job’s identity as a true member of the church and God’s
ultimate vindication of him. This emphasis indicates the ways that Beza’s own historical
context shaped the content of his exegesis. Finally, I analyze Beza’s use of Job as a
teacher and an example as part of the theological program he wished to promote for the
persecuted churches and suffering believers of his time, in which he sought to instill a
heart for trust in God’s providence and perseverance through patience and constancy.
This chapter continues to illuminate the patterns and the theological program of Beza’s
24
Beza, Jobus, A3r.
74
exegetical endeavors in continuity with his predecessors but also his own unique
contributions, shaped by his deep pastoral concerns for the political struggles of the
sixteenth century.
2.2 Reading Job as a Tragedy: Beyond a Literary Genre
Beza begins his commentary by framing the entire book of Job in the form of a
tragedy. This genre is not unfamiliar to Beza, as the very first substantial work he
published as a Protestant was Abraham Sacrifiant in 1550, a tragedy that exemplified
Abraham as a model of Christian faith who sacrificed all his comfort, family, and country
for the sake of the gospel.
25
Imitating the style of a play, Beza wrote Abraham Sacrifiant
in the form of exchanged dialogues between characters divided into poetic verses. Almost
forty-years later, he again makes a reference to this literary genre in the preface of his
commentary on Job. He identifies three reasons for associating this biblical book with
tragedy:
This entire book consists of dialogues, except for the prologue and the
conclusion of the book: and if it were not for the extremely joyful ending,
it might rightly be called a Tragedy, both because of the subject matter
itself, which nothing more serious can be thought of, and because of the
dignity of the distinguished characters: not as a fabricated poem but as
things that have indeed happened are most faithfully, most gravely, and
most divinely written, with which, even if it be determined by human
judgment on this matter, no writing of any poet, whether in respect of the
events or the words, can be rightly compared.
26
25
Beza, Abraham Sacrifiant: avec introduction et notes, eds. Keith Cameron, Kathleen M. Hall,
Francis Higman (Geneva: Librarie Droz, 1967).
26
Beza, Jobus, 13.
75
First, Beza observes that the dialogues constitute a major part of the book. Although he
does not rewrite Job into a play – as he had done for Abraham Sacrifiant – the design of
the book itself in dialogues is significant to be recognized as a tragedy. Secondly, he
points to the weight of the subject matter. For Beza, Job presents a complicated reality
between God’s justice and Job’s experience of it in history that deals with difficult
questions, such as whether God’s justice allows the wicked to prosper and the righteous
to suffer, whether God is the author of sin, and in what way God uses evil instruments.
27
Concerning such “weighty arguments,” Beza advises that we should not “measure the
wisdom and justice of God according to our understanding, nor immerse ourselves in the
abyss of divine wisdom like the three friends of Job.” But he continues, “as Job spoke
upon hearing the reproof from God,” we should “reverently adore the secrets of the Lord”
rather than “curiously scrutinize them.”
28
Although the story comes to a happy ending,
Beza sees in the story of Job a hero who experiences an intense spiritual anguish, torn
between God’s justice and his own suffering throughout the drama. Thirdly, Beza notes
that the distinguished characters in Job are marked features of a tragedy. Each character
contributes to the unfolding of the Joban story as they all come together in teaching
lessons concerning those “weighty arguments.” Hence, analyzing the characters,
including not only their roles but also lessons learned from each of them constitute a
significant part of Beza’s interpretative approach. Here, one sees Beza’s poetic interests
and his training in studia humanitatis still playing into his thoughts. He continues to
27
Beza, Jobus, 14-16.
28
Beza, Jobus, 16.
76
retain his appreciation for humanism and its tools even in the mature years of his career
as a reformer and utilizes them for his theological writings, including interpretation of the
Bible.
29
For Beza then, the distinct nature of the book of Job as a tragedy prompts a
literary structure broken down into ‘Acts’ and ‘Scenes,’ and characters referred to as
‘Actors’ or ‘Speakers,’ and informs the way that he reads and approaches the text.
30
Hence, he divides the whole book into five acts. The first act consists of two dialogues
between God and Satan, and Job and his wife (Job 1-2). The second act is Job’s
complaint, followed by three scenes in which Job’s friends, Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar,
make appearances and take turns disputing Job (Job 3-14). The debate intensifies between
Job and his friends as it continues in the third act over five scenes (Job 15-31). The fourth
act is Elihu’s monologue against the errors of Job and his friends (Job 32-37). Finally, the
book ends with God’s judgment in the fifth act, and a short epilogue (Job 38-42). For
Beza, each act consists of dialogues or monologues of characters, which gradually
aggravates the tragic experiences of the lone hero, until God intervenes finally to resolve
them at the end.
Beza’s categorization of Job as a tragedy seems straightforward given the format
and topic of the book. Is Beza, however, only referring to a particular literary genre by
29
For studies on Beza’s relation to humanism, see Manetsch, “Psalms before Sonnets: Theodore
Beza and the Studia Humanitatis,” in Continuity and Change: The Harvest of Late Medieval and
Reformation History, ed. Robert J. Bast and Andrew C. Gow (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 400-416, and Summers,
“Theodore Beza’s Classical Library and Christian Humanism,” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 82
(1991): 193-207. Both scholars argue that Beza remained a Christian humanist until the end of his life. My
own study supports this view.
30
Beza, Jobus, 13-14.
77
using this term? Jeremiah Martin, in his article, “Preaching Exile and Loss after Calvin:
The Notion of Tragedy in the Sermons of Theodore Beza,” traces Beza’s infrequent but
significant references to ‘tragedy’ in his writings, mainly from Abraham Sacrifiant and
his sermons on the Passion and the Resurrection of Christ, to argue that this word
signifies for Beza the classical genre as well as the real-life tragedies of war and
heresies.
31
He demonstrates how the word ‘tragedy’ is linked to Beza’s own experiences
and his view of the current political events. Could it be that Beza has in mind the tragic
happenings of his time as he is commenting on Job’s literary features? Given that Beza’s
choice of this particular book was very much incited by his political context, it is
certainly plausible that ‘tragedy’ is not just a reference to the literary structure but also the
content itself. His description of the epilogue supports this point. He writes that, at the
end, a “brief narrative of the fortunate outcome” concludes “the tragedy of Job’s
calamities.”
32
Here, Beza seems to be moving from a tragedy as a literary genre to a
tragedy as real-life adversities. In the end, his intent to comfort the church under
persecution and to encourage believers to remain steadfast in their faith were the
purposes for his work on Job as much as it was for Abraham Sacrifiant, in which both
main characters – Abraham and Job – served as a model for Christian piety in the midst
of their tragic circumstances. Through his emphases on the literal meaning and the topic
31
Jeremiah Martin, “Preaching Exile and Loss after Calvin: The Notion of Tragedy in the Sermons
of Theodore Beza,” in Calvinus frater in Domino: Papers of the Twelfth International Congress on Calvin
Research (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2020), 283-294.
32
Beza, Jobus, 14: “Inde brevis narratio felicis exitus calamitatum Jobi trageodiam instar
cuiusdam epilogi terminat.” [Emphasis mine]
78
of justice, Beza found in the book of Job a great consolation for the churches amid the
tragedies of the sixteenth century.
2.3 The Search for the Literal Meaning of Job
As Beza’s reading of Job as a tragedy reflects his commitment to studia
humanitatis, his endeavor to find the literal meaning within the original historical context
based on the Hebrew and Greek languages, and scriptural evidence also reveals his
distinct training as a humanist. From the very outset of his work, Beza expresses the
difficulty of understanding the text and meaning of Job, which requires special attention
to the original languages and translations for the task of proper interpretation.
33
He next
expresses his disapproval of allegories, which, in his opinion, not only distort but pervert
“the natural sense of the sacred text.”
34
In contrast to this tradition practiced since the
time of Origen, Beza names three faithful interpreters of Job – Johannes Oecolampadius,
John Calvin, and John Mercier – to whom he indicates his indebtedness and directs his
readers for “the grammatical explanation of the Hebrew text.”
35
According to Beza, “the
natural sense of the sacred text” is derived from the grammatical study of the Hebrew.
33
Beza, Jobus, A3v-A4v.
34
Beza, Jobus, A4r.
35
Beza, Jobus, 11. The three writings on Job that Beza references here are the following: Johannes
Oecolampadius, Jo. Oecolampadii viri doctiss. In librum Job exegemata. Opus admodum eruditum, ac
omnibus divinae Scripturae studiosis utile (Geneva: Jean Crispin, 1553); Jean Calvin, Sermons de M. Jean
Calvin sur le livre de Job (Geneva: François Perrin, 1569); and Jean Mercier, Joannis Merceri Regii
quondam in Academia Parisiensi literarum Hebraicarum Professoris Commentarii in librum Job. Adjecta
est Theodori Bezae Epistola, in qua de huius viri doctrina, & istorum Commentariorum utilitate disseritur
(Geneva: Eustathius Vignon, 1573).
79
Thus, he wrestles with finding the right meaning through the right translations throughout
the work.
Beza takes great advantage of his Greek and Hebrew knowledge. For example,
commenting on the word “man” in 1:1, Beza writes that this word in Hebrew denotes not
only the male gender but also the character of “excellency and preeminence.” Given this
original meaning, Beza remarks, Job must have been a man greatly “renowned among all
peoples” for his “singular and divine greatness of the soul.”
36
At times, diverse
translations confuse the meaning of a word. In Greek, the word “uprightness” of 1:1 that
describes Job’s character can be rendered as “without fault (αμώμων),” “truthful
(αληθενον),” or “simple and without deceit (απλούς).” After noting the “negligence” of
copyists as the common cause of the problem, he states his preference for the third
option, and explains that Job’s “uprightness” must be understood in terms of “simplicity,”
by which it means Job’s mind was “free from all pretense and deceit.”
37
This choice
clarifies the ambiguity in meaning for Beza. The word “uprightness” cannot refer to Job
being free from sin, since only Christ is without sin. Rather, this term is a reference to
Job’s “simple and without deceit” character that Satan and his friends so labored to take
away from him.
38
Similarly, as he explains the phrase that Job’s “family was very great”
(1:3), Beza presents different Greek renderings for the Hebrew word “family (הדבע),”
namely, whether this greatness in family refers to Job’s business, the number of his
servants, or his activities abroad. He chooses the second option for the simple reason that
36
Beza, Jobus, 19.
37
Beza, Jobus, 24.
38
Beza, Jobus, 24.
80
a mention of servants appear in later verses and that Job would have needed a great
number of servants to look after all his flocks and herds.
39
As such, Beza, with his vast
knowledge of Hebrew and Greek resources, considered navigating through various
interpretations as one of the primary tasks of a biblical exegete in search for a literal
meaning.
Of the Greek and Hebrew translations at hand, however, Beza had a clear
preference for the Hebrew.
40
He describes the primacy of the Hebrew in his comments on
1:5, where he pinpoints to the inaccurate Greek rendering of “burnt offerings.” The Greek
translates the word as a “sacrifice” in a general sense, and either omits or adds certain
words in the verse, “all of which,” Beza argues, has been rightly corrected by Jerome
“according to the Hebrew truth.”
41
He further states that “since the Greek translations are
faulty in many other places as well, and we must defer to the Hebrew, we will not dwell
on them [Greek translations] from now on, unless we find things worthy of
observation.”
42
Recognizing that “even the most learned Greek interpreters have erred in
the true exposition of all the Old Testament books” without their knowledge of the
Hebrew, Beza thanks God for restoring the Hebrew language in his day.
43
Beza’s
39
Beza, Jobus, 30.
40
Beza clearly held to the view that the Hebrew original (Masoretic) of the Old Testament is
superior to the Greek (Septuagint). In the early modern period, this was a significant debate as it also
involved the issue of authority of the Vulgate. For a study on this topic, see R. Gerald Hobbs, “Hebraica
Veritas and Tradition Apostolica: Saint Paul and the Interpretation of the Psalms in the Sixteenth Century,”
in The Bible in the Sixteenth Century, edited David C. Steinmetz (Durham: Duke University Press, 1990),
83-99.
41
Beza, Jobus, 33.
42
Beza, Jobus, 33.
43
Beza, Jobus, 33.
81
preference for the Hebrew is apparent throughout his commentary. For example, when
Job is sitting among the ashes after being afflicted with boils (2:8), Beza notes that the
Greek translation uses “dung” instead of “ashes” and adds “outside the city” to describe
Job’s location. According to Beza, this is not plausible since it does “not exist in the
Hebrew text.”
44
Likewise, for the same reason, he criticizes the Greek translation of 2:9
for adding elements that do not “exist in the Hebrew text.”
45
Beza declares that Greek
additions have “no authority at all.” It cannot be that the Hebrew text is incorrect in this
instance, as it is not probable for Hebrew copies to have been “mutilated” in this verse
while it remains perfect in the rest of the book.
46
Beza’s trust in the Hebrew text, however, must be distinguished from his view of
the Hebrew sources and the Jews. Though Beza held a high view of the Hebrew text, he
was not uncritical of Hebrew or Jewish sources. They provided him with useful tools for
reading the text in its original context, but at times he recognized serious errors in their
views. Commenting on the “messenger” who delivered devastating news to Job (1:14),
Beza writes, “the saying of the Hebrews that this messenger, and others mentioned later,
were demons sent by Satan is not supported by even the slightest conjecture, and it must
be counted among the Rabbinic fables.”
47
In another place, Beza equates the Arians with
the Jews. In his discussion on the “sons of God” (1:6), he states that the “impious Rabbis
44
Beza, Jobus, 103: “… in Hebraeo contextu non extat …”
45
Beza, Jobus, 104: “… neque in Hebreo contextu extent, neque probabile sit Hebraea exemplaria
…”
46
Beza, Jobus, 104.
47
Beza, Jobus, 64.
82
of the Jews” imagine “some Messiah created before the world” as the Arians did.
48
Thus,
Beza proclaims that as with the Arians, the Jews do not deserve to be counted as “sons of
God.” According to Beza, this title is reserved only for those who follow “Christ our
head,” appreciate God’s benefit given to us “in our adoption,” and do not grieve “the
Holy Spirit of adoption.” True worshippers are those who acknowledge Christ to be
“coeternal and coessential with the Father,” and “as one God with the Father and the
Holy Spirit,” from which beliefs the Jews exclude themselves.
49
Although not much can
be drawn from the commentary itself on Beza’s view on the Jews and Rabbinic sources, it
is worth noting from his few comments that they certainly held a place in his library
when he studied the Old Testament texts, as was the case for his Psalms interpretation.
Regardless of his agreement with their views, he believed that Jewish sources as well as
the study of original languages deepened his knowledge of the Old Testament biblical
books.
2.3.1 Job’s History
Beza’s emphasis on a literal interpretation of Job not only includes paying careful
attention to grammar and translations in original languages but also studying Job’s
historical context. For Beza, situating Job within his history and finding meaning therein
was an important exegetical task. Hence, first and foremost, he begins by defending Job’s
historicity against those who consider him as a fictional or imaginary character. He
48
Beza, Jobus, 44.
49
Beza, Jobus, 44.
83
appeals to the places within the canon that speak of Job, namely Ezekiel 14:14, 14:20,
and James 5:11, to establish the ground that he is a historical figure, an Edomite from the
land of Huz.
50
He argues that Job lived during the time of the Egyptian captivity.
51
He
restates this opinion toward the end of the commentary that Job’s story is indeed a “true
history,” which most likely took place during the time when the Edomites flourished and
the Israelites dwelt in Egypt.
52
Interestingly, he alludes to the possibility that Moses, not
Job, could have been the author of the book, for he would have learned about Job and his
story when he lived among the Midianites for forty years. In fact, Beza attributes this
view of Moses’ authorship to some of the Jews whom he does not name. Nevertheless,
the historicity of Job is an undisputable ground for Beza’s exegesis, upon which he builds
his views on the unity of the two testaments and the church as he moves toward drawing
applications for the sixteenth-century context.
First, setting this stage is important for Beza, as knowing Job’s historical context
provides a better understanding of the text. For example, when Job’s livestock are
mentioned (1:3), Beza finds it odd that there are only donkeys and camels but not horses.
Referring to “the custom of that region,” he remarks that whereas “camels were used for
bearing loads and donkeys for carrying people,” horses were rarely used.
53
In another
instance, Beza comments that “the work of Job’s hands” (1:10) is not a reference to an
activity that requires actual working with hands, but “according to Hebrew custom,” this
50
Beza, Jobus, 11-12.
51
Beza, Jobus, 12.
52
Beza, Jobus, 269.
53
Beza, Jobus, 30.
84
denotes all kinds of work of both the mind and the body, to which Job devoted himself
day and night with his family duties.
54
Also, commenting on 1:18-19, where a messenger
informs Job of the death of his children, Beza raises the question of whether Satan’s
power granted to him over Job’s possessions included Job’s children and servants.
55
Beza
again draws on the historical context, namely, the custom of the time to answer that both
children and servants were considered “properties” and “goods” of their masters and
parents. He explains that the practice of fathers selling their children seems to have been
common at that time, for God cautions the Hebrews against it in Exodus 21:7. Beza thus
concludes that Satan had a rightful permission from the Lord to bring calamity on Job’s
children as they were considered part of Job’s possessions, over which Satan was granted
the power.
56
Furthermore, Beza uses the historical context to explain the assaults of the
Sabeans (1:15) and of the Chaldeans (1:17) on Job’s properties. Historically, the Sabeans
were a people of Arabia who were infamous for robbery,
57
and the Chaldeans, who
eventually defeated the Assyrians, were even more powerful people than the Sabeans,
also notorious for their thievery.
58
Based on this historical understanding, Beza comments
that Satan needed little effort to use these wicked people to violently kill Job’s servants,
and steal Job’s donkeys and camels.
59
To Beza, historical evidences of their wicked
54
Beza, Jobus, 55-56.
55
Beza, Jobus, 67.
56
Beza, Jobus, 68.
57
Beza, Jobus, 64.
58
Beza, Jobus, 66.
59
Beza, Jobus, 64, 66.
85
nature illumine the reason behind Satan’s use of them and the cruel actions of these
particular people in tormenting Job.
Beza’s efforts to read the book in its literal sense through the original historical
context is further exemplified in his interpretation of Behemoth and Leviathan. Both
Gregory and Aquinas had identified the two beasts with Satan in their allegorical and
figurative readings, respectively, and thus, interpreted the whirlwind speech to be a
description of God’s victory over Satan through Christ.
60
Calvin, on the other hand, with
his strict adherence to literal interpretation, refused such allegories as absurd, and simply
read Behemoth to be an elephant and Leviathan a whale, by which God revealed divine
power and transcendence before human eyes.
61
Beza follows Calvin’s literal approach
and interprets Behemoth and Leviathan as mere beasts. He writes that this Behemoth is
an elephant whose “tail” (בָנָז) in 40:17 is clearly a reference to its trunk, a distinctive
feature of an elephant.
62
Unlike Calvin, however, he does not identify Leviathan as a
whale, but as “the enormous and fearsome monster of the Nile, the crocodile.”
63
Beza
provides both scriptural and historical reasons for this identification. Scripturally, a whale
does not fit the descriptions that appear in chapter forty-one, of a creature with an
impenetrable back, hard belly, and neck. Historically, considering that the Edomites were
people living “far from the deep sea but close to Egypt,” whales would have been
60
Schreiner, Where Shall Wisdom Be Found?, 48-50, 85, 90.
61
Schreiner, Where Shall Wisdom Be Found?, 138-146.
62
Beza, Jobus, 271.
63
Beza, Jobus, 271.
86
unknown to them.
64
Based on the geography and history of the time, Beza concludes that
Behemoth and Leviathan had to be creatures that Edomites were familiar with, that is, the
elephant and crocodile. For Beza, it was crucial that these creatures were actually known
to Edomites, for they were visible means through which God’s invisible works and divine
character were revealed.
2.3.2 The Unity of the Two Testaments
In Beza’s search for the literal meaning of the text, Job’s history was not the only
history that provided context for his interpretation. In fact, Beza believed that his literal
interpretation must cohere to the message of the entire Scripture, that is, with the histories
of both the Old and the New Testaments. He frequently employed references from the
Pentateuch, Psalms, Gospels, and Pauline epistles throughout his commentary, bringing
the entire Scripture together to support his exposition.
At times, his references to the Old and New Testaments were as simple as offering
additional examples. This use is well illustrated in 1:5, in which Job offers burnt offerings
for his children with the concern that they may have sinned. Beza writes concerning Job’s
actions, “what a splendid example is here presented to us, that we may, with true charity,
seek the salvation of others?”
65
He then locates three other places in the Scripture where
such action of “charity” has rescued many others, “even the undeserving from dangers”:
the people of Sodom (Genesis 18:32), the entire people of God (Isaiah 59:16), and those
64
Beza, Jobus, 271.
65
Beza, Jobus, 36.
87
who were in the same ship with Paul (Acts 27:24). A few sentences after this, he again
references texts from the Old and New Testaments for the same use. While reflecting on
Job’s need to ask God’s mercy for each of his children separately, Beza explains the need
for repentance among those who may have consented with or failed to rebuke those who
have sinned. Examples of this are seen in the case of the Israelites who proclaimed a fast
for the sin of Naboth (1 Kings 21:12), and also in Paul’s admonition to the church of
Corinth for failing to mourn the sin of an ungodly person (1 Cor. 5:2).
66
At times, however, Beza ties the Old and the New Testament references with his
interpretation of Job in order to demonstrate the unity between the two testaments. Again,
using the “burnt offerings” of 1:5 as an example, Beza notes that it is difficult to know
what kind of sacrifice Job used during his time. He uses this opportunity to launch into a
discussion on the history of ceremonial rites and sacrifices, arguing that although these
forms of worship were “more plainly” declared at Mount Sinai, they began immediately
after the fall in Adam’s own family.
67
Then, he outlines the significance of sacrifices from
the time of Noah to God’s giving of ceremonial laws on Mount Sinai through Moses, and
finally to the new covenant in Christ who abolished the outward rites of the Old
Testament, referencing texts from Genesis and Colossians.
68
The Old Testament sacrifices
were only “shadows,” which, by the coming of Christ, has been taken away, “except for
those two most simple sacraments of the New Covenant.”
69
Despite the discontinuities,
66
Beza, Jobus, 37.
67
Beza, Jobus, 34.
68
Beza, Jobus, 34-35.
69
Beza, Jobus, 35.
88
Beza concludes that the heart of the believer remains the same, whether in the Old or the
New. Similarly, in explaining the “sons of God” in 1:6, he associates their true identity
with being “conformed” to Christ the head and thus being received as God’s adopted
children.
70
Put simply, they are made “heirs together with Christ.”
71
Beza expounds the
“sons of God” of the Old Testament in the New Testament context by referencing John
1:12 and Mark 12:25. He thus places Christ at the center of the identity of God’s children,
alluding to the unity between the people of the two testaments.
For Beza, then, the Old and the New Testaments are held together by the unity of
God’s people, more specifically, God’s faithful covenant toward the church throughout all
history. This understanding is fundamental to his reading of Job. In the comments on 1:1
(in the land of Uz), Beza finds the need to explain Job’s relation to the church, for he is of
Esau’s descent. Can there be a man of such rare “wisdom and godliness” among the
“wicked” Edomites? To affirm Job’s place as a true member of the church, Beza argues
that God’s covenant with Abraham and his descendants did not necessarily exclude all
other nations.
72
Even outside of the house of Abraham, “there was a Church,” in which
“true marks of the Church” were found – namely, “the promise of the coming seed” and
the “Sacraments.”
73
These sacraments, Beza describes, gradually faded away in other
nations, whereas they remained “more pure” in the house of Abraham. Drawing on
70
Beza, Jobus, 44.
71
Beza, Jobus, 42.
72
Beza, Jobus, 19: “Sunt autem hic praeterea quaedam observandam, ac primum quidem Deum
quo tempore cum Abrahamo & eius nascitura sobole foeduis iniit, non videri statim caeteras gentes &
familias orbis terrarum abdicasse.”
73
Beza, Jobus, 20.
89
passages from Exodus, Leviticus, and Acts, he posits that the complete “rejection of the
Gentiles” took place when God’s people were led out of Egypt and renewed their
covenant with God.
74
To the question of how Job can be so pious and religious, when the
Scripture says God hated Esau and cursed his posterity, Beza responds:
I answer that, although Esau indeed demonstrated himself to be profane in
many ways, and the terrible judgment of God fell upon him, extending
even to his descendants, he is not said to have fallen from God’s covenant
but only from the birthright. And the fact that he was withdrawn from the
land of Canaan, I admit that it happened by the secret providence of God,
declaring thus that what eventually happened was a just judgment of God.
However, it should not be understood as if the Edomites were excluded at
that time from God’s covenant.
75
With this remark, Beza concludes that Job and his friends, who were not Israelites by
birth, were nevertheless “true members of the Church.”
76
He argues that the “true
knowledge of God” prevailed even among the Edomites at the time that Job was
written.
77
This substantial argument is closely tied to Beza’s defense of Job’s historicity,
for only when Job is a historical figure, the story of God’s faithfulness for the church
throughout history can be told in a meaningful way. Job’s historical truthfulness places
him and the believers of the New Testaments under the same narrative of God’s covenant
for God’s people. As Job is a true member of the church whose life testifies to God’s care
for the church, all other members also serve as witnesses of God’s faithfulness. Setting
this foundation upon the unity of the two testaments was important for Beza, as it allowed
74
Beza, Jobus, 20.
75
Beza, Jobus, 20-21.
76
Beza, Jobus, 21.
77
Beza, Jobus, 269.
90
him to identify the current church of his time with Job’s experiences of the Old Testament
in their shared identities as true members of the church.
In sum, Beza’s search for literal meaning was none other than reading the text in
its original context with the assistance of Greek and Hebrew translations and resources.
According to Beza, to properly unlock the literal and natural sense of the text, the original
context had to be considered by interpreting the text within Job’s history as well as the
broader biblical history, including both the Old and the New Testaments. Such an
approach had two effects: first, it prevented him from plunging into allegories, and
second, it led him to see the church as the central subject of his reading of Job. Thus,
Job’s place in the story as a historical figure and as a true member of the church was of
utmost importance for Beza. These aspects served as guidelines for his interpretation,
through which he hoped to clarify the plain sense of the text. Such a method of reading
Job provided the groundwork for him to highlight themes that connect Job’s experiences
to the situations of his modern-day churches.
2.4 The Main Thrust of the Story: God’s Justice and Human Righteousness
Upon the foundation of his literal and historical exegesis, Beza unlocks the story
of Job through the lens of God’s justice and human righteousness. In the preface, he
writes, “since the subject of providence is extensive, those who consider God’s justice
and human righteousness (de Dei & Hominum iustitia) to be sought in this book, and that
not universally or completely, but rather in a particular respect, seem to me more suitable
91
to follow.”
78
Beza finds Job to be an appropriate book to discuss the question of justice.
The particular example of Job carries significant implications for how God deals with the
church and God’s people on this earth. Beza’s consideration of justice occurs in two
aspects, namely, divine and human. By divine justice, he means “whether God’s justice
(iustitia) should cause men of truly good and upright lives to be affected by the hardest
and most severe calamities of all kinds, or to put it more briefly, whether God’s justice
allows evil to prosper in this life, or the good to suffer.” On the other hand, the matter of
human righteousness concerns “whether righteousness (iustitia) is to be judged of men
from secondary things, or unrighteousness (iniustitia) from adversity.”
79
As Beza sees it,
these two kinds of justice are two sides of the same coin. The essence of the question is
the suffering of the righteous. Concerning this same phenomenon, one may ask of the
divine, ‘is God just?’ or of the human, ‘is the human righteous?’ Beza sees both questions
“applied to the person and present state of Job,” as they are disputed by him and his
friends.
80
To Beza, who witnessed so much suffering being inflicted upon God’s church
and God’s people during his time, these questions were very pertinent and pastoral
matters. His ecclesial reading takes its shape from such awareness of the sixteenth-
century political and religious situations.
78
Beza, Jobus, 14. I found it to be more appropriate to translate “iustitia” as justice when it
concerns God, and the same ‘iustitia” as righteousness when it pertains to human beings. The English
translation also has the same renderings. See the English translation in Beza, Job, A8r: “But forasmuch as
the argument of God’s providence is more large, and extendeth it selfe farther, I rather allowe their
judgement, who thinke that the justice of God and man’s righteousnesse are the chiefe things debated and
reasoned upon in this booke; and that not in generall, but in some certine respect and particular
consideration.” [Emphasis mine]
79
Beza, Jobus, 14.
80
Beza, Jobus, 14.
92
2.4.1 Human Righteousness: Satan’s Assaults on the Righteous
The key idea underpinning Beza’s understanding of the human perspective of
suffering is that righteous people do suffer in this life. The matter of righteous or
unrighteous does not depend on earthly prosperity or adversity. Commenting on the pains
of life and death, Beza writes that sin has turned this life into something “most wretched
and calamitous.” Although death may end this tormented state of life for those who have
tasted God’s goodness through Christ, Beza stresses that in this present life “misery
remains.”
81
No other book teaches this better than Job. Thus, in order to argue that even
the righteous suffer adversities on this earth, and draw applications from it for his own
context, he consistently defends Job’s virtue and integrity throughout the commentary. If
a man so righteous and virtuous as Job can suffer, no believer can say they are exempt
from suffering because of their righteous state. In Beza’s interpretation, then, Job’s virtue
and innocence are greatly emphasized. He interprets Job and his words with sympathy
and highlights his integrity over his frailties. This positive approach to Job is a distinct
reading of Beza, for Calvin is not so forgiving of Job’s speeches and complaints. In fact,
Calvin considers Job’s self-justification so “enormous” a sin that he calls it a “mortal
crime.”
82
This results in Calvin’s far greater admiration for Elihu, and his use of David to
correct Job’s arguments.
83
For Beza, however, Job’s experiences of suffering as an
innocent man speaks into his own context, as Job and the believers of his time are
81
Beza, Jobus, 121.
82
As cited in Schreiner, Where Shall Wisdom Be Found?, 139. See CO 35:491.
83
Schreiner, Where Shall Wisdom Be Found?, 131-135. See also Schreiner, “Why Do the Wicked
Live?: Job and David in Calvin’s Sermons on Job,” in The Voice from the Whirlwind: Interpreting the Book
of Job, ed. Leo G. Perdue and W. Clark Gilpin (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1992), 129-143.
93
connected by their identities as “true members of the Church.” Beza grounds this reading
upon his literal and historical exegesis, as well as within his theological agenda and
political context.
Beza defends Job’s innocence against the background of Satan’s wicked assaults.
Satan is the perpetual “enemy of the Church.”
84
Satan’s power is more than enough to
drive humans to all kinds of evil, never satisfied with the harm that is already done.
85
With “cunning” and “craftiness,” Satan adds “injury after injury” and “blow after blow,”
inflicting wounds not only “consecutively” but “repeatedly” that Job hardly has any time
in between to gather his thoughts.
86
Since Satan excels “in vigilance for evil,” Beza
exhorts that we must prevail in our “diligence for good.”
87
Satan is never “lazy” in
assaulting God’s people, still very active today in Beza’s time in disguise, perverting and
distorting the truth. In one example, he warns of the modern-day “Sophists” as people
under Satan’s influence. These Sophists avoid answering questions by diverting the
conversations. He writes: “So today, when we ask our adversaries whether the Papist
assembly is the Church, they begin to argue about the authority of the Church. And when
consubstantiation, transubstantiation, or the ubiquity of Christ’s body is denied, the
sophists instead of an answer, asks whether God is not omnipotent and whether Christ’s
words are not to be trusted. Thus, the topic of the traditions of the Church, with the
adversaries refuted by the authority of the written word, becomes the universal response
84
Beza, Jobus, 49.
85
Beza, Jobus, 64-65.
86
Beza, Jobus, 65.
87
Beza, Jobus¸101.
94
of the Sophists to all controversies.”
88
It is not too difficult to imagine how much pressure
Beza would have been under from the Catholics at the time of his writing on Job –
namely, the Duke of Savoy looking to devour Geneva, the Jesuits challenging Reformed
doctrines, and the Catholic League and the Duke of Guise exerting greater Catholic
influence in France. Satan is always searching to torment the innocent from all sides.
Against the evil schemes of Satan, Beza emphasizes the integrity of Job to argue
that even an innocent man as Job lived a life of suffering in this world. According to
Beza, Job was the most righteous and virtuous man living on earth. He describes Job as a
man who is not only “free from all pretense and deceit” in his mind, but also a man of
“integrity” shown forth outwardly by “his upright and honest actions.”
89
Job’s fear of
God and turning away from evil (1:1) means that he practiced “piety and integrity” in
wholehearted obedience, abstaining “from all that is clearly evil” but also from “anything
that appears to be evil” out of his holy love and reverence for God.
90
While Job is
“renowned among all peoples,” he is also a great father, diligent in his children’s “holy
upbringing” and a wise “manager” of the household.
91
Even small details, such as Job’s
waking up “early in the morning” (1:5) testifies to his godliness.
92
Being the priest of the
house, Job offers burnt offerings for each person of the family because as a “man of
greatest integrity” who fears God, he recognizes the weight of sin committed, whether
88
Beza, Jobus, 51.
89
Beza, Jobus, 24.
90
Beza, Jobus, 25-28.
91
Beza, Jobus, 19, 33.
92
Beza, Jobus, 35.
95
known or unknown.
93
Even when Satan takes away Job’s possessions and children, Job
responds with reverence by falling to the ground (1:20). Such action is not a sign of his
impatience, as some would argue, but rather is a “reverent” and “religious” act of
“submission” to God’s will, proper for a man who fears God.
94
Beza particularly notes
that Job received first three messages “calmly,” and reacted only after the fourth message,
not in dismay, but testifying his piety with the “humblest adoration.”
95
Job’s confession in
1:21 (“The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away. Blessed be the name of the Lord.”) is
a clear evidence of his integrity, in which he does not speak out of “despair,”
“impatience,” nor “desperation” but with “godliness” and “reverence.”
96
Beza reiterates
this point, and concludes that such patience of Job was “therefore truly great, immense,
and sublime.”
97
Even the Scripture testifies to Job’s virtue in 1:22 (“in all this Job did not
sin”). For Beza, such admirable example of Job deserves even greater respect because he
comes from the historical lineage of Esau. Job remained faithful, despite being
surrounded by the wicked: “It is a much more remarkable praise to be so pious among the
impious, as were the greatest part of the Edomites, and so good among the worst.”
98
As the story continues, however, Job’s actions and speeches seem to call his
righteousness into question. Faced with unimaginable afflictions, Job’s patience begins to
93
Beza, Jobus, 36.
94
Beza, Jobus, 70.
95
Beza, Jobus, 70-71.
96
Beza, Jobus, 73-76.
97
Beza, Jobus, 89.
98
Beza, Jobus, 19.
96
falter. While some commentators interpret these passages as evidence of Job’s sin of
spiritual pride and arrogance,
99
Beza, though he acknowledges Job’s sin, continues to
affirm Job’s virtue and integrity as a righteous man. Job’s first speech appears in 2:10
after his wife confronts him to curse God (“Shall we receive good from God, and shall
we not receive evil?”). Beza explains that Job is forced to “break his silence” but in doing
so, he still does not “lose his patience.”
100
Beza again praises Job for “eluding the
cunning of Satan,” “enduring his tortures patiently,” and not becoming “enraged against
his wife.”
101
He comments on 2:10,
How much, in very few words, does Job say that is truly admirable,
especially when we consider the state in which he was at that time? … [I]n
the first temptation, however severe and manifold, Job not only did not
complain against God, who was taking away whatever he had bestowed on
him before, but, as if the loss were a new blessing, he gave thanks to God.
Now, this is all the more admirable as this plague was more severe than all
the previous ones. He remained silent at first, which was a great thing in
such horrendous torments; later, even as the most unjust accusation was
added to those torments, he did not burst out into some blasphemous
murmur but into praise of God. This clearly indicates what he had in mind
during that silence, namely, the reception of so many and such great
benefits from God, combined with a true knowledge of him and fear of
him.
102
This expression well reflects Beza’s affinity for Job. Job does not commit sin by
blaspheming God, but rather, in his most “horrendous torments,” he remains silent,
99
Gregory and Aquinas, in their respective allegorical and literal approaches, read the story of Job
as a celestial battle between God and the devil, in which Job triumphs against the temptation of spiritual
pride. Calvin, however, frames the story as a battle between God and Job, in which Job’s sin of pride and
presumption are dealt before God. See Schreiner, Where Shall Wisdom Be Found?, 50-51, 85-87, 143-144.
100
Beza, Jobus, 106-107.
101
Beza, Jobus, 107.
102
Beza, Jobus, 108.
97
giving thanks and praises to God. According to Beza, Job was right and just in denying
that he was a hypocrite, which his wife had accused him of.
103
Beza insists that “in all
this he did not sin with his lips” (2:10) does not mean that Job only avoided sinning with
his lips while he was sinning in his mind. To interpret in such a way would be a “great
injustice to this best and most courageous man.”
104
The appearance of Job’s friends in the second and third acts brings an interesting
twist to the drama. Beza’s first point of emphasis is that these friends were of “great name
and authority” with “true wisdom” of divine and human affairs, whose intention was
never to hurt Job but to comfort him, out of their deepest love for him.
105
Beza shows his
respect for these men of wisdom and knowledge. It comes to pass, however, that Job’s
endurance is turned into impatience and their consolation into a bitter controversy. For
Beza, the “silence” of the friends (2:13) is where the tension starts to build and drives Job
to desperation: “spending the entire seven days in this manner in silence, what else was it
but to drive Job to despair?”
106
He criticizes the friends that if they saw Job’s wounds
growing more and more “fatal” on him, they should have intervened “immediately and
diligently” by instilling in him “that singular and most certain covenant against the terror
of death and divine judgment, namely, the covenant of eternal life” and should have
103
Beza, Jobus, 109.
104
Beza, Jobus, 109. Beza notes that the culprit behind this error are the Hebrews: “Ista igitur, In
hoc toto, & labiis suis opponuntur sequentium capitum disceptationi, ad finem usque istius historie.
Magnam autem iniuriam faciunt huic optimo & fortissimo viro Hebraei, qui perinde hoc accipiunt ac si ore
quidem non peierarit, mente vero peccarit: quum e contrario ambigendum non sit quin linguae dictaverit
animus quicquid est prolocuta.”
105
Beza, Jobus, 110.
106
Beza, Jobus, 114.
98
“rejoiced with him for his constancy in God.”
107
As men of wisdom, they should have
reminded Job of God’s goodness, but by keeping silence, they aggravated his misery,
during which time they made unjust and unfair judgments about Job’s state, as if he was a
hypocrite, in their thoughts.
108
Beza goes so far as to argue that the seven days of silence
was what drove Job, “who had previously endured his torments with incredible patience,
to impatience.”
109
Beza thus alludes to the difference between the two kinds of silence:
the godly silence of Job and the ungodly silence of the friends. For Job, silence was a
time of remembering God’s goodness in his fear of God, as seen in the comments on
2:10; whereas for his friends, it was a time of applying their own knowledge of God to
Job’s situation with no regard for Job’s patience nor God’s goodness.
110
Thus, although
Job cannot be free from blame, Beza turns the fault of Job’s impatience to the silence of
his friends and interprets their following speeches as extensions of their unjust treatment
of Job.
111
To Beza, their biggest mistake was not in the content of their speeches itself but
in their wrong application of it to the person and situation of Job who was suffering from
107
Beza, Jobus, 114.
108
Beza, Jobus, 115.
109
Beza, Jobus, 115.
110
Beza, Jobus, 115: “Nam alioqui si sola Jobi impatientia, in quam ipsorum certe culpa erupit,
ipsos offendisset, illa graviter quidem, sed tamen prout cruciatuum magnitudo ferebat, repressa, sermonem
alio statim convertissent, perseverato potius illum in ea quam adhuc ostenderat aequanimitate, & de
bonitate Dei suos nunquam deserentis bene sperare iubentes.”
111
For some Lutheran interpreters, Job’s friends represented the pope and the papists who rely on
human reason and tradition in their unjust criticism of the reformers. See Ronald K. Rittgers, “Job in the
German Reformation,” in A Companion to Job in the Middle Ages, ed. Franklin T. Harkins and Aaron
Canty (Leiden: Brill, 2016), 254-286.
99
extreme pain. They did not take into consideration Job’s particular context of grief and
adversities.
112
For this very reason, God rebukes and blames them for Job’s mistakes.
113
Surprisingly, even Calvin’s favorite character, Elihu, is not exempt from this
blame of perverting and misconstruing Job’s intention in Beza’s view.
114
Commenting on
Elihu’s speech in 34:10-31, he contends that while Elihu speaks magnificently about
God’s justice, this is not really necessary, as Job had never denied it but openly professed
it almost in exact same words in the twelfth chapter.
115
On Elihu and his role in the story,
Beza remarks,
But you may say that Elihu passed over Job’s words quite a bit,
interpreting them improperly and contrary to their intended meaning,
almost as if following his footsteps, so that he appears to have fully
subscribed to Job’s accusation. I respond that Elihu was indeed sent by
God to curb Job’s excessive and immoderate words with a sharp remedy,
boasting of that sublime and frightful majesty of God. However, the
reproof voiced by Elihu was only approved by God to the extent that he
rightly rebuked both Job and his friends, and argued correctly against them
regarding the majesty of God: yet, not in the manner of the rebuke
itself.
116
112
Beza, Jobus, 256.
113
Beza, Jobus, 115-116.
114
In Beza’s comments on Elihu, there is a continuous tension between Job’s mistake that deserves
rebuke and Elihu’s misunderstanding of Job’s intention. For example, see Beza, Jobus, 244: “Certum est
igitur illa Jobi dicta ab Elio aliter accipi quam mens ipsius Jobi ferret. Ad alteram autem vers. 10 partem, et
vers. 11 quod attinet, totidem quidem illis verbis usus fuerat Jobus cap. 13 vers. 14, 15, et 27 immoderata
quailam vehementia usus, sed haec certe a gravissimo incredibilis pene doloris sensus, non autem a
superbia, ac multo minus ab impio quodam affectu profecta, consolatione potius, et ad constantiam
exhortatione, quam objurgatione tam aspera indigebat. Aliud enim est modum non satis tenere in tam iusta
lamentatione, quam adversus Deum ipsum arroganter contendere, quod posterius nunquam certe fuit Jobo
proposium.”
115
Beza, Jobus, 249.
116
Beza, Jobus, 270.
100
Unlike Calvin who considered Elihu to have spoken “the true doctrine perfectly as he
received it from God,” as the only justified and righteous speaker of the narrative, Beza’s
Elihu has some faults.
117
In misconstruing Job’s words, he is no different from the other
three friends. Then why does God not rebuke him? Beza answers that it is because he did
not sin in asserting God’s justice, and that Elihu’s role to bring the story to a conclusion
had been fulfilled.
118
Nevertheless, Beza does not excuse Job completely. Job’s mistake is largely
twofold: impatience and excessive confidence in his integrity. First, his impatience
pushes him to the brink of forgetting the very goodness of God that he had reflected upon
during his time of silence. Beza writes, “Job does not sin in crying out, but he sins in
loosening all reins to grief, as it were for a time, putting away God’s thought.”
119
He
further comments that Job’s complaints “do not proceed from a constant and calm
judgment of the mind, but are expressed by the greatness of his grief, obscuring for a time
the light of his faith and understanding.”
120
Job forgets “divine power” when he asks to
be delivered from his troubles by death and neglects “the many benefits he received”
when he wishes to never have been born.
121
To Beza, the heart of Job’s sin is his failure to
recall God’s goodness in the midst of his extreme distress. Second, Beza articulates that
117
As cited in Schreiner, “Calvin as an Interpreter of Job,” in Calvin and the Bible, ed. Donald
McKim (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 69. For Calvin’s interpretation of Elihu, see
idem., Where Shall Wisdom Be Found?, 131-135.
118
Beza, Jobus, 270.
119
Beza, Jobus, 117.
120
Beza, Jobus, 123.
121
Beza, Jobus, 123-124.
101
Job is at fault for taking the arguments of his integrity and innocence too far at times,
although it had never been his intention to contend against God. In the context of
commending Job for speaking gently to his wife, he admits that Job did not always
maintain “moderation in asserting the integrity of his past life.”
122
When commenting on
Bildad’s wrong accusation of Job in chapter 25, Beza similarly notes, “but it cannot be
denied that Job, at times, did not always restrain himself in his self-defense.”
123
He
interprets chapters 29, 30, and 31, where Job discusses “the integrity of his past life,” as
the most evident example of Job’s lack of “appropriate restraint,” for which he is justly
reproached by Elihu and subsequently by God.
124
To Beza, the sufferings and adversities were not signs of Job’s hypocrisy. Job was
a righteous man, a member of God’s true church, who may have faltered at times due to
the seriousness of his afflictions and the unfair accusations of his friends, but he did not
lose his faith in God’s goodness toward him. Job’s claim of his innocence was not based
on “his arrogance” but on “a sure conscience of his good cause.”
125
Job’s arguments
relied on “the upright testimony of his conscience.”
126
Beza’s Job had no intention of
appealing to his own wisdom against God or to free himself from all guilt of sin before
God in his defense of his innocence. Rather, Job was only declaring his innocence in
122
Beza, Jobus, 109.
123
Beza, Jobus, 214-215.
124
Beza, Jobus, 218-219.
125
Beza, Jobus, 167.
126
Beza, Jobus, 172.
102
answer to the false accusations of his friends who insist that Job’s suffering is a result of
his hypocrisy.
127
This was Beza’s answer to the human side of justice, ‘is Job righteous?’
2.4.2 God’s Justice: Divine Vindication of the Righteous
Now, where is God in the story? How does Beza explain the sufferings of God’s
people from the perspective of God’s justice? At the center of Beza’s discussion is God’s
vindication of the righteous. God preserves the faithful on this earth and leads them to the
ultimate victory according to God’s always just and divine will. God is a “lover of
righteousness” and a “hater of iniquity.”
128
For Beza, even God’s use of Satan to bring
affliction on Job is not an evidence of God’s injustice, for God not only uses Satan
“justly” as an instrument for executing God’s will but also God punishes Satan “justly”
for his own wickedness. Even Satan must appear before God as his “just judge.”
129
In
other words, Satan is never forced to commit evil against the righteous, but Satan acts out
of his own evil inclination. God only uses what is already evil as an instrument for
executing God’s good and just will.
130
According to Beza, God is never unjust, even
127
Beza, Jobus, 249: “Jobus enim sese iustum praedicans, minime repugnare voluit iis quae tum
alibi, tum usque adeo expresse dixerat supra 9:20 sed adversariis a quibus sceleratus hypocrita fuisse
dicebatur, suam innocentiam opponit, idque vere, ipso quoque Deo teste, supra 1:8 et 2:2 sicut et Paulus 1
Cor. 4:4 Corinthios respiciens.
128
Beza, Jobus, 41.
129
Beza, Jobus, 50: “… tum ut noverimus Satanam ipsum cogi iam nunc sese coram Deo utiusto
iudice sistere, cui scelerum suorum omnium rationem reddat: tum ut ex hoc exemplo discamus quoties
Deus malis istis instrumentis utitur, non indi ipsis aliquam a Deo ad malum inclinationem, utpote quae ipsis
insit per corruptionem, sed ab eo tamen illam quasi excitari, qua postea ipse quidem, quamuis pessimo
instrumento, bene & iuste utatur: illa vero mala per se & ex sese instrumentat male tunc etiam agant, ita
tandem iustas poenas subitura, quod iustum Dei opus iniuste exequantur. Jerem. 48.10.”
130
Beza, Jobus, 49: “… qua in re quoties operam suam adhibet Satan cum suis, minime id facere
existimandus est obsequendi animo, sed quod nocendi & opera Dei destruendi potestate sibi concessa
delectetur.”
103
when the righteous suffers. Thus, Job’s suffering does not negate God’s justice in any
way, but rather God’s goodness is revealed, for God does not forsake him.
For Beza, this battle is spiritual. He interprets Job’s struggles in terms of a
continual fight between the flesh and the spirit. This is a holy struggle, which God places
in the lives of the elect for their own benefits, and eventually toward a glorious victory.
God has a specific plan for allowing the righteous to suffer:
Nor should this seem surprising, since even in the holiest individuals,
there remains the struggle between the flesh and the Spirit. This is divinely
left in the elect, as the Apostle teaches us by his own example, not that we
may perish, but that we may not sing triumph before victory, which is
nothing more desirable for Satan, and also that we may learn to depend not
one ourselves but on God, being constantly conscious of our weakness.
Lastly, it is so that the more difficult and harsh the struggle, the more
glorious may be the victory of the pious.
131
This statement encapsulates Beza’s hermeneutical key to the whole book of Job: God’s
justice declared in the vindication of the righteous. This is the point where Beza’s defense
of Job’s integrity intersects with his discussion of God’s justice. To Beza, the focus of
Job’s suffering is not on the battle between God and Satan nor between Job and Satan; it
is on the outcome of the battle, which displays the goodness of God who triumphs
through the trials of the elect. Beza achieves this perspective by bringing Job’s
experiences within the framework of a spiritual battle between the Spirit and the flesh. He
continues, “in this spiritual conflict,” one should not assume that “the Spirit has
succumbed to the flesh” nor “condemn Job for impatience, let alone blasphemy.” Rather,
according to Beza, “no one enduring extreme torments of body and soul (such as Job
almost unbelievably sustained) should be considered impatient immediately because he
131
Beza, Jobus, 116.
104
did not continue in the course of constancy, but rather should be regarded as strong and
constant, in whom, in the end, the Spirit triumphs.”
132
Beza does not follow Gregory in
interpreting Job’s suffering as a moral progress of purification and ascent toward God.
Nor does he follow Calvin in criticizing Job’s shortcomings so much so that Elihu and
David are preferred. For Beza, Job provides an excellent example whose suffering
displays divine power and protection in God’s victory. The focus is not on Job’s patience
nor impatience itself, but on God’s nature and actions for God’s people. Again, he writes,
[I]n considering Job’s struggle, we should not focus on whatever was done
during the struggle, but on the result of the fight itself: that is, God
supporting his servant internally with constancy, and although severely,
yet never allowing him to be tempted beyond the strength that was
appropriately supplied to him. … Thus, Job did sin carelessly, for he was a
man; however, according to God’s judgment, he never yielded to the flesh
but, even though not without wounds received in the battle, triumphed in
the Spirit.
133
Beza reiterates this theme throughout the commentary, navigating the tension
between Job’s prosperity and adversity, Job’s patience and impatience, through
the framework of a spiritual battle between the flesh and the Spirit. The Spirit
fights the battle for the elect, whose victory is guaranteed. It is on this ground that
Beza stands with Job, in defense of his righteousness, and offers a positive
assessment of him, as an example for suffering churches and believers in their
adversities. Thus, he concludes his comments in the fifth act of Job with these
words of confidence:
132
Beza, Jobus, 116.
133
Beza, Jobus, 117. See also ibid., 58: “Sed in summa, quo pluribus & accommodatioribus
instrumentis ad Jobum in hanc Charybdim praecipitandum usus est Satan, tanto est illustrior Jobi
quantumuis interdum nutantis, per Dei Spiritum victoria: & tanto illustrius habemus Dei nusquam suos
deserentis exemplum.”
105
Moreover, in this history, especially in its culmination, that singular
philanthropy and ineffable mercy towards all who repent in God are
reflected as the clearest mirror: indeed, in Job and his friends, the
weakness and terrible struggle of even the wisest of men, the knowledge
of ignorance, the prudence of imprudence, the patience of impatience, the
hope of despair, the strength of weakness, the humility of pride, and the
docility mixed with rebellion are presented for our contemplation. Yet, the
Most Great God never forsakes his athletes and at last most graciously
crowns his gifts in them.
134
As such, Job’s suffering produced many struggles and spiritual tensions not unfamiliar to
those who live this life under God’s mercy. His experiences of weakness, strength,
patience, impatience, hope, and despair were all very real struggles. Yet, God does not
allow the righteous to suffer without reason. In the end, God vindicates the righteous for
God’s own glory as well as for the benefit of the righteous, crowning them with the
greatest gifts. For Beza, God’s vindication of the righteous provided a clear answer to ‘is
God just?’ Of course, Beza found in this reading of Job multiple implications relevant to
the church and believers of his sixteenth-century context.
2.5 Beza’s Use of Job as a Teacher and an Example
Beza’s literal interpretation of the book in Job’s history and sacred history laid the
foundation for him to discover God’s justice and human righteousness as the appropriate
lens through which the experience of Job instructs and exemplifies lessons for the
persecuted churches and suffering believers of his own time. He does not read Job as a
direct reference to the work of Christ, like some interpreters who would take Job’s
intercessory role as pointing to Christ’s mediating role, or use the beasts of the Leviathan
134
Beza, Jobus, 270.
106
and Behemoth as symbolizing the devil whom Christ defeats once and for all. Instead,
Beza’s literal and historical reading lead him to find God’s justice and human
righteousness as the key to unlocking the question of suffering of the righteous in this
world. Greatly troubled by the political circumstances of his time, Beza uses his biblical
interpretation, particularly Job and his experiences, as a teacher and example to comfort
churches and believers against those enemies who plant doubts of God’s justice in the
minds of the righteous.
Beza’s concern for his current context is well represented in his allusions to the
historical context throughout the commentary. In addition to his comments to Queen
Elizabeth concerning her kindness towards religious exiles, as seen in the introduction,
two other places are worth mentioning. As he exegetes the banquet scene of Job’s
children (1:4), Beza instructs his readers that there is a time for joy and a time for
weeping. He then transitions to a consideration of his present state, in which there are
“horrible famine, pestilence, and war.” He describes adversaries pressing upon the
churches of France and the Low Countries.
135
In England, “raging Antichrist” plots
“extreme deceit,” and so, “many miserable exiles” find “refuge” as it were a “sanctuary”
under “the Most Serene Queen.” Geneva suffers from “a terrible famine” and “war at its
doorstep.” In Switzerland, “a discord of the Spirit” intensifies. Beza further alludes to the
threats posed by the Jesuits, calling them “those boastful Jebusites” who “sound the war
trumpet throughout the Christian world.”
136
It is clear that Beza’s concerns move far
135
Beza, Jobus, 32.
136
Beza, Jobus, 32.
107
beyond his own personal difficulties in Geneva to the suffering churches and exiles of all
Western Europe, as he is interpreting the book of Job. Likewise, expounding “the
children of God” (1:6), he explains that one possible rendering of this phrase is angels, by
whom God defends the church from “miserable slavery” and “infinite dangers,” as seen
in the story of Daniel.
137
From this literal reading, Beza shifts his focus to his current
times: “so even now may God miraculously defend us against the Antichrist and the
conspiracy of the whole world.”
138
Beza’s fear of an international Catholic conspiracy
against the Protestants is well reflected in this remark. He continues to use the
opportunity to elaborate on his own political context. After describing the different ways
God defends the church from the Antichrist, which includes “wonderfully preserving
pious kings and princes, and queens,” he writes,
For a clear example of this, if ever we have seen one, is in that most
excellent heroine, Elizabeth, the most serene Queen of England, whom by
God’s singular providence, is protected from countless snares of Satan, the
Antichrist, and the Roman Pope in our times, and whom we can truly and
rightfully call the common refuge and sanctuary of the much-afflicted
church.
139
As seen before, Beza’s thoughts are transfixed on what is going on in other parts of
Europe, highly regarding the Queen’s role in preserving the church. He also extends his
concern to the French churches. Despite the tragic deaths of many of the Protestant
leaders in France, he assures his readers that God had indeed used the angels to protect
them. “Since the breakout of the first Civil War in France,” Beza asks, “who can doubt
137
Beza, Jobus, 43.
138
Beza, Jobus, 43.
139
Beza, Jobus, 43.
108
that those most excellent heroes, defenders of the French Churches, were protected by the
very presence of angels?”
140
He continues, God had not deserted them, especially “in that
final struggle when they were taken up to heaven.”
141
As Manetsch well demonstrates, St.
Bartholomew’s Day massacre had led to deaths of many Protestant leaders and ministers,
creating a “leadership vacuum” was of a primary concern.
142
Beza thus encourages his
readers: “And even now, certainly not by any human strength but by the most heavenly
and extraordinary means, that Most Serene King of Navarre, the pillar of the French
Churches, and the Most Illustrious Prince of Conde, are protected against those wicked
individuals and those who conspire against both the Church and the very kingdom of
France.”
143
Despite the roaming wickedness in the world that he sees around him, Beza
asserts God’s protection and control over churches and the faithful believers. The threat is
very real and painful, as one reads through the experience of Job. For Beza, then, the
book of Job provides a perfect opportunity to teach doctrines to comfort God’s people
and to use Job’s patience and constancy as a marvelous example for how God’s people
should respond in such adversities.
2.5.1 Job as a Teacher of Divine Providence
As with the literal tradition of Aquinas and Calvin, Beza sees divine providence as
a major theme of Job. In his dedicatory letter to Queen Elizabeth, he highlights that God’s
140
Beza, Jobus, 43.
141
Beza, Jobus, 43.
142
Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace, 93.
143
Beza, Jobus, 43.
109
providence is “nowhere more fully and abundantly discussed,” “nowhere illustrated more
clearly and certainly to a particular example,” and “nowhere defined more plainly by the
very word of God” than in this sacred book of Job.
144
Later, he reiterates this point: “I
have written a full commentary upon the first two chapters, in which I have solidly and
plainly, to the best of my ability, explained not only numerous weighty questions but also,
particularly, that controversy about the providence of God.”
145
With the entrance of Satan
to the story in 1:6, Beza begins his detailed discussion on the matters of God’s decree and
providence, and engages in a full-fledged explanation of the doctrine, with particular
focus on divine use of secondary causes, defending the doctrine against those who accuse
God as the author of sin.
146
In his articulation of this teaching, he employs multiple
distinctions: God’s decree and the execution of that decree; general, special, and secret
providence; and passive and active instruments.
147
His primary purpose for elaborating
the doctrine, however, was not in describing the doctrine itself, but rather, in encouraging
suffering and scattered churches through the lens of Job’s adversities. To Beza, divine
providence is not an abstract and theoretical teaching that is of interest to only
philosophers and theologians. Rather, it is the most encouraging and pertinent doctrine
for the godly people, so much so that it is one of the chief teachings Satan attacks to
144
Beza, Jobus, A3r-v.
145
Beza, Jobus, A5r.
146
Beza, Jobus, 72-90.
147
For studies on Beza’s doctrine of divine providence in his interpretation of Job, see Suk Yu
Chan, Heavenly Providence: A Historical Exploration of the Development of Calvin’s Biblical Doctrine of
Divine Providence (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2022), 154-171; and Shawn D. Wright, Our
Sovereign Refuge: The Pastoral Theology of Theodore Beza (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2006),
149-156.
110
“overturn the foundations of our faith and hope.”
148
But even Satan does not act on his
own but needs God’s permission to bring calamities upon the godly, being a secondary
cause dependent on God’s will and decree.
149
For Beza, knowing that the good and just
God is always in control over all matters in this life, including the evil instruments, is the
greatest comfort any believer can hold to in the midst of their afflictions. His explanation
of divine providence never occurs detached from the comfort that it conveys.
150
Beza reinforces these lessons taught by divine providence throughout the
commentary. For instance, commenting on Satan presenting himself before the Lord
(1:6), he writes, Job’s sudden downfall from being “the most righteous man of all” to “the
most wretched” provides “an example by which all the pious may console themselves in
their most miserable circumstances.”
151
Beza offers three benefits learned from such
example of Job: first, all believers are reminded that “nothing on this earth, whether it be
the prosperity of the righteous or the adversity of the wicked, happens apart from God’s
just and wise decree from eternity”; second, God’s people may maintain “constancy even
in the greatest calamities,” for “God always acts benevolently, whether employing good
or evil instruments,” always pleased “to bless the righteous” and “avenge the
unrighteous”; and finally, the faithful learn that Satan and all evils can only harm the
148
Beza, Jobus, 38.
149
Beza, Jobus, 41, 58-59.
150
See Heiko A. Oberman, John Calvin and the Reformation of the Refugees (Geneva: Librairie
Droz, 2009), 86. Oberman captures well Calvin’s intent of articulating the doctrine of predestination. He
demonstrates that this doctrine was shaped by Calvin’s own experience as a religious exile, and was drawn
in response to encourage the believers facing persecution. The purpose of teaching predestination was to
offer “all true Christians the hope that even under extreme duress they will persevere to the end.” A similar
argument can be made concerning Beza’s doctrine of providence.
151
Beza, Jobus, 41.
111
righteous as far as they are allowed “by God’s will and command,” which is always for
“the benefit of the righteous.”
152
He concludes his exposition of 1:6 by urging that “this
doctrine is full of extraordinary consolation: from which we understand that all the rage
of that hungry lion is checked by the power and bridle of our God.”
153
Although Satan
may seem to triumph against the faithful, these attacks are always constrained by God
and only for the time being. In the end, it is God’s glory that shines forth and works for
the benefit of God’s children.
Beza further emphasizes the divine special care that God reserves for the
righteous. In his comments on 1:12, he calls this God’s “particular” and “most singular
providence”:
Finally, it must be known that, although the Lord speaks indefinitely, as if
giving Satan the power to decree anything about Job’s well-being, Satan
could not decree or execute anything other than what God had decreed. …
Now that a particular and therefore a most singular providence must be
established. … And I ask, if it were not so, what would happen to us,
indeed, what would happen to the entire world every moment, if it were
absolutely subjected to the tyranny of Satan?
154
All believers are subject to God’s very special providence, which God reveals specifically
toward the elect against the wicked. In fact, God, according to his always just and good
will, hands authority over to Satan just so that Satan may be defeated by God who
152
Beza, Jobus, 41.
153
Beza, Jobus, 49-50.
154
Beza, Jobus, 59. See also Chan, Heavenly Providence, 158-159. Here, Chan notes the
difference between Calvin’s and Beza’s exegesis of 1:12. He argues that Calvin’s exegesis stresses God’s
judgment for both the godly and the wicked in secret providence. On the other hand, he contends that Beza
places the punishment of the wicked in secret providence, while in God’s particular and singular
providence, the righteous are protected by God’s special care.
112
triumphs through Job, putting Satan to his own shame.
155
Hence, instead of falling into
despair by the outward circumstances of injustice, Beza reminds his readers to remember
God’s particular care and goodness for them, in which they find the most secure hope.
Drawing on Job’s confession, “the Lord gives and the Lord takes away” (1:21), he claims
that only those who “rightly recognize God’s providence” and “acknowledge God to be
the most just and wise governor of all things” by the example of Job, in both general and
particular matters, can find “the safest and most peaceful harbor, in which they may rest,
having been tossed with ever so violent storms of afflictions.”
156
In this way, Beza
delivers a powerful message to believers who are suffering persecutions and questioning
God’s justice and control over the world.
157
Trusting in God’s providence is where the
righteous may properly define their Christian experience in life on this earth and find true
comfort.
158
No greater weapon exists, as seen in the example of Job, who subdued all
kinds of “monsters” with this “club (clava) of divine providence.”
159
155
Beza, Jobus, 59.
156
Beza, Jobus, 87.
157
Since the tragedies of St. Bartholomew’s Day and the continued violence afterwards, Beza and
other French theologians had to face the challenges of trying to explain these events in theological terms.
The themes that Beza addresses in his interpretation of Job echoes the difficult questions that were asked in
the aftermath on why God allows such brutality to take place among God’s people and whether God has
forgotten the church. See Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace, 51-56.
158
Beza, Jobus, 91: “Quum tamen visum fuerit Spiritui Sancto eadem hoc loco inculcare, hinc
satis intelligi potest nos admoneri quam sit nobis necessario de Dei providentia in gravissimis praesertim
tentationibus cogitandum: ut, sive castigemur ipsi, non haereamus in ipsis flagellis quibus utitur Dominus,
sed cum Deo nobis negotium esse reputantes, cohibito ultionis spiritu, exemplo Davidis 2 Sam. 16:10 & 11
humiliemur sub Dei potentis manu 1 Pet. 5:6 sive sic Deus nos exploret, sicut hic Jobo accidit, Jobi
constantiam & patientiam imitemur: sive denique propter sanctum ipsius nomen affligamur, non modo non
frangamur animis, sed in nostrum άγωνοθέτην respicientes, gratias etiam illi agamus, quod nobis sit datum
non tantum credere, sed etiam pati pro ipsius nomine Phil. 1:29, que consolationes omnes ex providentie
divine sensu dependent.”
159
Beza, Jobus, 88.
113
2.5.2 Job as an Example of Patience and Constancy
Beza not only uses Job as a teacher of divine providence but also as a model
embodying Christian virtues, most significantly, patience and constancy. Beza uses Job’s
demonstration of these virtues as an example of the appropriate demeanor that individuals
relying on God’s providence should uphold, even when facing adversities and
persecutions. Job is incomparable to other biblical figures in the degree of suffering he
experienced and the patience that was required for him to endure his terrible
circumstance:
For as Abraham, Moses, and David are greatly commended by their most
constant faith, yet the praise of patience is rightly attributed to Job, as if it
were a certain prerogative, since we read of no mortal who was assailed
with greater rage by Satan and his ministers, nor who, despite suffering
something human in the struggle, resisted them and himself so strongly to
the very end. The other Christian virtues fight against vices, but Patience,
which our letters call by a much more expressive Greek word, υπομονή,
supports those who fight, unequal to other virtues, and ultimately alone
seizes the crown: therefore, above all, it is assailed by the enemy of the
human race with all his furies and schemes.
160
Beza affirms patience as the greatest virtue that carries believers to their final victory
against not only the external enemies but also the internal struggles of human weakness.
Job exemplifies this better than anyone else in the Bible, as he was attacked by Satan on
every side and also had to fight the inner battle between the flesh and the Spirit, and yet
did not blaspheme God. Beza advises his readers to emulate Job who “sets an example of
patience in all such calamities.”
161
Thus, he writes, “[t]herefore, truly great, immense, and
160
Beza, Jobus, A2v-A3r.
161
Beza, Jobus, 86.
114
sublime was this patience of Job, which may God grant to us, so that we may at least
imitate it to some extent.”
162
In addition, Beza praises Job’s virtue of constancy, using the term almost
interchangeably with patience.
163
He identifies Job as “the most constant person” among
all humanity.
164
Job’s constancy is even more admirable, he claims, when one considers
the sudden loss of his wealth, which brought him down from being the richest man to the
poorest.
165
From Job’s constancy, Beza exhorts, “[L]et us marvel at this, and turn it to our
use, that having pushed himself with such impetus to the very limit of desperation and
blasphemy, yet, relying on divine power that never failed him, he stopped at the very
edge of this ditch: and finally having defeated Satan and himself with invincible
constancy, the more fiercely he was attacked, the more glorious was the victory from this
struggle.”
166
Beza urges believers to ask God to grant them “that sacred constancy,”
which prevents them from being puffed up with prosperity, nor cast down by adversity.
167
By this emphasis on constancy, it is likely that Beza had in mind those who have
converted to Catholicism. Job’s constancy serves an excellent example for instructing
162
Beza, Jobus, 89.
163
The English version at times uses patience and constancy together, even when the Latin only
has “most constant (constantissimus),” as if the two words go with one another. For example, the Latin “ut
ex ipsius Jobi quamuis inter homines constantissimi exemplo liquet” is translated in the English text as
“Job’s example may suffice who was the most constant and most patient of all men that ever were.” (Beza,
Jobus, 24) “Most patient” is added in by the translator. See also Beza, Jobus, 31 and 244.
164
Beza, Jobus, 24.
165
Beza, Jobus, 31. See also Beza, Jobus, 54: “Immo in hoc nostro iusto Jobo, & pauperrimi simul
& ditissimi exemplum habemus illustre.”
166
Beza, Jobus, 62.
167
Beza, Jobus, 63.
115
believers to stay loyal to the Protestant faith in anticipation of the glorious victory.
Imitating the invincible and sacred constancy of Job keeps the righteous on the right
course of faith, regardless of how miserable and unjust this world may be against the
righteous.
To gain patience and constancy, Beza stresses the role of the Spirit. Beza believed
that both virtues of patience and constancy do not come from Job’s own righteousness but
from the Spirit who gives these gifts unto God’s children for their holy obedience and
worship unto God. This is why he counsels his readers to ask God to grant them patience
and constancy throughout his comments. Making the distinction between pagan virtues
and Christian virtues in the first chapter, he plainly states that “the true virtues of the
righteous” proceed from “special grace” to those who are regenerated and have their
mind renewed by the Spirit and their will emended. These virtues are thus “fruits of a
spiritual person.”
168
The work of the Spirit in the face of trials and challenges is crucial
for Beza. In addition to the Spirit granting “special grace” of true virtues to the righteous,
it is also the Spirit who fights the battle, preserves the faithful until the final victory, and
ultimately crowns them. “The more fitting instruments Satan uses to plunge Job into
Charybdis,” explains Beza, “the more illustrious is the victory of Job through the Spirit of
God.”
169
In another instance, where Beza describes Job’s material and spiritual gifts, he
notes that spiritual gifts come from God’s “special grace,” the very basis for which God
also “crowns” the righteous.
170
Here, Beza’s emphasis upon God’s justice and human
168
Beza, Jobus, 27.
169
Beza, Jobus, 58.
170
Beza, Jobus, 28.
116
righteousness is evident once again. He praises Job and values his virtues, not in and of
themselves but because of the free and special grace attached to them that guarantees
God’s victory. Beza employs Job as a positive example for sixteenth-century believers to
imitate: “By God triumphing over his enemy, Job provides us with a singular example,
not only for confirming God’s goodness but also as a true example of constancy for the
righteous.”
171
Job’s example does not apply to individual believers only but to the community of
believers as well, that is, the church. Beza notes that afflictions are a part of the daily
experience of the church: “… miseries and calamities of this life are inflicted on both the
righteous and the wicked. Therefore, one should not judge the righteousness or
wickedness of anyone based on the prosperous or adverse state of this life. This is proved
to be most true by the example of Job himself, and it is demonstrated daily from it, that
there is no other condition for the true Church in this life.”
172
Similarly, in his comments
on chapter twenty-three, in which Job argues that one should not judge God’s pleasure or
displeasure by their prosperity or adversity, Beza affirms this as most certainly true,
testified in “the histories of all nations and especially the Church.”
173
Thus, instead of
trying to probe into God’s hidden providence, Beza points to the sufficient learning
gained from the following three lessons of Job’s suffering: God’s power in preserving the
righteous, the example of exceptional patience, and finally the glory of God’s own name
171
Beza, Jobus, 244.
172
Beza, Jobus, 250.
173
Beza, Jobus, 210.
117
declared by the defeat of Satan.
174
Here, Job’s patience serves as a model for the Church,
just as it does for each individual believer. Even amid cruel realities and afflictions,
churches must stand firm in patience and constancy, waiting for God to raise them up
victoriously. The following expresses Beza’s theological vision for the church:
[I]t is certain that these[tribulations] can never be completely abolished as
long as this world endures, proved by both experience and reason. Indeed,
the Church has always emerged and will emerge from whatever storms
arise, with the hand of her most powerful and merciful Savior lifting her
up as if from the very depths. Furthermore, if faith were to be completely
destroyed, the Church, that is, the kingdom of Christ on this earth, would
also necessarily be destroyed. Faith, however, comes from hearing the
preached word. It will, therefore, always stand as long as the world stands,
with the proclamation of the saving word, sometimes prominent and
visible to anyone who wishes to behold it; at other times rare, and through
the negligence or wickedness of pastors, and with the spirit of falsehood
occupying the throne, seen only privately among scattered sheep. … Once
the number of the elect is complete and Christ comes for triumph, all that
spiritual administration destined for gathering the elect will undoubtedly
cease at that time, with the Son handing over the peaceful kingdom to God
the Father.
175
The churches of this world experience all kinds of tribulations, as Beza witnesses so very
often in his own context, let alone at the very moment as he sets about to meditate on Job.
Sometimes, the outward appearance of churches seems very weak that sheep must scatter,
as the religious exiles had to flee their homes for the sake of the gospel. Yet, God
preserves the church on this earth, through the preaching of the word, until all people of
faith are gathered and brought to that final and eternal heavenly kingdom. In anticipation
of this glorious state of the church, Beza finds the most wonderful example of patience
and constancy in Job. He urges the church to imitate Job’s example of piety, for the
174
Beza, Jobus, 69.
175
Beza, Jobus, 83-84.
118
righteous may suffer on this earth for the time being but God’s justice prevails in God’s
vindication for those who are “true members of the Church.”
2.6 Conclusion
David J. A. Clines, in his study on Job and the Reformation, argues that the
reformers appropriated Job to represent the psychology and spirituality of their own
experience and piety. He contends, “for both Luther and Calvin the figure of Job models
the psychologically oriented, individualistic, pietistic tendencies in their contemporary
spirituality. For both of them, Job is a lone hero of faith, valiantly wrestling with doubt,
the devil and uncertainty. It is easy to see how their own psychological proclivities
contributed to the fashioning of that image, but harder perhaps to admit that it was their
tradition, their personalities and the spirit of their age, rather than the text of the book of
Job, that determined his configuration.”
176
While this argument may be partially true, in
the sense that the exegetical tasks of the reformers were shaped by the context of their
time, tradition, and spirituality, Clines neglects the ways that the reformers rigorously
engaged the text in their efforts to apply it appropriately to their contemporary
circumstances. The reformers took great pains to find the right meaning of the text in its
literal and historical contexts, although their exact understanding of these approaches
varied by their tradition and confessional divides. This chapter places Beza within the
trajectory of these exegetical endeavors through a study of the methods, themes, and uses
176
David J. A. Clines, “Job and the Spirituality of the Reformation,” in The Bible, the Reformation
and the Church: Essays in Honour of James Atkinson, ed. W. P. Stephens (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1995), 49-72.
119
of his reading of Job to affirm his contribution to a Reformed practices in biblical
interpretation.
Beza understood his task as a biblical exegete to consist in careful study of the
text, as well as faithful applications to his current context. By employing the available
linguistic and textual tools of Hebrew and Greek, Beza defined words as they were used
in the original context, clarified ambiguities in translations and meanings, and explained
them within the history of the entire biblical narrative. His concern, however, was more
than just linguistic or historical, as this study demonstrated. His political context in
Geneva, and the unfolding situation in other European nations, not only influenced his
choice of the book, but also shaped his understanding of the key themes and their
usefulness for churches and believers facing adversities. While Beza continued the
tradition of reading Job in terms of divine providence with Aquinas and Calvin, he
highlighted the themes of God’s justice and human righteousness as the hermeneutical
thrust of Job’s tragedy. Although God may allow the innocent to suffer, it is never for the
sake of giving them over to Satan but always for the benefit of God’s children according
to God’s good and just will. Thus, although Beza acknowledged Job’s faults, he was not
too critical of Job, as Calvin had been. In fact, Beza consistently defended Job’s integrity
and innocence, highlighting the unfortunate external circumstances that led Job to grow
impatient, and framing the life and experience of Job’s suffering as the ongoing conflict
between the flesh and the Spirit, until God finally vindicates the righteous. Through their
shared identity as “true members of the Church,” Job served as a teacher of divine
providence and an example of patience and constancy for scattered believers and
persecuted churches.
120
Beza’s affinity to Job distinguished him from other interpreters, in particular,
Calvin. It has been shown that Calvin held a much higher view of Elihu than Job.
Schreiner observes that “expounding only the literal sense, Calvin did not practice
typology and therefore did not make Job a prophet of Christ or a ‘type’ of the suffering,
martyred, or exiled church.” She further states that “portraying Job as the forerunner or
type of the suffering endured by the sixteenth-century reformed church was clearly not
the primary purpose governing Calvin’s exegesis of the Joban text.”
177
In contrast, Wright
insists the following in his study of Beza: “Job, according to the Reformer, was a type for
Christians who should follow him in his confident trust in the Lord during hardship.
Should his listeners want comfort, they must emulate Job’s quiet confidence in the
Lord.”
178
My study of Beza on the book of Job affirms Wright’s findings. Yet this chapter
offers a perspective to Beza’s reading of Job beyond Wright’s observations, as a study
that highlights Beza’s exegetical concerns as the foundation upon which Beza builds his
applications specific to his context.
In sum, while Beza highlighted similar literal and historical emphases in his Joban
interpretation with Calvin, his political circumstances differed from those of his
predecessor. This difference necessitated Beza as an exegete to apply his readings to
address distinct challenges during the period from 1579 to 1589. At the time of engaging
with the book of Job, Beza’s vision of reform was gripped by his fear that an international
Catholic conspiracy may very well overthrow Protestantism across Europe. Beza’s
concerns were further compounded by missionary activities led by Jesuits and the threat
177
Schreiner, Where Shall Wisdom Be Found?, 7.
178
Wright, Our Sovereign Refuge, 159-160.
121
of the Savoyard invasion of Geneva, which reinforced his suspicions of a Catholic
scheme. Beza’s exegetical endeavors were thus driven by theological and pastoral
considerations within a particular political context, with a central focus on providing
comfort to afflicted churches amidst political turmoil and instructing believers in
navigating adversity by cultivating Christian piety using the example of Job.
122
CHAPTER THREE
Beza’s Reading of Ecclesiastes (1588):
Solomon as a Teacher of Providence and Happiness
3.1 Introduction
In the midst of the myriad political and religious upheavals characterizing the
sixteenth century, Beza endeavored to employ his exegetical works of the Old Testament
poetic books as a means to edify the church, specifically by providing comfort and
cultivating piety among Protestant believers. Through his interpretation of the Psalms,
Beza enabled persecuted churches to resonate with the trials faced by David, thereby
underscoring the role of godly rulers and delineating the distinction between earthly and
heavenly kingdoms. His commentary on Job highlighted Job’s exemplary patience and
constancy as crucial virtues for the righteous to uphold in the face of adversity. In the
hands of Beza, these Old Testament poetic books became powerful and effective tools for
consoling and instructing the church. Following a similar pattern, this chapter analyzes
Beza’s paraphrases of Ecclesiastes to shed light on his exegetical approach as well as the
themes and uses of his interpretation in service of the church. This chapter illuminates
Beza’s reading of Ecclesiastes and its significance for his context as he sought to use
Solomon’s authority for instructing the church on divine providence and eternal
happiness amid the oppressions, sufferings, and miseries of this world.
Within the tradition of reading Ecclesiastes, this wisdom book consistently held a
significant place throughout the early and medieval periods as a resource for teaching
Christians the concept of contemptus mundi, or contempt for the world. Tremper
Longman observes that Ecclesiastes became “a pamphlet advocating an ascetic
123
perspective” and promoted “monastic lifestyle” throughout both the patristic and
medieval eras.
1
During these periods, theologians frequently turned to Ecclesiastes to
guide the church on the benefits of withdrawing oneself from the world, both spiritually
and physically. For instance, Jerome suggested that Ecclesiastes teaches a rejection of
worldly possessions and pursuits, as all worthless in comparison to God.
2
Gregory the
Great, who also endorsed this idea, attempted to resolve the seemingly contrasting
statements in Ecclesiastes – on one hand restraining pleasures of this life but on the other
hand promoting a luscious lifestyle – to argue for the superiority of the former life. For
Gregory, these statements were not inconsistencies but rather reflections of Solomon’s
different personas: “in some, he [Solomon] reproduces the thoughts of one tempted and
still given over to the pleasures of this life; in others, he discusses matters that pertain to
reason and tries to restrain the soul from pleasure.”
3
Gregory placed greater significance
on Solomon’s words that pointed to a life of abstinence, not the voice that spoke to a life
of pleasure. The key to reading Ecclesiastes for Gregory was in discerning the voices of
worldly wisdom and biblical wisdom, both expressed through the words of Solomon.
4
1
T. Longman III, “Ecclesiastes 3: History of Interpretation,” in T. Longman III and P. Enns (eds.),
Dictionary of the Old Testament: Wisdom, Poetry & Writings (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2008),
143-144.
2
Eric S. Christianson, “Ecclesiastes in Premodern Reading: Before 1500 C.E.,” in M. J. Boda, T.
Longman III, and C. G. Rata (eds.), The Words of the Wise are Like Goads: Engaging Qohelet in the 21st
Century (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2013), 30-31. See also St. Jerome, Commentary on Ecclesiastes, ed.
and trans. Richard J. Goodrich and David J. D. Miller (New York: Newman, 2012), 2.24, 54. Jerome
interpreted passages on eating and drinking in Ecclesiastes allegorically as references to the Lord’s Supper.
3
Saint Gregory the Great, Dialogues, trans. Odo John Zimmerman (Washington, DC: Catholic
University of America Press, 2002), 193-194.
4
See also Eric J. Eliason, “Vanitas Vanitatum: ‘Piers Plowman,’ Ecclesiastes, and Contempt of the
World (Ph.D. diss., University of Virginia, 1989), esp. 84-89.
124
In the time of the Reformation, a decisive shift in the reading of Ecclesiastes took
place through the Protestant exegetes, particularly Martin Luther (1483-1546), Philip
Melanchthon (1497-1560), and Johannes Brenz (1499-1570), who considered the
traditional contemptus mundi reading of Ecclesiastes to be an act of dishonoring God’s
good gifts in creation.
5
For example, Luther grieved that this idea polluted the entire
church in the form of “theology of the religious orders or monasteries”:
It was taught that to be a Christian meant to forsake the household, the
political order, even the episcopal (or, rather, the apostolic) office, to flee
to the desert, to isolate oneself from human society, to live in stillness and
silence; for it was impossible to serve God in the world. As though
Solomon was calling “vanity” the very marriage, political office, and
office of the ministry of the Word that he praises here in such a wonderful
way and calls gifts of God!
6
Instead of isolating oneself from the world, Luther contended that each person should
find contentment in the places where they are called to serve, for everyday affairs are
gifts of God.
7
As Wolters nicely summarizes, Luther read Ecclesiastes “to be affirming
rather than denying the positive value of the ordinary affairs of created human life,” and
“thus as constituting a warning against rather than a recommendation for a monastic
withdrawal from such earthly affairs.”
8
The book offered for Luther, counsels on
5
See Al Wolters, “Ecclesiastes and the Reformers,” in M. J. Boda, T. Longman III, and C. G. Rata
(eds.), The Words of the Wise are Like Goads: Engaging Qohelet in the 21st Century (Winona Lake:
Eisenbrauns, 2013), 55-68. Wolters notes that there were only a few commentaries on Ecclesiastes in the
sixteenth century, the most prominent among them written by Luther, Melanchthon, and Brenz. He finds it
intriguing that most prolific biblical commentators of the time, such as Calvin, Beza, Zwingli, Bullinger,
Bucer, Oecolampadius, and Capito never wrote commentaries on Ecclesiastes. He briefly mentions Beza’s
paraphrases of Ecclesiastes but on the grounds that it is not a commentary, he does not consider it for his
overall study of the Reformation reading of Ecclesiastes.
6
LW 15:4.
7
See LW, 15:8. Related to this idea is Luther’s theology of priesthood of all believers and
understanding of vocation.
8
Al Wolters, “Ecclesiastes and the Reformers,” 57.
125
economical and political spheres of life, not despair of human activities.
9
Both studies by
Endel Kallas and Robert Rosin on the Reformation reading of Ecclesiastes provide
helpful insights to understanding the exegetical contributions of Luther, Melanchthon,
and Brenz, particularly concerning the ways in which they used their interpretations in
response to theological challenges against Erasmus’s understanding of free will and
temptations of skepticism.
10
Against this background, Beza’s paraphrases appeared on the scene under the title
Ecclesiastes Solomonis Concio ad Populum habita, in 1588.
11
He indicates that he
prepared this work for publication after having preached on the book twice in the Church
of Geneva.
12
He approaches the book with similar themes as Luther – namely, creation as
God’s gifts and the calling of believers in daily affairs. Unlike Luther, however, who
develops these two emphases within the framework of faith and works relationship, Beza
9
LW 15:7.
10
For studies on Ecclesiastes reading by Luther, Melanchthon, and Brenz, see Endel Kallas,
Ecclesiastes: Traditum et Fides Evangelica: The Ecclesiastes Commentaries of Martin Luther, Philip
Melanchthon, and Johannes Brenz Considered within the History of Interpretation (Ph.D. diss., Graduate
Theological Union, 1979); and Robert Rosin, Reformers, the Preacher and Skepticism: Luther, Brenz,
Melanchthon and Ecclesiastes (Mainz: P. von Zabern, 1997). Kallas demonstrates the decisive shift put
forth by these three theologians in their interpretations of Ecclesiastes in the context of the patristic and
medieval readings of the book. Rosin examines their contributions in the context of the various strands of
skepticism that threatened the Protestant faith in the sixteenth century.
11
Beza, Ecclesiastes Solomonis Concio ad Populum habita, de vita sic instituenda, ut ad veram
aeternamque felicitatem perveniatur: Theodori Bezae paraphrasi illustrata (Geneva: Jean le Preux, 1588).
[Hereafter abbreviated Ecclesiastes]
12
Beza, “Epistola” in Ecclesiastes, 13. The dedicatory letter is also found in CB 29:243-263
(appendix XI). I refer to the copy from Ecclesiastes Solomonis Concio in order to highlight the close
connection between the letter and Beza’s paraphrases on Ecclesiastes. [Hereafter cited “Epistola”] See also
Eugénie Droz, “L’Ecclésiaste de Théodore de Bèze et ses éditions allemandes (1599 et 1605),” Revue
d’histoire et de philosophie religieuses, 47 (1967), 345-346. Droz speculates that the French sermons on
Ecclesiastes may have been published alongside these Latin paraphrases.
126
develops his readings within the two distinct Reformed theological concepts: divine
providence and the highest good. He writes in the first sentence of the dedicatory letter,
Absolutely necessary for establishing a right way of life, it is required that
one comes to a definite and well-investigated decision concerning two
questions: one of which inquires what must be established about God’s
providence, and the other investigates what is the highest good and what is
the method of attaining it.
13
Beza regards Ecclesiastes as serving an important function in teaching these two
important Reformed emphases for the edification of the church. He thereby regrets that
this book is not taught in the church as often as it should: “it is surprising that this truly
golden and so necessary book is so rarely read in the church, which ought to be worn out
with hands day and night, and so not only be read but also learned by heart.”
14
To Beza,
Ecclesiastes is a very practical book, consisting of objectives distinct from other books of
the Bible, offering guidance on how one finds order, trust, and happiness in life filled
with oppressions, sufferings, and miseries on earth. Given this context, it is surprising
that Wolters suggests Beza’s paraphrases to be “a return to the patristic and medieval
reading of the book” and proposes that Beza does not acquaint nor interact with “the
works on Ecclesiastes by Luther, Brenz, or Melanchthon.”
15
My study demonstrates
otherwise that Beza interpreted Ecclesiastes against the ascetic tendencies prior to the
Reformation and further developed his reading in conversation with other contemporaries
of his time to reflect Reformed distinctions of exegesis, highlighting teachings on divine
providence and the highest good as the overarching framework for interpreting the book.
13
Beza, “Epistola,” 3.
14
Beza, “Epistola,” 11-12.
15
Wolters, “Ecclesiastes and the Reformers,” 67.
127
This chapter is largely divided into three sections. The first part examines Beza’s
methodological aspects of Ecclesiastes interpretation, in which I demonstrate Beza’s
commitment to literal and historical exegesis, displayed in his particular attention to
Solomon’s authorship and emphasis on the centrality of authorial intention. He
establishes Solomon’s authorship on the foundation of divine authority and highlights
Solomon’s position and experience as a king to draw the plain meaning of the text. The
second section examines the overarching themes of Beza’s Ecclesiastes reading: divine
providence and the highest good. These two themes not only echo his emphases from his
readings of the Psalms and Job but also highlight the distinct teachings emphasized in
Reformed practices of reading Scripture. The third section analyzes the ways in which
Beza draws practical implications from Ecclesiastes for comforting and instructing
believers of his context, including lessons directed toward kings and princes but also to
the people on how to exercise wisdom in their relationships to civil authorities,
neighbors, and ultimately God in a world that is full of injustice, suffering, and
oppressions. The aim of this chapter is to explore methodologically how Beza establishes
Solomon’s authorship and highlights authorial intent from which he draws themes of
divine providence and the highest good, as well as investigate practically how he applies
its teachings to speak into his political and religious contexts. This chapter argues that
Beza retains his commitments to literal and historical exegesis by highlighting the
centrality of authorial intention and consistently employs his exegesis for the benefit of
the church by particularly applying the paraphrases to his political context. As this work
has largely been overlooked in Bezan studies, I seek to fill that gap by providing an
analysis of Beza’s reading within the larger exegetical and theological program that he
128
sought to promote for the church and believers of his time in connection with the
exegetical patterns and themes demonstrated in his other writings of the Old Testament
poetic literature.
16
3.2 Solomon the King as the Author and Context of Ecclesiastes
During the early modern period, biblical exegetes began to raise questions on
Solomon’s authorship of Ecclesiastes. Not only is there no specific indication in the text
that Solomon is the preacher but also Scripture does not record any signs of his
repentance after his fall to idolatry and marriage to many foreign wives. Scripture only
affirms the sinful end of Solomon, whose heart, according to 1 Kings 11:4, was not
“wholly true to the Lord his God.” Biblical interpreters were thus led to ask questions
concerning Solomon’s authority and his reliability as the preacher of Ecclesiastes.
17
Luther, for instance, addresses this issue by distinguishing between Solomon’s authorship
and his personal experience:
I think that these words were spoken by Solomon in some assembly of his
retinue, perhaps after dinner or even during dinner to some great and
prominent men who were present. He spoke this way after he had thought
long and hard to himself about the condition and the vanity of human
affairs, or rather of human affections. Then he poured this out to those
who were present, as usually happens, and afterwards what he said was
put down and assembled by the leaders of the community or of the church.
… This is, then, a public sermon which they heard from Solomon, on the
basis of which it seemed appropriate to call this book Qoheleth – not in the
16
The only article devoted to Beza’s paraphrases of Ecclesiastes that I have come across is
Eugénie Droz’s article, “L’Ecclésiaste de Théodore de Bèze et ses éditions allemandes (1599 et 1605).”
17
At what stage of his life Solomon authored Ecclesiastes was a looming concern for many
interpreters. For example, Sebastian Münster suggested that Solomon wrote Song of Songs in his minority,
Proverbs in his old age, and Ecclesiastes during the prime of life. On the other hand, Johannes Piscator
argued that Solomon wrote Ecclesiastes in his old age after his repentance and conversion to testify his
experience. See their excerpts in RCS 9: 208, 212.
129
sense that Solomon himself was a preacher but that this book was
preached as though it had been a public sermon.
18
By distancing Solomon’s words from Solomon’s history and experience, Luther attributes
the original source of Ecclesiastes to Solomon while preserving the reliability and
canonicity of the book. In this approach, however, the text loses its historical basis, as
Solomon’s words are taken out from his actual history. As Rosin notes, Luther is not
bothered that Solomon’s words may have come at a later time as long as Solomon speaks
the “divine message of sin and grace, of law and gospel.”
19
For Beza, however, historical
context of the human author takes great priority in his exegetical practice, as previous
chapters have demonstrated. He places the plain meaning of the text primarily within the
literal and historical contexts of the human author. Taking into account the exegetical
difficulties of Ecclesiastes, Beza first establishes Solomon’s authorship on the basis of
divine authorship and draws attention to the authorial intention by highlighting
Solomon’s experiences as a king to be the proper historical and literal context to shape
the book’s meaning.
Beza does not dispute Solomon’s authorship of Ecclesiastes. Although he does not
name Solomon per se throughout the paraphrases and only refers to him as ‘the Preacher,’
his identification of Solomon as not only the preacher but also the author of Ecclesiastes
18
LW 15:12. See also LW 35:263: “Now this book was certainly not written or set down by King
Solomon with his own hand. Instead scholars put together what others had heard from Solomon’s lips. …
That is to say, certain persons selected by the kings and the people were at that time appointed to fix and
arrange this and other books that were handed down by Solomon, the one shepherd.” For a detailed study
on Luther’s view of authorship, see Scott Jones, “Solomon’s Table Talk: Martin Luther on the Authorship
of Ecclesiastes,” Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 28, no. 1 (2014): 81-90.
19
Rosin, Reformers, the Preacher, and Skepticism, 116-117.
130
is evident, particularly in the descriptions used in his dedicatory letter.
20
He refers to
Solomon with these expressions: “what is said by Solomon,” “such as is described here
by the wisest Solomon,” and “this most precious writing of Solomon.”
21
Solomon
functions for Beza as the speaker and writer of Ecclesiastes. Yet most significantly, Beza
associates the authorship of Solomon with the authority of the Spirit, the divine author.
Following his comment that Ecclesiastes is one of the sacred books of Scripture that
communicates the truth and refutes falsehood with its own set of distinct teachings, he
asserts that all these teachings have been “dictated (dictatus) by the Holy Spirit and
received (exceptus) by Solomon.”
22
Beza masterfully draws on the divine authorship of
the Holy Spirit to secure human authorship as well as establish canonicity of the book.
Ecclesiastes is not Solomon’s words but words “dictated” to him by the Holy Spirit. The
questions of authorship and authority are not two but one for Beza. As such, he depicts
Solomon in Eccl. 1:1 as a “divinely appointed voice” by which he rules Jerusalem with
both holiness and wisdom.
23
Similarly, explaining 1:12 (“I, the preacher, king over Israel
in Jerusalem”), he highlights the authority of Solomon by portraying him as the king who
sits on the “throne of truth.”
24
This authority serves as the basis on which Beza invites
20
Although Beza understood the author of Ecclesiastes and identified ‘the Preacher’ with
Solomon, he does not refer to Solomon by name in the paraphrases itself. I think this reflects Beza’s
attention to the intent of the original author who also does not name ‘the Preacher’ by name throughout
Ecclesiastes. But I denote ‘the Preacher’ in Beza’s paraphrases as Solomon in this dissertation to make the
connection more explicit.
21
Beza, “Epistola,” 12, 13, 16.
22
Beza, “Epistola,” 12.
23
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 1:1.
24
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 1:12.
131
people of all ranks to listen to Solomon’s words on the “most necessary matters of all
things, both in public and in private.”
25
As he concludes his paraphrases, Beza reiterates
the divine nature of Solomon’s wisdom: “For I have diligently studied other teachings
also, and not a few of them, whereby according to the wisdom God has given to me, your
preacher among others.”
26
The key concerning Solomon’s wisdom and his reliability as
the preacher derives not from Solomon himself but from God who gives him the wisdom
to instruct people to the truth.
Solomon’s authorship and authority thus are not of his own but are divinely
appointed by the Holy Spirit who is the divine author. In making this connection, Beza
does not probe further into Solomon’s reliability or authorship. In fact, he accepts
Solomon’s authorship of all three books – Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs –
without much difficulty, and presents each of the three books as having its own distinct
function in guiding believers to the truth. While he characterizes Solomon in the Proverbs
as a master instructing the “true conduct of this life” to students, he draws upon an image
of Solomon in Ecclesiastes as a king preaching to his congregation a more advanced truth
from the top of a mountain:
[I]n Ecclesiastes, he [Solomon] led us from the flat land to a high
mountain, showing us from an elevated place the various twists and turns
by which all men go astray, each in their own way. Through the labyrinths,
he revealed the true path to avoid being ensnared by the vanity of this
world and to use this life in such a way that it becomes the path leading us
to true and lasting happiness.
27
25
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 1:1.
26
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 12:13.
27
Beza, Cantique, 17-18. In this same paragraph, Beza further points to the Song of Songs as a
most advanced teaching that follows the Proverbs and Ecclesiastes: “Mais finalement en ce Cantique ceux
qu’il a ainsi doublement instruits, sont esleuez par lui, comme iusques par dessus les nues, & comme ravis
à la consideration des biens celestes, comme s’ils estoyent desia habitans des cieux: ou pour le moins si
132
Solomon is guided by the masterplan and inspiration of the divine author to teach
appropriate truth according to the purpose of each book. These evidences indicate that
Beza’s understanding of human author and divine author goes hand in hand to establish
the foundation for Solomon’s authorship of Ecclesiastes.
In establishing Solomon’s authorship, however, Beza does not simply neglect the
issue of chracter in the person of Solomon. He addresses the question of whether
Solomon in fact repented.
28
Beza writes, “Solomon did all things very wisely and
religiously at the beginning; but afterwards failing of himself, he became the author of
the greatest calamities, both for himself and the entire people.”
29
Yet, at the same time, he
makes an effort to redeem Solomon’s status as a biblical author by suggesting that
Solomon could have repented in his old age despite the lack of such narrative in the
Scripture:
Although, as is clear from his writing, he seemed to have returned at an
advanced age, not only restoring himself but also earnestly striving to
restore the people to the right path. But nothing of the kind is declared
about him in the sacred writings, and what people complain about the
heavy yoke of Solomon to his immediate successor, Rehoboam, are in no
way fitting to him who had seriously repented. It is certainly probable that,
desia ils frappoyent à la porte d’iceux (18).” This understanding of spiritual progress among Solomon’s
three wisdom books is not a new concept in the history of biblical interpretation. In fact, Origen first
proposed this idea in his prologue to commentary on the Song of Songs. This idea was then further
developed and passed on to Jerome, Alcuin, the glossa ordinaria, and Hugh of St. Victor. (See Eliason,
“Vanitas Vanitatum,” 51-55) Although it is difficult to trace where Beza learned of this idea, it is clear that
Beza was very much aware of the exegetical tradition of Ecclesiastes.
28
See Eliason, “Vanitas Vanitatum,” 45-46. Eliason notes that since the patristic era, the Hebrew
tradition considered Ecclesiastes to be an act of Solomon’s penance. The Jewish scholars believed that
during his old age, Solomon journeyed from one place to another atoning for his sins while writing
Ecclesiastes. Jerome incorporated these rabbinic sources into his own understanding of Solomon’s sin and
authority.
29
Beza, “Epistola,” 14.
133
in the end, even in the last days of his reign, he was more wise concerning
others than himself.
30
Beza highlights the ambiguous ending of Solomon’s life that perhaps it could be read in
both directions – that is, as signs of his return at an old age or as his persistence in
idolatry.
31
He does not provide a conclusive answer, as the Scripture does not record
Solomon’s repentance, but he certainly leaves that reconciled ending as a possibility.
Regardless of whether he was restored to faith, Beza affirms Solomon’s authorship by
making a subtle distinction between Solomon’s wisdom for others and for himself.
Solomon may not have been as wise to seriously repent, but he was still capable of
proclaiming wisdom for others. In other words, Solomon’s lack of wisdom for himself
does not exclude him from his calling to teach wisdom to others. For Beza, this is
possible because there is a divine author who divinely appoints Solomon to speak God’s
words of truth. Human authorship and authority is fully dependent on divine authorship
and authority.
32
30
Beza, “Epistola,” 14. Here, Beza echoes Nicholas of Lyra’s treatment of Solomon’s repentance
to be incomplete: “From this verse [Eccl. 2:12] and others like it, certain men say that Solomon did
penance at the end of his life, but this penance does not seem to have been sufficient or complete, as I have
said more fully in Proverbs 30.” As quoted and translated in Eliason, “Vanitas Vanitatum,” 51.
31
See Beza, Cantique, 17. In his discussion on Solomon, he suggests the possiblity that Solomon
may have repented in his old age, even though Scripture makes no explicit mention of it and his idolatries
continued for some time after him.
32
See Eliason, “Vanitas Vanitatum,” 49-50, in which Eliason demonstrates Bonaventure as
proposing a similar argument. Rosin also observes a similar connection between the authority of Solomon
and the validity of the text in Luther: “For Luther, the text of Ecclesiastes and the author is crucial. The
text’s validity rests on the right of the author to speak as God’s representative and on the content of the
message conveyed … Thus Solomon becomes an important character for Luther, first as a spokesman and,
on another level, in serving as messenger he also demonstrates a proper fulfilling of a divinely given
vocation …” (Rosin, Reformers, the Preacher, and Skepticism, 115-116).
134
Having established Solomon’s authorship, then, Beza demonstrates his
commitment to literal and historical exegesis by highlighting the authorial intention as the
central interpretive context for reading Ecclesiastes. For Beza, Solomon’s context as the
king takes priority for his interpretation. He achieves his twofold goals for writing
paraphrases on Ecclesiastes – namely, “to explain the author’s meaning more fully” and
“to show the sequence and connection of the parts of the entire text” – by using King
Solomon’s life and experience as the proper ground for finding the plain meaning.
33
Hence, commenting on 1:1 (“These are the words of the Preacher, the son of David, the
king of Jerusalem”), Beza places greater emphasis on Solomon’s identity as the king over
his identities as the Preacher or the son of David.
34
He charges all people to listen to
Solomon’s words who is not just any preacher but the king himself. “It is the king,”
declares Beza, “who rules Jerusalem with both holiness and wisdom.”
35
Solomon’s life as
a king is exemplified in all his abundant wealth and extravagant surroundings. More
33
Beza, “Epistola,” 13.
34
The idea of king Solomon preaching is an interesting one. Before the early modern era, the
distinction between the role and office of Solomon had not been emphasized as much. One finds instances,
for example, in the case of Gregory Thaumaturgos, where Solomon is identified as a prophet who speaks
about the apocalyptic vision of Ecclesiastes. (See Christianson, “Ecclesiastes in Premodern Reading,” 26)
With the rise of more critical reading in the early modern period, however, whether preaching is part of
Solomon’s role as king gets called into question, most notably by Martin Luther. Rosin notes that Luther
considered the term “preacher” to be unfitting for Solomon since he was a king, not a priest. At this point,
Luther differed from Brenz and Melanchthon who thought that as a civil and supreme leader of the
Israelites, Solomon also had a certain priestly role that would allow him to be a preacher. (See Rosin,
Reformers, the Preacher, and Skepticism, 117) Writing in the late sixteenth century, Jean de Serres explains
this as follows in his commentary on Ecclesiastes: “Nor did Solomon confuse the distinct office of a king
with that of a preacher. For although the sacred history does relate that Solomon preached at the dedication
of the temple, this was something extraordinary, going beyond the general duty of a king to uphold and
propagate true doctrine – and yet not so far as to violate the limits of his calling.” (Excerpt taken from RCS
9:228) Given this context, it is intereting that Beza, in his comments on Eccl. 1:1, describes that Solomon
was appointed the king but not to priesthood. By adding this distinction, it seems Beza is picking up on the
language and the issue under discussion.
35
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 1:1.
135
specifically, God’s gift of wisdom to Solomon provides an important historical context
for Beza’s understanding of the authorial intention in Ecclesiastes. For Beza, Solomon
speaks as a king who possessed far superior wisdom than anyone else to explore all
knowledge and secrets of nature on earth. No one under heaven has “searched out the
causes and effects of all things” in his will and mind as diligently and with great effort
than Solomon..
36
In case someone suspects that Solomon may have lacked intelligence or
attention, Beza writes that Solomon has “surpassed far and wide even the most eminent”
in his wisdom and knowledge.
37
Beza reiterates Solomon’s diligent pursuit of knowledge
in human affairs: “Listen to what I, the preacher, explain to you in plain words what I
have discovered after most diligent examination of all particular matters”; “I endeavored
with great study to comprehend the reason of all worldly affairs and examine all those
things in which people exhaust themselves so anxiously.”
38
Beza grounds his
interpretation on the basis of Solomon’s appeal to his own experiences: “Could anyone
have experienced this better than I, who lacked nothing to indulge in?”
39
Yet, Beza
underscores that “in such splendor and abundance,” Solomon “never departed from the
office of a wise king.”
40
By this comment, Beza elevates Solomon’s authority and
reliability in instructing people with his wisdom, which again is not built on Solomon
himself but on its divinely given nature.
36
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 1:13.
37
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 1:16.
38
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 7:27, 8:16.
39
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 2:25.
40
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 2:9.
136
Certainly, Beza considers Solomon to be a king with many flaws despite his
special calling as the author of Ecclesiastes. In drawing attention to the authorial intent,
Beza portrays Solomon’s failures as constituting his overall experience as a king.
Commenting on 7:25, Beza writes of Solomon that in his careful search to understand
human affairs, he went as far as to investigate “human wickedness” and “their
stupidity.”
41
Beza’s consideration of both Solomon’s experiences in history as well as
divine authority is most clearly represented in his paraphrases of 7:23:
And I [Solomon] ask that you trust me with your experience. For I do not
suggest anything to you here that I have not learned by the wisdom that
was divinely bestowed upon me. I confess this without shame so that I
may instruct others by exposing my own error. Relying on that wisdom
bestowed upon me by God, to which I had added my own endeavors, I
seemed truly wise to myself. But how false that was. For the more I
believed that I had come nearer to wisdom, it further withdrew from me.
Here, Beza draws attention to Solomon’s experiences in which he committed sinful
actions of idolatry and marrying foreign wives. At the same time, by highlighting that
Solomon’s wisdom comes from God, Beza not only preserves Solomon’s authority to
instruct even through his own errors but also divine purpose in using Solomon as a tool
for conveying the truth. For Beza, this divine authority eclipses the question of whether
Solomon repented, as Solomon’s qualifications and experiences all take shape under the
divine purpose of instructing God’s people with the necessary truth. The human author’s
intention is thus intimately tied to the divine author. In this framework, Beza reveals
Solomon’s intent for writing Ecclesiastes: “Ultimately, I wanted to understand which way
of life would make someone truly happy while pursuing the course of this life on earth.”
42
41
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 7:25.
42
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 2:3.
137
Similarly, drawing upon Solomon’s experiences as a king who has diligently investigated
all human affairs with most abundant wealth and greatest wisdom, Beza indicates that the
author’s purpose in Ecclesiastes is to explain what is “most desirable of all”: “the true and
certain opinion concerning the attainment of the highest good.”
43
In all, methodologically,
Beza achieves his goal to explain the author’s meaning of Ecclesiastes and understand
each part of the text in connection to the entire book by highlighting King Solomon’s
experience as the proper ground for determining the authorial intention and thereby
establishes Solomon’s authorship and reliability upon divine authority.
3.3 Solomon as the Teacher of God’s Providence and the Highest Good
Beza neither follows the traditional contemptus mundi reading of Ecclesiastes nor
utilizes the Lutheran lens to interpret this book in terms of law and gospel or faith and
works. He highlights two themes in continuity with his emphases from the Psalms and
Job interpretations as well as with Reformed distinctions: first, God’s providence and
second, the highest good and the method of attaining it. These two themes provide
evidence of Beza’s interactions with particularly two other theologians of his time, Philip
Melanchthon and Jean de Serres (1540-1598). With Melanchthon, Beza reads
Ecclesiastes to be primarily about divine providence, while with Serres, he interprets the
book in terms of the highest good. Although these interpreters share the same emphases
as the overarching themes of Ecclesiastes, Beza employs these two teachings with a
strong urge to use them for comforting persecuted churches and afflicted believers, rather
43
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 12:14.
138
than to explain the doctrines themselves. This approach compares with Melanchthon
whose primary aim was to attack those who doubt divine providence through his
exposition of divine providence. Melanchthon writes, “[A]fter the reader of these
sermons of Solomon has considered the counsels this book contains, they will know that
this whole book, which is titled Ecclesiastes, is primarily concerned with affirming the
doctrine of providence. … [I]t asserts God’s providence against the Epicureans,
Pyrrhonians, Stoics, and other thinkers who seek to undermine belief in providence.”
44
For Serres, attention to the theme of highest good is important because those who read
Ecclesiastes to be primarily about the doctrine of providence do not bring out the full
sense of the text. Serres argues,
Therefore, I take the main point of this discussion to be the highest good,
brilliantly expounded by comparison with its opposite. For although
happiness is the chief and highest end of our whole life, and all people
strive for happiness with their entire will and devotion, yet despite the
common agreement and desire for this same thing there are so many and
conflicting opinions among all sorts of people that in the meantime the
greatest part are led far away from happiness. Therefore, it is necessary
that clear teaching should be set down concerning true happiness, in which
we can rest with certainty, so that we do not cling to an image or shadow
of happiness instead of the real thing.
45
Beza draws upon both interpreters in presenting divine providence and the highest good
to be the essential teachings taught by Solomon in Ecclesiastes. Hence, Wolters is
inaccurate when he notes that Beza reads Ecclesiastes as a return to the patristic and
medieval interpretations and that he does not interact with works on Ecclesiastes by
44
Melanchthon, CR 14:94, as quoted in RCS 9:210-211.
45
Serres, Commentarius, in Solomonis Ecclesiasten, 5-8, as quoted in RCS 9:211-212.
139
Luther, Brenz, or Melanchthon.
46
Although Beza only mentions Melanchthon and John
Mercier by name in reference to Ecclesiastes interpretation, his attention to these two
particular topics serves as evidence that he develops his exegetical themes in interaction
with other exegetes of his time. Against this background, this section examines the ways
in which Beza develops divine providence and the highest good from his reading of
Ecclesiastes.
3.3.1 God’s Providence
Since his paraphrases of Ecclesiastes is not a theological treatise on divine
providence, Beza does not provide an extensive doctrinal explanation on this particular
topic. Rather, he uses the text as his starting point to discuss this theme whenever he
considers that it is the primary intention of the human author. Before exploring the text
itself, however, it is first necessary to note that there is a particular context to his reading
of divine providence in Ecclesiastes – namely, those philosophers who err concerning the
doctrine and those skeptics who doubt God’s governance of this world. For Beza,
Ecclesiastes offers an opportunity for correcting false philosophical ideas and delineating
proper understanding of divine providence, not for the sake of engaging in polemics but
for the sake of guiding the church toward trusting in God’s most certain control over this
world.
Beza’s dedicatory letter provides the background to his teaching on providence in
Ecclesiastes. He laments that there are so many false teachings concerning God’s
46
Wolters, “Ecclesiastes and the Reformers,” 67.
140
governance of this world when the whole universe proclaims God to be the creator and
requires God’s support for its very sustainment.
47
Beza boldly states that removing God
from human affairs negates possibilities for any piety or religion, which then
“necessarily” takes away all matters of “faith, mode of human society, and the supreme
virtue of justice” in this world.
48
He names the main culprits of this false belief: the
Epicureans who pretend God does not exist and only seek pleasure; the Stoics who bind
God to the “chains of secondary causes”; the Peripatetics who only acknowledge
providence over general matters; and others who claim that God “borrows” from the
“anticipated secondary causes” the causes and reasons for executing divine decrees.
49
Beza bemoans, “Where does this so intolerable audacity come from?”
50
The primary
cause of this impious thought, observes Beza, lies in human reliance on their own reason
and knowledge for comprehending worldly matters. He further notes that this impiety can
be so deceptive, even appearing in forms of religion: “The wisdom of the flesh is so
deceptive and insidious, assuming the guise of piety. Satan himself can transform into an
angel of light. Therefore, we must be cautious about that most arrogant curiosity, daring
to investigate and even judge what we should rather adore.”
51
This warning against
curiosity echoes a point Beza also highlights in his Job interpretation – namely that unlike
47
Beza, “Epistola,” 7-8.
48
Beza, “Epistola,” 8. In making this statement, Beza quotes Cicero: “Quorum si vera sententia
est, inquit recte Cicero, quae potest esse pietas, quae sanctitas, quae religio? Pietate vero adversus Deum
sublata fides etiam & societas humani generis & una excelletissima virtus Iustitia, tollatur, necesse est.”
49
Beza, “Epistola,” 8.
50
Beza, “Epistola,” 8.
51
Beza, “Epistola,” 9.
141
Job’s three friends who attempt to measure the wisdom and justice of God according to
their human understanding, we should adore the Lord’s secrets with reverence rather than
curiously scrutinize them.
52
Against such opinions that rise from human arrogance, Beza employs Solomon’s
words to describe proper understanding of God’s providence. Drawing on 3:1 (“For
everything there is a season and a time for every matter under heaven”), Beza articulates
that in all matters of life, including their beginnings and endings, “divine providence has
prescribed its opportune time, on which depends the successful outcome of all of them:
and which God himself controls most freely, but no mortal can either delay or hasten.”
53
God freely controls all matters of human affairs including human birth and death (3:2),
unnatural deaths due to external forces and recovery from illness (3:3), weeping and
rejoicing (3:4), building and unbuilding, marrying and having children (3:5), acquiring
gains in business and incurring losses (3:6), sewing and tearing apart clothing, speaking
and keeping silence (3:7), forming friendship and recognizing enemies, and peace and
war (3:8). While there is a divine timing for all these aspects of human existence, Beza
particularly highlights in commenting on 3:3 that at certain times in life, people die by
“thousands of deadly accidents” and “external forces,” while at other times, people
escape dangers or recover from deadly diseases.
54
These explanations allude to the
52
Beza, Jobus, 16. Many of the points that Beza highlights in Ecclesiastes, particularly on divine
providence, prosperity of the wicked against adversity of the righteous, and the dangers of arrogant
curiosity align with his emphases from his Job interpretation. This is probably the reason for Beza’s
publishing his Ecclesiastes paraphrases with Job commentary when the latter was printed a year after in
1589.
53
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 3:1.
54
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 3:3.
142
threats, wars, and plagues that concerned the people of Beza’s time. Yet, his reason for
outlining the details of human tragedies is clear: there is an “inexplicable counsel of God”
governing all events of life beyond human control.
55
This understanding offers Beza the
greatest assurance since God knows and controls all things according to his perfect free
will beyond the reach of human knowledge and understanding. Beza writes, “God, the
most wise and powerful creator and governor of all things, created all things in a most
beautiful order and predetermined opportune times for each, in which nothing is
lacking.”
56
In the context of Ecclesiastes, Beza highlights the firm and certain nature of
divine providence over against the fleeting and uncertain nature of this world. Such
unstable nature is encapsulated in Solomon’s repeated word vanity. Beza defines “vanity”
in terms of the “unstable, transient, vanishing, and empty” nature of world affairs.
57
He
repeats this understanding at the end of Ecclesiastes (12:12), identifying “vanity” with
“transience and emptiness.”
58
Not only are the things in themselves vain, but Beza
explains that “the pursuit of seeking for something stable and permanent” is also vain, for
nothing in human affairs stays or lasts.
59
All human actions of chasing after worldly
things thinking that one can find stability in them can only end in vain. Beza notes on 1:4
55
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 3:3.
56
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 3:11.
57
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 1:2.
58
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 12:12. Beza is not the first to interpret vanity in these terms, for theologians
like Brenz had also highlighted the void and emptiness of all things. On the other hand, Serres,
understanding vanity in the context of his emphasis on the highest good, defined it as human pride of those
who seek human happiness in human things. See RCS 9:218.
59
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 1:2.
143
that there is nothing more foolish than trying “to find something stable and enduring to
rely on” when human life itself is “uncertain and fleeting.”
60
He states that the reversed
fate of the righteous and the wicked in this world offers the “most compelling argument
for the uncertain and fickle nature of human affairs.”
61
Solomon’s teaching on divine
providence in Ecclesiastes carries great significance for Beza because God’s governance
is the only certain and stable principle in this world. What is unclear to humans is most
clear and certain to God. Drawing on 3:14 (“I perceived that whatever God does endures
forever”), Beza contends that “no matter how unclear it may be to us” and “even though
it may not always be evident to us,” God’s decrees will always stand “firm.”
62
Likewise,
in 8:6-7, comparing the uncertain knowledge that people have of the future, he maintains
that all outcomes of future events necessarily depend on God’s most certain appointed
time and manner.
63
As God is the source of all things and decrees all things according to
divine plan, Beza insists that all human ability to perform a specific task, the execution of
that task, and the benefits that result from it must be attributed to God alone.
64
For Beza,
God’s governance of all things according to God’s wisdom and plan provides the sure
foundation for living in the world full of uncertainties.
60
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 1:4.
61
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 8:14.
62
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 3:14.
63
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 8:6-7.
64
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 9:11.
144
3.3.2 The Highest Good
Beza further considers that the plain meaning of the text prompts a reading of
Ecclesiastes in terms of the highest good and the ways to attain it. Similar to his
discussion on divine providence, Beza draws attention to a particular philosophical
context, in which a proper understanding of the highest good needs to be clarified on the
basis of biblical truth. He begins with the premise that all human beings, by their
common nature, necessarily seek a certain notion of good as opposed to evil and desire
happiness as opposed to misery.
65
The fall of humanity, however, has brought upon itself
confusion and corruption distorting all understanding about good and evil in this world.
66
Beza argues that people have deviated from what is “truly desiring good” and what is
“truly avoiding evil.”
67
Citing Augustine as a reference, he notes that there are as many as
288 different opinions, not yet settled by the philosophers to this day, on what is disgrace
and what is honorable, which ultimately points to the question concerning the highest
good.
68
Of these “cattle of philosophers,” as Jerome calls it, some locate this highest good
within the body and things related to the body, while others place it in the mind.
69
While
the Stoics place the highest good as inherent in virtue itself, the Peripatetics find it in the
practice of virtues in moral and intellectual spheres.
70
Nevertheless, they all err, argues
65
Beza, “Epistola,” 4.
66
Beza, “Epistola,” 3-4.
67
Beza, “Epistola,” 4.
68
Beza, “Epistola,” 6.
69
Beza, “Epistola,” 6.
70
Beza, “Epistola,” 6.
145
Beza, by positing that these virtues “come from natural principles and can be perfected in
this life through proper education and long practice” without divine special
benevolence.
71
They foolishly conclude with their own reason and knowledge that their
ultimate goal is to achieve true happiness in this life. Thus, for Beza, the question of the
highest good is closely related to the attainment of blessed life and true happiness. Where
people place the highest good is where they believe that true happiness lies. Beza
concludes that throughout the “writings of profane authors,” we hear those “dreadful
cries of desperate men” as well as their false boasting about their virtues and their utterly
vain hopes of “blessed immortality” that arise from their “ignorance of the highest good
and how to attain it.”
72
To Beza, the answer to this fundamental question, which all philosophers have
failed to provide, is most clearly presented in Ecclesiastes through King Solomon whose
God-given knowledge and wisdom enabled him to arrive at this biblical truth. As he has
noted in the errors of philosophers, the highest good and the attainment of true happiness
do not reside in worldly affairs or human nature. In fact, due to the corrupt nature of this
world, Solomon testifies that the more one searches for true happiness within, the more
one falls into that most troubling state.
73
Beza renders 3:11, where Solomon declares that
God placed eternity into people’s hearts, as a reference to God’s judgment on human
minds with the “delusion” that this world is within their grasp.
74
The central issue is in
71
Beza, “Epistola,” 6.
72
Beza, ”Epistola,” 7.
73
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 1:15.
74
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 3:11. It is interesting to note that exegetes rendered the “eternity” that God
placed into people’s hearts differently based on their overall theme. For example, Luther interpreted this
146
understanding that true happiness is not found in human virtues or knowledge in this
uncertain and fleeting world; it is found beyond this life in God’s certain and eternal
kingdom. For Beza then, until the faithful comes to experience complete happiness found
beyond this temporal world according to God’s opportune time, worship and hearing
God’s word take primary importance on this earth, through which believers are able to
foretaste the true and eternal happiness. Beza interprets Solomon’s words in 5:1 (“Guard
your steps when you go to the house of God; to draw near to listen is better than the
sacrifice offered by fools”) as an opportunity for driving home the importance of worship
as a place to find true happiness in this world:
If you wish to understand the path to follow in this life and attain true
happiness beyond this world, remember first of all that these truths are not
learned in the schools of men but elsewhere, namely in the place chosen
and preserved by the Lord Himself. Therefore, you must approach it but as
is fitting. As you go there, consider repeatedly where you are going and
whom you are going to: and do not imitate these fools who, as if God
needed their offerings, think they have performed their duty when they
have loaded the altars with gifts. For it is not for this reason that sacrifices
are instituted, as if men reconcile or merit by gifts given to God: neither to
add anything to God but to receive from him, his house should be
approached, namely, so that you may hear and understand the true wisdom
resounding there.
75
positively to mean that God gives the world into the hearts of humanity “so that they can use them joyfully
and with pleasure and so that they have fun and delight from it (LW 15:53).” This very much contrasts with
Beza’s negative understanding of “eternity” as human delusion, placed as a result of God’s judgment after
the Fall. Serres shared a similar approach with Beza, insisting that such positive rendering is an incorrect
interpretation of the words and the meaning of this passage. Rather, he argued that people’s hearts are filled
with “human vanity of making for themselves an idol.” (Serres, Commentarius, in Solomonis Ecclesiasten,
203-6, as quoted in RCS 9:243-244)
75
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 5:1. Compare this to Serres’ comments on the same verse: “It starts not only
a new argument but an entirely new topic – indeed, the most important topic in the whole book, as it deals
with true happiness. With the intention of urging this and setting it within an earnest fear of God (that is,
true piety), he sets down a necessary preface, and diligently teaches how godliness ought to be set forth, so
that instead of true religion we should not embrace its naked shadow and show. … To ‘take heed of your
steps when you enter the house of God’ is to worship God with a pure and sound mind; or, to maintain a
pure and sound mind in worshiping God.” Serres, Commentarius, in Solomonis Ecclesiasten, 248-249, as
quoted and translated in RCS 9:258-259.
147
Beza reiterates that true happiness is not learned from “schools of men” but from the
Lord who instructs believers at a designated place – that is, the house of God preserved
for worship. Beza advises the faithful unto proper worship, which constitutes not in
offering gifts to God for acquiring merits but in receiving God’s words in reverence. At
this place of worship, believers gather to hear and understand God’s true wisdom. Beza
closely ties his understanding of true happiness and worship together. Drawing on 5:2 to
instruct his audience on prayer, Beza further highlights the importance of recognizing the
nature of who God is and who we are, as prayers are means to declaring our entire
dependence on God and offering God our due reverence.
76
For Beza, true happiness
ultimately lies in the act of “genuine and sincere reverence for God,” for this world is full
of vanities and empty words.
77
Although Beza does not go as far as Serres in reading the
entire chapter five for highlighting God’s Word as the rule for true worship and ministry,
the ways in which he ties the question of true happiness with worship echoes similar
emphases with Serres. This reading is further distinct when compared to interpreters like
Luther who renders these texts as teachings on the relationship between faith and
works.
78
In the end, Beza conjoins his conclusion with Solomon’s words in 12:17 (“Fear
76
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 5:2.
77
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 5:7.
78
See LW 15:74-75: “The reading of this book has the same effect on senseless people that the
preaching of the gospel has on wicked people. For when the latter hear the righteousness of faith and
Christian liberty being preached and the righteousness of works being denied, they soon draw the
inference: “Then let us not do any works. In fact, let us sin! For faith is sufficient.” On the other hand, if
works and the fruits of faith are preached, they soon attribute justification to these and look for salvation
from that source. Thus it is that the Word of God is always followed by these two effects, presumption and
despair, so that it is extremely difficult to stick to the royal road. This little book has the same effects. For
when senseless people hear this doctrine, that we should have such a quiet and peaceful heart that we
commit everything to God, they draw this inference: “If everything is in the hand of God, we shall not do
any works.” In the same way others sin in the opposite direction by being excessively solicitous and
148
God and keep his commandments”). He writes that all those who desire to attain true
happiness should direct all their efforts to fear God and obey his commandments
diligently.
79
In fact, he asks, “how could someone say of happiness in 2:1 and throughout
the book, that it does not lead us to the fear of God and his commandments?”
80
This
question reveals Beza’s keen interest in the practical aspect of his exegesis. Although
Beza sets his discussions of divine providence and the highest good against the
background of philosophical errors, his goal is not to engage in philosophical debates but
rather to offer edifying readings for the church. For Beza, Solomon’s teachings on these
two themes provide the utmost comfort and certainty, particularly as he sees so much
confusion, corruption, uncertainty, and vanity in the world around him. As with his
readings of other poetic literature of the Old Testament, Beza draws practical applications
from Ecclesiastes to comfort the church and cultivate piety among believers within his
sixteenth-century political and religious contexts.
3.4 Solomon’s Wisdom for Churches of the Sixteenth Century
Beza’s writings on the Old Testament poetic books were published during a
tumultuous time for the Reformed churches throughout Europe. Similar to his other
writings, Beza intends his paraphrases of Ecclesiastes to provide comfort for the
persecuted church and instruct the faithful toward cultivating proper piety as part of the
wanting to measure and control everything in every way. But one should travel on royal road. Let us work
hard and do whatever we can in accordance with the Word of God; let us not, however, measure the work
on the basis of our efforts, but commit every effort and plan and outcome to the wisdom of God.”
79
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 12:17.
80
Beza, “Epistola,” 12.
149
effort to promote his theological program. His dedication of this work to Jean Casimir
and his nephew states this point in view. According to Droz, Beza dedicates paraphrases
of Ecclesiastes to Jean Casimir in 1588, following his military defeat in 1587 fighting for
the cause of the Huguenots, to comfort and encourage him from his loss and despair.
81
Although Beza does not mention this particular event in the work itself, he conveys the
consoling message of true happiness that cannot be attained in this world and further
alludes to the political and religious situations of his day beyond Casimir’s personal
circumstances. First, in the dedicatory letter, he notes his gratitude to Jean Casimir for his
efforts in protecting the Reformed faith and providing care for the refugees against
Roman Catholic threats. He commends Casimir,
Although God desired you to be adorned with numerous and significant
gifts, both of the soul and body, as well as other external blessings, which
however, you regard as worthless and perishable compared to the pursuit
of true religion, the French and Belgian Churches stand as witnesses to
this. You spared not even your own life, demonstrating a rare and
distinguished example of the most fervent zeal, in assisting and ultimately
delivering these churches from the tyranny of the Roman Antichrist, to the
detriment of the favor of all the most powerful kings and princes of
Europe. But God, through his usual benevolence and by averting the rage
of the enemies, preserved you, by his single providence, as described by
the wisest Solomon, for the sake of his church, and will, as we hope,
continue to preserve you.
82
In this expression, Beza reveals his great concern for the well-being of the churches
across Europe. Casimir’s efforts are praiseworthy because he prioritized Protestant faith
over his own safety and protected churches against Catholic enemies to the point of
sacrificing his ties with other powerful kings and princes of Europe. Given Casimir’s
81
Droz, “L’Ecclésiaste de Théodore de Bèze,” 338-343.
82
Beza, “Epistola,” 13-14.
150
involvement in the French religious wars, it is likely that Beza’s comments refer to
Casimir’s relationships with the Catholic authorities of France.
83
Beza further recognizes
Casimir’s important role in providing a refuge for religious exiles, as historical accounts
surrounding Montbéliard and Count Frederick of this period testifies.
84
It is noteworthy
that he appeals to God’s providence, taught by Solomon in Ecclesiastes, as the principle
by which God protects and preserves God’s people in the midst of adversities of this
world.
Furthermore, Beza mentions Casimir’s endeavors within his personal territories
and in the rest of Palatinate to maintain correct doctrines of Reformed faith: “[i]t has been
divinely granted for you to correct the true doctrine in the Palatinate, which had been
grievously corrupted by some new Aelure and Gnaphaeus. You have also restored the
entire ecclesiastical discipline that had been weakened. Furthermore, you have supported
the Heidelberg Academy, a unique ornament of all Germany, which was already
declining, and by your authority, you have established the Neustadt Academy as if they
are a pair.”
85
Beza does not forget to mention the past Electors of Palatinate for their wise
governance – in particular, Frederick II (Elector 1544-1556) and Frederick III (Elector
83
See Jill Raitt, “Elizabeth of England, John Casimir, and the Protestant League,” in Controversy
and Conciliation: The Reformation and the Palatinate 1559-1583, ed. Derk Visser (Eugene, OR: Pickwick
Publications, 1986), 117-145.
84
Jill Raitt, “The Emperor and the Exiles: The Clash of Religion and Politics in the Late Sixteenth
Century,” Church History 52, no. 2 (1983): 145-156; and Raitt, The Colloquy of Montbéliard: Religion and
Politics in the Sixteenth Century (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993).
85
Beza, “Epistola,” 14. See also CB 29:260 (n. 89). The editors of Beza’s correspondences note
that Aelure is a reference to Timothée Aelure (d. 477), whose name signifies an opponent of Christ’s two
natures doctrine. They suspect that Beza may be referring to Timotheus Kirchner, a Lutheran professor, as
the new Aelure. Wilhelm Gnaphaeus (1493-1568) was a Dutch theologian with Anabaptist leanings. Both
Kirchner and Gnaphaeus were expelled from their teaching posts and replaced by theologians who adhered
to Reformed doctrines.
151
1559-1576) for their contributions in bringing forth “the light of the true gospel,” but also
Ludwig VI (Elector 1576-1583) to whom Beza maintains necessary politeness despite his
Lutheran leanings. Then, he turns his attention to Casimir’s nephew, the young prince
Frederick, with expression of great hopes that he may continue in his “unwavering
dedication to hearing God’s word” and excel “in piety and all virtues” by learning from
Solomon’s example.
86
For a prince who must navigate the challenges of this world with
utmost wisdom and authority in the face of great temptations, Beza finds Solomon’s
experience and teachings in Ecclesiastes to be the most appropriate. Thus, he explains the
reason for his dedication of this particular book to Jean Casimir and prince Frederick:
And since this book, among the rest of the sacred books, most abundantly
and explicitly conveys everything for great princes, who are sailing in the
most stormy sea of this human life filled with shipwrecks, all the more
necessary, partly as more severe storms threaten them and partly as the
gentle voices of the sirens more cunningly lie in wait for them, I thought it
would be worthwhile to dedicate this paraphrase of mine to you, in whom
we already see a clear manifestation of the same quality that Solomon and
Josiah exhibited at a similar age. I have attempted to illustrate that most
precious writing of Solomon, hoping that by the example of this wisest
King, the Most Illustrious Prince, God Most Almighty may allow you to
come closer and closer as possible.
87
Beza likens Jean Casimir and his nephew to Solomon and Josiah, demonstrating his use
of Old Testament biblical figures for his contemporary context. For Beza, the distance
between biblical characters and people of his time is not so great, as they are bound as
members of one true church under God’s one eternal covenant.
86
Beza, “Epistola,” 15.
87
Beza, “Epistola,” 16.
152
As such, Beza’s reading of Ecclesiastes sheds light on many practical tips of
wisdom for those kings and princes that speak to their experiences through the lens of
King Solomon. For example, Beza advises them in 2:3 that kings must practice wisdom
in using their splendor, for it can easily lead them into sin. Kings are to live “splendidly
and magnificently” as proper to a king, yet “not dissolutely and immoderately.”
88
They
must never depart “from the office of a wise king,” prioritizing pursuit for wisdom above
every “splendor and abundance.”
89
Commenting on 4:13 (“Better is a poor but wise youth
than an old but foolish king who will no longer take advice”), Beza underscores the
importance for a king to strive for wisdom and to allow himself to be advised.
90
The
rulers of this world, in particular the “mighty princes,” must be careful to avoid errors,
warns Beza, since their wrong actions can lead to great destruction for those under their
rule.
91
Alluding to his own context perhaps, Beza notes, while explaining 8:9 (“one
person exercises authority over another to the other’s hurt”), that “the most miserable
time” is now where those who should rightly govern are actually causing the most harm
to others.
92
Drawing on 10:16-17, he delineates the characteristics of such an unfortunate
kingdom: “O you, indeed, an unhappy kingdom whose king, whether in age or in mind, is
a child unexperienced in the sense and use of things, and whose princes being the day
88
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 2:3.
89
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 2:9.
90
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 4:13.
91
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 10:5.
92
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 8:9.
153
with pleasures, instead of taking counsels.”
93
On the contrary, however, a blessed
kingdom is ruled by kings and princes who attend to their duties with diligence: “But
you, on the other hand, are a blessed kingdom, where the king comes of noble lineage
and character: and whose sober leaders take food at proper time, not to satisfy their
gluttony, but to restore their body to be strong and to devote themselves to carrying out
their tasks.”
94
In other words, foolish kings rule to fulfill their own selfish desires
whereas wise kings rule for the benefit of the people.
Yet ultimately, Beza’s message toward kings and princes has the purpose in
guiding them to recognize that even the royal office is vanity. Beza observes that people’s
favoritism toward a ruler does not last but fluctuates as time advances, and so it is natural
for once a highly regarded ruler to be disregarded with age.
95
Kings and princes must not
be prideful or abuse their authority but recognize their limitations and the same destiny
that befalls on all human beings. In fact, even kings are servants to the land, for they, as
with the rest of humanity, are dependent on the fruits of this earth (5:9).
96
Beza thus
directs them to trust in God’s governance of this world and wholly depend on the will of
God who is a mightier being than themselves.
97
A wise king and prince are those who
“adore the incomprehensible majesty of God” and “find rest in God’s will alone.”
98
Beza
93
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 10:16.
94
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 10:17.
95
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 4:16.
96
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 5:9.
97
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 6:10.
98
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 7:18.
154
uses these practical applications found in Solomon’s words to advise kings and princes of
his time – not only Jean Casimir and prince Frederick of Palatinate but most certainly
Henry of Navarre and Queen Elizabeth as well.
Ecclesiastes, however, is not just a book for kings and princes. Beza extends
Solomon’s wisdom to every believer and applies the text to everyday affairs, particularly
concerning political and social activities. Echoing his emphases in the Psalms and Job
interpretations, Beza begins from the basic premise that this world is constantly subject to
disorder, injustice, suffering, and oppressions. For example, observing that the righteous
perish due to their integrity while the wicked flourish in their own wickedness, Beza
comments, “Do not think that this most disordered state of human affairs is something
new.”
99
Similarly, he notes, human life is filled with countless vanities, miseries, and
calamities so much so that those who are dead or have never been born are considered to
be in a better state.
100
Injustices abound everywhere and people continue to afflict others,
while those who have the authority to rule only oppress them even more.
101
Commenting
on 3:16 (“in the place of justice, wickedness was there, and in the place of righteousness,
wickedness was there as well”), Beza pinpoints to the problems he witnesses in political
and social spheres: “[W]hen I consider how people behave among themselves, it occurs
to me that it is by far the most miserable thing, that when innumerable controversies arise
between them, for the purpose of which good laws have been established and magistrates
appointed, it is far from the case that each person is granted justice by law but rather,
99
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 7:15 and 8:14.
100
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 7:1, 8:6, and 4:2-3.
101
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 4:1.
155
injustice openly reigns, as if public authority stirs everyone to injustice.”
102
In this
grievous situation, Beza does not encourage people to take personal revenge but rather
states in the following verse that “one must appeal to God alone, the just avenger and
defender of the oppressed innocent.”
103
Nonetheless, to the question of when this
vindication of the innocent will happen, he answers,
Let no one exhaust himself in vain, but take refuge in God’s tribunal with
a calm mind, waiting for the time of judgment. For that moment is
certainly predetermined there, when all, both the righteous and the wicked
will stand before his tribunal. At that time, God will judge what is just
concerning every human thought, let alone require an account for every
good or bad action.
104
Similar to the themes highlighted in his readings of the Psalms and Job, Beza highlights
patience in waiting for God’s time of judgment as an important virtue for believers who
navigate turmoil on earth. He exhorts that when a person is “unworthily insulted,” it is
better to seek ways to “grant forgiveness” than to seek “revenge.”
105
This is because there
is no one in the entire world who lives such an “upright and virtuous life” that they never
depart from “the duties of a good person.”
106
Under God’s providence, injustices become
opportunities for a person to “examine” oneself.
Moreover, Beza extends this act of patience to the ways in which a person should
relate to a king. He insists that even if a king is found to have faults, people must act
102
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 3:16.
103
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 3:17.
104
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 3:17.
105
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 7:21-22.
106
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 7:20.
156
wisely, remembering that it is the Lord God who “ordained” this king and gave him
power.
107
Hence, Beza asks, “even if the king uses his power badly, it is right for you to
forget your place, that is, your private state, and the duty you owe to him?”
108
Beza
advises against any private action of revolt against a king.
109
Similarly, commenting on
10:4 (“If the anger of the ruler rises against you, do not leave your post”), he reiterates
that a person must remember an individual’s “private and inferior” place before a king
and “stand firm in wisdom.”
110
This act of wisdom is crucial in Beza’s discussion on how
a person should respond to unjust rulers. Subjects are required to follow king’s
commands (8:2) but they must do so without violating the oath that binds them to God.
111
Beza continues, wisdom itself suggests and demonstrates to the “mind of the wise”
“when and how one should obey” and “what is the correct way of obedience.”
112
Given
Beza’s involvement in the religious wars, it is noteworthy that he emphasizes great
caution and wisdom in responding to unjust rulers. Certainly, he disallows any act of
revolt out of private anger, echoing the emphasis from his reading of the imprecatory
psalms. In this context, Beza again appeals to God who is the just avenger and defender
of the innocent, noting God’s exceptional patience toward the wicked. God is only
107
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 10:20.
108
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 10:20.
109
This point aligns with Beza’s argument from Du droit des magistrats sur leurs suiets, in which
he places the power to depose an abusive tyrant, not in the hands of private individuals but in the people led
by higher authorities and magistrates.
110
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 10:4.
111
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 8:2.
112
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 8:5.
157
delaying the punishments of the wicked for a time out of “God’s singular goodness.”
Thus, even if it appears that the righteous suffers while the wicked prospers, Beza assures
suffering believers and persecuted churches that “those who fear God” will ultimately
end in eternal happiness, whereas “those who do not fear the threats and wrath of the
most patient God” will face a misfortunate end and “vanish like a shadow.”
113
Beza
encapsulates this teaching most explicitly in 7:8: “Therefore, I maintain that which is
most certain, that both the very nature of God as the just judge and continuous experience
demonstrate that the outcome that follows such wicked deeds does not correspond to the
principles of the wicked. In the end, they prove that the condition of those who have
patiently endured the injustices inflicted upon them is ultimately better than that of those
who have no guilt about arrogantly and unjustly harassing the innocent.”
114
Beza’s
emphases on wisdom and patience in Ecclesiastes are thus grounded on his understanding
of God’s vindication of the righteous and God’s providence, which align with the key
themes demonstrated in his interpretation of Job. In sum, Beza consistently employs his
reading of Ecclesiastes not only to provide comfort by highlighting divine providence and
true happiness but also to draw from those teachings practical applications for instructing
churches and believers on cultivating proper piety amid sufferings and injustices
prevalent in the sixteenth-century context.
113
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 8:12-14.
114
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 7:8.
158
3.5 Conclusion
Beza’s paraphrases of Ecclesiastes illustrates a surprising wealth of exegetical and
theological insights despite the brevity of the work. Methodologically, Beza demonstrates
his commitment to literal and historical exegesis by first establishing Solomon’s
authorship on the basis of divine authority and then highlighting Solomon’s life and
experience as a king to provide the lens for reading Ecclesiastes. He particularly
emphasizes the centrality of authorial intention, which, for Beza, is intimately tied to the
divine author. With close analysis on Solomon’s words and experience, Beza locates the
plain meaning of the text within two key themes of God’s providence and the highest
good. While Beza is not the first to read Ecclesiastes regarding these two teachings – for
Beza shares one of each theme with Melanchthon and Serres – he presents the topics not
as abstract doctrines but very relevant to understanding the nature of God and the
weakness of human beings. The lessons of divine providence and the highest good thus
serve as two pillars of perceiving human affairs and tragic events of this world. Wolters’s
argument that Beza reads Ecclesiastes in line with the patristic and medieval periods does
not stand, since the whole purpose of Beza’s paraphrases is to instruct believers the ways
in which they can navigate the storms faced in this world with right theology and proper
wisdom, not to withdraw themselves from such turmoil. As such, Beza offers numerous
applications for kings and princes, drawing on common experiences between them and
Solomon, while extending lessons to believers who face injustices, sufferings, and
oppressions in everyday affairs. Throughout the paraphrases, Beza brings his audience to
trust in God’s providence and cultivate piety of wisdom and patience through the act of
revering God in worship. Overall, the historical emphasis in Beza’s exegetical endeavor
159
is not as explicit in Ecclesiastes compared to other Old Testament poetic books, for it is
not a historical book per se, but by consistently employing Solomon’s experience as a
king as the lens for reading the text, he conveys helpful insights for the church and
believers of his sixteenth-century context. As the previous chapters have also
demonstrated, Beza’s exegetical contribution thus lies in the use of his reading for the
edification of the church, particularly in the ways that he applies the Old Testament poetic
books to his immediate political situations.
For Beza, biblical wisdom is found in the Scripture alone and not in any human
reason or intellect. The book of Ecclesiastes offers that great and certain wisdom, which
this fleeting and uncertain world cannot comprehend without the help of the Spirit. Beza
describes that “[w]isdom is like a shelter under which one can seek refuge against all
storms, and though external possessions may provide some comfort in various
adversities, it is wisdom that truly enriches the lives of those who possess it.”
115
Wisdom
is not a philosophical idea for Beza; it is where one finds refuge and comfort against
storms and adversities. Returning to the prefatory letter, it becomes obvious why Beza
dedicated this work to Jean Casimir after his defeat in fighting for the Huguenot cause.
He guides Casimir to seek the true and eternal happiness in Ecclesiastes:
In this work one does not hear Heraclitus uselessly weeping or Democritus
mocking the wretched, nor someone blaspheming nature, or rather
attacking God; no, one hears the Spirit, the one teacher of the truth, who
seeks out the blind through all the byways of this world and takes them by
the hand, leading them sweetly to the harbor of eternal happiness.
116
115
Beza, Ecclesiastes, 7:12.
116
Beza, “Epistola,” 15-16, as quoted in Summers and Manetsch, “Introduction: New Perspective
on an Old Reformer,” in Theodore Beza at 500 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2022), 16.
160
As Summers and Manetsch point out, Beza considered Ecclesiastes “to be a work that
surpasses by far all the wisdom of the philosophers of antiquity.”
117
Solomon’s book
served as a powerful tool in the hands of Beza as he sought to bring the author’s words
and experience closer to those of his time, primarily for the purpose of comforting and
instructing believers so that they may endure the sufferings of life on earth with hopes for
eternal and true happiness.
117
Summers and Manetsch, “Introduction,” 16.
161
CHAPTER FOUR
Beza’s Reading of the Song of Songs (1586):
Allegory, Prophecy, and History in the Union between Christ and the Church
4.1 Introduction
Against the background of Beza’s readings of the Psalms, Job, and Ecclesiastes,
this final chapter on his sermons on the Song of Songs brings together the diverse aspects
of his exegetical method and pastoral applications, particularly concerning the Old
Testament poetic books published from 1579 to 1589.
1
I demonstrated in the previous
chapters how Beza’s political context and pastoral concerns shaped the emphases of his
biblical interpretation, especially for the purpose of comforting persecuted churches and
afflicted believers of reformed faith. As a skilled humanist, he not only employed literary
and grammatical tools; he also focused on the historical meaning of each text as the
foundation for establishing his exegesis. Identifying the human author of each book, their
intent, and their historical context were important tasks for proper biblical interpretation.
On the basis of his literal and historical emphases as well as his understanding of the
unity of the two Testaments, Beza aligned contemporary believers with Old Testament
figures, drawing applications from David, Job, and Solomon. He did so often at the
expense of traditional christological readings, following the example of Calvin in using
the biblical characters as examples and teachers for the believers of the sixteenth century.
His immediate and pressing political context, however, subsequent to the tragedies of St.
Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, prompted a reading that linked the experiences of David,
1
Beza, Sermons sur les trois premiers chapitres du cantique des Cantiques de Salomon (Geneva:
Jean le Preux, 1586). [Hereafter abbreviated Cantique]
162
Job, and Solomon closer to the experiences of the churches and the faithful of his time
than his predecessor, to bolster their trust in God’s providence and their anticipation of
the future heavenly kingdom as well as to instruct them toward proper Christian response
in the face of their persecutions and sufferings. Beza’s sermons on the Song of Songs
provides another window into examining the place of his biblical interpretation within his
larger theological program, while also displaying his exegetical insights on rendering
allegories, understanding prophet and prophecy, highlighting salvation history, and
applying exegetical content to the context of sixteenth-century churches. Although Beza’s
sermons on the Song of Songs came shortly before the publications of his Job and
Ecclesiastes commentaries and paraphrases, this seven-hundred page work on the first
three chapters of the book presents a rich source of Beza’s Old Testament interpretation
and his engagement with context, such that all the emphases and aspects of Beza’s
reading observed in the previous chapters are even more fully prefigured in this work on
the Song.
2
Compared to his paraphrases and commentaries, these sermons amplify the
importance of theological applications and pastoral concerns of Beza’s exegetical
endeavors – the point which I have consistently argued throughout this project. This
chapter thus continues to examine the themes from the previous chapters while it
discusses new topics of allegory, prophecy, and history that contribute to understanding
Beza the exegete from the broader perspectives of history of biblical interpretation and
Reformed confessional identity.
2
Beza preached his sermons on the Song of Songs in 1583-1584, although it was not published
until 1586. In a letter to Grynaeus on March 25, 1584, Beza indicates he is revising his French sermons for
publication, while still preaching through the book of the Songs. He also mentions his desire to add his
paraphrases of Job and Ecclesiastes to the work. See Beza to Grynaeus, 25 March 1584, in CB 25:58.
163
Scholars have generally identified three main trajectories in the interpretation of
the Song of Songs prior to the Reformation: (1) an allegorical reading of love between
Christ and the church, which has been the most dominant approach in the history of
interpretation, (2) a tropological reading of love between Christ and the human soul,
which developed in connection to monastic communities, and (3) a mariological reading,
which influenced the formation of Marian piety that flourished in the twelfth century.
3
Despite the common understanding that the reformers rejected all methods of allegories,
as far as the Song of Songs was concerned, exegetes of the Reformation continued the
tradition of reading the Song in allegorical and figurative ways in line with the first two
approaches.
4
Not surprisingly, mariological reading lost its footing in the Protestant
tradition. In his exegesis of the Song, Beza criticizes those who have incorrectly applied
3
E. Ann Matter, The Voice of My Beloved: The Song of Songs in Western Medieval Christianity
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1990), esp. p. 11, 86, and 201-202. With these three
trajectories being the major lines of interpretation, Matter depicts the various spectrum of medieval
exegesis of the Song of Songs through the examples of specific figures, and she examines the shifts in the
emphases in the context of the ecclesial demands and missions that were particular to each generation. For
these three distinctions of interpreting the Song of Songs, see also the introduction in RCS, 9: xlvii-xlviii.
4
See James Alfred Loader, “Calvin and the Canticles,” Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae 35, no. 2
(2009): 57-75, and George L. Scheper, “Reformation Attitudes toward Allegory and the Song of Songs,”
PMLA 89, no. 3 (1974): 551-562. Both Loader and Scheper argue that the reformers’ emphasis on literal
reading did not necessarily contradict nor exclude their allegorical readings of the Song of Songs. The
reformers located the spiritual meaning of the Songs, not on another level of interpretation, but in the plain
and literal sense as consisting in the original author’s intention. Nevertheless, there were those who
proposed a more unique reading of the Song rather than follow the traditional approach, most
representatively, Martin Luther and John Cotton. Luther read the Song politically as “an encomium of the
political order” (LW 15:195), whereas Cotton considered the poem to be an apocalyptic text that should be
read as “a historical prophecy or prophetical history.” For studies on Luther’s approach, see Jarrett A. Carty,
“Martin Luther’s Political Interpretation of the Song of Songs,” The Review of Politics 73, no. 3 (2011):
449-467; Endel Kallas, “Martin Luther as Expositor of the Song of Songs,” Lutheran Quarterly 2, no. 3
(1988): 323-341; and James G. Kiecker, “Luther and Lyra on the Song of Solomon: Were They Singing the
Same Tune?” Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 81, no. 1 (1984): 6-15. For studies on Cotton’s interpretation,
see Jeffrey A. Hammond, “The Bride in Redemptive Time: John Cotton and the Canticles Controversy,”
The New England Quarterly 56, no. 1 (1983): 78-102; and Timothy H. Robinson, “Varieties of Reformed
and Puritan Reception of the Song of Songs, 1550-1730” in The Song of Songs through the Ages: Essays on
the Song’s Reception History in Different Times, Contexts, and Genres, ed. Annette Schellenberg (Berlin,
Boston: De Gruyter, 2023), 329-346.
164
“the person of virgin Mary” to the “mother” who crowned King Solomon on the day of
his wedding (3:11) and to all other references concerning the church throughout the book.
He writes, though “she was truly blessed among all faithful women,” some imagine “as if
Jesus Christ received the crown of his empire from his mother.”
5
According to Beza,
Mary is also at the mercy of Christ’s gratuitous goodness for receiving her own crown of
glory like any other. Beza views it as a superstition to read it in such a way.
For Beza, then, the Song of Songs is an “allegory” that is entirely grounded on
“the conjugal union of marriage” between the Bride and the Bridegroom.
6
He identifies
the bride as “the company of believers, which is called the Church,” represented in one
single person who speaks on behalf of all his followers, and the bridegroom as “our Lord
Jesus Christ.”
7
The Holy Spirit could not have chosen “a more proper, nor a more
effective pattern and model than this union,” for “no relationship among human beings”
is “more sacred in obligation, nor more firmly binding in effect, than marriage.”
8
In this
“most intimate spiritual bond,” the faithful comes to know what is otherwise
“incomprehensible” by human knowledge.
9
Hence, putting aside all “carnal and impure
5
Beza, Cantique, 662: “… qui ont approprie non seulement ce passage, mais quasi tout ce qui est
dit de l’Eglise en ce Cantique, a la personne de la vierge Marie: laquelle vrayement a este benite entre
toutes les femmes fidelles, mais non pas en ce que ces superstitieux ont imagine, comme si Jesus Christ
tenoit de sa mere la couronne de son Empire, au lieu que c’est lui qui par sa gratuite bonte l’a faite sa mere,
entant qu’il a prins nostre chair au ventre virginal d’icelle, qui l’a couronnee de la mesure de gloire telle
qu’il lui a pleu?”
6
Beza, Cantique, 4: “… ceste Allegorie est entierement fondee sur la conjonction de mariage …”
7
Beza, Cantique, 14: “L’espouse c’est la compagnie des croyans, qui se nomme l’Eglise,
representee comme en une seule personne, en laquelle compagnie toutesfois Salomon en introduit une
comme parlant au nom de toute sa suitte. … Dautrepart l’espoux c’est nostre Seigneur Jesus Christ.”
8
Beza, Cantique, 8-10. Also cited and translated in RCS 9:310.
9
Beza, Cantique, 10.
165
thoughts,” Beza invites his audience to “conceive with Solomon this husband and this
marriage, and all that is said about it.”
10
Clearly, Beza found the Song of Songs to be an important text for expounding key
doctrines of Reformed faith, particularly concerning Christ and the church. In his preface
to the ministers of Geneva, dated August 20, 1586, he expresses his hope that by
publishing his sermons on the Song, churches may receive “instruction” and
“confirmation” on the “principal points concerning the true Jesus Christ and the true
Church” and on the “infallible marks” of both.
11
This purpose had an important polemical
effect for Beza – namely, instructing what is true naturally exposed what is false. Writing
to Dudith on March 17, 1585, Beza indicates that in the sermons, he endeavored “to
explain the question of the marks of the true Church” against the false errors of his
Catholic enemies.
12
As Theodore Van Raalte rightly observes, “these sermons contain
extensive teaching about the marks of the true Christ, and the true church over against
false Christs and the false church.”
13
Van Raalte makes a fascinating point that the reason
for the brevity of Beza’s reply to his Jesuit opponent John Hay is because he regarded his
sermons on the Song of Songs to be a sufficient “anti-Jesuit weapon.”
14
Historical
evidences reveal that from early to mid-1580s, during which Beza focused on the Song of
10
Beza, Cantique, 13: “… mais il faut qu’avec Salomon nostre ame concoyue ce mari & ce
mariage, & tout ce qui en est dit, d’une facon eslongnee de toutes pensees charnelles & pollues, …”
11
Beza, Cantique, A3r.
12
Beza to Dudith, 17 March 1585, in CB 26:62.
13
Theodore Van Raalte, “Compelling Each Other. Theodore Beza’s Response to John Hay as Part
of Geneva’s Anti-Jesuit Efforts,” in Theodore Beza at 500: New Perspective on an Old Reformer, edited by
Kirk Summers and Scott M. Manetsch (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2021), 281.
14
Van Raalte, “Compelling Each Other,” 267.
166
Songs (and also Job and Ecclesiastes), he became more and more concerned with the
Jesuits as being one of the primary threats to the Reformed faith and city of Geneva.
15
Before diving into Beza’s reading of the Song of Songs, it is important to consider
the genre of this work. While the previous writings on the Psalms, Job, and Ecclesiastes
were published as commentaries and paraphrases, the Songs were published as sermons,
which he had preached weekly on Thursdays during the period of 1583-84 in Geneva.
16
Each of Beza’s thirty-one sermons follows this general pattern: (1) introduction of the
overall message with a summary from last week’s sermon, (2) definition of key word(s)
in the text, (3) explanation of the meaning as it relates to the bridegroom, (4) explanation
of the meaning as it relates to the bride, and (5) application and exhortation. Of course,
these categories are not clear-cut and more often than not vague, as some points are
merged and certain theological explanations or polemics against false Christs and false
churches are added to the overall message. Nevertheless, this general distinction helps
one to see the structure and the goal of Beza’s sermons, which is geared toward
“edification” of the audience.
17
Hence, compared to his commentaries and paraphrases,
there are much less technical comparisons between Hebrew and Greek translations and
citations of secular poets or writers, but more scripture interpreting scripture,
15
Van Raalte, “Compelling Each Other,” 276-278. For Beza’s conflicts with the Jesuits, see also
Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace, 125-132.
16
In several places throughout the sermons, Beza refers back to what he had preached “last
Thursday.” See the following places in Beza, Cantique: “Nous entendismes Jeudi dernier …” (484), “Nous
demeurames Jeudi dernier sur ce poinct …” (624), and “Nous avons encor a traicter un poinct sur ce que
nous commencasmes a monstrer Jeudy dernier …” (644).
17
Beza, Cantique, A3r: “… il m’a semble que l’auditoire en a receu edification, qui est le seul but
auquel vous scavez que tend l’exercise de nostre sainct ministere.”
167
applications, and exhortations. In his larger theological scheme, he reserved the more
technical aspects of the Song of Songs exegesis, such as issues on sacred versus profane
translations and meters of Hebrew poetry, to his polemical writing against one of his
Catholic opponents, Gilbert Génébrard.
18
Beza did not consider sermons to be an
appropriate occasion for diverging into critical studies of the text.
19
Such sermon
structure is consistent with Manetsch’s findings on Beza’s theology of preaching.
Manetsch argues that a good preacher for Beza is not someone who “shows off one’s
learning” or “indulges in idle speculation,” but with simple language, “applies Christian
doctrine to his congregation for their spiritual edification.”
20
Thus, while polemics
against Roman Catholics as being the false church remain in Beza’s sermons, one will not
find much of the philological or linguistic discussions, or references to Greek and Latin
authors in them.
In light of this, this chapter considers Beza’s distinct methods of reading the Song
of Songs and his particular exegetical applications in the time of political and religious
18
Beza, Ad Gilberti Genebrardi accusationem. Theodori Bezae defensio (Geneva: Eustathium
Vignon, 1585).
19
On Beza’s preaching ministry, see Armand Dückert, Théodore de Bèze, Prédicateur (Geneva,
Imprimerie Romet, 1891), Michel Delval, “La Prédication d’un Réformateur au XVIe Siècle: L’Activité
Homilétique de Théodore de Bèze,” Mélanges de science religieuse 41 (1984): 61-86, and M. Delval,
“Orthodoxie et Prédication: Théodore de Bèze,” Bulletin de la Société de l’Histoire du Protestantisme
Français (1903-2015), vol. 134 (1988): 693-697. Delval primarily considers Beza’s sermons on Christ’s
passion and resurrection to demonstrate that Beza added numerous systematic, didactic, and scholastic
aspects to the original homilies in the revision process, which he calls a “duality of literary genres” in
Beza’s sermons. Nevertheless, he concludes that he faithfully continued Calvin’s legacy, as such use of
dialectic was the typical mode of thinking in Beza’s time, especially in the academic and polemical
contexts. Manetsch also provides a helpful perspective on the aspects of Beza’s preaching in his study on
Beza’s theology of pastoral ministry. See Manetsch, “’The Most Despised Vocation Today’: Theodore
Beza’s Theology of Pastoral Ministry,” in Théodore de Bèze (1519-1605): Actes du colloque de Genève
(septembre 2005), ed. Irena Backus (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2007), 243-256.
20
Manetsch, “Beza’s Theology of Pastoral Ministry,” 251-252.
168
challenges of the sixteenth century, with special attention to the following four topics.
First, I examine Beza’s allegorical reading of the Song of Songs. Although the majority of
the Protestant reformers agreed on allegorical reading of the Song, they differed on how
this was to be done. I suggest there are four principles that guide Beza’s allegorical
reading, which are closely tied to the literal and historical emphases of his exegesis.
Allegorical reading is not a break from his endeavor to find the plain sense of the text, but
rather, it is consistent with his exegetical methods found in the other poetic books of the
Old Testament. Secondly, I demonstrate Beza’s understandings of prophet and prophecy
in his sermons on the Song. For Beza, Solomon plays a prophetic role in the voice of the
bride by envisioning the intimate love and future coming of Christ, the bridegroom. Beza
perceives pastors and doctors of his current time as receiving this prophetic role, although
in a very different manner and form. Thirdly, I analyze how Beza’s allegorical and
prophetical readings are closely tied to his understanding of history as it unfolds in the
relationship between Christ and the Church over the entire history of God’s salvation for
God’s people from the Old Covenant to the New. To Beza, the Bridegroom’s interactions
with the Bride take place in history, which further extends to include the church of Beza’s
current times. Finally, I conclude by looking at Beza’s applications and uses of the Song
interpretation for the persecuted churches and suffering believers for the purposes of
exhorting and comforting them through the lens of Christ’s relationship to the church.
God never forsakes the members of the true church by virtue of Christ’s work, although
they may be weak and poor in their outward appearance. Believers are thus led to place
their confidence in God’s promises by daily living out their vocations faithfully on this
earth while also earnestly anticipating the day when they will be raised up with the
169
bridegroom for the consummation of this spiritual marriage to be fulfilled in the future
heavenly kingdom of Christ. As there has not yet been a study on Beza’s exegetical
approach to the Song, I aim to show his methods and uses in reading the Song in this
chapter – namely, that Beza’s allegorical reading of the Song as a conjugal union between
Christ and the church had its foundation on his literal and historical emphases, which
shaped his views on prophet, prophecy, and history as well as his applications for the
faithful sixteenth-century Christians. Overall, this chapter serves not only to bring
together Beza’s approaches to the poetic books of the Old Testament but also to
demonstrate his role as an exegete in the consolidating of Reformed confessional identity.
I argue that Beza continued and strengthened the exegetical approaches of his
predecessor but also contributed to ways of reading Scripture shaped by his own
historical context and theological program.
4.2 Beza on Allegorical Reading in the Song of Songs
Beza believed that the key to unlocking the meaning of the Song of Songs was in
allegories. Although he was against allegorical readings for most of his exegetical
endeavors, as had been observed in the previous chapters, he believed that this particular
book by Solomon was an exception. Stating in the prefatory letter that this book is “all-
allegorical,” he continues throughout his sermons, highlighting the allegorical meaning of
each word or idea as it relates to the larger theme of the spiritual union between Christ
and the Church.
21
He follows, however, certain literal and scriptural patterns in his
allegorical reading. Four distinct factors emerge in his Song interpretation: (1) the focus
21
Beza, Cantique, A2r.
170
on original author’s intention; (2) the analysis of the natural object on which the spiritual
meaning is found; (3) the attention to literal construct of words, especially whether they
are singular or plural; and (4) the abundant use of scripture references. Through his use of
these four guiding principles, I show that Beza’s allegories emerge consistent with his
emphases on literal and historical context. In his allegorical reading, he retains his
emphases on grammar, authorial intent, and the literal and historical aspects of biblical
interpretation. Before discussing these matters, however, I briefly trace the contours of
Beza’s debates with two of his opponents concerning the interpretation of the Song: the
infamous French theologian Sebastian Castellio (1515-1563) and the prestigious French
Catholic Hebraist, Gilbert Génébrard (1535-1597). These controversies provide a helpful
background to Beza’s own approach to the Song of Songs.
4.2.1 Sebastian Castellio and Gilbert Génébrard
It is very unlikely that one would come across the names of Castellio and
Génébrard used together under one title, as their scholarly circles and writings did not
have much of an overlap. Yet they shared a common ground in their influences on
Theodore Beza and his interpretation of the Song of Songs. Although I do not intend to
describe all the details of their disagreements, engaging these controversies gives a better
perspective to Beza’s own readings. On the one hand, Castellio advocated a strict literal
reading, interpreting the Songs exclusively in terms of profane human love, leaving out
all possibilities of a spiritual sense. He died in 1563 and did not live to see Beza’s own
interpretation of the Songs. From Beza’s perspective, Castellio’s literal interpretation of
the same book and the controversies that followed on various other issues (which
171
eventually led to Castellio’s banishment from Geneva) left an indelible mark on his
impression of this enigmatic book. This memory would have certainly affected him as he
set to meditate on the same book more than twenty years later.
22
On the other hand,
adhering to a mystical reading of the Canticles, Génébrard attacked Beza for his too
literal interpretation and profane translations. It is interesting that these were the exact
criticisms that the Genevans had used against Castellio. Beza and Génébrard exchanged
several criticisms in their letters and writings, both publishing their own interpretations of
the Song of Songs to make their statements against each other.
Castellio argued that the Song of Songs should be read purely in its literal sense,
by which he meant as a love song between two human beings. According to Calvin, the
Canticles turned into a “lascivious” and “obscene poem” of Solomon’s “shameless love
affairs” in the hands of Castellio.
23
Calvin further contended that the book was never read
as such in the history of the church.
24
Novelty was never a good sign in the sixteenth
century. The disagreement, however, was much more than just a literal versus allegorical
reading. Engammare explains that while both theologians, being advocates of literal
reading of Scripture, placed importance on “the words of the text” and thus avoided
imposing “a Christological interpretation of the Old Testament,” Castellio highlighted
22
On the details and complexities of Castellio’s controversies with Calvin, see Hans R.
Guggisberg, Sebastian Castellio, 1515-1563: Humanist and Defender of Religious Toleration in a
Confessional Age, edited and translated by Bruce Gordon (London: Routledge, 2017).
23
CO 11:674, quoted in Max Engammare, Qu’il me baise des baisiers de sa bouche. Le Cantique
des Cantiques a la Renaissance: Etude et Bibliographie (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1993), 10.
24
Engammare, Le Cantique des Cantiques, 10. It is known that the only exception was Theodore
of Mopsuesta who was condemned by the Second Council of Constantinople of 553 for his refusal to read
the Song allegorically. See Scheper, “Reformation Attitudes toward Allegory and the Song of Songs,” 556-
557.
172
human “moral” and “reason” as criteria for judging the Scripture, whereas Calvin
defended “the inner testimony of the Spirit and Christ as the scope of Scripture.”
25
Furthermore, Engammare argues, while Calvin appealed to analogia fidei to read the
Song of Songs, Castellio refused to do so.
26
Although the topic of religious toleration
overshadowed their disagreements on exegetical methods per se, this difference proved to
be a key moment for Beza’s own work on the Song. Beza later commented that Castellio
had “outright condemned” the Song of Songs, a canonical book with an “excellent
mystery proposed to us in common expressions of this world,” as a “dirty” and
“immodest” poem.
27
The other opponent, Gilbert Génébrard was a Hebrew professor at the Royal
College of Navarre and an influential Hebraist of his time. He started to take issues with
Beza’s Old Testament translations since Beza’s work on the Psalms. In 1582, Génébrard
published his own Psalms commentary dedicated to Pope Gregory XIII, with an address
to the readers that began with an attack on Beza: “The most recent obscenity of
Théomore Beza impelled me for your sake, Christian reader, to this most divine work of
commentaries.”
28
Engammare explains that by spelling Beza’s name as “Théomore,”
25
Engammare, Le Cantique des Cantiques, 16-17.
26
Engammare, Le Cantique des Cantiques, 17.
27
Beza, Vie de J. Calvin, edited by Alfred Franklin (Paris: J. Cherbuliez Libraire, 1864), 116:
“Cela fut cause [sa vanite] que de plein saut il condamna un des livres canoniques de la saincte Escriture,
comme livre sale et impudique. C’est assavoir le Cantique des cantiques de Salomon; comme ainsi soit
qu’un mystere excellent nous y soit propose sous facons de parler communes de ce monde, ainsi qu’ont
monstre des docteurs anciens S. Gregoire et S. Bernard. Ce que luy estant remonstre, il desgorgea
publiquement mille injures contre les pasteurs de ceste Eglise.”
28
Gilbert Genebrard, “Christianae pietatis studioso,” Psalmi Davidis, vulgate editione, calendario
hebraeo…, (1582): “Novissimum Theomori Bezae propudium me tua causa impulit, Christiane Lector, ad
hoc divinissimum opus commentariolis illustrandum,” [ã]r. [Hereafter Psalmi Davidis]
173
Génébrard was performing a wordplay, combining “Théodore” and the Greek word
mwroj(stupid) to belittle Beza’s skills as an exegete.
29
Aimed at Beza’s Latin paraphrases
of 1579, Génébrard accused Beza primarily of his lack of Hebrew competency and
ignorance of rabbinical literature, and turned the Genevan’s criticism of Castellio right
against him.
30
He even identified Beza with paganism by referring to a couplet that he
claimed has been circulating: “Beza passed from paganism to calvinism / Beza returned
from calvinism to paganism.”
31
Beza responded in the dedicatory letter of his second
French edition of Psalm Paraphrases by naming “a certain monk,” who seems to be
“strangely possessed by a malicious spirit” to slander his work.
32
This conflict continued into their writings on the Song of Songs. Beza’s first
published writing on the Song was not his sermon; it was a work of paraphrases in 1584,
in which he displayed his poetic prowess to experiment with translations and meters of
Hebrew verses.
33
Beza, however, did not attach any theological explanations to the work.
It was simply a paraphrastic translation of the Song. Since he provided no mention of
29
Max Engammare, “Licence Poétique versus Métrique Sacrée: La Polémique entre Bèze et
Génébrard au Sujet des Psaumes et du Cantique des Cantiques (1579-1586) – Première Partie,” in Théodore
de Bèze (1519-1605), ed. Irena Backus (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2007), 483.
30
Genebrard, Psalmi Davidis, [ã]2r-[ã]3r. Genebrard’s attack is also based on Beza’s preference
for Hebrew translations of Moller, van Campen, Vatable, and Pagnini, as found in the Genevan Bibles, over
Jerome’s translation. This criticism comes in the context of the Council of Trent recognizing Jerome’s
veritas hebraica to be the authentic translation. See Engammare, “Licence Poétique versus Métrique
Sacrée,” 483-484.
31
Genebrard, Psalmi Davidis, [ã]3v.
32
Beza, Les Pseaumes de David et les Cantiques de la Bible, avec les argumens & la paraphrase
de Theodore de Besze (Geneva: Jaques Berjon, 1581), *iii.v-*iiii.r.
33
Beza, Canticum Canticorum Solomonis, Latinis versibus expressum. Theodoro Beza Vezelio
auctore (Eustache Vignon, 1584).
174
who the bride and the bridegroom are in this work and adopted a poetic meter that had
traditionally been identified as a mark of profane poetry, it appeared as if he had
completely turned this sacred book of Scripture into a mere love song. Dissatisfied with
Beza’s translations, Génébrard published his own commentary on the Song of Songs a
year after with a letter publicly addressed to the “ministers of Geneva,” in which he
reproached Beza for his improper language and translation, his use of unsuitable meter,
lack of comments on the text, and lack of rabbinic support for his grammar decisions.
34
Génébrard complained that Beza misunderstands “the author’s intention,” distorting the
letter and twisting the meaning, and that he misinterprets Solomon’s use of “similitudes”
as signifying “physical and bestial love.”
35
To put simply, Beza’s interpretations were too
literal according to Génébrard’s mystical standards.
36
Reinforcing his point, Génébrard
strikes Beza with these words: “[W]e lament that he [Beza] has removed himself so far
from the aim of the author. For when Solomon sends us to heaven even in our most
ignoble members, he continually curves and bends us, like pigs, to the earth.”
37
These
were not unforeseen criticisms, however, as even one of Beza’s friends had suggested,
34
Genebrard, Canticum Canticorum Salomonis versibus et commentariis illustratum (Paris,
Aegidium Gorbinum, 1585). The fact that Genebrard published this targeting Beza’s paraphrase on the
Song of Songs is evident in the subtitle: “Gilbert Genebrardo Theologo Parisiensi, professore regio auctore.
Adversus Trochaïcam Theodori Bezae Paraphrasim. Subjuncti sunt trium Rabbinorum Salomonis Iarhii,
Abrahami Abben Ezrae, & innominati cuiusdam commentarii, eodem interprete.”
35
Genebrard, Canticum Canticorum, A7v-B4v.
36
André Ravier describes the influence of Génébrard’s mystical interpretation of the Song as the
“loves of the Sulamite and of her shepherd” on Francis de Sales’s own mystical formation. See André
Ravier, S. J., Francis de Sales: Sage and Saint, translated by Joseph D. Bowler (Stella Niagara, NY:
DeSales Resource Center, 2007), 31.
37
Genebrard, Canticum Canticorum, B4r: “… ingemiscimus quod se tantopere a scopo Auctoris
removerit. Cum enim Salomon in ignobilissimis etiam membris nos trasmittat ad coelum, iste perpetuo nos,
tanquam porcos, in terram curvat & inflectit.”
175
reading his paraphrastic translations, that Beza add “marginal notes” to explain the
“mystical sense” for the “most ignorant.”
38
It is in this context that Beza writes a treatise
defending himself against Génébrard in 1585 and publishes his sermons on the Song of
Songs the following year.
39
4.2.2 Four Guiding Principles
Sixteenth-century theologians disputed over what constitutes a proper reading of
the Song of Songs and the author’s intention therein. Beza’s sermons offer an opportunity
to investigate his interpretation of the book, particularly concerning how he read the text
in a way that he believed to be consistent with both the human and the divine author’s
intention, as opposed to Génébrard’s criticism that Beza had completely misread the true
meaning. Four principles guide Beza’s allegorical interpretation: Solomon’s intention, the
analysis of the material object used for revealing the spiritual truth, the distinction
between singular and plural nouns, and scripture interpreting scripture. These factors
gave structure to Beza’s allegorical readings, limiting his interpretation within literal and
historical boundaries. These guiding principles served as determining markers for the
spiritual meaning of the text and provided him with valid and proper exegetical
38
Gwalther to Beza, 13 April 1584, in CB 25:88: “Vidi divinissimi illud Solomonis Canticum,
quod versibus doctis et festivis expressisti, et magna cum voluptate perlegi, vereor autem ne Ubiquitarii et
Jacobandreani nostri qui jampridem ex priori poematum tuorum libello, quae tu ipse tam serio damnasti et
sublata voluisti, praeter omnem aequitatem calumniandi occasionem novam arripiunt. … Quare meo
judicio bene feceris et pie si loco commentariolo scholia marginalia addas, quae sensum mysticum
rudioribus delineent.”
39
Beza, Ad Gilberti Genebrardi Accusationem. Theodori Bezae defensio (Geneva: Eustache
Vignon, 1585). For the historical account and details of this debate, refer to the two articles by Engammare:
“Licence Poétique versus Métrique Sacrée: La Polémique entre Bèze et Génébrard au Sujet des Psaumes et
du Cantique des Cantiques (1579-1586) – Première Partie,” 479-499 and the second part with the same title
in Revue de l’histoire des religions 226, no. 1 (Jan-Mar 2009): 102-125.
176
foundation and practice. In the end, Beza did not abandon his literal and historical
emphases, even when he used allegories to interpret Scripture.
In many instances, Beza’s allegorical interpretation begins with a consideration of
the human author’s intention. Why should one read the Song of Songs as describing the
love between Christ and the church? Because this Christ and church relationship was
indeed the “main purpose” that Solomon had in mind, declares Beza, in order to offer a
vivid “portrait” of “the essential qualities of this Bridegroom” and “of the Bride, who is
the church.”
40
Hence, Beza invites his audience to come to know this husband and this
marriage “with Solomon.”
41
Thus, the task of reading “with Solomon” first included
knowing the custom of Solomon’s time. In 1:2, the spouse does not say, “kiss me” but
“let him kiss me,” which sounds as if the spouse is speaking to a third person and not
directly to the bridegroom. Beza explains that this manner of speech is “the custom of the
language” in Solomon’s time, and so one must read it as a dialogue between the spouse
and her beloved.
42
Again, commenting on 1:9, where the spouse is compared to the
horses of Pharaoh’s chariots, he writes, “as for the mention of Pharaoh here, there is no
need to seek another reason or allegory, except that among all the horses of those times,
those of Egypt were considered the most beautiful, as attested in various places in
Scripture, especially in the history of Solomon (1 Kings 10:28).”
43
Instead of allegorizing
Pharaoh’s chariots, he preferred a simple meaning. Likewise, he notes, during the time of
40
Beza, Cantique, A.iii.
41
Beza, Cantique, 13.
42
Beza, Cantique, 28.
43
Beza, Cantique, 256.
177
Solomon, “gazelle” (2:9) represented “the most agile and skillful” animal, which can also
be taken to refer to “a chamois,” a beast of “incredible boldness and skill” that can
effortlessly “leap from rock to rock.”
44
Beza finds Solomon’s use of this animal as an
excellent depiction of the bridegroom’s desire to come to his bride by jumping over all
kinds of obstacles with great boldness and skills. In another place, when Solomon speaks
of “sixty mighty men” (3:7), instead of spiritualizing the number sixty, as some
theologians have done in relation to the temple or the number of canonical books, Beza
simply notes that sixty was probably “the ordinary number of night guards” who would
stand close to Solomon’s bed in those times.
45
Furthermore, for Beza, perceiving this spiritual marriage “with Solomon” meant
reading with an understanding of the life and experiences of Solomon, especially in
relation to his mission to build God’s Temple and restore God’s worship. For example, on
Solomon’s reference to a “banquet,” Beza explains that not only does it capture the joy in
eating and drinking together (especially the banquet meals shared after offering
sacrifices), but it also reflects Solomon’s anticipation for “restoration” and
“embellishment of the service of God,” at which time “the beautiful temple would be
built, and the entire Ecclesiastical ministry established with marvelous magnificence.”
46
In another instance, Beza relates Solomon’s use of “wall,” “windows,” and “lattice” (2:9)
to temple structures. He writes, “there is no doubt that Solomon, who was the builder of
the temple, used these manners of speaking with regard to these walls, windows, and
44
Beza, Cantique, 378-379.
45
Beza, Cantique, 546.
46
Beza, Cantique, 281-282.
178
lattices, by which not only the common people were distinguished from the court of the
priests but also the court of the priests from the sanctuary.”
47
Again, Solomon’s
experience plays an important context for interpreting 2:11-13, which reads, “for now the
winter is past, the rain is over and gone. The flowers appear on the earth; the time of
singing has come, and the voice of the turtledove is heard in our land. The fig tree puts
forth its figs, and the vines are in blossom; they give forth fragrance.” Beza spends a
great amount of time explaining the meaning of different seasons and God’s garden from
the examples found in sacred history and in his time. Yet he concludes this discussion
with a comment from Solomon’s viewpoint: “Such was the condition of the church after
the storms of Saul’s time, to which David had applied great remedies but he could not
completely rectify the ceremonial service or the temple. Solomon, having done so,
compares this new restoration to an inheritance where fig trees give forth its figs, and the
vine shows its clusters, giving great hope for a bountiful harvest.”
48
Secondly, along with the original author’s intention, Beza also considers the
original nature of the material object as an important guiding principle, which involved
analyzing and making distinctions between similitudes and figures as they are interpreted
in allegorical context. Explaining why the Song of Songs is a difficult book to expound,
he writes that it is “entirely allegorical and enigmatic” in style, or more simply, “it
conveys to us spiritual things by similitude and figure drawn from natural and corporeal
47
Beza, Cantique, 387.
48
Beza, Cantique, 415.
179
things.”
49
For Beza, while both are means for representing spiritual truth, similitude
points to the truth by some matching quality between the natural and the spiritual,
whereas figure contains promises that lead people to look unto the real substance and
anticipate a future fulfillment. No spiritual promise is attached to the object in a
similitude but in the case of a figure, the real substance – that is, Jesus Christ – is always
attached in the form of a promise. Thus, Beza describes Old Testament ceremonial laws
and sacrifices as figures and shadows that contain promises of Jesus Christ. For example,
concerning “the ornaments of the Levitical priesthood and the riches of the temple,” he
writes that all this was “a figure of the spiritual riches of the true temple of God, namely
our Lord Jesus Christ under the pedagogy of the law.”
50
Likewise, referring to the
different ways that the Lord spoke in the Old Covenant, Beza comments, “he spoke
differently to the patriarchs before the law, and then in another way under the law by its
shadows and figures, the substance and the body of which was Jesus Christ.”
51
When
expressed in sacramental terms, figures are often ‘the sign’ that points to ‘the thing
signified.’ Beza’s interpretation of “your name is perfume poured out” (1:3) offers a great
example. The “perfume” here is distinguished from other perfumes, as it is a spiritual
perfume, “ordained in the law” with a “sacramental” significance.
52
As the water of
49
Beza, Cantique, 4: “… pource qu’il est escrit d’un style entierement allegorique &
aenigmatique, cest a dire nous donne a entendre les choses spirituelles par similitude & figure prinse des
choses naturelles & corporelles …” [Emphasis mine]
50
Beza, Cantique, 239: “Je respon quant aux ornemens de la Sacraficature Levitique & richesses
du temple, que tout cela a este une figure des richesses spirituelles du vray temple de Dieu ascavoir de
nostre Seigneur Jesus Christ soubs la pedagogie de la loy.” [Emphasis mine]
51
Beza, Cantique, 385. [Emphasis mine]
52
Beza, Cantique, 74-75.
180
baptism and the bread and wine of the holy supper are effectual ‘signs’ of ‘the thing
signified,’ the perfume also signifies Jesus Christ, the bridegroom of the church.
53
Beza
parses the meaning of this correspondence in three ways: First, this “sacramental
perfume” proceeds from God in the “perfections of Christ’s two natures”; second, the
church draws God’s gifts from Christ’s perfection by being united to Christ’s humanity;
and finally, as a “good perfume” gets rid of foul smells, the perfection in Christ’s
humanity puts away “all the stench of our corruption” so that we are made “acceptable
unto God,” being lifted to heaven by the virtue of Christ’s “perfuming” work.
54
He
concludes that “this sign” was “figured in the Law by the corporeal and sensual sacred
perfumes,” signifying “all perfections” that is in Jesus Christ.
55
Moreover, Beza
highlights the ways in which Solomon himself is a figure of the true Solomon:
Solomon, the son of David, being here presented as a figure of the true
Solomon, and his coronation in Jerusalem here on earth, being represented
to us as not in vain figure of the real taking of possession of the true
Solomon in the heavenly Jerusalem: it seems to me that there is no doubt
that, according to the ordinary style of the prophets, the time of
solemnizing betrothal, during which this Song was written, is properly
mentioned here, but in such a way that it is joined with that which is
figured, namely, with the solemnizing of the wedding, as if it were one and
the same time.
56
53
Beza, Cantique, 75-76.
54
Beza, Cantique, 76-81.
55
Beza, Cantique, 81.
56
Beza, Cantique, 668. Another example can be found on p. 543: “D’autre coste par Salomon est
entendu non seulement ce nom, qui vault autant a dire que pacifique, mais aussi la promesse faicte a David
de ce fils successeur Eternel, chouchee en tels termes qu’elle enveloppe tout en un, tant la figure qui est ce
fils de david: que la verite ou realite figuree par icelui, qui est Jesus Christ, 2 Sam. 7:13 & 1 Chro. 17:12.
Salomon donc nous represente ici cest Espoux, le vray & seul pacificateur entre Dieu & ses bien-aimes,
comme il est expressement appelle le prince de paix Es. 9:6 & son lict d’aujourhui est le monde universel
par tout ou il est recognu des eleus receuillis des quatre coins du monde, comme il fust monstre a S. Pierre,
par ce linseul descendant du ciel, & attache par les quatre bouts Act 10:11.” See also 426, 439, 589, 602,
663, 666.
181
In other words, “figure” brings together not only the corporeal with the spiritual and
visible with the invisible, but also the present with the future, with Christ being the
central point of connection. Beza reiterates his point that the proper method of
interpreting “the figures and the shadows of the ceremonial laws” must always lead
people to see “the substance and the body, which is our Lord Jesus Christ.”
57
Compared to figures, similitudes are visible objects that help to explain a certain
spiritual idea or truth by virtue of their likeness or similarity in qualities. After having laid
out the general contours of the love between Christ and the church in the first chapter,
Beza begins his sermon on chapter two, stating that the rest of this Canticle is about “the
perfect excellence of this bridegroom and the very blessed condition of this bride”
presented “under the figure of a wedding banquet and their mutual affections” through
the use of “diverse singular similitudes.”
58
If a figure is constituted in the sign and the
thing signified that comes to its fulfillment in Jesus Christ, similitudes are tools for
teaching and instruction. Beza proffers an explanation as to why God at times uses things
of the nature and creation to show forth divine truths:
As for the first point we have touched upon [creation], the Lord acts as the
expositor of the book of nature. But in this second point [the Gospel], he
makes his creatures serve a more excellent purpose, surpassing the goal of
their creation, namely, to help us understand this high and supernatural
secret of our salvation and its author, who is the Son of God, and of what it
depends on, drawing from these visible and corporeal things similitudes
that greatly aid in grasping the spiritual. This is seen by countless
similitudes, parables, or comparisons found in the Holy Scriptures,
especially in the Gospel narrative, of which if we have well planted in our
57
Beza, Cantique, 668.
58
Beza, Cantique, 315-316. [Emphasis mine]
182
memory, nothing could be presented to our eyes that would not lead us to
think of God for dedicating our entire lives to him.
59
Working within this framework, Beza finds numerous similitudes used in the Song of
Songs: wine (1:2), tents, curtains (1:5), vineyard (1:6), noon (1:7), horses, chariots (1:9),
ornaments, jewels (1:10), couch, nard (1:12), myrrh (1:13), henna blossoms (1:14),
beams, cedar, rafters, pine (1:17), rose, lily, (2:1), brambles (2:2), apple tree (2:3), raisins,
apples (2:5), gazelles, wild does (2:7), mountains (2:8), wall, windows, lattice (2:9),
winter, rain (2:11), fig tree, vines (2:13), clefts, cliff (2:14), foxes (2:15), city (3:2),
sentinels (3:3), palanquin, wood of Lebanon (3:9), and silver, gold, purple (3:10) to name
a few. For each of these similitudes, Beza describes its distinct trait or quality, which he
then uses to explain an aspect of the overall theme of the Song, that is, the love between
Christ and the church. Hence, he does not immediately launch into an allegorical or
spiritual reading per se but he attempts to ground it first on the basis of the original nature
of the object in view. For example, as he expounds on “horse” (1:9), he first draws
attention to the “tall” and “upright” features of the animal. These physicalities then
compare to the “tall” and “upright” beauties of a woman, who exemplifies the
“excellency of the church.”
60
Also related to the horse, Beza alludes to the significance of
how there is more than one horse pulling the chariot. The fact that the horses are coupled,
notes Beza, is “a most gracious similitude.” As horses are couple and yoked, the faithful
forms a company, as “two by two under the yoke of the Lord,” who encourage one
59
Beza, Cantique, 320.
60
Beza, Cantique, 255.
183
another by words and examples.
61
Further, Beza explains allegories of the “lily” and the
“rose” (2:1) by using their colors as “wonderfully fitting” similitudes for representing the
“most beautiful and resplendent” qualities of the bridegroom. The “purity” and
“righteousness” of Jesus Christ is nowhere better shown than in the “whiteness” and
“purity” of the lilies.
62
As for the allegory of the “rose,” Beza refers to two kinds of
colors. The “pink rose,” he describes, “is the great secret of our religion, namely, the true
Son of God made manifest in flesh, justified in spirit, seen by the angels, preached to the
nations, believed in the world, and exalted in glory.”
63
As this rose suffers death on the
cross, it is “stained entirely red with the blood by which our sins are washed away.” This
redness of the rose thus points to a significant spiritual truth – that is, in order for us to
please God, we need “this all-red rose and this all-pure lily.”
64
Another example comes
from “the wood of Lebanon” (3:9). Beza refers to the “incorruptible” nature of this wood,
and connects it to the “invincibility” of the “holy and sacred government” of the church.
65
Nothing, whether time nor humankind, can destroy the church, just as no force can bring
down Solomon’s carriage made out of wood of Lebanon. These examples demonstrate
that as much as the original author’s intention was important to Beza, the original nature
of the visible object, as figures and similitudes, also served as a significant guiding
principle for his allegorical interpretation.
61
Beza, Cantique, 261-262.
62
Beza, Cantique, 322.
63
Beza, Cantique, 322-323.
64
Beza, Cantique, 325-326.
65
Beza, Cantique, 565.
184
Thirdly, Beza dissects the literal construct of the Song of Songs, paying particular
attention to whether a word is singular or plural, from which then he draws his allegorical
readings. The first instance appears in his sermon on 1:2 (“Let him kiss me with the
kisses of his mouth.”). This entire second sermon hinges on Beza’s explanation of this
“kiss,” which, according to him is an outward expression of one’s greatest desire and
affection toward another being.
66
Understood in relation to the bride and the bridegroom,
this kiss speaks of the “most holy” and “most chaste” conjugal union between Christ and
the church. According to Beza, Christ kisses the church by “preaching of his word” and
more intimately by “coming in person,” at which time Christ’s mouth will be, as if,
“glued to ours by this holy kiss.”
67
Here, Beza notices that the bride is asking to be kissed
with “kisses of his mouth” in plural. He relates this to Christ’s coming in two stages: “she
[bride] desires kiss upon kiss, knowing that this [Christ’s] bodily presence here below
would last only a short time and that the true consummation of this marriage is not on
earth but in the heavens.”
68
Beza builds upon the plural word form to point his listeners
forward in anticipation of Christ’s second coming, and also to urge them to desire Christ
repeatedly, kiss upon kiss, with their “pure, holy, and well-ordered affection.”
69
Again, in
his sermon on the second part of 1:2 (“for your love is better than wine”), Beza brings
attention to the word “love.” In the Hebrew grammar, this word can be singular when
used as a concrete noun but also plural in abstract. Beza uses the plural (“dilections”) and
66
Beza, Cantique, 33.
67
Beza, Cantique, 34, 36-37.
68
Beza, Cantique, 38-39.
69
Beza, Cantique, 48-49: “d’une affection pure, saincte & bien reglee …”
185
notes that the “bride speaks of the dilections of her bridegroom, in the plural, not because
there are multiple beings in the essence of God” but because God pours out “infinite
diversity of his grace in quality and quantity” upon the church.
70
Similarly, he writes that
the plural is used in “perfumes” (1:3) to represent Christ’s “perfections” that are “without
measure” and “most excellent in sovereign degree.”
71
For Beza, the abundance of God’s
love for God’s people is also reflected in the use of plural in “chambers” (1:4). He
connects the “chambers” to Christ’s own testimony that there are many rooms in the
Father’s house (John 14:2).
72
If these examples demonstrate Beza’s attention to the plural nouns in order to
emphasize the diverse, abundant, and excellent nature of God’s care and love for the
church in Christ, the next set of examples illustrate the significance of singular nouns for
Beza’s interpretation. One example is his sermon on 1:6 (“they made me keeper of the
vineyards, but my own vineyard I have not kept”). As he explains the meaning of
“vineyard,” he writes that Scripture often compares the “inheritance” given to the Jews in
the land of Canaan to a “well-planted” and “well-cultivated” vineyard that is “blessed
with abundant growth.” According to Beza, this “vineyard” is singular, because in the
time of the Old Testament, there was only “one land consecrated to God, one people
included in the covenant, and one place established and consecrated in Jerusalem for the
70
Beza, Cantique, 55. This same word “dilections” appears in 1:4, where it reads, “we will extol
your love more than wine.” Beza interprets this the same way and says this love in plural denotes the
abundance of God’s love reserved for God’s people. See Beza, Cantique, 112-113.
71
Beza, Cantique, 76.
72
Beza, Cantique, 113.
186
ordinary external service of the Lord.”
73
He contrasts this singular with the plural
“vineyards,” which represent the countless “false religions and false churches.”
74
He
notes that although this “vineyard” is no longer limited to one particular place, there is
still only “one God, one faith, and one church” as opposed to the great number of false
churches in his day.
75
In short, Beza uses the singular and plural of this “vineyard” to
contrast one true church against many false churches. In a similar manner, preaching on
1:7 and 1:8 (“for why should I be like one who is veiled beside the flocks of your
companions? If you do not know, O fairest among women, follow the tracks of the flock,
and pasture your kids beside the shepherds’ tents”), Beza compares the singular and
plural uses of the “flock” to make a distinction between many false churches who pretend
to assume the role of Christ’s companions (“the flocks of your companions”) and the one
true universal Church (“the flock”).
76
Under this one universal “flock” there are many
particular “tents,” where the true “shepherds” lead all members unto the one and only
Shepherd, the bridegroom.
77
Beza’s attention to the grammatical form of a word,
particularly the singular and plural nouns, illustrates how his allegorical reading was not
completely distinct from his literal and grammatical exegesis.
The final guiding principle of Beza’s reading of the Song of Songs as an allegory
is Scripture itself. Beza makes numerous references to other books of the Bible and cites
73
Beza, Cantique, 151.
74
Beza, Cantique, 152.
75
Beza, Cantique, 152-154.
76
Beza, Cantique, 218.
77
Beza, Cantique, 238.
187
them in support of his interpretations, relying on Scripture to interpret Scripture. His use
of scriptural context gains even greater importance for interpreting the Song than the
other biblical books of the previous chapters, because of the enigmatic nature of its
allegories. This is why in the preface, he stresses that scriptural knowledge is a
prerequisite for those who attempt to exegete the Song of Songs: “[E]veryone knows how
hazardous the exposition of allegories is, and even dangerous if one does not approach it
with a very religious spirit, well-founded and well-versed in the scriptures.”
78
He
particularly points to the mistakes committed by both Greeks and Latins in their Song of
Songs exposition, which resulted because they had put forth everything that came to their
minds and indulged in those thoughts without using the Scripture as their context.
79
Following his own advice, Beza supports his reading of allegories with abundant
scriptural evidences, citing from both the Old and the New Testaments, throughout his
sermons. In one instance, as he draws on the image of a banquet and the meaning of a
“round table” (1:12) to describe the “beautiful banquet of the Bridegroom.” He directs his
audience to Matthew 22:2 and Luke 14:16, and suggests that these passages on Christ’s
parable of the banquet serve as a “commentary for clarifying the allegory of this
passage.”
80
And yet, of the many places in the Scripture that Beza use to support his
allegorical readings, Psalm 45 is the most significant, which he considers to be a
78
Beza, Cantique, A2v.
79
Beza, Cantique, A2v.
80
Beza, Cantique, 282-283.
188
“summary of this entire Song.”
81
In fact, his entire explanation on Psalm 45 from his
Psalm Paraphrases appears as an introduction to his sermons on the Song of Songs,
setting the tone and direction for the general theme of this biblical book. According to
Beza, Psalm 45 is a love song that reveals the spiritual truth of “the union between Christ
and the Church” through an allegory of common marriage.
82
Christ is pictured as the true
king riding on a chariot, who not only obtains victory for the church against her enemies
and sits on the throne of justice beautifully with fragrant garments, but also adorns the
Queen with golden robes and leads her into the chamber. Thus, the beauty of the true
church is not in the external but in the inner “chamber,” the heart, which the whole world
will come to see when this marriage is perfectly fulfilled on the day of seeing this
husband in his glorious palace.
83
One can easily sense the overlap in images and themes
between Psalm 45 and the Song: the picture of “perfume” running down from “ivory
palaces,” the splendor and superiority of this king over all “companions,” the image of a
“queen” signifying the church, the true beauty of the spouse that lies in the “chamber,”
and the life of “forgetting” the past and this world to “go forth” toward this king and his
kingdom.
84
For Beza, these two passages that speak of spiritual marriage are intimately
81
Beza, Cantique, 6. Beza lists multiple places in the Scripture where the same allegory of
marriage is used to describe the relationship between Christ and the Church. These passages include, Ps.
45, Is. 61:1-6, Jer. 3, Ez. 16 & 23, Hos. 1-2, Matt. 25, John 3:29, Rom. 7:1, 2 Cor. 11:2, Eph. 5, and Rev.
17. Regarding this last reference to Revelation 17, the editors of volume 9 of the Reformation Commentary
on Scripture suggest that Beza must have been referring to Rev. 22:17, not Rev. 17. See RCS 9:310, n.7.
82
Beza, Psalmorum, 158. See the section on Psalm 45 in chapter 2 of this study.
83
Beza, Psalmorum, 158-161, and Beza, Cantique, A4v.-A7v.
84
For Beza’s references to Psalm 45 in explaning the meaning of the Song, see his Cantique, 87,
126, 138, 190, 193, 270-271, 275-276, 282, 303, 323, 414, 597, 600.
189
connected, as they provide not only the scriptural contours for his allegorical reading but
also a fuller picture of the sacred union between Christ and the church.
85
In short, Beza’s interpretation of allegories was not aliteral nor ahistorical, but
firmly grounded on his consistent literal and historical exegetical methods demonstrated
throughout this study. The four factors – authorial intent, distinction between figure and
similitude, the meaning of singular and plural nouns, and scriptural context – provided
Beza the foundation for developing his allegorical readings, as he sought to harmonize
them in illustrating the spiritual truth concerning the union between Christ and the
church. Beza’s method of reading the Song of Songs contributed to consolidating
Reformed confessional identity, particularly in the distinct ways that the literal and
historical contexts played in Reformed approaches to Scripture.
4.3 Prophet and Prophecy in Beza’s Reading of the Song of Songs
Beza’s understanding of prophet and prophecy in the Song of Songs is closely tied
to allegorical reading. Although the Song is not a prophetic book per se, Beza
nevertheless views Solomon as having a prophetic vision of Christ’s coming and Christ’s
work in the history of salvation, as David’s history, demonstrated in the Psalms chapter,
points to Christ by a way of prophetic spirit. Beza grounded his allegorical reading of the
Song with a focus on the union between Christ and the church on the belief that this
85
Beza was not alone in seeing Psalm 45 as an abridgement of the Song, as Calvin had also argued
the same point. Calvin did not, however, make explicit mentions of Christ or the church in the content of
his Psalm 45 exegesis, nor wrote a commentary on the Song of Songs. As Engammare demonstrates, Calvin
makes only subtle references to Christ as the bridegroom and the church as the bride, preferring to read the
psalm in human author’s history rather than in Christ’s history. See Engammare, Le Cantique des
Cantiques, 10-11, esp. n. 48, and also Loader, “Calvin and Canticles,” 3.
190
doctrine was the very essence of Solomon’s prophecy. In analyzing Beza’s views of
prophet and prophecy, I find Sujin Pak’s observations on Calvin’s understanding of
prophets and prophecy very helpful: “His [Calvin’s] particular contributions to early
Protestant conceptions of prophecy were his emphases on the prophet as a teacher who
specifically provides application to contemporary circumstances and on the distinction
between temporary and permanent (ordinary) church offices.”
86
Building upon Pak’s
study, I approach this section with the question of whether Beza, in his interpretation of
the Song of Songs, echoes the patterns of Calvin’s reading of prophets and prophecies in
the Old Testament – namely, the way Beza defines the role of prophets and the
significance of such an understanding for the apostles of the New Testament as well as
the pastors and teachers of his current time. To answer these questions, I first explore
Beza’s understanding of prophet and prophecy as presented in his Song of Songs. I then
demonstrate in what sense he viewed Solomon to be a prophet in the Old Testament
context.
Beza prescribes a twofold definition of a prophet. First, taken in a narrow sense,
prophets are those who “predict future things concerning our Lord Jesus Christ” and
provide a “specific application of the threats or promises of the Law.”
87
These figures,
Beza notes, include the “fifteen Prophets” who authored books of the Bible, as well as
86
G. Sujin Pak, The Reformation of Prophecy: Early Modern Interpretations of the Prophet and
Old Testament Prophecy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018), 167.
87
Beza, Cantique, 183-184. This view of prophets as an interpreter of the law echoes the emphasis
of Bullinger and Calvin in their understanding of Old Testament prophets. On the contrary, Pak notes that
this view was mostly absent in Luther’s accounts and only briefly mentioned in Zwingli’s writings. See
Pak, The Reformation of Prophecy, in particular 137-147 on Bullinger and 155-163 on Calvin.
191
“many others mentioned in the Holy Scriptures.”
88
Although he includes in this narrow
definition “many others,” his most basic understanding points specifically to those
“fifteen prophets” who lived in a particular time and place of the Old Testament period.
Their primary responsibilities, as Beza describes, were in foreseeing and applying – that
is, foreseeing the work of Christ and applying the Law to the people of God. Citing Isaiah
8:20, Beza affirms that the “prophets preached among the desolations of the church in
their times” with the aim to always direct the “misguided” back “to the law and the
testimony.”
89
Further, he comments that the prophets were given the task by God to speak
about the “revelations of the secrets of God concerning our salvation in Jesus Christ,”
although they only looked from a distance in the form of “promises from afar.”
90
For
Beza, these messages of the prophets always included both “consolation” and “judgment”
for the people of God.
91
Hand in hand with this narrow definition, Beza also offers a more general
understanding of a prophet, as “an announcer of the will of God concerning our
salvation.”
92
Beza’s emphasis on the prophet’s task of announcing God’s will resonates
with Calvin’s identification of the prophets as those who know, interpret, and make
88
Beza, Cantique, 184.
89
Beza, Cantique, 235.
90
Beza, Cantique, 110-111.
91
Beza, Cantique, 224. Pak observes that Calvin argues a similar point: “Calvin presented a
unified conception, in which both the New and Old Testament depict the prophet as an interpreter who
discerns God’s will and applies Scripture to contemporary circumstances, and as a teacher with the chief
duties of edification, exhortation, and consolation” (Pak, The Reformation of Prophecy, 159-160).
92
Beza, Cantique, 184.
192
known God’s will for the people of God under the category of teaching office.
93
By
making this argument, Beza ultimately presents Jesus Christ as the true prophet, who
“was ordained by the Father eternally to declare his will to men.”
94
As the human
prophets preached messages of both “consolation” and “judgment” according to the will
of God, Beza cites New Testament passages to argue that Christ also preached judgment
and comfort by coming “in flesh to reveal the Father’s will.” He similarly states, Christ is
“the only prophet and declarer of God’s counsel concerning human salvation.”
95
By
proclaiming Christ to be the only true and eternal prophet, Beza firmly grounds all other
offices and functions of prophecy on Christ’s work and Christ’s teachings. All true
prophetic activities and proclaimed prophecies must have Christ as their central subject.
For Beza, then, Christ is the link between the prophets of the Old Testament and the
apostles of the New Testament, unto whom the Holy Spirit revealed the secrets of the
revelation of Christ.
96
Beza writes concerning Christ’s “sovereign prophetic authority”
that the “ancient prophets spoke by his Spirit, 1 Peter 1:11, and who, after announcing in
person the entire will of God his Father, without reserving anything, John 15:15, … has
continued to declare to the world through his faithful apostles enlightened by a special
93
See Pak, The Reformation of Prophecy, 151-153 in particular for Calvin’s view of prophets as
interpreters of God’s will. She finds the same emphasis in other Reformed exegetes, including, Grynaeus,
Daneau, and Pareus.
94
Beza, Cantique, 184.
95
Beza, Cantique, 646.
96
I note here that Beza emerges as more christological in his reading of prophecy than Calvin.
According to Pak, while Calvin would agree that Christ is the true prophet and is central to interpreting Old
Testament prophecies, he is reluctant to see them as primarily christological but favors metaphorical
reading for the church across the ages. See Pak, The Reformation of Prophecy, 284-291.
193
power of the Holy Spirit.”
97
To add or subtract from what has been declared by these
“ancient prophets” and “faithful apostles” is to change not only “white to black and light
to darkness,” but more fundamentally, “degrade Jesus Christ from his prophetic
dignity.”
98
On a similar note, against the false teachings of the Roman Catholics, Beza
directs his audience to seek Christ in the preached and written Word, which was put down
into writing “first by his prophets according to the measure and dispensations of the times
and finally by his apostles.”
99
Beza associates the writings of prophets and apostles with
the “shepherds’ tents,” which is where true Jesus Christ is found and discerned (1:8), the
“beams” and “rafters” that firmly support the true Catholic church (1:17), and the “true
vessels” from which “good wine” of God’s Word is drawn (2:5).
100
The prophetic
function of declaring God’s will for God’s people is thereby maintained from the Old
Testament prophets to the New Testament apostles on the foundation of Christ’s work and
Christ’s teachings, which have been put down into writing. As such, Beza’s
understanding of prophets and prophecy was intimately tied to his understanding of
Scripture as revelation.
Taking his definition of prophets as announcers of God’s will concerning human
salvation in Christ, Beza found significant implications for strengthening the authority of
97
Beza, Cantique, 647.
98
Beza, Cantique, 647. Throughout the sermons, Beza emphasizes that nothing can be added,
amended or subtracted from Scripture. Against the Catholics claim authority on tradition, he makes it clear
that there can be no new revelation or authority besides what has already been given in written word. See
Jon Balserak, “Theodore Beza on Prophets and Prochecy,” in Theodore Beza at 500, edited by Summers
and Manetsch (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2021), 205-219, esp. 215, 218.
99
Beza, Cantique, 108.
100
Beza, Cantique, 244, 312, 355.
194
church offices, particularly the roles of pastors and doctors in the Christian church. The
Old Testament prophetic office that entailed foreseeing future events, applying the law,
and authoring books of Scripture under the guidance of the Holy Spirit had ceased for
Beza, but the prophetic function of teaching God’s people about God’s will concerning
human salvation was still an ongoing ministry.
101
Following this line of thought, Beza
asserts that pastors and doctors are faithful successors of the prophets and apostles.
102
Particularly important in this regard is his explanation of the bridegroom’s “companions”
(1:7). He clearly states that Christ, in his kingship and prophetic office, “has no
companion,” for all works of governing Christ’s kingdom and revealing God’s will
belong to Christ alone.
103
Beza continues, those who are called “prophets, apostles,
pastors, and doctors” are only “heralds and ambassadors” of Christ.
104
He then proceeds
to describe the succession of God’s appointed people throughout all history of the church.
First, God revealed to the “patriarchs” who maintained God’s doctrines among families
and people throughout the land.
105
Next, when it pleased God to build a nation through
Abraham’s descendants, God appeared to Moses “in an extraordinary way,” commanding
him “to speak, act, and write, without adding or subtracting anything” from what was
101
Here I employ Pak’s distinction between prophetic office and prophetic function, which she
identifies as a development in Bullinger’s and Calvin’s view of prophecy that came to distinguish the
Reformed from other confessional identities. See Pak, The Reformation of Prophecy, especially chapter 4
on “Prophecy and Teaching Office,” 129-177.
102
Pak’s study shows that Beza’s view aligns with Calvin on this point as well. See Pak, The
Reformation of Prophecy, 163-168.
103
Beza, Cantique, 201.
104
Beza, Cantique, 201.
105
Beza, Cantique, 201.
195
revealed to him.
106
Then, God raised prophets whose task was “none other than to expose
and apply God’s blessing and judgments, according to the special revelations they
received.”
107
After them, Christ came in person “with full authority” and “fully taught the
will of his father concerning the salvation of mankind.”
108
This prophetic role was passed
on to the apostles, “whom Christ appointed as founders” of the church; yet their ministry
was “limited” to what Christ had taught them and was fully dependent on the instructions
given by an “extraordinary measure of the Holy Spirit.”
109
Finally, the pastors and
doctors succeeded the apostles, “not to establish any new truth, but to build good and
solid teachings, exhortations, consolations, and reprehensions upon the foundation of the
Apostles.”
110
From this line of succession of authority, four points are worth noting. First,
Beza makes a clear distinction between the “extraordinary” and “special” revelation the
prophets and apostles received, and the ordinary task of the pastors and doctors to build
upon the already-established foundation.
111
Second, Beza highlights the shared task of
prophets, apostles, and pastors in applying the Word of God for the benefit of God’s
people. Third, by placing pastors and doctors in a long line of succession, Beza
106
Beza, Cantique, 202.
107
Beza, Cantique, 202-203.
108
Beza, Cantique, 203.
109
Beza, Cantique, 203.
110
Beza, Cantique, 203. On this point, Beza references 1 Cor. 3:10, Eph. 4:11, and 2 Tim. 3:16.
111
See also Balserak, “Theodore Beza on Prophets and Prophecy,” 215-218, where he notes that in
Beza’s understanding, prophets, apostles, and evangelists came under the category of extraordinary
vocations whereas pastors, doctors, deacons, and elders under ordinary vocations. At the same time,
however, Balserak argues that Beza extended the role of extraordinary vocation of Old Testament prophets
to the reformers, particularly to defend their authority in correcting the errors of the church.
196
establishes and strengthens the authority of the teaching office of the Christian church
over against the Roman Catholic’s claim for their priestly succession and authority.
Finally, Beza emphasizes the derivative nature of all offices and teaching ministries,
which come from the full authority and instructions of Christ who is the only true
prophet. Thus, to add or subtract anything to Christ’s authority and teach beyond the
Gospel is unacceptable and leads to worship of idols rooted in human inventions.
112
Beza underlines these same points through an allegorical interpretation of King
Solomon’s palanquin. The verse reads, “King Solomon made himself a palanquin from
the wood of Lebanon. He made its posts of silver, its back of gold, its seat of purple; its
interior was inlaid with love” (3:9-10). For Beza, this “palanquin” made from “the wood
of Lebanon” represents God’s church that Christ has established and designed according
to Christ’s own pleasure and order, which is “invincible” against all assaults, like the
“incorruptible” wood of Lebanon.
113
As for the structure of this palanquin, Beza
interprets the “posts of silver” as prophets and apostles who are succeeded by pastors and
doctors, the “back of gold” as Jesus Christ, and the “seat of purple” as the “heavenly
power of God.”
114
Expanding on the meaning of the silver posts, he highlights the
differences between prophets, apostles, and pastors and doctors. Though the prophets and
apostles share the identity as the “principal architects and the hand of this king” in
building this palanquin, the prophets “outlined” the truth, while the apostles “completed”
112
Beza, Cantique, 203.
113
Beza, Cantique, 564-565.
114
Beza, Cantique, 566-569.
197
this outline by “grace” given to them.
115
The pastors and doctors succeeded them, only
after the palanquin has been completely finished. The job of the pastors and doctors,
therefore, is “to maintain” the palanquin in all its parts and members, which includes for
Beza, the church in general but also the individual members who are seated on the
palanquin.
116
In short, pastors maintain what apostles have completed based on the
outlines drawn by prophets, all supported by the “back of gold,” which is Jesus Christ.
Nevertheless, despite the specific tasks given to each office, they shared in
declaring God’s will concerning human salvation, leading people to the true shepherd and
applying God’s Word to the people of God. According to Beza, the “voice of the
turtledove” (2:11) is God’s holy Word, first sung by the prophets, then in the person of
Christ, then by his apostles, and today by faithful pastors and doctors.
117
The fact that
they all sang the same song to the same tune of Jesus Christ as revealed in the Scripture
had significant practical implications, particularly for discerning false doctrines and
examining diverse interpretations. In such cases, pastors were to expound the passages
“scripture by scripture” and compare them to “the articles of our faith, the Creed,” which
Beza defined as a “collection and summary of all the fundamental doctrine of
Christianity.”
118
For Beza, the historic creeds and analogy of faith with their foundation
on the writings of prophets and apostles, acted as the criteria for judging all aspects of
115
Beza, Cantique, 566-567.
116
Beza, Cantique, 565-566.
117
Beza, Cantique, 410.
118
Beza, Cantique, 514-515. See also p. 244-245.
198
prophecies, on which the status of true church and true pastor against the false churches
and false pastors of his day were to be confirmed.
In light of his understanding of prophet and prophecy, Beza often portrayed
Solomon as a prophet in his interpretation of the Song of Songs. For Beza, Solomon, as
an author of Old Testament biblical books, had a prophetic vision of foreseeing Christ’s
first and second coming, as well as the persecutions and sufferings of the church on this
earth, while also prophesying the message of comfort found in the bridegroom. The two
key aspects of foreseeing salvation in Christ and applying judgments and consolation
from Beza’s definition of prophecy are exemplified in Solomon’s words in the Song of
Songs. Beza outlines Solomon’s prophetic foresight in his very first sermon. In answering
the question why the bride speaks before the bridegroom, Beza explains that it is because
the bride is captured with “expectation and desire for the real and personal presence of
this bridegroom,” which Solomon “prophetically foretells” in the “manifestation of the
Son of God in the flesh and his real conversation among his own” and even beyond to
Christ’s second coming.
119
“Nevertheless,” Beza continues, “Solomon does not forget to
speak of the persecutions that will happen unto the church, even by her own people, and
the calling of the Gentiles, along with the most firm and excellent consolations.”
120
Drawing on the bride’s words that “the sun has gazed on me” (1:6), Beza revisits this
point on Solomon’s prediction of future persecutions. According to Beza, the cause of
this bride being “sunburnt” lies in the “horrible confusions” and the “strange desolations”
119
Beza, Cantique, 16.
120
Beza, Cantique, 16.
199
of the church, which Solomon saw take place in the past histories “from the death of
Joshua until the time of David” but also “prophetically predicted” to take place in
“Judah” and the “kingdom of Israel,” leading to the exile of the church, the return from
Babylon, and all the way up to the persecutions “under the Greeks and the Romans,”
even to the “coming and departure of Jesus Christ.”
121
All these future sufferings of the
church, Solomon predicted with a prophetic vision. On the other side of the future
warnings, however, Solomon also looked toward consolations: “Solomon does not forget
the tribulations that the church and each member must suffer while waiting the fulfillment
of her desire. Nor does he forget the consolations of her bridegroom, who is in heaven
and extends his arms to her until the consummation of the world.”
122
This consolation
comes from none other than the bridegroom, whose presence the bride earnestly desires
throughout the Song of Songs. Hence, in the “banquet” scene (1:12-14), Beza depicts
Solomon as foreseeing the complete “restoration” and “embellishment” of the temple and
the entire ecclesiastical ministry.
123
He writes, Solomon “looked forward to Jesus Christ
in a prophetic spirit,” to the day of full celebration when the bride will be “seated at the
side of her bridegroom.”
124
Since Beza did not publish a written work on the prophetic books, previous
studies on his view of prophet and biblical prophecy have mostly focused on his New
121
Beza, Cantique, 149.
122
Beza, Cantique, 28.
123
Beza, Cantique, 282.
124
Beza, Cantique, 282.
200
Testament writings.
125
Although the Song of Songs is not a prophetic book per se, it
provides insights into Beza’s understanding of prophecy in the Old Testament context
through the lens of Solomon, who not only foresaw future events concerning Christ and
the church but also offered consolation to churches in the midst of their persecutions.
Beza’s emphasis on these two aspects of foreseeing and applying were significant for
locating a continuous succession of prophetic function from the Old Testament prophets
to the pastors and teachers of his day. As demonstrated, this argument bolstered the
teaching and pastoral authority of the offices of the Protestant church, all of which had its
ultimate authority from the work and teachings of Jesus Christ. In these aspects, Beza
strengthened distinctive Reformed teachings concerning the prophet and prophecy.
4.4 History, Christ, and Church in Beza’s Reading of the Song of Songs
Allegorical reading together with a prophetical emphasis prepared the ground for
Beza to develop his idea of history as it unfolds in the relationship between Christ and the
church in the Song of Songs. As Beza found the Song to be a helpful resource in
advancing his thoughts on prophet and prophecy, he discovered the book to be just as
useful in elaborating the theme of history. For Beza, the identity of the church is
historical in its essence because God is a God of history and works through history in
gathering the members of God’s church. Discussions of the true church thus can never be
ahistorical. Under God’s providential rule and plan, the church has its beginning and is
125
I note two studies in particular. Pak looks at Beza as one of the figures who developed Calvin’s
thoughts and consolidated Reformed distinctions on prophet and prophecy by using references from his
New Testament annotations, particularly, on his comments on Romans 12:6 and 1 Corinthians 14.
Balserak’s study is also mainly focused on Beza’s New Testament writings: his sermons on the passion,
annotations, and response to John Hay. He only briefly mentions Beza’s sermons on the Song.
201
destined for its fulfillment in the second coming of Christ. This historical nature of the
true church is a very important theme in his reading of the Song of Songs against the
polemical challenges posed by the Roman Catholics who claimed for themselves the
titles of catholicity and apostolicity. I approach my analysis of Beza’s conception of
history in two parts. First, I examine Beza’s depiction of the historical nature of the
church through different stages of salvation history from the Old to the New Covenant,
and secondly, I investigate his understanding of the true church as opposed to the false
churches, and the nature of both, as they unfold in the history of the church. My aim is
not to propose a systematic treatment of his ecclesiology but to examine these topics as
they provide Beza with the exegetical grounds for drawing applications for his own
context.
126
Beza’s interpretation of the Song of Songs accentuates the historical thrust in the
identity of the church on this earth. While history emerges as a keen interest of his
sermons, he makes several distinctions: sacred history, profane history, and ecclesiastical
history. Sacred history, for Beza, is always the history of God’s people represented in the
narratives of the Old and the New Testaments, whereas ecclesiastical history is the
history of the church from the post-apostolic period to Christ’s second coming, and
profane history is all other history that happens outside of God’s dealings with the
church.
127
If profane history is subject to God’s general governance of the world, sacred
and ecclesiastical histories are closely tied to God’s special plan for God’s chosen people
126
For the doctrinal discussions and development of Beza’s ecclesiology in relation to history, see
Maruyama, The Ecclesiology of Theodore Beza (Geneva, Librairie Droz, 1978).
127
For examples of Beza’s outline of these histories, see 293-295, 400-402, 426-429, and 440-442,
586-589.
202
across all time and place through the saving work of Christ. For Beza, the Song of Songs
unfolds this salvation history of God’s people, along with all the prosperities and
adversities of it, as this allegorical book most intimately expresses than any other place in
the Scripture the mutual desire and love between the bride and the bridegroom. Thus,
from the very outset of the sermons, Beza introduces his view of salvation history and the
framework for reading the Song according to three corresponding stages of a marriage
relationship. The first is the “stipulation” or the engagement stage between “fiancé and
fiancée,” wherein the “fiancé” is “absent” but present only in the form of “Levitical
sacrifices and shadows of the gospel promise.”
128
The second stage corresponds to the
“celebration of marriage” between “bridegroom and bride,” in which the bridegroom is
more intimately present in real person. The last stage is the “consummation of marriage”
between “husband and wife,” which, Beza mentions, will happen at the day of Christ’s
second coming.
129
As Maruyama points out, this three-stage distinction of salvation
history is a unique contribution of Beza that runs as a major theme of his sermons.
130
He
reiterates the same division later in sermon 13: “Under the allegory and figure of which
we have declared this infinite dilection of Jesus Christ who loves and cherishes his
church, … we must consider three degrees in this holy marriage, namely, the engagement
contracted by the words of the future under the Old Covenant, the marriage by the words
128
Beza, Cantique, 15.
129
Beza, Cantique, 15.
130
Tadataka Maruyama, The Ecclesiology of Theodore Beza: The Reform of the True Church, 151-
153. Maruyama posits that Beza’s such way of reading the Song may be placed between the traditional
allegorical interpretation and the historical interpretations of the seventeenth century, of which one example
is Johannes Cocceius who divided the history of Christ’s marriage to the church into seven periods. See p.
153, n77.
203
of the present, related to the coming of Jesus Christ and preaching of the Gospel, and the
full consummation that we await.”
131
This consummation is the “real and full actual
union” that the bride aspires to on this earth by means of the promises in the Old
Testament and the Gospel in the New Testament.
132
Beza’s division of salvation history also corresponds to the distinctions between
the Old and New Testaments and the Old and New Covenants. Although he uses the two
distinctions almost interchangeably in the Song, he displays a greater preference on the
latter distinction when describing the ways that the bridegroom relates to the bride
throughout the salvation history. If the Old and New Testament is a simple category used
to divide the books of the Bible, with Christ being at the center of the two, the Old and
New covenant distinction has its emphasis on the different manners in which Christ is
made manifest unto the world. For instance, drawing on the transportability of a
“carriage” (3:9), Beza describes that in the “Old Covenant,” the bridegroom placed “his
dwelling” in the temple and Jerusalem, but desiring “to walk” around, he “scattered”
priests and Levites throughout the land.
133
On the other hand, in the “New Covenant,”
131
Beza, Cantique, 265-266. See also p. 666-667, where he further divides the engagement period
into “small engagement” and “solemn engagement”: “Jusques a la Loy donques il y a eu comme ce qu’on
appelle ici, le petit fiancement, & le temps de depuis la Loy, qui estoit comme un crayon de cest Espoux
Heb. 10:1 & Coloss. 2:17, sera comme les fianceailles solennelles, sur tout en l’edification du temple, &
establissement si magnifique de la sacrificature Levitique. Puis a la venue du Seigneur en chair, aura este
contracte reellement ce mariage par parole de present, suyuant ce que nous enseigne l’Apostre
expressement Eph. 5:25 & 29, estant ratifie le contract de la nouvelle alliance par le nouveau seel de la
saincte Cene, comme il appert par la teneur de l’institution d’icelle, & par le but ou elle tend, ascavoir, par
la communion de corps, & de biens, avec cest Espoux, 1 Cor. 1:30 & 10:16, tellement toutefois que la
pleine, & parfaictement reelle consommation de ce mariage appartenant a la jouissance de la vie eternelle,
1 Cor. 15:28 & 54, est remise au jour de son apparition glorieuse 1 Thessalon. 4:16 & 17, …”
132
Beza, Cantique, 38.
133
Beza, Cantique, 552.
204
such transportability was executed “by the coming of the bridegroom” who “walked”
throughout the land in person first, “announcing the good news,” and then by sending his
apostles, followed by pastors and doctors “for the gathering of his chosen ones from all
four corners of the world.”
134
The Old and New Covenant distinction highlights the
different ways that divine grace was dispensed throughout salvation history. He further
compares the two covenants as if they are divided by a “wall” and “lattice” (2:9). While it
is true that Jesus Christ is the only “mediator between God and humanity” whose “effect”
is received by one and the same faith, “due to the manner and measure of manifestation
of this knowledge of salvation, there have been two covenants: the old, which ended, was
ordained only until the real coming of the Savior and the full exhibition and declaration
of the doctrine of salvation, the Gospel.”
135
In other words, the church of the Old
Covenant knew Christ “under the law through its shadows and figures,” as if there was a
“wall” between Christ and the church.
136
Yet, Beza continues, this wall was not “so thick
and substantial that the bridegroom could not be perceived,” for this wall was “clearly
visible” as if “pierced with a lattice.”
137
For Beza, the different manners and measures of
dispensation do not mean that the church under the Old Covenant knew a different Christ
or had a different faith: “Now, Jesus Christ to come and Jesus Christ who came, who was
to be born and accomplish what was absolutely required for our salvation, and who
actually accomplished it in his time, are not two Jesus Christs, just as there has never
134
Beza, Cantique, 553.
135
Beza, Cantique, 384-385.
136
Beza, Cantique, 386.
137
Beza, Cantique, 387.
205
been and will never be but one God, one faith, and one church.”
138
As shown in the
chapter on Job, the unity of the two testaments clearly undergirds Beza’s reading of
Scripture and understanding of salvation history. Although there are two covenants in the
manner of dispensation and manifestation, there is one church and one people of God in
substance, at the center of which is Jesus Christ. For Beza, the unity of entire salvation
history is held together by Christ and Christ’s love for the church, as expressed
throughout the Song of Songs. This narrative offers an analogical account of Christ’s love
for the church across all history, providing him the platform to draw meaningful
applications from the Old Testament for the benefit of the believers of his current context.
Closely associated with Beza’s view of history are his questions concerning the
true church. Beza believes that the Song of Songs offers vivid pictures of the ways in
which God preserves the true church throughout all history through the dialogue between
the bride and the bridegroom despite the persecutions from outside and corruptions from
within. In illustrating this idea, what grips Beza’s imagination is the idea of beauty, as so
well expressed in the bridegroom’s words to his bride. What consists in the beauty of a
true church? Is the greatness in number and the external splendor of church buildings
marks of the true church? How does one discern the true church from the false? These
questions are very pertinent to Beza against the claims of the Roman Catholics, especially
against the Jesuit influences represented in the writings of John Hay. Beza writes that the
first beauty proper to the true church is the “inestimable splendor of the clarity of truth
138
Beza, Cantique, 457-458.
206
and the benevolence of the one who endows it.”
139
This beauty is an inner beauty,
inherent to the bride. The second aspect of beauty proper to the church, he continues,
consists in the “good order of the holy ministry and external divine service.”
140
This
beauty is visible to all, as it had been exemplified in the tabernacle, the temple of
Solomon, and in the Gospel ministry.
141
While the perpetual beauty comes from the
“preaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments,” along with the “good
order of ministerial vocations and church discipline,” these “visible marks” may be
“obscured to the point that she [church] is unrecognized for a time, as if she were no
longer in the world.”
142
Identifying the inner and visible beauty as “two ornaments,” Beza
explains, “the inner is never taken away from this bride” but the “visible marks” of the
church may be deprived for a time, either because of the unworthiness of the world to
have such beauty in its midst, or because of some fault committed by the bride herself.
143
For Beza, persecutions cause the bride to be “black” (1:4), which allegorically expresses
139
Beza, Cantique, 126. In explaining this inner beauty of the true church, Beza cites Psalm 45:13,
where it says, “the princess is decked in her chamber with gold-woven robes.” Beza interprets “the
chamber” to refer to the beauty that is within.
140
Beza, Cantique, 126.
141
Beza, Cantique, 127.
142
Beza, Cantique, 134-135. Beza seems to vary between mentioning two marks and three marks
of the church. According to Maruyama, Beza endored the two traditional Protestant marks of the church,
the word and the sacraments, and often went beyond to add the third mark of church discipline in his
mature ecclesiology. But Maruyama also observes that at times Beza went even further to include
ministerial vocation in the third mark. The reference here seems to prove this point, as Beza places
ministerial vocation alongside church discipline. But there are also places where only two marks are
mentioned. For examples, see Beza, Cantique, 284. On this discussion, see Maruyama, The Ecclesiology of
Theodore Beza, 209-211.
143
Beza, Cantique, 127-128.
207
the “poor and miserable state” of the church.
144
Yet as the sun may look clouded in the
human eyes by mists of the earth, although it is still “full of light and splendor” in its
nature, so does the bride still retain traces of her “innate and candid beauty,” though
persecutions may obscure it.
145
In fact, the church is never “more beautiful and
resplendent than under the cross,” which Beza calls the “true mark given only to true
believers to endure for the name of God.”
146
Therefore, in contrast to the multitude and
shining appearances of the church of Rome, the true church has her identity “in heaven”
and only in the “complete union and enjoyment in whom lies all its treasure, our Lord
Jesus Christ.”
147
On the basis of his description of the true church, Beza affirms through numerous
examples that the entire salvation history is a witness to a continual battle of the true
against the false. Beza locates the beginning of false churches “with Cain and his
descendants.”
148
This historical observation is significant since it provides Beza with the
ground to argue for priority of the true church, which for him is the Protestant church:
“For concerning the true church of God, she will always be found older than the false,
144
Beza, Cantique, 126. Compare this understanding of blackness to other reformers’
interpretations. For example, Luther interprets it as the devil’s opposition. (LW 15:203) Thomas Brightman
understands it as Solomon’s prophetic foresight of the future darkness of the church, particularly of
Rehoboam and ten lost tribes. (Brightman, A Commentary on the Canticles or the Song of Salomon, 985)
John Cotton understands it as God’s chastisement for the deformities in the church. (Cotton, A Brief
Exposition on the Whole Book of Canticles, 31-33).
145
Beza, Cantique, 136-137.
146
Beza, Cantique, 134, 145-146.
147
Beza, Cantique, 74. For Beza’s discussions on the great multitude as a false mark of the Roman
Catholic church, see 120-122, 486-488. For his discussions on the excessiveness of church buildings, see
241.
148
Beza, Cantique, 413.
208
since truth is before falsehood, and what is whole precedes what is corrupted.”
149
As there
is continuity of the true church from the sacred history of the Old and the New
Testaments until the day of full consummation, the existence of the false churches also
stretches throughout the entire salvation history. His list of false religions who persecute
the true church include Edom, Moab, Ammon, Chaldeans, and Babylonians against the
Israelites, the Roman Empire, the Saracens, Persians, and Turks in the time of the
Christian Church, and most significantly, the Church of Rome in Beza’s time.
150
If these
are “lions and tigers” who openly persecute the Church, there are also cunning “foxes”
(2:15) who attempt to overthrow the “vineyard” in more subtle forms.
151
Again, the
history of these “foxes” include Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Arians, Nestorians,
Eutychians, and more contemporary enemies, Anabaptists and Libertines.
152
These false
churches corrupt the true church under the disguised names of “service of God, the
authority of the church, antiquity, and good intentions.”
153
How does one discern the true
church from all these lions and foxes? Beza refers to the point he has repeatedly stressed
149
Beza, Cantique, 412-413.
150
Beza, Cantique, 440-444.
151
Beza, Cantique, 440.
152
Beza, Cantique, 442-445. It is interesting that in this particular list of false churches, Beza does
not name the Jews. He does not comment much on the Jews in his sermons, primarily because the Jews
were not his utmost concern when he published this work. Rather, in Beza’s view, the Catholic Church was
the greater hinderance to the advancement of God’s kingdom. Thus, he significantly remarks that it is
neither the Jews nor the Turks but the Roman Catholics who are worse enemies today: “Car qui empesche
le plus aujourd’hui l’avancement du royaume de Dieu, & qui l’Eglise ne se resiouisse de ce repos? Ce ne
sont point ni les Juifs, ni les Turcs au prix de ceux qui s’appelent l’Eglise Catholique, voire les pilliers
d’icelle: & quelques malheureux Apostats, & heretiques sortis du milieu de nous, pource qu’ils n’estoyent
pas des nostres a la verite.” (p. 367) Nevertheless, he does not exclude the Jews completely from his
discussion of false religions. See p. 237.
153
Beza, Cantique, 108.
209
in his sermons on the Song of Songs: one must refer to the “one Jesus Christ,” the “holy
and unique word preached,” and the “writings” by the prophets and apostles.
154
In
another place, he also adds that one will not be deceived if one considers Scripture to be
both the “commentary” and the “text” for every interpretation of Scripture itself, and
examines against the “articles of faith as the certain and infallible rule for discerning the
true from false,” which serve as a “summary of the entire Scripture”
155
Beza again
appeals to the analogy of faith as a proper tool for discerning the true from the false.
Through this, he reclaims the “apostolic” and “catholic” status for the Protestant church.
This trueness is intimately tied to how one interprets the Scripture, for, according to Beza,
false religions and heresies have come forth from either “not adhering entirely to
Scripture” or “poorly expounding” the Scripture, eventually inventing something entirely
new.
156
In short, Beza’s view of history allows him to see the church of his time in
continuity with the true teachings of the prophets and apostles, which have been faithfully
exposited by the true catholic and apostolic church, the Protestant church. The Song of
Songs thus, in its prophecies and histories concerning Christ’s love for the church,
provides applications that extend to churches across time.
4.5 Exhortation and Comfort for the Church
Beza interprets his current time and state of the church within a continuum of
history that began from God’s creation and will come to its fulfillment with Christ’s
154
Beza, Cantique, 108.
155
Beza, Cantique, 491.
156
Beza, Cantique, 489, 491.
210
second coming – that is, from the engagement to the full consummation of the marriage
between Christ and the church. As demonstrated, this continuum is a history of Christ’s
saving work, through which God gathers God’s people from all places across the age. For
Beza, such historical vision meant that Scripture could offer meaningful “instructions,
exhortations, consolations, and reprehensions” for not only the believers of the past but
also for those of the sixteenth century.
157
Thus, preaching the Song of Songs to people of
Geneva in the mid-1580s, Beza applies the words of the bride and the bridegroom to
comfort and exhort churches under political persecutions and religious pressures. Beza’s
applications center not so much on the doctrines of Christ or salvation per se but more so
on God’s care and God’s preservation of the church through all history, as well as proper
Christian responses in their cultivation of worship and pious living. In this final section, I
demonstrate Beza’s use of the Song of Songs for the church amid adversities in his
particular time and place, especially how his context shaped his emphases on religious
refugees and one’s identity in Christ. I further examine his exhortation toward Christians
to trust in God’s protection of God’s people against the assaults of their enemies and false
churches, while faithfully pursuing one’s vocation in this world and patiently waiting for
the consummation of this spiritual marriage.
Beza’s self-assessment of his time and place in the Song includes both
encouraging and discouraging sentiments. On the positive side, he rejoices that God has
graciously heard the prayers of the church and has raise up God’s faithful servants to
restore the church unto “her native splendor.”
158
The Lord has begun the work of
157
Beza, Cantique, 203.
158
Beza, Cantique, 133.
211
“uplifting the tears and groans” of the bride to gradually restore her beauty.
159
“Since
about sixty years ago,” he proclaims, the Lord has driven out the “horrible and deadly
darkness” of Rome’s idolatry from some parts of Christendom, raising up godly pastors
for the ministry of God’s Word as well as magistrates like Ezekias and Josias.
160
God is
gathering “the poor lost sheep among the wolves.”
161
Quoting Jeremiah 3:1, Beza asserts,
this bride, who had been rejected for a time has now been reconciled unto the
bridegroom.
162
In another place, he exclaims that the time of “holy jubilee” has come and
the truth is now revealed with greater clarity.
163
These descriptions reveal Beza’s
enthusiasm for his time, in which God is performing “great miracles” to deliver God’s
people from idolatries and false teachings.
164
At the same time, however, Beza laments
that there are still many great enemies of truth that hinder the advancement of God’s
kingdom and that the reforming days may possibly be over. Drawing on the analogy of
light and darkness again, he expresses disappointment in the current progress of reform:
“we should not be surprised, if today we see the work of God retreating rather than
advancing, nor if the darkness thickens in several places where the light of truth had once
159
Beza, Cantique, 154, 156.
160
Beza, Cantique, 401-402.
161
Beza, Cantique, 227.
162
Beza, Cantique, 259. In this reference, Beza mentions it has been 70 years since God has begun
the work of reconciliation with the church.
163
Beza, Cantique, 8.
164
Beza, Cantique, 506.
212
begun to shine so brightly.”
165
He fears that Satan is obscuring the light sent by God from
heaven with errors to such great effect.
166
Although God was pleased to straighten and
raise the “banner of his holy ministry” in Beza’s time, the church is so heavily afflicted
from all sides that there seems to be no way out.
167
Much to his regret, Christianity is still
found in “extreme desolation.”
168
But as he also described in the Psalm Paraphrases, the
sufferings of the church are nothing new for Beza. Assaults against the church composed
the very fabric of the church’s identity. As long as the church remains on this earth, there
will always be parching of the sun at “noon,” which signifies “debauchery” and
“persecutions” against the true church.
169
Beza’s understanding of his own time and generation shaped the emphases in his
applications of the Song of Songs, particularly on religious refugees and one’s identity in
Christ. Responding to these ongoing persecutions was a pressing concern that Beza had
to address for his church and congregation. When is it appropriate for one to leave one’s
place for the sake of truth? This question was not only a pastoral matter, as the city of
Geneva had been a refuge for many of the religious exiles seeking escape, but also a
personal issue, as Beza himself also left his native land for a safe haven in Geneva.
Interpreting “tell me, you whom my soul loves, where you pasture your flock, where you
165
Beza, Cantique, 163. Also cited in Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace in
France, 141.
166
Beza, Cantique, 221.
167
Beza, Cantique, 248.
168
Beza, Cantique, 250.
169
Beza, Cantique, 165.
213
make it lie down at noon” (1:7), Beza reads the bride’s request to be led to the
bridegroom’s pasture as analogous to those of his time who seek places of religious peace
and freedom.
170
He remarks that even today, believers pray to be delivered out from lands
of persecution to be led to “where God feeds his sheep in all abundance and greatest
assurance.”
171
In a later sermon, he revisits the theme of religious refugees when
commenting on the bridegroom’s command, “follow the tracks of the flock” (1:8).
Referring to examples in the Bible – Joseph and David who remained in their places, and
to Abraham and Moses who left – Beza deliberates on when and how one should leave or
not leave their posts. Provided that one has the means to hear God’s word purely
preached and God’s ordained sacraments administered, Beza strongly recommends that
one stays to fulfill one’s duty, should this individual have the strength “to withstand the
attacks” and “not to be seduced by bad examples.”
172
For those who hold “ecclesiastical
vocations,” however, he applies a higher standard, asserting that they must consider their
responsibilities “more precious than their own life” and remain in their posts as Joseph
and Daniel have done; for them to leave their charge would mean that either they fear
people more than God or are ignorant of their vocation.
173
His instructions nevertheless
center on the individual’s proper and sincere heart to seek “glory of God” and “peace of
one’s conscience.”
174
With all these matters considered, if one decides to depart after all,
170
Beza, Cantique, 166.
171
Beza, Cantique, 167.
172
Beza, Cantique, 229-230.
173
Beza, Cantique, 230.
174
Beza, Cantique, 232. His emphasis on one’s conscience is closely tied to his understanding of
his own exile experience as “voluntary.” See Beza to Wolmar, 12 March 1560, CB 3:48, also cited in
214
one can still be assured of God’s generous promises toward those who flee for the sake of
the truth: “[The Lord’s] promise is so generous toward those who, for their love of him,
leave their houses, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or
possessions, even though the world calls them crazy and foolish.”
175
In these words, one
hears Beza’s theme from Abraham Sacrifiant echoing in the background, through whom
he identifies his own experiences of religious exile and receives great comfort for himself
and others.
176
In this context, the Song provides Beza with profound insights on where the
church must find their true rest and identity. Much more important than worldly
connections and wealth, loving and desiring Christ, the bridegroom, is the source for all
spiritual blessings and riches. Beza’s applications are filled with encouragements and
exhortations toward believers to seek Christ, love Christ, find rest in Christ, set their
hearts on Christ, and look forward to the day when they will enter into a full
consummated marriage with Christ. Explaining the reciprocal nature of “kissing,” Beza
comments,
Who then is this bride kissed by her bridegroom, and kissing him in
return? Certainly, this does not belong at all to those who look backward,
seeking themselves and things of the earth: for the heavens are not in the
Manetsch, “The Journey toward Geneva: Theodore Beza’s Conversion, 1535-1548,” in Calvin, Beza and
Later Calvinism: Papers Presented at the 15th Colloquium of the Calvin Studies Society, edited by David
Foxgrover (Grand Rapids: CRC Product Services, 2006), 56: “Simulatque igitur licuit lectum relinquere,
abruptis omnibus vinculis, sarcinulis compositis, patriam, parentes, amicos semel desero ut Christum
sequam, meque una cum mea conjuge Genevam in exilium voluntarium recipio.”
175
Beza, Cantique, 232.
176
On the ways in which Beza’s experience as a religious refugee influenced his ministry and
thoughts, particularly in his use of Abraham’s words, “The Lord will provide,” see Manetsch, “Theodore
Beza, Father Abraham, and the Reformation of the Refugees,” forthcoming in the conference volume
presented at the International Congress on Calvin Research, to be published by Vandenheock and Ruprecht.
I am grateful to Scott Manetsch for giving me the permission to cite this article before its publication.
215
earth, and none has a share in this bridegroom except the one who seeks
him earnestly, renouncing oneself above all. For the bride saying, “let him
kiss me,” shows that she expects all things from him and even forgets
herself in seeking and finding him.
177
For Beza, the question is never about which does one love more between “delicacies” of
the world and of the heaven. When the bride confesses to love the bridegroom “more than
wine” (1:4), it means that the bride’s “affection” and “mind” cannot be possessed by
anything of this present life but only by the bridegroom.
178
From this, he draws an
application that believers are to request temporal blessings with conditions attached, “if it
is good, if it is expedient, when and as you please,” but spiritual blessings are to be asked
with “all holy assurance,” for all that is Christ’s has been given unto the church.
179
A
believer’s identity is not in the successes of this world but in heaven. The overall purpose
of the Song, Beza affirms, is to show that although the true church is in this world, “her
entire heart is captivated by heaven,” longing for the “complete union and enjoyment of
the one in whom lies all its treasure, our Lord Jesus Christ.”
180
In concluding one of his
sermons, Beza uses an image of an army to describe the identity of the faithful living in
the midst of persecutions and trials: “Just as the banner among soldiers is what
distinguishes the bands and companies under which each soldier must align, so the love
that Jesus Christ bears towards us is what assembles us to form this body called the
church. It binds and sustains us in all the assaults and battles that we have to face.”
181
177
Beza, Cantique, 43.
178
Beza, Cantique, 114.
179
Beza, Cantique, 453.
180
Beza, Cantique, 74.
181
Beza, Cantique, 347.
216
Meanwhile, as the church awaits the glorious consummation, Beza believes that
every member must cultivate proper Christian piety in their diligent practice of worship
and faithful pursuit of one’s vocation. Beza’s vision of reformation includes more than
just a recovery of the doctrines. The effects of the reformation are just as significant – in
other words, the Christian life.
182
While Beza’s disappointment in the progress of reform
found roots in the persecutions he witnessed in Europe, it was also partly due to
Genevans’ negligence in their worship and piety. Instead of gathering for worship, Beza
observes that “some prefer to go for walks, play, visit taverns, collect their debts, or
simply chat and gossip in the squares or in front of their doors.” Yet there are those who
attend worship, and even listen to the word preached and prayers recited by their pastor,
but make no effort to amend their life; some just come to sleep.
183
The great zeal that
Geneva once possessed has now vanished so much so that the majority of the people are
mocking God’s word and refusing to listen.
184
As such, Beza continuously exhorts his
audience to move further in their spiritual state using images from the Song: it is not
enough to come to the banquet, but we must sit down. It is not enough to enter the house,
but we must enter into the chamber. It is not enough to look at the bridegroom, but we
must contemplate him.
185
The bride must make every effort to hear the voice of the
bridegroom in the preaching of the word and the administration of the sacraments, as
182
Beza, Cantique, 72, 290, 549.
183
Beza, Cantique, 436.
184
Beza, Cantique, 103, 421.
185
Beza, Cantique, 286, 522-523, 613-614.
217
these are the means that God has ordained for the church to seek Christ in the time
between the ceremony and the consummation of the wedding.
186
Beza’s exhortations,
however, do not stop there but move forward to encourage the believers to faithfully
pursue one’s vocation. After urging his listeners to embrace Christ’s invitation to hear the
word preached, he writes that their “most burning desire to receive, eat, savor, digest such
precious food must show their effects inside and outside their homes.”
187
Similarly, the
purpose for receiving spiritual food is twofold: to be nourished and to be used according
to their vocation for the benefit of the entire body of church.
188
For Beza, the meaning of
“arise and come away” (2:10) is none other than the bridegroom’s invitation for each
member of the church to practice their knowledge in their daily Christian life: “For what
can rise and take the path to go to him [Christ] be, than to direct the course of one’s life
according to one’s vocation in conformity with the commandments of God?”
189
This
purpose of Christian life is directly opposed to those who withdraw themselves for a life
of contemplation under the name of religion. These people move away from the “primary
duty of a Christian,” argues Beza, “which is to serve one’s neighbor according to one’s
vocation,” for all divine and human knowledge must be applied to the “mutual
advancement of one another.”
190
186
Beza, Cantique, 378, 602-604, 608.
187
Beza, Cantique, 345-346.
188
Beza, Cantique, 369.
189
Beza, Cantique, 374.
190
Beza, Cantique, 373.
218
Undergirding all Beza’s applications – whether he is comforting the church under
persecution or exhorting the church to cultivate worship and piety – is his firm belief that
the church is always under God’s care and protection. Although he does not describe
God’s providence as explicitly as he does in other writings (such as his commentary on
Job), the doctrine forms a very important backbone to all his discussions on the
relationship between Christ and the church, as the latter moves in history from being
engaged to being fully consummated in this spiritual union. Beza’s messages of God’s
protection for the church amid afflictions is abundant throughout his sermons. Although
the world may judge the church based on the “black” or “dark” colors (1:4, 6), the
sufferings of the church are the “means to achieving true and perfect whiteness”; the Lord
never allows the “fundamental points and articles of true religion to be abolished in his
church,” regardless of what appears to human eyes by the virtue of God’s covenant and
Christ’s perfect righteousness.
191
Just as a “gazelle” jumps over every mountain, the
bridegroom “leaps” over all obstacles to preserve the church and deliver the faithful from
the hands of enemies according to God’s timing.
192
Beza includes all these events under
the framework of God’s “perpetual providence.”
193
As the “visible world” rotates around
different seasons, the “spiritual world” revolves around the “wheels of divine
providence,” which are “secret” and “unknown” except when it pleases God to reveal
them.
194
The bridegroom’s “carriage” is also moved by “wheels of God’s providence
191
Beza, Cantique, 147, 224-225.
192
Beza, Cantique, 378-381.
193
Beza, Cantique, 365.
194
Beza, Cantique, 398.
219
alone” in a “special and entirely divine way.”
195
Beza fully trusts that God is in perfect
control of this world despite the persecutions from outside and the disruptions from
within. God will nevertheless lead the church to her glory on the day of the final
consummation. Bringing all these instructions and applications together, Beza ends his
sermons on the Song of Songs by affirming the “sovereign, spiritual, and eternal” nature
of the true king.
196
This king, the true bridegroom and the true Solomon, has power and
authority over all creation of heaven and earth. While the earthly kingdom will perish, the
spiritual kingdom of the faithful will last.
197
It is to this king that Beza guides the church
to love and worship, awaiting the day of full consummation where the bride will be
seated at the spiritual banquet table adorned with the greatest gifts and glory. The
following exhortation nicely encapsulates Beza’s application of the Song of Songs for the
church of the sixteenth century:
But above all, let us seek where our strength lies, namely, in this great
Solomon, of whom all the rest is but an instrument: he who came, fought,
and conquered all our enemies through his sufferings, taking on all the
assaults, in which sense he also fought for us. He continues to fight in us
day by day through his Spirit those same enemies that still wriggle. What
do we have to fear to be terrified? Where will our retreat be at all times?
… Therefore, he is truly the strong one, and on his side, we must stand.
Even those who die in this battle are the true victors. May the Lord, who
has brought us out of darkness into the light of his truth, and has
miraculously placed and preserved us in this holy peace of conscience
until now, engrain this holy assurance of his power and goodwill toward
us, while we wait for the full accomplishment of his promises. May we
never be astonished by the assaults of Satan and all those whom he
employs. On the contrary, let us persevere in this holy profession of his
truth, both in speech and in a holy and Christian life, until we truly enjoy
195
Beza, Cantique, 585-586.
196
Beza, Cantique, 614.
197
Beza, Cantique, 614-616.
220
everything he has made us believe and hope for according to his very holy
and very certain promises.
198
4.6 Conclusion
The Song of Songs provides Beza with an opportunity for exercising his skills as
an exegete, engaging in polemics against the Jesuits, and applying Scripture pastorally to
comfort and exhort the church. The Songs offers an insight to his approach to the
challenge of allegorical interpretation. To avoid falling into the traps of mystical reading,
which he associated with Génébrard, he employs a few guiding principles that would
allow him to stay within the limits of literal and historical boundaries. Four observable
patterns are his attention to the original author’s intention, his use and distinction between
figure and similitude, his analysis of singular and plural nouns, and his abundant
references to other places of Scripture in support of his exegetical decisions. At the same
time, his allegorical reading of the Song has a prophetical and a historical thrust. For
Beza, Solomon had a prophetical foresight through which he spoke of Christ’s future
work of salvation along with the forthcoming sufferings of the church. More generally,
however, Beza’s definition of prophecy includes a long line of succession from the
prophets to the apostles to even the pastors and doctors of his time. The prophets outlined
the truth concerning Christ and the church, the apostles completed it, and the pastors are
to maintain it. For Beza, the primary task of the pastors in continuation with the prophets
and the apostles did not consist in proclaiming new teachings, but in explaining,
instructing, and exhorting the church on the basis of the revelation that has already been
198
Beza, Cantique, 549-550.
221
given to them in the Old and New Testaments. In light of this view, it was evident that the
Roman Catholics, who have added and changed the teachings of Scripture, did not stand
on the true succession of the authority of Christ but on their traditions and human
inventions, proving themselves to be the false church. Beza’s historical thrust further
enhances his emphasis on the Protestant church as being the true church. By presenting a
full scope of salvation history, Beza traced the identity of one true church from the Old
Covenant to the New and placed the church of his own time as being in that continuum as
opposed to the identity of false churches. From these exegetical efforts, he was able to
draw numerous applications, particularly in comforting the church under extreme
persecutions as well as instructing the church toward cultivating proper worship and
piety. His messages did not hinge on the doctrines of Christ or the distinction between
law and gospel, although these themes are all present in the sermons, but on the display
of God’s providence and care for the church across history and time.
Beza’s reading of the Song of Songs demonstrates his place within the history of
biblical interpretation as consistent with Reformed confessional distinctions. His literal
and historical emphases, even when reading allegorically, together with his views of
prophecy and history, echoes the exegetical contours of Reformed confessional identity
that Pak presents in her two important studies, Judaizing Calvin and The Reformation of
Prophecy. He shares much of the doctrinal commitments and exegetical principles of
Calvin. Yet Beza’s contribution lies in the application of exegesis, through which he
employs Old Testament figures at times to draw particular analogies to his own political
context or to instruct churches toward particular responses in the midst of sufferings and
persecutions of the sixteenth century. In the case of the Song of Songs, the prophetical
222
and historical thrusts bolstered the church’s faith and trust in God’s providence and care,
which always stand on the side of the true church, the Protestant church, against the false
church, the Roman Catholics, and their persecutions. Given that Beza’s sermons on the
Song of Songs was translated and published in England the very next year in 1587,
whether his reading influenced the Song’s interpretation as a historical prophecy in the
seventeenth-century Puritan context is a topic for future research.
199
Nevertheless, this
chapter demonstrates Beza’s methods, content, and uses of his reading of the Song of
Songs, by which he sought to edify and comfort the churches of his time. His sermons on
the Song play an indispensable part in promoting his theological program for encouraging
the suffering and persecuted churches as well as cultivating worship and piety among the
believers of reformed faith.
199
Beza’s sermons on the Song of Songs was published in Latin (1587), English (1587), and
Dutch (1600). For the publication history, see Gardy, Bibliographie des Oeuvres Théologiques, Littéraires,
Historiques et Juridiques de Théodore de Bèze (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1960), 193-196.
223
CONCLUSION
Theodore Beza’s encounters with the religious persecutions and political
pressures from all corners of Europe in the late sixteenth century shaped his ministry,
exegesis, and theology. Beza endeavored throughout his career to procure the safety of
Protestant believers and secure a firm Reformed theological foundation against enemies
of the church. His biblical writings were instrumental in fighting the battle of defending
the Reformed church against political and religious challenges as well as promoting key
practices of worship and godly living amongst Reformed communities. Around the time
he published his four writings on the Old Testament poetic books between 1579 and
1589, Beza was growing agitated with the lack of progress, or perhaps a regression in his
view, in religious reform throughout Europe. The political pressures seemed to be
threatening the very survival of the Reformed faith. Giving attention to such context, this
study has demonstrated the central role that Beza’s exegetical writings played in
promoting his theological program, precisely the ways that he sought to apply biblical
texts to comfort and instruct the church in the face of persecutions and spiritual
challenges. I have argued throughout these chapters that the dynamics of his time shaped
his exegetical method, theological themes, and pastoral uses. The lives and experiences of
David, Job, and Solomon became powerful tools in the hands of Beza for his reforming
work in France, England, and Geneva. I conclude this study first with an overall
summary of the exegetical patterns and themes gathered from my analyses of his Old
Testament readings. Next, I evaluate his role in the consolidation of Reformed
confessional identity as well as his place as a precritical exegete in the history of biblical
224
interpretation. In doing so, this work points to topics for further investigations concerning
Beza’s exegetical contributions.
Beza’s Patterns in Reading the Old Testament Poetic Books
The study of Beza’s readings of the Old Testament poetic books reveals several
patterns and themes of his biblical interpretation. First, exegetical writings for Beza had
as significant and valuable use for polemics and theological debates as much as his other
writings. These four biblical books provided powerful weapons for battling enemies of
the gospel, directly from Scripture itself. I have shown how each book fulfills this role in
Beza’s reform efforts. In his Psalms interpretation, he used the examples of enemies in
David’s history to allude to the very enemies of the sixteenth-century Huguenots – most
notably, Charles IX and Henry III but also the Guise family and the conservative Catholic
faction. As David’s opponents had persecuted him and disrupted worship in the church,
the modern-day adversaries also persecuted Protestants and hindered their practices of
worship. In his reading of Job, Beza was primarily concerned with the Tridentine reforms
spreading throughout Europe and the Savoyards’ threats at the gates of Geneva. Facing
the same context, in Ecclesiastes, Beza further addressed the Catholic philosophers and
apologists of his time, especially those who doubted God’s providence and ignored
certainty in biblical wisdom. In the Song of Songs, he combatted the Jesuits on the
superiority of Christ and the nature of the true church, partly as an extension to the
ongoing debates with John Hay. Each of these Old Testament books furnished Beza with
the scriptural grounds to battle the enemies of the Reformed churches and thereby
strengthen his reforming efforts. One would be greatly mistaken to think that old Beza
225
was at peace in his library meditating on these books, immersed in his own textual
interests. Rather, the fierce and intense political and religious situations around him kept
him alert and agitated as he set to study and preach these Old Testament poetic literature,
which became powerful tools for demarcating the enemies in defense of the Reformed
faith.
Beza’s work on these four books, however, was not only for the purpose of
prescribing Reformed faith against wrong theologies. The major part of his exegetical
endeavor consisted in comforting and exhorting the persecuted churches, scattered
religious exiles, and discouraged believers toward cultivating true worship and piety
through examples of David, Job, and Solomon. Beza believed that the task of an exegete
involved translating the experiences of biblical figures to the experiences of his present-
day believers. This study has shown the ways in which Beza used each of these Old
Testament biblical characters to relate to the faithful of his time and encourage them in
their trust of God’s providence and God’s care for the church. Though the external
circumstances of the church seemed difficult and discouraging, Beza discovered in the
examples of David, Job, and Solomon, the God who never forsakes the church but guides
the faithful to a victorious end regardless of current turmoil. As Job’s example so clearly
illustrated, the adversities of this life did not necessarily reflect God’s judgment on the
faithful. Thus, Beza uncovered distinct yet similar lessons from the examples of each Old
Testament characters: through David, he taught God’s promises to punish the wicked and
restore the church; through Job, God’s vindication for the righteous according to God’s
justice; through Solomon in Ecclesiastes, God’s gifts and order of certainty and assurance
in the created world for God’s people; and through Solomon in the Song of Songs, God’s
226
care and preservation of the church throughout all history until the church enters the full
consummation of marriage with Christ as the true bridegroom. These themes align with
Kirk Summers’s conclusion in his study of Beza’s use of Emblemata to console the
persecuted Huguenots: “This consolation […] reminded the discouraged of God’s
faithfulness, of empathy within the body, and the transient nature of earthly existence;
and, finally, it promised the defeat of the Church’s enemies, the victory of the faithful,
and eternal rest in God’s presence.”
1
If Beza sought to comfort the church and refugees
through images and poems in Emblemata, he intended to achieve the same goal through
Old Testament biblical texts and characters in his exegetical writings.
Beza, however, did not stop there. He used exegetical writings to instill proper
practices of worship, Christian virtues of patience and constancy, and proper duties
according to one’s vocation amongst Reformed communities. His theological program
included not only consolations but also exhortations to churches for cultivating true
Christian piety. These emphases coincide with Beza’s vision of reform not only in the
doctrines but also in the lives of believers.
2
In his Psalms reading, he encouraged
believers to remain steadfast in their worship and patiently pray in adversities; in Job, he
emphasized Job’s patience and constancy as great Christian virtues that believers under
persecution must imitate; in Ecclesiastes, he highlighted how Solomon teaches godly
kings and princes to rule for the benefit of their subjects with reverence toward God
whereas the faithful to foster patience and wisdom against ungodly rulers; and in the
1
Kirk M. Summers, “Consoling the Huguenot Refugees in Late Sixteenth-Century Geneva,”
Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 110 (2019), 266-267.
2
See Maruyama, The Ecclesiology of Theodore Beza, 155-158.
227
Song of Songs, he preached unto the church the need to break away from moral laxity
and return to their proper duties of worship and vocation. For Beza, the task of proper
exegesis involved this very emphasis upon cultivating worship and piety.
The final exegetical and thematic pattern that Beza’s readings of Old Testament
poetic literature exhibits is his understanding of the unity of the Scripture across both the
Old and New Testaments. This element of the unity of the two testaments in his exegesis
is crucial as it undergirds all his exegetical principles discussed in this study – literal and
historical exegesis, typology, christological reading, allegory, ecclesial reading, the
prophet and prophecy, and salvation history. For Beza, the uses of these exegetical
methods are rendered possible on the basis of scriptural unity. At the heart of Beza’s
understanding of this unity is Scripture’s divine authorship and its christological content.
Beza viewed Scripture to be a divinely inspired book, coherent in its christological
message – that is, Christ’s saving work as the one substance of both covenants. For this
reason, when Beza discussed the unity of the two testaments in his Confessio Christianae
Fidei (1560), he treated the topic first under the heading of “the Son” and then again
under the heading of “the Holy Spirit.”
3
Christ unifies the two testaments because there is
only one gospel under Christ who is the substance of both covenants, which is authored
by and applied by the Holy Spirit. This underlining theological viewpoint enabled Beza
to read the Old Testament writings and use biblical figures as teachers for his present-day
context. When Beza practiced typology to read David as foreshadowing Christ, read Job
as a type for suffering believers of sixteenth century, viewed Solomon as the embodiment
3
Beza, Confessio Christianae Fidei, et eiusdem collatio cum papisticis haeresibus (Geneva:
Iohannis Bonae fidei, 1560).
228
of true wisdom for all faithful, and employed allegory and prophetical reading in the
Song of Songs, he did so on the basis that Scripture is written by a divine author who
reveals Christ as the content of both testaments. Yet, to end here would be to miss a great
emphasis in Beza’s reading of Scripture. As seen in the chapters, the main thrust of
Beza’s exegesis is always the church. Beza’s understanding of scriptural unity does not
consist in merely Christ’s saving events per se, but Christ’s saving work for the church as
it unfolds in history. This perspective broadens Beza’s exegetical scope in a way that
supports his ability to draw readings from the Old Testament and its characters to teach
the church of his sixteenth-century context on divine providence, God’s care and
protection of God’s church, God’s vindication of the righteous, and God as the highest
good from whom flows eternal happiness.
In all, Beza’s readings shares a certain thematic pattern, which highlights the
working of God’s providence in the history and identity of God’s church. This teaching
was not a speculative doctrine for Beza; it was shaped by his very personal experiences
of witnessing religious wars, famines, plagues, persecutions, and scattered refugees all
throughout Europe, let alone his own departure from his native land for the sake of
Protestant faith.
4
This interpretive method with particular attention to his political context
stands out as Beza’s distinct way of reading the Old Testament poetic books. Not only did
his reading of Scripture shape his understanding of his context, but his experience also
informed his reading in significant ways for the sake of comforting and exhorting the
4
Concerning this point, I find Heiko A. Oberman’s insight particularly helpful. On his discussion
of Calvin’s doctrine of predestination, he argues that it was born out of experience, in Calvin’s case, his
own experience of exile. See Heiko A. Oberman, John Calvin and the Reformation of the Refugees
(Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2009), 86.
229
church toward proper faith as Beza aimed to offer all believers the consolation that “the
Lord will provide.”
5
Beza as an Exegete in the Era of Confessional Distinctions
Beza’s distinct approach and patterns of interpretation open the window to
evaluating his relationships to Reformed practices of biblical exegesis. For this task, I
draw upon studies of other historians who have suggested that separate confessional
identities emerged in the last few decades of the sixteenth century.
6
Doctrinally and
confessionally, Beza’s contribution to the formation of distinct confessional identities has
been noted by scholars, particularly in his leadership in organizing a publication of the
confessions of faith of the Reformed Churches in response to the Lutheran Formula of
Concord.
7
With the threat of Tridentine reforms infringing upon Reformed territories,
Beza felt the need more and more to foster unity and solidarity among the Reformed
5
Manetsch uncovers the ways in which Beza found great comfort in the doctrine of God’s
providence, as expressed in the words “the Lord will provide” (Gen. 22:14). See Manetsch, “Theodore
Beza, Father Abraham, and the Reformation of the Refugees,” forthcoming in the conference volume
presented at the International Congress on Calvin Research, to be published by Vandenheock and Ruprecht.
[Used with permission].
6
See Bruce Gordon (ed.) Protestant History and Identity in Sixteenth-Century Europe, 2 vols.
(Aldershot, UK: Scolar, 1996); Irena Backus, Historical Method and Confessional Identity in the Era of the
Reformation (1378-1615) (Leiden: Brill, 2003); and John M. Headley et al. (eds) Confessionalization in
Europe, 1555-1700: Essays in Honor and Memory of Bodo Nischan (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2004).
7
In response to the Formula of Concord, Beza and a few of his colleagues, including Antoine de
Chandieu, Lambert Daneau, and Simon Goulart, published the Harmonia confessionum fidei (1581), which
included doctrinal agreements between eleven confessions of churches of France, England, Scotland, the
Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, Bohemia, and Augsburg (the variata). See Reinhard Bodenmann, “La
manifeste retrouvé de Théodore de Bèze et de ses collègues contre la Formule de concorde (1578),”
Bulletin de la société de l’histoire du protestantisme français 142 (1996): 345-87; Francis Higman,
“L’Harmonia confessionum fidei de 1581,” in Catechismes et Confessions de foi, eds. Marie-Madelaine
Fragonard and Michel Peronnet (Montpellier: Le Centre d’histoire des réformes et du protestantisme de
l’Université de Montpellier, 1995), 243-62; and Scott Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace,
134-137.
230
churches scattered throughout Europe. Although his theological and doctrinal
contributions to the strengthening and consolidation of confessional identities is beyond
the scope of this study, my findings point to some exegetical aspects that demonstrate his
consistency with Reformed distinctions. Concerning his understanding of the literal
sense, I have noted his efforts to situate the plain sense of the text in the literal, historical,
and canonical contexts, with particular emphasis on the human author’s intent. For this
endeavor, Beza employed Hebrew, Greek, and Protestant sources as tools to examine and
build the most proper basis for his interpretation. The histories of David, Job, and
Solomon were central to his practice of prioritizing the life and experience of the biblical
figures, rather than Christ’s life events and christological doctrines per se. In this, Beza
very much shared Calvin’s exegetical emphases and reading strategies. Furthermore, as
with Calvin, Beza connected prophet and prophecy to the interpretation of God’s will as
revealed in Scripture. Beza’s appeal to the prophetic nature of Solomon as foreseeing
future events concerning Christ and applying God’s revelation of Christ’s saving work to
God’s people established the ongoing prophetic function of his current-day pastors and
doctors. I have also demonstrated that Beza’s view of salvation history followed that of
Calvin’s in his portrayal of history as God’s covenantal relationship with the church in the
saving work of Christ.
The similarities of Beza’s exegesis to Calvin’s fundamentally arose from their
shared interpretive principles and doctrinal commitments. In their christological readings
(or restrained christological readings), both reformers held Christ to be the fulfillment of
Old Testament, the one and only substance of the two testaments, the ultimate prophet,
the central content of Old Testament prophecies and histories. Beza followed Calvin in
231
bringing his christological focus intimately in connection with his attention to the church
as the main thrust of his exegesis, thereby rooting his ecclesial reading on his christology.
Thus, as Calvin always employed christological readings in service of the church, so did
Beza. Both Calvin and Beza highlighted the goal of biblical exegesis to be in applying
scriptural texts for the edification of church and cultivating worship and piety. Moreover,
Beza echoed Calvin’s approach when he extended his readings further into his context to
apply them to the church and believers under persecutions. These shared doctrinal beliefs
and ecclesial goals were ways that Beza sought to read Scripture in the footsteps of his
predecessor and thereby confirm his place within the contours of Reformed practices of
exegesis. My work has argued that Beza strengthened these exegetical strategies in his
own reading of Scripture following Calvin’s death.
Was Beza then simply imitating Calvin and contributing nothing of his own? My
findings suggested that their differences are not in their doctrinal commitments or
exegetical goals but in their applications of interpretations, particularly in the way that
Beza applied them to relate to his context of late sixteenth century in the aftermath of
Saint Bartholomew’s Day massacre. When Beza set to work on these Old Testament
books, he felt the threats so close at his gates that he feared the Reformation may well be
over. From Beza’s perspective, the Catholic League and its alliance with Spain, the rise of
Jesuits, and the Savoyard’s attack on Geneva all seemed to signal a Tridentine conspiracy
against Protestantism. While not overstating the differences – as Calvin also applied
much of his readings of the Old Testament prophets to persecuted Protestants – my work
has demonstrated that Beza did not simply provide edifying readings for the church but
applied his readings of biblical texts in an even more pronounced way to interpret his
232
time and place from a particular political standpoint. This was evident in his emphases on
earthly kingdom as a representation of God’s governance and the role of godly rulers in
the Psalms through the example of David as well as his use of Job as a positive example
for patience and constancy as opposed to Calvin’s view of Job as an arrogant man. All of
this is to point to a key understanding about Beza’s exegesis that this work has repeatedly
argued – that is, Beza’s exegesis was not simply about grammar, philology, linguistics,
and translations. This is not to say that Beza did not pay attention to these aspects of
exegesis. In fact, his Annotationes provide a wealth of resource in these areas. There was
certainly a place in Beza’s writings in which he placed priority in such a textual study.
Yet, in his paraphrases, commentaries, and sermons on the Psalms, Job, Ecclesiastes, and
the Song of Songs, Beza had a theological agenda. He had theological goals and uses in
his reading of Scripture to teach God’s providence, instruct kings and princes on godly
governance, emphasize God’s vindication for the righteous, encourage persecuted
Protestant churches, and promote Christian virtues in daily affairs. In sum, Beza’s
understanding of his time, polemics, and pastoral concerns guided him to draw
applications with deep ties to his sixteenth-century context while his shared interpretive
methods and exegetical themes with Calvin fortified his place in the Reformed
distinctions of exegesis.
Beza as an Exegete: Precritical or Modern?
In light of these conclusions, I conclude with my answer to this question: Does
Beza as an exegete foreshadow the era of modern historical criticism? First, my findings
firmly situate Beza as a precritical exegete. While Beza considered the availability of
233
biblical manuscripts and the recovery of historical resources for textual studies as useful
tools for exegesis, he never approached the text detached from recognition of its divine
author or its scriptural context. Beza’s focus on the human author and the historical
context were founded upon his understanding of the unity of the two testaments, which,
as shown in several places of this study, are divinely inspired by the work of the Holy
Spirit. For Beza, the human authors spoke according to the intention of the divine author.
This adherence to scriptural unity with its christological and ecclesial thrust marks a
distinct feature of precritical exegesis in which Beza assuredly finds his place. Yet, being
precritical did not mean uncritical in exegesis.
8
Beza’s keen interest in philology,
translations, and textual transmission points to some similarities with the practices of
modern exegesis in a way that perhaps Beza can be said to foreshadow modern exegesis.
Based on the available manuscripts, Beza endeavored to correct the errors of previous
editions and proposed alternative readings of Scripture. Such effort is clear in his New
Testament Annotationes, as Krans’s study demonstrates. But even Krans, as he focuses on
Beza’s text critical work, acknowledges that Beza places all his work as a translator and
text critic within an ecclesiastical context and submits himself to the authority of
Scripture.
9
This perspective captures the essence of Beza as an exegete. An examination
of his interpretations of the four Old Testament poetic books most explicitly
demonstrated this church-centered approach to be fundamental in his readings.
8
See Richard A. Muller and John L. Thompson, “The Significance of Precritical Exegesis:
Retrospect and Prospect,” in Biblical Interpretation in the Era of the Reformation, ed. Richard A. Muller
and John L. Thompson (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 335-345; and David Steinmetz, “The
Superiority of Pre-Critical Exegesis,” Theology Today 37 (1980): 27-28.
9
Krans, Beyond What is Written, 318.
234
This study aimed to show the place and significance of Beza as an exegete within
the context of the sixteenth-century political and religious challenges by analyzing his
readings of the Old Testament literature. Admittedly, it did not fully explore topics of his
philology and translations of Old Testament. Further, the reception of his interpretation
among his contemporaries and future generations was beyond the scope of this
dissertation. Such studies are desirable to shed light on Beza’s further contributions
entering into the seventeenth-century period of Reformed orthodoxy. This study
illuminates Beza’s Old Testament interpretations within the dynamics of his political
context. It is first in Bezan scholarship to examine his exegetical methods, theological
themes, and pastoral uses of the biblical poetic books in a single work, and thus argue for
a consistent thread of exegetical, theological, and political vision that binds these four
writings together as part of his larger theological program. The hope, as well, is that it
lays the groundwork needed for studies to come about the reception and ongoing impact
of Beza’s exegetical legacy.
235
SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY
I. Primary Sources
Augustine. Expositions on the Book of Psalms. Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1849.
Beza, Theodore. Abraham sacrifiant: avec introduction et notes. Edited by Keith
Cameron, Kathleen M. Hall, Francis Higman. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1967.
_______. Confession de la foy chrestienne, contenant la confirmation d’icelle, & la
refutation des superstitions contraires. Conrad Badius, 1559.
_______. Confessio Christianae Fidei, et eiusdem collatio cum papisticis haeresibus.
Geneva: Johannis Bonae fidei, 1560.
_______. De Veris et Visibilibus Ecclesiae Catholicae notis, tractatio. Geneva: Eustathius
Vignon, 1579.
_______. Psalmorum Davidis et Aliorum Prophetarum libri quinque, argumenti & Latina
Paraphrasi illustrate, ac etiam vario carminum genere latine expressi. Geneva,
1579.
_______. Psalmorum Sacrorum Libri Quinque, vario Carminum genere Latine expressi,
& argumentis, atque Paraphrasi illustrati. Geneva, 1581.
_______. Chrestienes Meditations sur Huict Pseaumes du Prophete David. Geneva,
1581.
_______. Meditations upon Eight Psalms of the Prophet David. London: Christopher
Barker, 1582.
_______. Canticum Canticorum Solomonis, Latinis versibus expressum. Theodoro Beza
Vezelio auctore. Eustache Vignon, 1584.
_______. Ad Gilberti Genebrardi accusationem. Theodori Bezae defensio. Geneva:
Eustathius Vignon, 1585.
_______. Sermons sur les trois premiers chapitres du cantique des Cantiques de
Salomon. Geneva: Jean le Preux, 1586.
_______. Ecclesiastes Solomonis Concio ad Populum habita, de vita sic instituenda, ut
ad veram aeternamque felicitatem perveniatur: Theodori Bezae paraphrasi
illustrata. Geneva: Jean le Preux, 1588.
236
_______. Jobus, Theodori Bezae partim Commentariis partim Paraphrasi illustratus. Cui
etiam additus est Ecclesiastes, Solomonis Concio de summo bono, ab eodem Th.
B. paraphrastice explicata. London: Georgii Bishop, 1589.
_______. Job Expounded by Theodore Beza, partly in manner of a commentary, partly in
manner of a paraphrase. London: John Legatt, 1589.
Bugenhagen, Johannes. Librum Psalmorum Interpretatio. Mainz: Julius, 1523.
Calvin, John. Commentary on the Book of Psalms. 5 vols. Edinburgh: Calvin Translation
Society, 1845-1849.
_______. Sermons de M. Jean Calvin sur le livre de Job. Geneva: François Perrin, 1569.
Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze. 43 vols. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1960-2017.
Génébrard, Gilbert. Psalmi Davidis, vulgate editione, calendario hebraeo, 1582.
_______. Canticum Canticorum Salomonis versibus et commentariis illustratum. Paris:
Aegidium Gorbinum, 1585.
Gregory the Great, Dialogues. Translated by Odo John Zimmerman. Washington DC:
Catholic University Press, 2002.
Jerome. Commentary on Ecclesiastes. Edited and translated by Richard J. Goodrich and
David J. D. Miller. New York: Newman, 2012.
Lefèvre d’Étaples, Jacques. Quincuplex Psalterium: Gallicum, Rhomanum, Hebraicum,
Vetus, Conciliatum. Paris: Henry Stephen, 1513.
Luther, Martin. Luther’s Works [American edition]. 82 vols. projected. St. Louis:
Concordia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1955-1986; 2009-.
Marot, Clément and Theodore Beza. Les Pseaumes mis en rime françoise (Volume I:
Texte de 1562). Edited by Max Engammare. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2019.
Melanchthon, Philipp. Enarratio brevis Concionum Libri Salomonis, cuius Titulus est
Ecclesiastes. Wittenberg, 1551.
_______. Explicatio Proverberium Salomonis, in schola Witembergensi dictata.
Wittenberg, 1555.
Mercier, Jean. Joannis Merceri Regii quondam in Academia Parisiensi literarum
Hebraicarum Professoris Commentarii in librum Job. Adjecta est Theodori Bezae
Epistola, in qua de huius viri doctrina, & istorum Commentariorum utilitate
disseritur. Geneva: Eustathius Vignon, 1573.
237
Oecolampadius, Johannes. Jo. Oecolampadii viri doctiss. In librum Job exegemata. Opus
admodum eruditum, ac omnibus divinae Scripturae studiosis utile. Geneva: Jean
Crispin, 1553.
Reformation Commentary on Scripture: Old Testament. Vols. 7-8, Psalms 1-150. Edited
by Herman J. Selderhuis. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2015-2018.
Reformation Commentary on Scripture: Old Testament. Vol. 9, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes,
Song of Songs. Edited by David C. Fink. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic,
2023.
Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Genève. Edited by Olivier Fatio and Olivier
Labarthe. 14 vols. Geneva, Librarie Droz, 1962-2012.
Serres, Jean de. Joannis Serrani Commentarius, in Solomonis Ecclesiasten. Quo
commentario ultilissimae concionis methodus, sententia, usus, breviter et
perspicue explicantur. Geneva, 1580.
II. Secondary Sources
Armstrong, B. G. Calvinism and the Amyraut Heresy: Protestant Scholasticism and
Humanism in Seventeenth-Century France. Madison: University of Wisconsin,
1969.
Backus, Irena D. The Reformed Roots of the English New Testament: The Influence of
Theodore Beza on the English New Testament. Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1980.
_______. Historical Method and Confessional Identity in the Era of the Reformation
(1378-1615). Leiden: Brill, 2003.
_______, ed., Théodore de Bèze (1519-1605): Actes du colloque de Genève (septembre
2005). Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2007.
Baird, Henry Martyn. Theodore Beza: The Counsellor of the French Reformation, 1419-
1605. New York: Burt Franklin, 1970.
Benedict, Philip. Rouen During the Wars of Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1981.
_______. Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed: A Social History of Calvinism. New
Haven: Yale University Press, 2004.
238
_______. Season of Conspiracy: Calvin, the French Reformed Churches, and Protestant
Plotting in the Reign of Francis II (1559-60). Philadelphia: American
Philosophical Society Press, 2020.
Besserman, Lawrence. The Legend of Job in the Middle Ages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1979.
Bland, Kalman P. “Issues in Sixteenth-Century Jewish Exegesis.” Pages 50-67 in The
Bible in the Sixteenth Century. Edited by David C. Steinmetz. Durham: Duke
University Press, 1990.
Bodenmann, Reinhard. “La manifeste retrouvé de Théodore de Bèze et de ses collègues
contre la Formule de concorde (1578).” Bulletin de la société de l’histoire du
protestantisme français 142 (1996): 345-87.
Bradley, James E. and Richard A. Muller. Church History: An Introduction to Research,
Reference Works, and Methods. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.
Bray, John. Theodore Beza’s Doctrine of Predestination. Nieuwkoop: B. de Graaf, 1979.
Carty, Jarrett A. “Martin Luther’s Political Interpretation of the Song of Songs.” The
Review of Politics 73:3 (2011): 449-467.
Chan, Michael J. “Futility and Gift: Luther on Ecclesiastes.” Word & World 43:1 (2023):
14-21.
Chan, Suk Yu. Heavenly Providence: A Historical Exploration of the Development of
Calvin’s Biblical Doctrine of Divine Providence. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 2022.
Christianson, Eric S. Ecclesiastes through the Centuries. Oxford: Blackwell, 2007.
_______. “Ecclesiastes in Premodern Reading: Before 1500 C.E.” Pages 3-36 in The
Words of the Wise are Like Goads: Engaging Qohelet in the 21st Century. Edited
by M. J. Boda, T. Longman III, and C. G. Rata. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2013.
Clines, David J. A. “Job and the Spirituality of the Reformation.” Pages 49-72 in The
Bible, the Reformation and the Church: Essays in Honour of James Atkinson.
Edited by W. P. Stephens. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995.
Conner, Philip. Huguenot Heartland: Montauban and Southern French Calvinism during
the Wars of Religion. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 2022.
Dailey, Thomas. “A Song of Prayer: Reading the Canticles of Canticles with St. Francis
de Sales.” Studia Mystica 15:4 (1992): 65-82.
239
Dantine, J. “Les Tabelles sur la Doctrine de la Prédestination par Théodore de Bèze.”
Revue de Théologie et de Philosophie 16 (1966): 365-377.
Delval, Michel. “La Prédication d’un Réformateur au XVIe Siècle: L’Activité
Homilétique de Théodore de Bèze.” Mélanges de science religieuse 41 (1984):
61-86.
_______. “Orthodoxie et Prédication: Théodore de Bèze.” Bulletin de la Société de
l’Histoire du Protestantisme Français 134 (1988): 693-697.
Droz, Eugénie. “L’Ecclésiaste de Théodore de Bèze et ses éditions allemandes (1599 et
1605).” Revue d’histoire et de philosophie religieuses 47 (1967): 338-346.
Dückert, Armand. Théodore de Bèze, Prédicateur. Geneva: Imprimerie Romet, 1891.
Dufour, Alain. Théodore de Bèze: Poète et théologien. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2006.
Duncumb, Margaret. “The Latin Psalm Paraphrases of Théodore de Bèze.” Pages 381-
400 in Théodore de Bèze (1519-1605). Edited by Irena Backus. Geneva: Librairie
Droz, 2007.
Eliason, Eric J. “Vanitas Vanitatum: ‘Piers Plowman,’ Ecclesiastes, and Contempt of the
World.” Doctoral diss., University of Virginia, 1989.
Engammare, Max. Qu’il me baise des baisiers de sa bouche. Le Cantique des Cantiques
a la Renaissance: Etude et Bibliographie. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1993.
_______. “Licence Poétique versus Métrique Sacrée: La Polémique entre Bèze et
Génébrard au Sujet des Psaumes et du Cantique des Cantiques (1579-1586) –
Première Partie.” Pages 479-499 in Théodore de Bèze (1519-1605). Edited by
Irena Backus. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2007.
_______. “Licence Poétique versus Métrique Sacrée: La Polémique entre Bèze et
Génébrard au Sujet des Psaumes et Cantique des Cantiques (1579-1586) II.”
Revue de l’histoire des religions 226:1 (2009): 102-125.
Ferrer, Véronique. “Variations autour du psaume 51: les méditations de Bèze, d’Aubigné
et de Duplessis-Mornay.” Bulletin de la Société de l’histoire du protestantisme
francais 149:4 (2003): 705-718.
Gamble, Richard C. “The Christian and the Tyrant: Beza and Knox on Political
Resistance Theory.” Westminster Theological Journal 46:1 (1984): 125-139.
240
Ganoczy, Alexandre. La Bibliothèque de l’Académie de Calvin. Geneva: Librairie Droz,
1969.
Gardy, Frédèric. Bibliographie des Oeuvres Théologiques, Littéraires, Historiques et
Juridiques de Théodore de Bèze. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1960.
Geisendorf, Paul F. Théodore de Bèze. Geneva: Alexandre Jullien, 1967.
Genton, Hervé. “Théodore de Bèze and Geneva.” Pages 93-117 in A Companion to the
Reformation in Geneva. Edited by Jon Balserak. Leiden: Brill, 2021.
Gordon, Bruce. ed. Protestant History and Identity in Sixteenth-Century Europe. 2 vols.
Aldershot, UK: Scolar, 1996.
Gosselin, Edward A. “David in Tempore Belli: Beza’s David in the Service of the
Huguenots.” Sixteenth Century Journal 7:2 (1976): 31-45.
_______. “Two Views of the Evangelical David: Lefèvre d’Etaples and Theodore Beza.”
Pages 56-67 in The David Myth in Western Literature. Edited by Raymond-Jean
Frontain and Jan Wojcik. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 1980.
Guggisberg, Hans R. Sebastian Castellio, 1515-1563: Humanist and Defender of
Religious Toleration in a Confessional Age. Edited and translated by Bruce
Gordon. London: Routledge, 2017.
Hall, Basil. “Calvin against the Calvinists.” Pages 19-37 in John Calvin. Edited by
Gervase Duffield. Abingdon: Sutton Courtenay, 1966.
Hammond, Jeffrey A. “The Bride in Redemptive Time: John Cotton and the Canticles
Controversy.” The New England Quarterly 56:1 (1983): 78-102.
Higman, Francis. “L’Harmonia confessionum fidei de 1581.” Pages 243-262 in
Catechismes et Confessions de foi. Edited by Marie-Madelaine Fragonard and
Michel Peronnet. Montpellier: Le Centre d’histoire des réformes et du
protestantisme de l’Université de Montpellier, 1995.
Hinlicky, Paul R. “Luther on Ecclesiastes: Nature in the Light of Grace.” Word & World
43:1 (2023): 31-42.
Hobbs, R. Gerald. “How Firm a Foundation: Martin Bucer’s Historical Exegesis of the
Psalms.” Church History 53 (1984): 477-91.
_______. “Bucer’s Use of King David as Mirror of the Christian Prince.” Reformation
and Renaissance Review 5 (2003): 102-128.
241
_______. “Hebraica Veritas and Tradition Apostolica: Saint Paul and the Interpretation of
the Psalms in the Sixteenth Century.” Pages 83-99 in The Bible in the Sixteenth
Century, edited David C. Steinmetz. Durham: Duke University Press, 1990.
Holt, Mack P. The French Wars of Religion, 1562-1629. Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, 1995.
Jeanneret, Michel. Poésie et tradition biblique au XVIe siècle. Recherches stylistiques sur
les paraphrases des psaumes de Marot à Malherbe. Paris: Librairie Jose Corti,
1969.
Jones, Scott C. “Solomon’s Table Talk: Martin Luther on the Authorship of Ecclesiastes.”
Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 28:1 (2014): 81-90.
Kallas, Endel. Ecclesiastes: Traditum et Fides Evangelica: The Ecclesiastes
Commentaries of Martin Luther, Philip Melanchthon, and Johannes Brenz
Considered within the History of Interpretation. Ph.D. dissertation, Graduate
Theological Union, 1979.
_______. “Martin Luther as Expositor of the Song of Songs.” Lutheran Quarterly 2:3
(1988): 323-341.
Kiecker, James G. “Luther and Lyra on the Song of Solomon: Were They Singing the
Same Tune?” Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 81:1 (1984): 6-15.
Kingdon, Robert M. Geneva and the Consolidation of the French Protestant Movement
1564-1572. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1967.
King’oo Clare Costley. “From Penance to Politics.” Pages 129-156 in Misere Mei: The
Penitential Psalms in Late Medieval and Early Modern England. Notre Dame,
IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2012.
Kircher, Timothy. The Poet’s Wisdom: The Humanists, the Church, and the Formation of
Philosophy in the Early Renaissance. Leiden: Brill, 2006.
Krans, Jan. Beyond What is Written: Erasmus and Beza as Conjectural Critics of the New
Testament. Leiden: Brill, 2006.
Léchot, Pierre-Olivier. “Théodore de Bèze spirituel: À propos des Chrestiennes
meditations (1582).” Revue d’histoire du protestantisme 4 (2019): 617-626.
Legaspi, Michael C. Wisdom in Classical and Biblical Tradition. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2018.
242
Letis, Theodore. “Theodore Beza as a Text Critic: A View to the Sixteenth-Century
Approach to New Testament Text Criticism.” Pages 113-144 in The Majority Text:
Essays and Reviews in the Continuing Debate. Edited by Theodore Letis. Grand
Rapids: Institute for Biblical Textual Studies, 1987.
Loader, James Alfred. “Calvin and the Canticles.” Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae 35:2
(2009): 57-75.
Longman III, Tremper. “Ecclesiastes 3: History of Interpretation.” Pages 140-148 in
Dictionary of the Old Testament: Wisdom, Poetry & Writings. Edited by T.
Longman III and P. Enns. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2008.
Lehman, Jeffrey S. “‘As I read, I was set on fire’: On the Psalms in Augustine’s
Confessions.” Logos 16:2 (2013): 160-184.
Mallinson, Jeffrey. Faith, Reason, and Revelation in Theodore Beza (1519-1605). New
York: Oxford University Press, 2003.
Manetsch, Scott M. Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace in France, 1572-1598.
Leiden: Brill, 2000.
_______. “Psalms before Sonnets: Theodore Beza and the Studia Humanitatis.” Pages
400-416 in Continuity and Change: The Harvest of Late Medieval and
Reformation History. Edited by Robert J. Bast and Andrew C. Gow. Leiden: Brill,
2000.
_______. “The Journey toward Geneva: Theodore Beza’s Conversion, 1535-1548.” Pages
38-57 in Calvin, Beza and Later Calvinism: Papers Presented at the 15th
Colloquium of the Calvin Studies Society. Edited by David Foxgrover. Grand
Rapids: CRC Product Services, 2006.
_______. “‘The Most Despised Vocation Today’: Theodore Beza’s Theology of Pastoral
Ministry.” Pages 243-256 in Théodore de Bèze (1519-1605): Actes du colloque de
Genève (septembre 2005). Edited by Irena Backus. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2007.
_______. “Pastors and Ministry in Reformed Geneva.” Pages 190-212 in A Companion to
the Reformation in Geneva. Edited by Jon Balserak. Leiden: Brill, 2021
_______. “Theodore Beza, Father Abraham, and the Reformation of the Refugees.”
Forthcoming in the International Congress on Calvin Research volume by
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Used with permission.
Martin, Jeremiah. “Preaching Exile and Loss after Calvin: The Notion of Tragedy in the
Sermons of Theodore Beza.” Pages 283-294 in Calvinus frater in Domino:
243
Papers of the Twelfth International Congress on Calvin Research. Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2020.
Matter, E. Ann. The Voice of My Beloved: The Song of Songs in Western Medieval
Christianity. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1990.
Maruyama, Tadataka. The Ecclesiology of Theodore Beza: The Reform of the True
Church. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1978.
McNutt, Jennifer Powell. “From Codex Bezae to La Bible: Theodore Beza’s Biblical
Scholarship and the French Geneva Bible of 1588.” Pages 157-175 in Theodore
Beza at 500: New Perspective on an Old Reformer. Edited by Kirk Summers and
Scott M. Manetsch. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2021.
McPhee, Ian. “Transformer or Conserver of Calvin’s Theology? A Study of the Origins
and Development of Theodore Beza’s Thought.” Ph.D. dissertation, Cambridge
University, 1979.
Monter, E. William. Calvin’s Geneva. Huntington, NY: Robert E. Krieger, 1975.
Muller, Richard A. Christ and the Decree. Durham, NC: Labyrinth Press, 1987.
_______. After Calvin: Studies in the Development of a Theological Tradition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2003.
_______. Calvin and the Reformed Tradition: On the Work of Christ and the Order of
Salvation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012.
_______ and John L. Thompson, eds. Biblical Interpretation in the Era of the
Reformation. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996.
_______. “The Use and Abuse of a Document: Beza’s Tabula Praedestinationis, The
Bolsec Controversy, and the Origins of Reformed Orthodoxy.” Pages 33-61 in
Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment. Edited by Carl R. Trueman and
R. S. Clark. Carlisle: Paternoster, 1999.
_______. “Calvin, Beza, and the Exegetical History of Romans 13:1-7.” Pages 39-56 in
The Identity of Geneva: The Christian Commonwealth, 1564-1864. Edited by
John B. Roney and Martin I. Klauber. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1998.
Oberman, Heiko A. John Calvin and the Reformation of the Refugees. Geneva: Librairie
Droz, 2009.
Pak, G. Sujin. The Judaizing Calvin: Sixteenth-Century Debates over the Messianic
Psalms. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.
244
_______. The Reformation of Prophecy: Early Modern Interpretations of the Prophet and
Old Testament Prophecy. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018.
Palombaro, Ottavio. “Beza’s Pastoral Calling: Combat, Encouragement, and Duty.” Unio
cum Christo 5:2 (2019): 97-110.
Phipps, William E. “The Plight of the Song of Songs.” Journal of the American Academy
of Religion 42:1 (1974): 82-100.
Pot, Olivier. “L’invention d’un Genre: Les Chrestiennes Meditations sur Huict
Pseaumes.” Pages 449-467 in Théodore de Bèze (1519-1605). Edited by Irena
Backus. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2007.
Prescott, Anne Lake. “English Writers and Beza’s Latin Epigrams: The Uses and Abuses
of Poetry.” Studies in the Renaissance 21 (1974): 83-117.
Raitt, Jill. The Eucharistic Theology of Theodore Beza: Development of the Reformed
Doctrine. Chambersburg: American Academy of Religion, 1972.
_______. The Colloquy of Montbéliard: Religion and Politics in the Sixteenth Century.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.
_______. “The Emperor and the Exiles: The Clash of Religion and Politics in the Late
Sixteenth Century.” Church History 52:2 (1983): 145-156.
_______. “Beza, Guide for the Faithful Life.” Scottish Journal of Theology 39 (1986):
83-107.
_______. “Elizabeth of England, John Casimir, and the Protestant League.” Pages 117-
145 in Controversy and Conciliation: The Reformation and the Palatinate 1559-
1583. Edited by Derk Visser. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 1986.
_______. “Lessons in Troubled Times: Beza’s Lessons on Job.” Pages 21-45 in Calvin
and the State: Papers and Responses Presented at the Seventh and Eighth
Colloquia on Calvin and Calvin Studies. Edited by Peter De Klerk. Grand Rapids:
Calvin Studies Society, 1993.
Rittgers, Ronald K. “Job in the German Reformation.” Pages 254-286 in A Companion to
Job in the Middle Ages. Edited by Franklin T. Harkins and Aaron Canty. Leiden:
Brill, 2016.
Robinson, Timothy H., ed., Companion to the Song of Songs in the History of
Spirituality. Leiden: Brill, 2021.
245
_______. “Varieties of Reformed and Puritan Reception of the Song of Songs, 1550-
1730.” Pages 329-346 in The Song of Songs through the Ages: Essays on the
Song’s Reception History in Different Times, Contexts, and Genres. Edited by
Annette Schellenberg. Boston: De Gruyter, 2023.
Rosin, Robert. Reformers, the Preacher and Skepticism: Luther, Brenz, Melanchthon and
Ecclesiastes. Mainz: P. von Zabern, 1997.
Rouwendal, P. L. Predestination and Preaching in Genevan Theology from Calvin to
Pictet. Kampen: Summum Academic Publications, 2017.
Rowley, Harold Henry. “The Interpretation of the Song of Songs.” The Journal of
Theological Studies 38 (1937): 337-363.
Scheffler, Eben. “Allegorising Song of Songs’ Most Erotic Parts: Judaism, Calvinism,
Lutheranism.” Old Testament Essays 31:3 (2018): 737-758.
Schellenberg, Annette. The Song of Songs through the Ages: Essays on the Song’s
Reception History in Different Times, Context, and Genres. Boston: De Gruyter,
2023.
Scheper, George L. “Reformation Attitudes toward Allegory and the Song of Songs.”
PMLA 89:3 (1974): 551-562.
Schreiner, Susan E. Where Shall Wisdom Be Found?: Calvin’s Exegesis of Job from
Medieval and Modern Perspectives. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press, 1994.
_______. “‘Through a Mirror Dimly’: Calvin’s Sermons on Job.” Calvin Theological
Seminary 21 (1986): 175-93.
_______. “Exegesis and Double Justice in Calvin’s Sermons on Job.” Church History
58:3 (1989): 322-338.
_______. “Why Do the Wicked Live?: Job and David in Calvin’s Sermons on Job.” Pages
129-143 in The Voice from the Whirlwind: Interpreting the Book of Job. Edited by
Leo G. Perdue and W. Clark Gilpin. Nashville, TN: Abindgon Press, 1992.
_______. “Calvin as an Interpreter of Job.” Pages 53-84 in Calvin and the Bible. Edited
by Donald McKim. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Shin, Euntaek D. “Psalms for Restless Memory: The Logic of Grace and Rest in
Augustine’s Confessions.” Scottish Journal of Theology 75 (2022): 250-261.
Southworth Jr., John F. Theodore Beza, Covenantalism and Resistance to Political
Authority in the 16th Century. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI, 2004.
246
Steinmetz, David C. Luther in Context. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986.
_______. “The Superiority of Pre-Critical Exegesis.” Theology Today 37 (1980): 27-38.
_______, ed. The Biblie in the Sixteenth Century. Durham: Duke University Press, 1990.
Summers, Kirk. Morality after Calvin: Theodore Beza’s Christian Censor and Reformed
Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016.
_______. “Theodore Beza’s Classical Library and Christian Humanism.” Archiv für
Reformationsgeschichte 82 (1991): 193-207.
_______. “The Classical Foundations of Beza’s Thought.” Pages 369-380 in Théodore de
Bèze (1519-1605): Actes du colloque de Genève (septembre 2005). Edited by
Irena Backus. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2007.
_______. “Consoling the Huguenot Refugees in Late Sixteenth-Century Geneva.” Archiv
für Reformationsgeschichte 110 (2019): 237-267.
_______. “Theodore Beza’s ‘Bare-Breasted Religion.’ Liturgical Mystery and the English
Vestments Controversy.” Pages 337-351 in Calvinus frater in Domino: Papers of
the Twelfth International Congress on Calvin Research. Edited by Arnold Huijgen
and Karin Maag. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2020.
_______ and Scott M. Manetsch, eds. Theodore Beza at 500: New Perspective on an Old
Reformer. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2021.
_______. “Theodore Beza’s Elegy on the Five Martyrs of Lyon: Wonder and
Consolation.” Pages 241-260 in Theodore Beza at 500: New Perspective on an
Old Reformer. Edited by Kirk Summers and Scott M. Manetsch. Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2021.
Trueman, Carl R. Histories and Fallacies: Problems Faced in the Writing of History.
Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010.
Van Deusen, Nancy, ed. The Place of the Psalms in the Intellectual Culture of the Middle
Ages. Albany, NY: State University of New York, 1999.
Van Raalte, Theodore G. Antoine de Chandieu: the Silver Horn of Geneva’s Reformed
Triumvirate. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018.
_______. “Compelling Each Other: Theodore Beza’s Response to John Hay as Part of
Geneva’s Anti-Jesuit Efforts.” Pages 263-282 in Theodore Beza at 500: New
247
Perspective on an Old Reformer. Edited by Kirk Summers and Scott M.
Manetsch. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2021.
Vicchio, Stephen J. “Part I: The History of Interpreting the Book of Job.” Pages 1-45 in
The Book of Job: A History of Interpretation and a Commentary. Eugene, OR:
Wipf & Stock, 2020.
White, Graham. “Luther on Ecclesiastes and the Limits of Human Ability.” Neue
Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie 29 (1987): 180-
194.
Wicks, Jared. “Catholic Old Testament Interpretation in the Reformation and Early
Confessional Eras.” Pages 617-648 in Hebrew Bible/Old Testament: The History
of Its Interpretation. vol. 2. Edited by Magne Saebø. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 2008.
Wolters, Al. “Ecclesiastes and the Reformers.” Pages 55-68 in The Words of the Wise are
Like Goads: Engaging Qohelet in the 21st Century. Edited by M. J. Boda, T.
Longman III, and C. G. Rata. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2013.
Woo, Kenneth J. Nicodemism and the English Calvin, 1544-1584. Leiden: Brill, 2019.
Woudstra, Marten H. “The Use of ‘Example’ in Calvin’s Sermons on Job.” Pages 344-51
and 456-58 in Bezield Verband: Opstellen aangeboden aan Prof. J. Kamphuis.
Edited by M. Arntzen. Kampen: J. H. Kok, 1984.
Wright, Shawn D. Our Sovereign Refuge: The Pastoral Theology of Theodore Beza.
Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2006.
Wursten, Dick. Clément Marot and Religion: A Reassessment in the Light of His Psalm
Paraphrases. Leiden: Brill, 2010.
_______. “Clément Marot, the Learned Poet: Jewish Medieval Exegesis and the Genevan
Psalter.” Reformation & Renaissance Review 12:1 (2010): 71-107.
Zahnd, Ueli. “Tolerant Humanists? Nikolaus Zurkinden and the Debate between Calvin,
Castellio, and Beza.” Pages 370-385 in Crossing Traditions: Essays on the
Reformation and Intellectual History. Leiden: Brill, 2017.
248
BIOGRAPHY
Eunjin Kim was born on June 11, 1985 in Seoul, Korea. She graduated from
Yonsei University (Seoul, Korea) with the Bachelor of Arts in English Literature and
Linguistics in 2009 and from Hapdong Theological Seminary with the Master of Divinity
in 2012. Eunjin received a full tuition scholarship to Duke Divinity School and graduated
with the Master of Theology (Th.M.) in 2013. She was awarded a full tuition scholarship
to Westminster Theological Seminary (PA) in 2013, where she was a Ph.D. Candidate in
Historical Theology before transferring to Duke as a Th.D. Candidate in 2020. Eunjin
was a recipient of the Sarang Scholarship awarded by Hapdong Theological Seminary
from 2015-2019. Her publications include the following:
“‘The Leader of the Ancient Theologians’: Beza’s Use of Augustine in His Predestination
Doctrine.” Pages 221-240 in Theodore Beza at 500: New Perspectives on an Old
Reformer. Edited by Scott M. Manetsch and Kirk Summers. Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2021.
Review of Martin Luther: A Spiritual Biography by Herman Selderhuis in Unio cum
Christo 4:2 (October 2018): 236-239.
Co-authored with Carl R. Trueman. “The Reformers and Their Reformations.” Pages
111-141 in A Systematic Summary: Reformation Theology. Edited by Matthew
Barrett. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2017.
Review of Theodore Beza: The Man and the Myth by Shawn D. Wright in Westminster
Theological Journal 78:2 (Fall 2016): 349-351.
