2

"Hugh of Saint-Cher († 1263) was the second Dominican Master of Theology in Paris, and the first Dominican cardinal" (n. 39) who, "through the persuasion of Master [St.] Albert [the Great]", convinced "John of Vercelli, Master General of the [Dominican] Order" to accept St. Thomas Aquinas into "the Baccalaureate at the Order’s studium in Paris." (William of Tocco’s Life of St. Thomas Aquinas pp. 61-62).

"Hugh is celebrated for his prodigious theological and exegetical works, particularly the monumental commentary on the entire Bible (Postillæ in totam Bibliam) that he composed with a team of friars." (ibid. p. 62n39).

Does an English translation of Hugh of Saint-Cher's Postillæ in totam Bibliam exist?

2
  • St Alphonsus Liguori often made reference to a "Cardinal Hugo" with references of course, in Latin, but (at least in Duties and Dignities of the Priest or Selva), never a specific book reference. Would you say that that "Cardinal Hugo" was the same as the Hugh of Saint-Cher you refer to?
    – DDS
    Commented Jul 24, 2023 at 4:16
  • @I.Chekhov Maybe.
    – Geremia
    Commented Jul 24, 2023 at 4:24

1 Answer 1

2

I don't think there is any English translation of the whole thing, just quotes here and there in other works. The Latin text of his Postilla (8 vols. in folio. Venetiis:1703) can be conveniently accessed online as scanned pages and an electronic edition. The latter is work in progress.

I think St. Alphonsus does cite him, but probably indirectly. If you can get by in old fashioned Italian, the best way to track down citations St. Alphonsus makes is with the critical edition that Intratext digitized. In the first chapter of his Selva, we find the citation "Ugon cardinale fa parlare il Signore e dire al sacerdote che assolve un peccatore: Ego feci coelum et terram, verumtamen meliorem et nobiliorem creationem do tibi: fac novam animam quae est in peccato" (I made Heaven and earth, yet I give you a better and nobler creation: make new the soul that is in sin). The footnote tells us this is from "In 1. Cor. 3," but when I consult the electronic edition of that chapter, I don't find those words. So I think he has borrowed the citation from someone else who was paraphrasing or expanding on what Hugh said.

5
  • You say the electronic edition is a WIP, but it seems complete to me. What's it missing?
    – Geremia
    Commented May 10 at 4:17
  • Wow, gloss-e.irht.cnrs.fr even has the Glossa Ordinaria. Grazie!
    – Geremia
    Commented May 10 at 4:21
  • @Geremia I haven't used the electronic edition enough to have a full picture of its extent, but while I was writing my answer, I tried to look at the commentary on Lamentations 4 and that was missing. In the list of books, Lamentations, Baruch, and Ruth are marked with an asterisk, which seems to mean they are not yet available. Also, the commentary for 1 Cor 3 just had verse 1 marked at the beginning instead of having a fuller verse division like the Glossa ordinaria.
    – jcr
    Commented May 11 at 12:03
  • @Geremia you may find the Catena aurea edition interesting: this is a critical edition that seeks to identify its sources, so you can how St. Thomas paraphrased what they said and whether they are who he thought they were.
    – jcr
    Commented May 11 at 12:10
  • Wow, I see! It's very well-referenced.
    – Geremia
    Commented May 11 at 20:33

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .