« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
lesser matters? For that very reason they are the more credible, in that they do not agree in all things; for then it would have been thought that they had met and consulted together: but now one has written what another has omitted, and therefore they seem to differ in some things.' This should be compared with a passage of Chrysostom° formerly transcribed.
27. Upon Matth. ii. 11, he says, When the child was born, the Virgin laid him in a stable, not finding any house to be in. But afterwards he thinks it likely they found room in a house, and there the magians of the east found him.
28. Upon Matth. v. 44: To love some men, and those our friends, and hate others, is a mark of imperfection: he is perfect who loves all men.'
29. Her finely explains those words of our Lord, Mark x. 40, "It is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared;" and his observations upon this place may be compared with what he says upon Matth. xx. 23.
30. Upon Luke xxi. 37, 38: Our Lord,' says Theophylact, said many excellent things to those who came to him in the temple: and from this and other places, we may conclude therefore, that the evangelists have related a few things only; for though the Lord preached almost three years, if a man should say, that all which they have recorded might be spoken in the compass of one day, he would not speak much beside the truth.'
For certain, the evangelical writings, in which conciseness and fulness are united, deserve the highest commendations.
From that passage it appears that Theophylact did not compute our Saviour's ministry to have lasted three years and more, but somewhat less than three years: accordingly, he does not suppose the Jewish feast, mentioned by St. John, v. 1, to have been a passover, but" some other feast, possibly pentecost, as he conjectures. Of this point I have spoken formerly.
31. The section concerning the woman taken in adultery, which we have in John viii. at the beginning, is not explained by Theophylact.
32. I now beg leave to mention a general observation.
P P. 13. E.
Vid. p. 674.
* P. 117, 118.
Theophylact's Commentaries are very useful and valuable : but it seems to me, that too much respect has been shown to his prefaces to the four gospels, where he determines the times of the several evangelists' writing. Just and useful observations, right or probable interpretations of scripture, may be received from any man, let him live when he will, but, as an historian, the testimony of a man, who speaks of things done a thousand years before his time, is of little value, unless it be derived from more ancient writers. Mill, in his Prolegomena, says, that Theophylact is the first who has assigned the precise year in which each evangelist published his gospel; and yet he has placed Theophylact's prefaces, where those determinations are made, at the head of the several gospels in his edition, without any remarks; and many have followed Theophylact in that point, though Mill had more judgment: but the early date of the gospels is popular, and it has become almost a general opinion. Upon this point some observations were mentioned in the chapter of Eusebius of Cæsarea.
1. EUTHYMIUS was a monk who lived at Constantinople in the latter part of the eleventh and the beginning of the twelfth century. He wrote a work entitled Panoplia, against all heretics; Commentaries upon the Psalms, and upon the gospels, collected chiefly out of Chrysostom and other ancient writers; and also some other books. His works are not yet published in the original Greek, that I know of, but only in Latin versions; though Mill, and R. Simon, and
Theophylactus hic noster, omnium (quod sciam) primus, designat ipsum præcise annum, quo evangelista singuli sua conscripserint evangelia. Matthæum evangelium suum scripsisse ait anno post ascensionem Christi octavo; Marcum decimo; Lucam decimo quinto; Joannem trigesimo secundo. Et ad hujus calculum se componunt MSS. plurimi in notatis ad calcem evangeliorum. Mill. Prol. n. 1072.
y See vol. iv. p. 133-135.
a Vid. Cav. H. L. T.
ii. Du Pin, Bibl. des Aut. Ec. T. ix. p. 197. Fabr. Bib. Gr. 1. v. c. 11. T. vii. p. 460, &c. R. Simon Hist. Critic. des commentat. du N. T. ch. 29. p. 469, &c.
some others, who had access to manuscripts, have quoted several passages from him in Greek.
2. In his preface to St. Matthew's gospel he says, that Matthew wrote at the request of the Jewish believers in Judea.' He seems to say in the same place, that Mark wrote his gospel at the request of the believers in Egypt. He likewise says, that Matthew's gospel was first written, and in Judea, for the Jewish believers, in Hebrew, eight years after our Lord's ascension; afterwards his gospel was translated into the Greek language.
3. The evangelist Mark he supposeth to be the nephew of Barnabas, often mentioned in the Acts and St. Paul's epistles; he supposeth him likewise to be the same who is mentioned by Peter at the end of his first epistle. He says his gospel was written about ten years after our Lord's ascension, at Rome, as some said, or in Egypt, according to others. He says, that at the first Mark was much with his uncle Barnabas, and Paul: afterwards he was with Peter at Rome, as the first epistle of that apostle shows, whom he also there calls his son; from whom also he received the whole history of the gospel.
4. If Mark was at first much with Barnabas and Paul, and not with Peter till afterwards, that does not favour the supposition, that his gospel was written within ten years after our Lord's ascension; for, according to the general and almost universally concurring testimony of ancient authors, Mark received his gospel from the apostle Peter, as is also said by this writer himself.
5. Having explained St. Mark's gospel to the end of ver.
Matthæum enim, qui ex Judæis crediderant, obsecraverunt, ut scriptam relinqueret ipsis evangelii historiam, quam eos verbo docuerat. Similiter et Marcum, qui in Ægypto edocti fuerant. Euthym. in iv. Evangelia, ap. Bib. PP. Max. T. xix. p. 487. G.
• Primus autem scripsit Matthæus quod nunc præ manibus est evangelium, post octo annos Christi in cœlos assumpti. Scripsit autem ad illos, qui ex Judæis crediderant, ut prædiximus, Hebræâ usus linguâ ac contexturâ. Postea vero in nostram linguam traductum est. Id. ib. p. 488. A. Conf. Testimonia, ap. Mill. N. T.
d Marcus, filius Mariæ, quæ in domo suâ benigne apostolos excipiebat. Vocabatur autem et Joannes, quemadmodum in Actis Apostolorum invenimus. -Et circa principia quidem conjunctus est Barnabæ avunculo suo, et Paulo, sicuti liber Actorum testatur, et Paulus in epistolis mentionem faciens. Deinde cum Petro Romæ conversatus est, quemadmodum prior ejus epistola demonstrat, quâ etiam filium suum juxta spiritum Marcum appellavit. A quo insuper totum evangelii sermonem didicit, et postmodum evangelium conscripsit, secundum Clementem Stromaticum, in ipsâ Româ; juxta Chrysostomum autem in Ægypto, rogatus a fratribus, qui ibidem morabantur, post decimum a Salvatoris assumtione annum. Ibid. p. 597. G. H.
8th of the 16th chapter, he says, 'Some expositors affirm this to be the conclusion of Mark's gospel, and that what follows has been added since: nevertheless it ought to be explained by us, as it contains nothing contrary to truth.'
6. Luke, he says, was a native of Antioch, and a physician. He was a hearer of Christ, and, as some say, one of his seventy disciples, as well as Mark; he was afterwards very intimate with Paul. He wrote his gospel, with Paul's permission, fifteen years after our Lord's ascension.
7. He says, thats St. John's gospel was not written until many years after the destruction of Jerusalem.
8. Of the noted various reading in St. John's gospel he expresseth himself after this manner. Having explained ch. vii. 52, he adds, Ith ought to be observed, that what follows here to those words, " then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world," are either wanting in the more exact copies, or marked with a dagger in the margin, denoting them to be spurious and interpolated: of which it is some argument, that this place is not explained by former interpreters; nevertheless, as it may be useful, we shall explain it.'
• Quidam autem interpretum asserunt, hoc in loco completum esse Marci evangelium, quæ vero sequuntur recentiorem esse additionem. Oportet tamen et hanc explanare, quum veritati nihil repugnet. p. 614. B.
f Beatus Lucas Antiochensis fuit genere. Omnem autem sermonis disciplinam adeptus, medicinam etiam corporum didicit, ac postmodum animarum quoque medicinam assequutus est. Primum, quidem, Christo adhæsit, et ab eo pietatis semina suscepit. Postea vero Paulo duci conjunctus, maximeque familiaris effectus est, ac discipulus ejus, comesque itineris. Dicunt autem quidam, et maxime Origenes, quod Marcus et Lucas ante dominicam passionem inter septuaginta discipulos connumerati sunt. Post quindecim vero annos a Salvatoris assumtione, permissu Pauli, conscripsit evangelium ad Theophilum, fidelissimum, Deique amantissimum. Ibid. p. 615. B.
Præsens autem evangelium multis annis post capta Jerosolyma conscripsit. Ib. p. 663. E.
Scire autem oportet, quod ea quæ ab hoc loco habentur usque ad eum quo dicitur: Iterum ergo loquutus est illis Jesus dicens: Ego lux mundi :' in exactioribus exemplaribus aut non inveniuntur, aut obelo confossa sunt, eo quod illegitima videantur et addita. Et hujus argumentum est, quod nullus ea sit interpretatus, &c. Ibid. 690. G.
1. NICEPHORUS, son of Callistus Xanthopulus, a learned monk of Constantinople, is placed by H. Wharton, in his Appendix to Cave, at the year 1333; but as the emperor, to whom his work is dedicated, is computed to have died in 1327, I shall place him a few years sooner, in 1325.
He wrote in the Greek language an Ecclesiastical History in eighteen books, from the nativity of Christ to the year 610, collected, as he says, out of Eusebius of Cæsarea, Socrates, Sozomen, Philostorgius, Theodoret, Euagrius, and others.
2. From him I shall transcribe an article concerning the books of the New Testament, omitting some particulars, which render his narration prolix, and which are not now needful to be taken by us at large, after having seen what is said by Eusebius, and other ecclesiastical writers of former times,
3. In the 45th chapter of the second book of his History he says, Thus we have spoken of the twelve apostles, and their names it is now proper to show, who of them have left writings which are in the Testament; such as the four sacred gospels, the divine Acts of the Apostles, and the catholic epistles, and the rest, and their order; and also such as are spurious, and are rejected by the church. And in the first place, of the divine gospels: two only of the twelve, Matthew and John, have left memoirs of our Lord's life on earth; and two of the Seventy, Mark and Luke; and it is said that they were all compelled to write, as it
a Vid Pagi ann. 610. n. vii. Fabric. Bib. Gr. l. v. cap. 4. T. vi. p. 130. &c. Du Pin, Bib. des Aut. Ec. T. xi. p. 98.
b Cav. H. L. in App. p. 33.
Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopulus, Callistides, sive Callisti Xanthopuli filius, historiam suam obtulit Andronico Palæologo Imperatori jam seni, qui A. C. 1327, septuagenario major obiit. Fabr. ubi supr. p. 130.
d Vid. H. E. L. i. cap. 1. p. 35, 36. Paris. 1630.
* Οσοι γε μην συγγραμματα καταλελοιποτες εισιν, ἃ και ὡς ενδιαθηκα κατελέγησαν· ετι δε και περι των ιερων τεσσαρων ευαγγελιων, των τε θειων πράξεων αποτολικων, και των επιςολων των τε καθολικων, και της ταξεως αυτων, ἑξης μεν ειῃ δηλεν, ὁσα τε νοθα, και τη εκκλησια αποβλητα. Ὑπομνηματα μεν εν των τ8 Κυριε διατριβων, δυο μονες των δώδεκα ισμεν συγγραψαμένες. L. ii. c. 45. p. 213.