Page images

Fabricius about 1070. His Commentaries are collected out of Chrysostom and others, with observations likewise, undoubtedly, of his own.

2. Beside these works, he is said to have written likewise a Commentary upon the twelve lesser prophets, mentioned by Cave in the place before referred to, and more particularly byd Fabricius : but I have not seen it; and whether it bas been yet published I cannot certainly say.

3. I proceed directly to take notice of divers things in his Commentaries upon the books of the New Testament.

• 4. In his preface to St. Matthew's gospel he says, thate Christ has given us four gospels.' And' that there are four evangelists, two of which, Matthew and John, were of the choir of the twelve apostles: the other two, Mark and Luke, were of the number of the Seventy. Mark was a companion and disciple of Peter, Luke of Paul. Matthew first wrote a gospel in the Hebrew language, for the sake of the Hebrew believers, eight years after Christ's ascension; and John, as is said, translated it out of Hebrew into Greek. Mark wrote ten years after our Lord's ascension, having been instructed by Peter; Luke fifteen ; and Jobn, the most excellent divine, twoh and thirty years after our Lord's ascension ; for it is said, that when he had outlived them, after their death their three gospels were brought to him, that he might judge whether what they had written was true. Having seen them, he added some things omitted by thein : and whereas they had not taken notice of the eternal existence of God the Word, hei gave an account of his divinity, lest he should be esteemed a mere man; for Matthew discourseth only of his nativity according to the

b Bib. Gr. T. vi. p. 284, c.

c Du Pin, Bibl. T. viii. p. 113. R. Simon Hist. Crit. des Comment. du N. T. ch. 28. p. 390, &c. Fabr. Bib. Gr. T. vii. p. 787. d Theophylacti

, Bulgarorum Archiepiscopi, qui circa A. C. 1070 claruit, Commentarios in xii prophetas minores, ex antiquiorum patrum monumentis decerptos, brevi in lucem edendos speramus a C. V. Johanne Henrico Lederbino, Linguarum Orientalium in Academiâ Argentoratensi Professore, qui illos ex Græco codice Bibl. publicæ illius urbis descripsit, et utrâque linguâ vulgaturum recepit. B. Gr. T. vii. p. 765.

Teocapa de dedwKev vpliv evayyedia. Pr. in Matt. p. 1. B. Paris. 1631.

Τεσσαρες μεν εισιν οι ευαγγελισαι: τατων οι μεν δυο--ησαν εκ τ8 χορο των δωδεκα οι δε δυο, Μαρκος φημι και Λακας, εκ των έβδομηκοντα, κ. λ. Ιb. p. 2. D. E. p. 3. A.

8 θεολογικωτατος. According to that account, St. John's gospel was written in the year of our Lord's nativity 65, or thereabout, before the destruction of Jerusalem, and before the siege of that city was begun; which is different from the sentiments of more early writers.

- αυτος εθεολογησε:



flesh, because he wrote for the Hebrews, who were fully satisfied, when they had been assured that the Christ was born of David and Abraham.'

5. The preface to St. Mark is to this purpose : • Thek gospel according to Mark was written at Rome, ten years after Christ's ascension, at the request of the believers there : for this Mark was a disciple of Peter, whom he calls his son spiritually. His name was John. He was nephew to Barnabas, and' was also a companion of Paul.'

6. In this same prefacem he mentions the symbols of the evangelists : but differently from many others. The gospel of John, in the first place, he supposes to be resembled by the face of a lion, the king of beasts, denoting John's preeminence: Matthew's by the face of a man. Mark he compares to an eagle, because he begins with the history of John, who was a prophet; and the gift of prophecy is farsighted. Luke he compares to a calf or ox,

7. In the Commentary upon Acts xii. 12, where John, surnamed Mark, is inentioned, he says, “ Perhaps this is Mark the evangelist, by whom, as is said, Peter evangelized; for Mark's gospel is said to be Peter's :' and he

, 8. In the preface to his Commentary upon St. Luke, Theophylact expresseth himself as if he thought the evangelist, in the introduction, referred to the gospels according to the Egyptians, and according to the twelve. He also says, thatP from that introduction it appears, Luke was not from the beginning a disciple, but only afterwards ; for others were disciples from the beginning, as Peter, and the sons of Zebedee, who delivered to him the things which he had not seen or beard.

9. This seems to be contrary to what was said in the preface to St. Matthew's gospel, that Mark and Luke were of the number of the seventy ; unless he can be understood to mean some things only, even in the more early part of Christ's ministry, about which Luke might be informed by those disciples, who then attended upon the Lord. It is also said, in the argument of Luke's gospel, that, he was


k In Marc. ib. p. 189.

-αλλα και Πυλα συνεκδημος. . mn P. 190. A. B.

Tαχα ουτος εσι Mαρχος ο ευαγγελισης. K. 1. In Act. Ap. p. 115. M. Coloniæ. 1568.

° Πολλοι γαρ συνεγραψαν ευαγγελια δηθεν οίον εσι το κατ’ Αιγυπτιος, και το επιγραφομενον των δωδεκα, κ. λ. Ρr. in Luc. p. 297. Β. p Ib. p. 297, 298.

ωσε φασι τινες, ένα και αυτον γενεσθαι των εβδομηκοντα αποσολων" και εκ νεκρων δε αναςαντι τω Χριση συναντησαι μετα κλεοπα.-Γραφει δε προς θεοφιλον, συγκλητικoν οντα και

said to have been one of Christ's seventy apostles, and, after the Lord's resurrection, to have met hin with Cleophas. Here likewise he says, that Theopbilus, to whom St. Luke wrote, was a man of senatorian rank, and possibly a governor; forasmuch as he calls him most excellent,' the same title which St. Paul useth in his addresses to Felix and Festus.

10. In his comment upon the history of the two disciples whom Jesus met in the way to Emmaus, one of whom is said to be Cleophas, Luke xxiv. 18, Theophylact says, some have thought the other to be Luke the evangelist, who, out of modesty, declined to mention himself. Here again St. Luke is supposed to bave been personally acquainted with. the Lord Jesus.

11. In the preface to St. John's gospel, Theophylact says, • thats John wrote his gospel when he was an exile in Patmos, two and thirty years after Christ's ascension.' He proceeds : • John" was beloved above all the disciples, because of his simplicity, and meekness, and mildness, and purity, for be was a virgin ; moreover he was related to the Lord. But how can that be ? Attend. Joseph, husband of the blessed Mary, had seven children by a former wife; four sons, and three daughters, Martha, (perhaps it should be Mary,] Esther, and Salome, whose son John was; therefore Salome was reckoned our Lord's sister, and John was his nephew:' so Theophylact in that place. In another place' he says, Joseph had by the widow of his brother Cleophas, who died without issue, six children, four sons, and two daughters, named Mary, who was reckoned daughter of Cleophas according to law, and Salone : and he always supposeth Mary, mother of our Lord, to be the same as Mary the mother of James and Joses, who were Joseph's children by a former wife; as was also Salome, the mother αρχοντα ισως το γαρ κρατισος επι των αρχοντων και ηγεμονων ελεγετο: ώς και ο Παυλος φησι προς τον ηγεμονα Φησον κρατισε Φησε. p. 293. r P. 539. C.

• ο και συνεγραψεν εν Πατμω τη νηση εξορισος διατελων, κ. λ. p. 554. Β.

So likewise in the latter part of the Synopsis ascribed to Athanasius, it is said, “The gospel according to John was dictated by the holy and beloved • apostle, when he was an exile in Patmos, and was afterwards published by • him at Ephesus, under the care of Gaius his host, and of the other apostles,

of whom Paul says in the epistle to the Romans (xvi. 23.) “Gaius my host, • and of the whole church, saluteth you."' Ap. Ath. T. ii. p. 202. F. u P. 554. B. C. D.

' In Matth. cap. xiii. p. 79. C. D. Την Μαριαν, η ελεγετο το Κλοπα θυγατηρ κατα τον νομον και την Σαdwunv. Ibid.

* Vid. in Matth. cap. xxvii. y 178. C. D. In Marc. cap. xv. p. 286. C. D. in Luc. cap. xxiv. p. 538. D. In Joan. cap. xix. p. 826. C. D.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


of Zebedee's children. And whereas in John xix. 25, mention is made of Mary, wife or daughter of Cleophas, and • sister' to our Lord's mother, he says, that y by sister' must be there understood relation ;' for that Mary is supposed to be daughter of Cleophas, brother of Joseph, whose widow he had married.

11. Theophylact says, there was this very extraordinary in John the evangelist, that he had three mothers; his own mother Salome, and Thunder, and the blessed Mary, forasmuch as the Lord said to him, “ Behold thy mother,” John xix. 27.

12. He likewise says, that there are four Marys mentioned in the gospels : our Lord's mother, Mary Magdalene, Mary daughter of Cleophas, and the sister of Lazarus.

13. In the argument or preface to the Acts of the Apostles Theophylact says, the writer is Luke, native of 'Antioch, by profession a physician. He here also says, that Paul wrote fourteen epistles : and indeed our author has explained them all.

14. I need not give a particular account of his several prefaces to St. Paul's epistles : I observe a few things only.

15. He says, thed epistle to the Ephesians was written by the apostle Paul at Rome, when he was a prisoner.

16. Upon Coloss. iv. 14, he says, thate Luke, the phy, sician there mentioned, is the evangelist; but he does not there say that he was a native or citizen of Antioch.

17. Upon Col. iv. 16, he writes, that' (or which') is the epistle from Laodicea ? It is the first epistle to Timothy, for that was written from Laodicea. But some say it is an epistle which the Laodiceans had sent to Paul; though I do not know what they have to justify this opinion. From all which it may be reckoned very probable, that Theophylact had never heard of any epistle of Paul to the Laodiceanş.

18. The epistle of St. James is several times quoted in Theophylact's Commentaries : he quotes its expressly as written by James, the Lord's brother.

19. I need not say he received the first epistle of St. Peter. y Ib. p. 826. B. C.

* Μονος γαρ ούτος τρεις μητερας αναφαινεται εχων, την φυσικην την Σαλωμην, την βροντην, υίος γαρ βροντης δια ευαγγελια μεγαλοφωνιαν, και την θεοτοκον, κ. λ. In Joh. p. 554. D. E.

1 - ή θεοτοκος-δευτερα η Μαγδαληνη, τριτη ή το Κλεοπα, και τεταρτη η το Λαζαρε αδελφη. In Jo. p. 826. • Comments in Act. Ap. p. 1. Colon. 1568.

• Ibid. p. 3. In Ep. Paul. Comm. p. 498. Londin. 1636.

e Ib. p. 675. P. 676.

8 In Evangel. p. 218. C.

VOL. v.


20. He once quotes St. John's first epistle in this manner: • Forb he says in one of his epistles, “ That which was from the beginning, which we have seen. Therefore he received more than one.

21. It is probable that Theophylact received all the seven catholic epistles.

22. But I cannot say that he received the book of the Revelation : I do not remember that he has any where quoted it; which, I think, he would have done, if it bad been of authority with him. However I put in the margini a reference or two, to be considered by those who please; but I do not reckon them very material. Perhaps he was of the same opinion with St. Chrysostom concerning the book of the Revelation.

23. Theophylact quotes no forged christian writings of apocryphal books of the New Testament. He cuts off a good number of them by that observation upon John i. 3134, that. Christ wrought no miracle in his infancy, or before the time of his public ministry; about which he is clear and positive. We formerly saw a like observation in Chrysostom.

24. He seldom quotes any apocryphal books of the Old Testament. A passage of Ecclesiasticus is cited as the saying of a wise man.

25. I shall now take a few remarkable passages.

26. In the preface to St. Matthew's gospel : And" was not one evangelist sufficient? Yes. Nevertheless, for making the truth more manifest, four were permitted to write : for when you see these four not conferring together, nor meeting in the same place, but separate from each other, writing the same things as with one mouth, are you not led to admire the truth of the gospel, and to say that they spake by the Holy Ghost ? Do not say to me that they do not agree in every thing ; for wherein do they differ ? Does one say that Christ was born, and another not? or does one say that he rose from the dead, and another that he did not rise ? By no means; for they agree in the necessary and principal things : and if they do not differ in the principal things, why should you wonder that they vary in

Φησι γαρ εν μια των αυτο επιςολων. Ο ην απαρχης, ο έωρακαμεν. Ιb. p. 555. C.

Vid. in Matth. cap. xxii. p. 128. E. In Marc. cap. ii. p. 201. B.

Κ Εντευθεν δε μανθανομεν, ότι τα λεγομενα παιδικα τα Χριση θαυματα ψευδη εισι, και παρα των θελοντων διαγελασθαι το μυςηριον συντεθεμενα. . Ει γαρ ησαν αληθη, πως ηγνοειτο ποιων ταυτα ο Κυριος. Ιn Jo. c. i. p. 576. Ε. I See vol. iv. ch. cxviii, num. xv.

Φησι γαρ και σοφος, κ.λ. In Luc. c. xiv. p. 437. C.

n In Matth. p. 3.

[ocr errors]


« PreviousContinue »