Catena Aurea. COMMENTARY ON THE F O U R G O SPELS, COLLECTED OUT OE THE WORKS OF THE FATHERS BY S. THOMAS AQUINAS. ST. MATTHEW.—VOL. I. NEW EDITION. Oxford and London : JAMES PARKER AND CO. 1874. 226 T36cE v. 1 PEEFACE. By a Catena Patrum is meant a string or series of passages selected from the writings of various Fathers, and arranged for the elucidation of some portion of Scripture, as the Psalms or the Gospels. Catenas seem to have originated in the short scholia or glosses which it was customary in MSS. of the Scriptures to introduce between the lines or on the margin, perhaps in imitation of the scholiasts on the profane authors. These, as time went on, were gradually expanded, and passages from the Homilies or Sermons of the Fathers upon the same Scriptures added to them. The earliest commentaries on Scripture had been of this discursive nature, being addresses by word of mouth to the people, which were taken down by secretaries, and so preserved. While the traditionary teaching of the Church still preserved the vigour and vividness of its Apostolical origin, and spoke with an exactness and cogency which impressed an adequate image of it upon the mind of the Christian Expositor, he was able to allow himself free range in handling the sacred text, and to admit into the comment his own particular character of mind, and his spontaneous and individual ideas, in the full security, that, however he might follow the leadings of his own thoughts in unfolding the words of Scripture, his own deeply fixed views of Catholic truth would bring him safe home, without overstepping the limits of truth and sobriety. Accordingly, while the early Fathers manifest a most remarkable agreement in the principles and b2 IV PREFACE. the substance of their interpretation, they have at the same time a distinctive spirit and manner, by which each may be known from the rest. About the vith or viith century this originality disappears; the oral or traditionary teaching, which allowed scope to the individual teacher, became hardened into a written tradition, and henceforward there is a uniform invariable character as well as substance of Scripture interpretation. Perhaps we should not err in putting Gregory the Great as the last of the original Commentators ; for though very numerous commentators on every book of Scripture continued to be written by the most eminent doctors in their own names, probably not one interpretation of any importance would be found in them which could not be traced to some older source. So that all later comments are in fact Catenas or selections from the earlier Fathers, whether they present themselves expressly in the form of citations from their volumes, or are lections upon the Lesson or Gospel for the day, extempore indeed in form, but as to their materials drawn from the previous studies and stores of the expositor. The latter would be better adapted for the general reader, the former for the purposes of the theologian. Commentaries of both classes are very numerous. Fabri-cius a speaks of several hundred MS. Catenas in the Royal Library of France. According to Wolf and Cramer b the earliest compiler of a Greek Catena was CEcumenius, in the ixth or xth century ; for the claims of Olympiodorus in the vith to be the author of the Catena on Job, have been disproved by Patricius Junius, in his edition. (Lond. 1637.) But though this may be the first regular Catena, the practice of compiling commentaries had been in use much earlier. In the East, Eustathius of Antioch in the ivth, and Procopius of Gaza in the beginning of the vith, collected "the interpretations of the ancients ;" and in the West, the Commentaries on the Gospels which go under the name of Bede, (A.D. 700,) are but a summary of the authorized interpreta- a Vol. viii. p. 638. ed. Harles. Matt. et Marci, Oxon. 1840. which con- b Praef. in Catenas in Evang. SS. tains much information on the subject. PREFACE. v tions chiefly drawn from S. Augustine, S. Leo, &c, and even S. Jerome describes his Commentary on Galatians as a compendium of former writers, chiefly Origen. It may be added, that the same change took place in dogmatic teaching, as in the exposition of Scripture. This indeed was still more to be expected, for the issue of controversies and the decrees of Councils had given to the doctrinal statements of the Fathers an authority, or rather prerogative, which was never claimed for their commentaries. Accordingly, S. John Damascene's work on the Orthodox Faith in the viiith century is scarcely more than a careful selection and combination of sentences and phrases from the great theologians who preceded him, principally S. Gregory Nazianzen. A comment or scholia by the same author upon S. Paul's Epistles have come down to us, which are mainly taken from S. Chrysostom, but with some use of other expositors. All such commentaries have more or less merit and usefulness, but they are very inferior to the ' Catena Aurea,' which is now presented to the English reader: being all of them partial and capricious, dilating on one passage, and passing unnoticed another of equal or greater difficulty; arbitrary in their selection from the Fathers, and as compilations crude and indigested. But it is impossible to read the Catena of S. Thomas, without being struck with the masterly and architectonic skill with which it is put together. A learning of the highest kind,—not a mere literary book-knowledge, which might have supplied the place of indexes and tables in ages destitute of those helps, and when every thing was to be read in unarranged and fragmentary MSS.— but a thorough acquaintance with the whole range of ecclesiastical antiquity, so as to be able to bring the substance of all that had been written on any point to bear upon the text which involved it—a familiarity with the style of each writer, so as to compress into few words the pith of a whole page, and a power of clear and orderly arrangement in this mass of knowledge, are qualities which make this Catena VI PREFACE. perhaps nearly perfect as a conspectus of Patristic interpretation. Other compilations exhibit research, industry, learning ; but this, though a mere compilation, evinces a masterly command over the whole subject of Theology. The Catena is so contrived that it reads as a running commentary, the several extracts being dovetailed together by the compiler. And it consists only of extracts, the com, piler introducing nothing of his own but the few connecting particles which link one extract to the next. There are also a few quotations headed ' Glossa/ which none of the editors have been able to find in any author, and which from their character, being briefly introductory of a new chapter or a new subject, may be probably assigned to the compiler; though even this is dispensed with whenever it is possible: when a Father will furnish the words for such transition or connection, they are dexterously introduced. In the Gospel of S. Matthew there are only a few other passages which seem to belong to S. Thomas. These are mostly short explanations or notes upon something that seemed to need explanation in some passage quoted, and which in a modern book would have been thrown into the form of a foot-note. An instance of this may be seen in p. 405. The only important passages of this kind are some Glosses on chap. xxvi. 26, which will be noticed in their place. This continuity is expressed in the title which the Author gives his work in his dedication to Pope Urban IV., ' expo-sitio continua ;' the term Catena was not used till after his death. De Rubeis the Venetian editor speaks of a MS. of the xivth century in which it is so entitled, but the earlier editions have either ' Glossa Continua/ or ' Continuum.' The sacred text is broken into paragraphs longer or shorter; the shortest less than a verse, the longest twenty verses, and the exposition of each portion follows this order; —First, the transition from the last paragraph to that under review; if they are events, the harmony with the chronology of the other Evangelists is shewn, S. Augustine (de Consensu PREFACE. Vll Evangelistarum) being the authority used for this: then comes the literal, or, what is called, the historical exposition. Where different Fathers have given different explanations, they are introduced generally in the order of the most obvious and literal first, and so proceeding to the most recondite, by the words ' Vel aliter.' Then if any important doctrine hinges upon any part of the passage or comma, selections are given from the most approved treatises on the subject; e.g. on chap. v. 17, a lengthened summary of the arguments against the Manicheans from Aug. cont. Faust.; on chap. xi. 21. long extracts from Aug. de Bono Perseve-rantise; on viii. 2. a short passage from Damascenus de Fid. Orth. as if for the purpose of referring the reader to a treatise which contains a full discussion of the doctrine implied in the words, c And He stretched forth His hand, and touched him;' on xiii. 29. on the question of toleration, Aug. ep. ad Vincentium is quoted. And the comment on the portion is wound up with what is variously called the mystical, moral, allegorical, tropical, topological, or spiritual sense. The peculiar exposition of Origen, which seems to hold a mean place between the historical and the authorized mystical interpretation, is accordingly often inserted between these. The quotations do not profess to be made with scrupulous adherence to the words of the original. But they are not (a very few excepted) abridgments in the words of the compiler, but condensations in their own language. How admirably this is done may be seen by any one who will take the trouble of collating a few pages of some of the more diffuse writers, e.g. S. Chrysostom or Origen, with the Catena. For instances particularly in which a sentence is made up of clauses gathered from distant pages, see the summary of the Sermon on the Mount, chap. vii. in fin., and a quotation from Chrysostom on chap, xxiii. 26. Nor is it the case with this Catena as it seems to be with every other, that some one commentary has been taken as a nucleus or basis, into which other extracts have been inserted. Dr. Cramer says, that Chrysostom is the staple viii PREFACE. of all the Greek Catenas on S. Matthew; but though S. Thomas held Chrysostom in such esteem that he is reported to have said ' malle se uti Chrysostomi libris in Matthseum quam possidere fruique Lutetia Parisiorum,' (praef. Ben.) and though he has drawn upon the Homilies very largely, it is no more than he has done upon nearly all the principal commentaries. If any book might be supposed to have been his guide more than another it would be Rabanus Maurus; though we should not say that he quoted any other writers mediately through Rabanus, yet this compiler seems often to have guided him to quotations in S. Augustine, Gregory, and the general treatises of the Latin Fathers. With respect to the fidelity of the references, putting aside the connective Glossae which may probably be assigned to S. Thomas himself, there are very few (as far as the translation has hitherto proceeded) which it has not been possible to find. Of these, some are quoted from S. Augustine's Sermons, and among the multitude of doubtful and spurious compositions of this class, it is probable that the extracts to which they belong may be found, though it was scarcely worth while to spend much time in the search of a few unimportant passages. But there are two passages of serious moment, one on Matt. xvi. 18. the other on Luke xxii. 19. quoted from S. Cyril, which require a remark. The first affirming the supremacy of the successors of S. Peter is quoted from e Cyril, in lib. Thes/ but occurs no where in S. Cyril's writings. Accordingly it has been made the groundwork of an old charge against S. Thomas (lately revived by a German writer, see Ellendorf Hist. Blatter) of forgery, which however has been amply refuted by Guyart and Nicolai. In the dedication to another of his works, 'Opusculum contra errores Graecorum' addressed to Pope Urban IV. he says, Libellum ab excellentia vestra mihi ex-hibitum diligenter perlegi, in quo inveni quamplurima ad nostrae fidei assertionem utilia. Consideravi autem quod ejus fructus posset apud plurimos impediri propter quaedam in auctoritatibus SS. Patrum contenta, quae dubia esse videntur. PREFACE. IX The other passage is affirmatory of Transubstantiation, and quoted from S. Cyril without any specification of place; on this Father Simon (Hist. Crit. c. 33.) observes, that S. Cyril's commentaries on the New Testament have come down to us imperfect, and this very passage occurs quoted under the name of Cyril in the second part of the Greek Catena of Possinus. (in Matt, xxvii. 28.) The words fim.o quern bibas quern manduces/ on chap. v. 27. are not in the earlier editions of the Catena, but were inserted (perhaps by the Louvain Editor) from the original text of S. Augustine. Of the authors cited, the Catena contains nearly all that is material in S. Chrysostom's Homilies on S. Matthew, S. Jerome's Commentary, S. Hilary's Canons, and the Glossa Ordinaria all through the Gospel. The Latin commentary of Pseudo-Chrysostom is cited fully till about the middle of chap, viii., after which it is cited more rarely. At this place the Benedictine editor notes a hiatus in some of the MSS. of Chrysostom. S. Augustine de Cons. Ev. and In Sermonem Domini in Mont, are nearly incorporated into the Catena, and from ch. xvi. to the end, Origen's Commentaries on S. Matthew. It is generally supposed that Aquinas was ignorant of Greek, and that therefore he must have quoted the Greek authors in Translations; but his own words in his dedication to Pope Urban seem to imply otherwise. ' Interdum etiam sensum posui, verba dimisi, prsecipue in Homiliario Chry-sostomi propter hoc quod est translatio vitiosa.' That for Chrysostom he used neither the version of Anianus, (as the Benedictine editor of Chrys. supposed,) nor the current Latin version, is evident on the slightest comparison with his quotations. However this may be, he has in several instances quite missed the sense of the Greek. The Catena begins to quote Origen's Commentary on S. Matt, at chap, xvi., though our fragment of it begins as early as chap. xiii. It uses the Old Interpretation, which Huet conjectures to have been the work of Bellator, or of X PREFACE. some contemporary of Cassiodorus. This version will be found in the Ben. Ed. of Origen, and is according to Huet barbarous and full of errors. Great accidental value is given to many of the inedited Greek Catenas by the extracts which they contain from lost works; in this on S. Matt, are quoted two writers, whose works do not seem to have been printed. The first is Eemigius, which is frequently cited throughout. The commentary on S. Matthew of Eemigius, a Monk of Auxerre in the ixth century, is extant in MS. in several libraries, but the only part of it which has ever been printed is the Preface, in Fontani Novae Eruditorum Delicise, Florence 1793. One short passage concerning the dates of the Gospels, which is quoted in S. Thomas's Proem, is not found in this Preface, but a passage in S. Thomas's Proem to S. Mark quoted from Eemigius super Matt, occurs in it. This would be proof enough of the identity of the Eemigius of the Catena with the inedited Commentary described by Fontani. But he has also printed in the same volume several homilies of Eemigius, which he says are only extracts or abridgments (apocopse) of the Commentary. On comparing these with the quotations in the Catena, they answer exactly to that description, the substance is the same, the words only a little different. Haymo is much more rarely quoted. The quotations do not correspond with the ' Homilies on the Gospels' printed with his name at Paris, 1545, but there is much the same kind of resemblance between them, as between the quotations and the Homilies of Eemigius. It may perhaps be conjectured, that he also may have written a commentary of which the Homilies are abridgments. Eabanus Maurus, who as well as Haymo was a scholar of Alcuin, wrote one of the most full and valuable commentaries on S. Matthew extant. It contains copious extracts from the Latin Fathers, such, he says, (quantum mihi prao innumeris monastics servitutis retinaculis licuit, et pro nutrimento parvalorum quod non parvam nobis ingerit PREFACE. XI molestiam et lectionis facit injuriam/ (he seems from this to have been Abbot at the time he wrote,) but interwoven with the extracts is much original matter of his own, c non-nulla quae mihi Author lucis aperire dignatus estc/ which he distinguishes by the note 'Maurus* on the margin. In the only printed edition of his works, there is a hiatus of several pages in chapp. 23. and 24. and another in chap. 28. * quae inter excudendum a militibus omnia vastantibus de-perdita sunt.' S. Jerome speaks of his own commentary on S. Matthew (in the preface to Eusebius), as having been written off very hastily in the short space of a fortnight — and as being entirely his own, if for no other reason, from his want of leisure to read the numerous commentators even then existing on the Gospels. He names Origen's twenty-five volumes, and as many homilies on S.Matthew only; Theo-philus Antioch., Hippolytus Martyr, Theodorus, Apollinaris, Didymus, Hilary, Victorinus, For tun ati anus. He says also, 6 historicam interpretationem digessi breviter, et interdum spiritualis intelligentise flores miscui, perfectum opus re-servam in posterum.' The Enarrationes in Matthseum printed as the work of the Archbishop Anselm (Cologne, 1612) are ascribed by Cave to Anselm Laudunensis, and by others to William of Paris, who died in 1249. This is partly a compilation and partly original. It does not seem used in the Catena, but it has been referred to in this translation as containing many passages cited in the Catena, under the title Gloss., and which appeared to have been drawn by both authors from some common source. The Glossa Ordinaria seems to have been a brief Catena, compiled from the Fathers by Strabus, a Monk of Fulda, a pupil and amanuensis of Rabanus Maurus. Among the extracts, he seems to have inserted short observations of his c Great part of the introduction of Epistle dedicatory to Bp. Acca; how Rabanus describing bis method of com- is this to be explained? pilation, is word for word with Bede's Xll PREFACE. own, distinguishing them by the title of ' Glossa.' Even of these the substance seems to have been drawn from the Fathers, or rather from that received mode of interpreting Scripture and Fathers which was traditionally preserved in the Schools. These portions (in whatever degree original) got the name of Glossa Ordinaria say the editors, (Douay, 1617,) "quia illam posteri omnes tanquam officinam eccle-siasticorum sensuum consulere solebant." It is sometimes cited under the title of ' auetoritas.' The Glossa Interlinearis is ascribed to Anselm Laudu-nensis early in the xiith century, and was intended to accompany the common editions of the Bible written in a small hand in the vacant spaces between the lines. A few passages are quoted from Bede. Of these some are from his Homilies on the Gospels, some from his Commentary on Luke. There is among Bede's works a Commentary on S. Matthew, and in one or two instances this is referred to by Nicolai, but on looking at the quotations in older editions of the Catena, it is merely ' Bed. in Horn/ To many quotations of Remigius and Rabanus, which agreed in sense with this Commentary on Matthew, the mark c e Beda' has been added, because he was the earliest author in which the translator found them; but an inspection of this Commentary will make it very doubtful whether it is Bede's. First, he does not mention it in the catalogue which he gives of his own works at the end of the Hist. Eccl. (p. 222. ed. Smith.) Secondly, those on Mark and Luke (which he does mention there) are introduced by Epistles to Acca, Bishop of Hexham. Thirdly, the style of these is different, being full and copious, that on Matthew short, and 'per saltus.' Fourthly, comparing Rabanus' numerous quotations from Bede, they seem to be all taken from the comments on the parallel passages of Mark4and Luke. But a great deal of what is given as original in Rabanus coincides with the Commentary on S. Matth. in question. Is it an abridgment of Rabanus, or did they only both draw upon their recollections of the Fathers ? The Commentary on S. Paul's PREFACE. xni Epistles printed among Bede's Works, and which is a compilation chiefly from S. Augustine, seems to have been proved by Mabillon to be the work of Florus the Deacon, (Mab. Vet. Analecta, i. 12.) The following extracts from Bede's Preface to S. Luke illustrate the manner of compiling such Commentaries then in fashion. Bede excused himself from the task because it had been so fully performed by Ambrose. Acca answers that there were many things in Ambrose so eloquent and high, that they could only be understood by Doctors, and something weaker was wanted for the unlearned; that S. Gregory had not been afraid to rifle all the Fathers for his homilies on the Gospels, and in short it might be said of every thing with the comic poet, ' Nihil sit dictum quod non sit dictum prius/ Bede then describes the method he had pursued; " Having gathered around me the works of the Fathers, truly the most worthy to be employed in such a task, I set myself diligently to look out what S. Ambrose, what Augustine, what Gregory most keen-eyed, (as his name signifies,) the Apostle of our nation, what the Translator of the Sacred Story Jerome, and what the other Fathers have thought upon the words of Luke. This I forthwith committed to paper either in the very words of the author, or where abridgment was needed in my own. To save the labour of inserting a reference to the author in each case in my text, I have marked the first letters of his name in the margin, being anxious that none should take me for a plagiarist, endeavouring to pass off as my own the words of greater men." Vol. v. p. 215. ed. Col. The Translation has been made from the Venetian edition of 1775, which professes to give the original text of the Catena without the alterations of Nicolai. For by the repeated reprints—and no book went through more during the two first centuries after the invention of printing—the text had become so corrupt—" tarn frequentes in earn irrep-serant et tarn enormes corrupted, tot depravatse voces, tot involutse constructiones, tot perturbatse phrases, tot prse-sertim ex Grsecis autoribus autoritates adulterate, tot vitiosse XIV PREFACE. versiones, tot mutilati textus, tot indices omissi vel prsepos-tere annotati, tot hiantes et imperfecti sensus occurrebant ut eas mirer tarn impense laudari potuisse quae tarn turpi-ter aberrassent." (Praef. Nicol.) Nicolai therefore in 1657 undertook a recension of the text, for which he employed, not MSS. or early editions of the Catena, (the Venetian editor thinks it probable that he used only two editions, one a Parisian, the other an Antwerp,) but had recourse to the authorities themselves; his aim being, not so much to give it as it came from S. Thomas, but to improve the usefulness of the work, as what it is indeed, a complete syllabus of Catholic theology. But as the Venetian edition is wretchedly printed, it has been corrected throughout by a reference to Nicolai, (ed. Lugd. 1686,) and the references have all been verified afresh and adapted to the best editions of the Fathers. No reference has been given to any passage which the translator has not verified for himself substantially in its own original place; but in those places only in which there was any doubt or difficulty about the meaning, or where an important doctrine was involved, or any important variety of reading between the two editions of the Catena, has he attentively collated the passage of the Catena with the original; in a very few has he introduced any alteration or addition from the originals, and that has been sometimes noticed in the note. Where a reference could not be found, it has been marked c non occurrit;' of these the majority are those Glossae which are most probably to be ascribed to S. Thomas: of the rest, some had escaped the diligence of Nicolai, only one or two which Nic. had marked as found, the present translator has not been able to find. Where no note of reference is put, it is to be understood that the passage is in each case in the author's commentary on that chapter and verse of S. Matt.; as the only note of reference to which must have been ' in locum/ it was thought a perpetual repetition of that note was needless. To aid in referring to S. Chrys. the number of the Homily has been given at the first place where each is referred to. PREFACE. xv The references to Scripture have been verified anew, (those in the Psalms conformed to the numeration of the English Bible,) and many more given which the previous editions omit. The text of the Gospel commented upon is given from the E. V.; but all passages quoted in the body of the comment are translated from the Latin as there given, which is often important when the remarks are upon words which have no equivalent in our version, e. g. ' supersub-stantialis' in c. vi. 11. There is no uniformity in the editions in the mode of printing the sacred text. The MSS. and earlier editions do not contain it, so that it is probable that it was so published by Aquinas, especially as nearly the whole is worked into the series of comment; the next class of editions have the sacred text, occupying a small space in the centre of the upper part of the page, and the Catena arranged around it; and at last the commata or paragraphs, which it was clearly S.Thomas's intention to make, were divided, and in some editions the portion of text was inserted between them, in others each chapter was printed at the head of its own comment, divided into the same paragraphs, with letters referring to the paragraphs of the Catena. It only remains to add, that the Editors are indebted for the Translation of St. Matthew, as well as for the above introductory remarks, to the Rev. Mark Pattison, M.A., Fellow of Lincoln College. J. H. N. LIST OF AUTHORS USED IN THE CATENA ON ST. MATTHEW, With the Editions of their Works referred to in the Translation. Origen, Presbyter of Alexandria, A.D. 230. Ed. Ben. Par. 1753. Pseudo-Origen Homilice sex ex diver sis locis collector. Merlin, Par. 1512. S. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, A.D. 248. Oxford Translation, 1839. Eusebius, Archbishop of Csesarea, A.D. 315. Oxford, 1838. S. Athanasius, Archbishop of Alexandria, A.D. 326. Ed. Ben. Par. 1698. Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, A.D. 340—530. Paris, 1615. S. Hilary, Bishop of Poictiers, A.D. 354. Ed. Ben. Par. 1693. S. Gregory of Nazianzus, Abp. of Constantinople, A.D. 370. Col. 1680. S. Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa, A.D. 370. Paris, 1615. S. Ambrose, Archbishop of Milan, A.D. 374. Ed. Ben. Par. 1686. S. Jerome, Presbyter and Monk of Bethlehem, A.D. 378. Verona, 1735. Nemesius, A.D. 380. Apud Bill. Patr. Grcec. Paris, 1624. S. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, A.D. 396. Ed. Ben. Par. 1679—1700. S.John Chrysostom, Abp. of Constantinople, A.D. 398. Ed. Ben. Par. 1718—38. S. Cyril, Archbishop of Alexandria, A.D. 412. Paris, 1638. S. Maximus, Bishop of Turin, A.D. 422. Paris, 1614. Cassian, Presbyter and Monk of Marseilles, A.D 424. } Bill. Patr. S. Peter Chrysologus, Archbishop of Ravenna, A.D. 433. } Col. 1618. Council of Ephesus, Canons of } A.D. 431. ap. Labbe Concilia, Par. 1671. Theodotus of Ancyra, S. Leo I. Pope, AD. 440. Venice, 1783. Gennadius, Presbyter of Marseilles, A.D. 495. Hamb. 1614. S. Gregory I. Pope, A.D. 590. Ed. Ben. Paris, 1705. S. Isidore, Archbishop of Seville, A.D. 595. Col. 1617. Bede, Venerable, Presbyter and Monk of Yarrow, A.D. 700. Col. 1612. S. John, Presbyter of Damascus, A.D. 730. Paris, 1712. Rabanus Maurus, Archbishop of Mayence, A.D. 847. Col. 1626. Haymo, Bishop of Halberstadt, A.D. 853. } Works not printed. Remigius, Presbyter and Monk of Auxerre, A.D. 880. Glossa Ordinaria, in ninth century. Lugd. 1589. } Bill. Patr. Paschasius Radbertus, A.D. 850. Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, A.D. 1080. S. Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury, A.D. 1093. Col. 1612. Glossa Interlinearis, in twelfth century. Lugd. 1589. PREFACE TO THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. Isaiah xl. 9. Go up to the top of the mountain, thou that preachest glad tidings in Sion; lift up thy voice with might, thou that preachest in Jerusalem: cry aloud, fear not: say to the cities of Judah, Behold your God! Lo, the Lord God shall come with power, and His arm shall have dominion; Lo, His reward is with Sim. The Prophet Isaiah, a manifest preacher of the Gospel, briefly expressing the loftiness, the name, and the substance of the Gospel doctrine, addresses the evangelic teacher in the person of the Lord, saying, Go up to the top of the mountain, fyc. But to make our beginning with the title, The Gospel Augustine. The word 'Evangelium/ (Gospel,) is rendered Aug. in Latin ' bonus nuntius/ or e bona annuntiatio/ (good news.) ™^lt It may indeed be used on all occasions whenever any good ii. 2. is announced; but it has come to be appropriated to the announcement of the Saviour. Gloss. Those who have related the birth, deeds, words, and sufferings of the Lord Jesus Christ, are properly styled Evangelists. Chrysostom. chrys. For what is there that can equal these good tidings ? God on ?°^?ll*t earth, man in heaven; that long war ceased, reconciliation i. 2. made between God and our nature, the devil overthrown, death abolished, paradise opened. These things, so far beyond our merits, are given us with all fulness; not for our own toil or labour, but because we are beloved of God. Aug. Whereas God in many ways heals the souls of men; ac- Aug. de cording to the times and the seasons which are ordained by His vQ*™Qme g" VOL. I. B 2 PREFACE TO THE GOSPEL Pseudo- ¦ Aug. Serm. d ie Nativ. Serm. i; x. Leo. Epist. i id Flavian . xxviii. i S. Aug-, de doct. Christ. i. 12. Leo. Serm. ii a Nativ. s. xix. S >. Aug. de Pec-catorurr 1 Meritis, , ii. 30. Leo. Ubi suj ). Matt. 5 . 12. Aug. Contra Faust, iv. 2. marvellous wisdom, yet has He in no way more beneficently provided for the human race, than when the Very Wisdom of God, the Only Son of one substance and coeternal with the Father, stooped to take upon Him perfect man, and the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. Hereby He made manifest how high a place among creatures had human nature, in that He appeared to men as Yery Man. Pseudo-Aug. God was made man, that man might be made God. Gloss ; This part of the glad tidings that should be preached, the Prophet foretells saying, Behold, your God, &;c. Leo Pope; For this emptying of Himself, by which the Invisible made Himself Visible, and the Creator and Lord of all things chose to become one of us mortal creatures, was a stooping of His mercy, not a failing of His power. Gloss ; Therefore that the Lord should not be supposed to be present in such a way as that there should be any thing lost of His power, the Prophet adds, The Lord shall come tvith power. Aug. Come, not by passing through the regions of space, but by shewing Himself to men in the flesh. Leo; By the unspeakable power of God, it was wrought, that while very Man was in the inviolable God, and very God in passible flesh, there was bestowed upon man, glory through shame, immortality through punishment, life through death. Aug. For blood that was without sin being shed, the bond of all men's sins was done away, by which men were before held captive by the Devil. Gloss ; Therefore because men, having been delivered from sin by virtue of Christ suffering, became the servants of God, it follows, And His arm shall have dominion. Leo ; In Christ then was given us this wonderful deliverance, that on our passible nature the condition of death should not abide, which His impassible essence had admitted, and that by that which could not die, that which was dead might be brought to life. Gloss; And thus through Christ is opened to us the entrance of immortal glory, concerning which it follows, Lo, His reward is with Him; that, namely, of which Himself speaks, Your reward is abundant in Heaven. Aug. The promise of eternal life and the kingdom of heaven belongs to the New Testament; in the Old Testament are contained promises of temporal things. Gloss ; So then evangelic teaching delivers to us four things ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 3 concerning Christ; the Divinity that takes upon it, the Humanity that is taken upon it, His Death by which we are delivered from bondage, His Resurrection by which the entrance of a glorious life is opened to us. On this account it is represented in Ezekiel under the figure of the four animals. Gregory ; The Only-begotten Son of God was Himself verily Greg, made Man; Himself condescended to die as the sacrifice of gomzeiv'# our redemption as a Calf; He rose again through the power of His might, as a Lion; and as an Eagle He ascended aloft into heaven. Gloss; In which ascension He shewed manifestly His Divinity; Matthew then is denoted by the Man, because he dwells chiefly on the humanity of Christ; Mark by the Lion, because he treats of His Eesurrection; Luke by the Calf, because he insists on His Priesthood; John by the Eagle, because he describes the sacraments of His Divinity. Ambrose ; And it has happened well that we Ambros. set out with delivering the opinion that the Gospel according in°L^' to Matthew is of a moral kind, for morals are the peculiar pref. province of man. The figure of a Lion is ascribed to Mark, because he begins with an assertion of His Divine power, saying, The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the Son of God. The figure of the Eagle is given to John, because he has described the miracles of the Divine Eesurrection. Greg. These things the commencement of each of the Gospel Greg. books testifies. Because he opens with Christ's human gene- 1 sup* ration, Matthew is rightly designated by a Man; Mark by a Lion, because he begins with the crying in the desert; Luke by a Calf, because he begins with a sacrifice; because he takes his beginning from the divinity of the Word, John is worthily signified by an Eagle. Aug. Or, Matthew Aug. who has chiefly represented the regal character of Christ, is Sgnsl°n" designated by a Lion; Luke by a Calf, because of the Priest's Evang. victim ; Mark, who chose neither to relate the royal nor the ' priestly lineage % and yet is clearly busied about His human nature, is designated by the figure of a Man. These three animals, the Lion, the Man, the Calf, walk on the earth, whence these three Evangelists are mostly employed about those things which Christ wrought in the flesh. But John, a The original text of Augustine has sacerdbtalem vel consecrationem vel here, t( neque stirpem regiam neque cognationem." b2 4 PREFACE TO THE GOSPEL as the Eagle, soars on high, and with most keen eyes of the heart beholds the light of unchangeable Truth. From which we may understand, that the other three Evangelists are occupied about the active, and John about the contemplative, life. The Greek Doctors by the Man understood Matthew, because he has deduced the Lord's lineage according to the flesh; by the Lion, John, because as the lion strikes terror into the other beasts by his roaring, so John struck terror into all heretics; by the Calf, they understood Luke, because the calf was the victim of the Priests, and he is much employed concerning the Temple and the Priesthood; and by the Eagle they understood Mark, because the eagle in the Divine Scripture is used to denote the Holy Spirit, who spake by the mouths of the Prophets; and Mark begins with a citation from the Prophets. Hier. Jerome. Concerning the number of the Evangelists, it in Evan. should be known, that there were many who had written Matt, ad Gospels, as the Evangelist Luke witnesses, saying, Foras-Luke 1 1. mucn as many have taken in hand, fyc, and as books remaining to the present time declare which divers authors have set forth, therein laying the foundation of many heresies; such as the Gospel according to the Egyptians, according to Thomas, Matthias, and Bartholomew b; that of the twelve Apostles, and Basilides, and Apelles, and others whom it would be long to reckon up. But the Church, which is founded by the Lord's word upon the rock, sending forth, like Paradise, its four streams, has four corners and four rings, by which as the ark of the covenant, and the guardian of the Law of the Lord, it is carried about on moveablec b These apocryphal compositions are date. One is still extant, and is one of elsewhere mentioned by Clement Alex, the two Gospelsofour Saviour's infancy, (Strom, iii. p. 539, 553.) Origen (in which seem to be the work of the Gnos- Luc. i.) Eusebius (Hist. iii. 25.) tics. The Gospel according to the Pseudo-Athanasius(Synops. 76.) Cyril Twelve Apostles seems to be the same (Catech. iv. 36. vi. 31. Epiphanius as the celebrated Gospel according to (Haer. 62. n. 2.) Ambrose (in Luc. i. the Nazarenes, or Hebrews, supposed to 2.) and Pope Gelasius in his Decree. have been prior to the inspired Gospels, The Gospel according to the Egyp- and afterwards corrupted by the Ebion- tians is supposed to be one of the works ites. Basilides was a Gnostic, and referred to in the beginning of St. Luke. Apelles a Marcionite, Little is known It was afterwards used by the Gnostics of the Gospels according to Matthias, and Sabellians in their defence. There and Bartholomew ; the former seems seem to have been several Gospels ac- to have been of Gnostic origin, cording to Thomas, one ascribed to a c Some read 'immobilibus.' disciple of Manes; one of an earlier ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 5 staves. Aug. Or, Because there are four quarters of Aug. the world, through the whole of which Christ's Church is eV^" i',} extended. In learning and preaching they had a different order from that they had in writing. In learning and preaching they ranked first who followed the Lord present in the flesh, heard Him teaching, saw Him acting, and by His mouth were sent to preach the Gospel; but in penning the Gospel, an order which we must suppose to have been fixed by Heaven, the first place and the last place were filled out of the number of those whom the Lord chose before His passion, the first by Matthew, the last by John; so that the other two, who were not of that number, but who yet followed Christ speaking in them, were embraced as sons, and placed in the middle between the other two, so as to be supported by them on both sides. Remigius. Matthew wrote in Judaea in the time of the Emperor Caius Caligula; Mark in Italy, at Rome, in the time of Nero or Claudius, according to Raba-nus; Luke in the parts of Achaia and Bseotia, at the request of Theophilus; John at Ephesus, in Asia Minor, under Nerva. Bede. But though there were four Evangelists, yet what they wrote is not so much four Gospels, as one true harmony of four books. For as two verses having the same substance, non oco. but different words and different metre, yet contain one and the same matter, so the books of the Evangelists, though four in number, yet contain one Gospel, teaching one doctrine of the Catholic faith. Chrysost. It had indeed been chrys. enough that one Evangelist should have written all; but Ubl sup* whereas four speak all things as with one mouth, and that neither from the same place nor at the same time, nor having met and discoursed together, these things are the greatest test of truth. It is also a mark of truth, that in some small matters they seem to disagree. For had their agreement been complete throughout, adversaries might have supposed that it was by a human collusion that this was brought about. Indeed in essentials which pertain to direction of life, and preaching the faith, they do not differ in the least thing. And if in their accounts of miracles, one tells it in one way, another in another, let not this disturb you; but think that if one had told all, the other three would have been a needless superfluity; had they all written different things, there would have been no 6 PREFACE TO THE GOSPEL room for proof of their harmony. And if their account differs in times or modes, this does not hinder the truth of the facts themselves which they relate, as shall be shewn below. Aug. Aug. Though each seems to have followed an order of 1 sup' narration of his own, yet we do not find any one of them writing as if in ignorance of his predecessor, or that he left out some things which he did not know, which another was to supply; but as each had inspiration, he gave accordingly the cooperation of his own not unnecessary labour. Gloss. Gloss. But the sublimity of the Gospel doctrine consists, first, in its preeminent authority. Aug. For among all the Divine instruments which are contained in Holy Writ, the Gospel has justly the most excellent place; its first preachers were the Apostles who had seen the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ present in the flesh; and some of them, that is, Matthew and John, published each a book of such things as seemed good to be published concerning Him. And that it should not be supposed, that, as far as relates to receiving and preaching the Gospel, it makes any difference whether it is announced by those who followed Him during His sojourn in the flesh, or by those who faithfully believed what they heard from others, it is provided by Divine Providence through the Holy Spiritd, that a commission, as well of writing as of preaching the Gospel, should be bestowed on some out of the number of those that followed the first Apostles. Gloss. And thus it is clear that the sublimity of the authority of the Gospel is derived from Christ; this is proved by the words of the Prophet cited above, Go up to the top of the mountain. For Christ is that Mountain of whom Is. 2, 2. the same Isaiah speaks, And there shall be in the last days a mountain prepared, the house of the Lord in the top of the mountains; that is, upon all the saints who from Christ the Mountain are also called mountains; for of His fulness have we all received. And rightly is that, Go thou up upon a high mountain, addressed to Matthew, who, as had been foretold, in his own person saw the deeds of Christ, and heard His Aucr. doctrine. Aug. This should be considered which to many i'e cons, presents a great difficulty, why the Lord Himself wrote nothing, so that we are obliged to give our belief to others who d A clause is inserted here from the original to complete the sense. ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 7 wrote of Him. Gloss. But we ought not to say that He wrote nothing, seeing His members have written those things which they learned by the dictation of their Head. For whatever He would have us to read concerning His actions or His words, that He enjoined upon them to write as His own hands. Gloss. Secondly, the Evangelic doctrine has sublimity of strength; whence the Apostle says, The Gospel is the power Rom. l, of God to the salvation of all that believe. The Prophet also ' shews this in the foregoing words, Lift up thy voice with might; which further marks out the matter of evangelic teaching, by that raising the voice which gives clearness to the doctrine. Aug. For the mode in which Holy Scripture is put Aug. a