The Proverbs of Exalted Godfrey

[thesmellypocket 1839]

((Don’t mind me, just posting some stuff I wrote but never posted. During Hunwald’s Pontificate I got permission to write this Proverbs-type text, which would have a semi-canonical status. It was approved fully by all the relevant authorities and I posted it in the Church discord, but never on the forums. It is also quoted at length in the Breviary. I wrote it in Latin and English, so Father Humbert, my char at the time, translated it and wrote detailed footnotes. I will post the introduction here; the rest is in the doc.

 

((Link to text: (It has detailed footnotes so should be read in doc?https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gg65mjMHKMIIhUNLSOT6a-n5c7FUO625VDRMxbDfB3w/edit ))

 

THE PROVERBS OF EXALTED GODFREY

-Translated by Father Humbert, O.S.J.-

 

 

Preface: Note on the Canonical Status of the Text.

 

The Proverbs, also known as the Book of Wisdom, were transcribed in the time of the Prophet Godfrey, and from that time the Canonical status of the text has been seen as unclear. Some hold that, since it is the work of a Prophet, as well as for a number of other reasons, the Proverbs should be considered an intrinsic part of the Holy Scrolls. Others that these are the proverbs of Godfrey and not the Wisdom of God, and therefore they cannot be considered as Revelation. Others still have even postulated that the Proverbs are a work based on what Godfrey said, instead of being proverbs directly transcribed from him, therefore being an historical work, and on those grounds containing no divine inspiration whatsoever. 

 

It is incumbent on the Church to decisively rule on this matter - for our Apostolic duty is that there be no dissension or confusion, but that unity and love reign among us. Truth is our object; therefore Truth must be established if ever it can, otherwise the office of the Church is doubtful to begin with.

 

Since the honour of translating this text has fallen unto me, an unworthy slave, who has access to both the Church and Judite archives, I would humbly but firmly give my reasons for thinking this text partly canonical. I will then give the arguments often advanced against this text, and then the manner of their refutation. 

 

All this being noted, signs that point to a canonical text include:

 

i)The immaculate preservation of the manuscripts from one century to another. This is quite remarkable. In a time when printing was almost unheard of, such manuscripts were relied upon. We may generally rely upon their accuracy, for any differences from manuscript to manuscript are usually superficial: spelling conventions, grammatical errors and the like. Yet the Proverbs prove to soon be astoundingly different. Each manuscript, over centuries, is the exact same, to the point of near-impossibility. For example, in the time of Godfrey it was often the custom in Flexio to omit the letter ‘j’ and instead use ‘i’ as in ‘Iustitia’ being ‘Justitia.’ Yet even in the newest manuscripts do we find the use of Godfrey’s time. Now, whilst this individual thing is not remarkable in itself, imagine thousands of variations like this simply not appearing. As an historian and clergyman myself, I can safely say that the preservation of these manuscripts is near-miraculous, if not outright so, and is matched only by the preservation of St. Jude’s Theses.

 

ii)Exalted Godfrey makes prophecy, especially notable in the sixth chapter. This heavily suggests at least an element of direct divine inspiration, rather than it being the work of the mere fallible man, it would therefore be understood as being the work of the Prophet; therefore of God.

 

iii)In the first chapter, Godfrey says ‘Tradidi quod et accepi’ which is, in Common, ‘I hath passed on what hath been given me.’ (1:2) This direct reference to receiving something asserts something external to himself, further reinforcing the second point. This is even made clearer in 3:1 when Godfrey says he has ‘received’ the prayers, and calls them the ‘sum of Truth’ - and since God is the fullness of Truth, it must follow that this text has been received from Him. In the first chapter Godfrey also directly quotes God as saying ‘Ego Sum Via Veritas et Vita.’ (1:2) That is ‘I am the Way the Truth and the Life.’

 

iv)The work is explicitly theological. It concerns right action in the light of God. Exalted Godfrey had two offices: Prophet and Emperor. We may say that since this is not the work of a secular Emperor, it might easily be the work of Godfrey the Prophet.

 

Attempts at refuting the Divine origin of the text include:

 

i)The genre itself suggests that this is not Revelation. Revelation is a direct message from God, but here it is supposedly in the form of proverbs. Divine Revelation is much more explicit and God would have been more clear if he wished this to be considered as such: to say otherwise is to ascribe fallibility to God and therefore constitutes Heresy.

 

Yet this argument is flawed. The Epistles do not of themselves mention directly that they are the Word of God. They do mention the Prophethood of Exalted Owyn, yet so does this text. So if an explicit ‘this is the Word of God’ is necessary, then we are in for some slippery slope. As for Heresy, it would be prudent to answer this: I earlier called on the Church to review the Canonical status of this text. If this is Revelation, then it is the fault of men for failing to recognise it, just as it would be

men’s fault if the Epistles had no Canonical Recognition. Therefore, to call for the recognition of this text in no way undermines any Dogma; nor does it ascribe falsity to God, who alone is the ‘Alpha and the Omega.’ (Proverbs 1:2.)

 

ii)Even accepting the manuscripts as miraculous, this avails the recognition argument nothing. For St. Jude’s Theses were similarly protected - wouldst thou ascribe the same Divine origin to them?

 

No. I would not. There are many differences between this and the Theses. The Theses are themselves commentaries on the Scrolls and their meanings, circulated for common use. On the contrary, the Proverbs not only stand on their own merit, but contain, as far as I can see, no errors, whilst St. Jude’s works, although fantastic, do. This rules them out from being infallible in a way that these Proverbs are not. Which is more, the authority of a Prophet is verily greater than that of a Saint. 

 

I, however, submit all this to the judgement of men far wiser and more advanced than I, who may rule on it in Council.

 

I hope indeed that thou wilt enjoy and relish this translation fully.

 

Thy Humble Slave in God,

 

-Father Humbert, O.S.J.