The author, "sources," and characteristics of the first Gospel

By Hugh Pope, O.P., S.T.M., D.S.ScR.
Professor of New Testament Exegesis
The Collegio Angelico, Rome

A. The Life of St. Matthew.

B. The Authenticity of the First Gospel.

C. The Date of its Composition.

D. The Sources used by St. Matthew.

E. Linguistic Peculiarities of St. Matthew's Gospel,

F. The Historical Trustworthiness of the Gospel.

i. In General,
ii. Recent Views,
iii. The Gospel according to the Hebrews.

G. Divisions and Analysis of the Gospel.

H. Passages peculiar to St. Matthew.

J. The Theological Teaching.

K. Bibliography.

L. Appendix: St. Irenaeus, Adv. Hær, III. i.

A. Life of St. Matthew

ST. MATTHEW has himself told us how, as Levi the Publican, he was called by Our Savior to follow Him, Matthew 9:9, 10:3; Luke 5:27, 6:15. Luke 6:15 and Acts 1:13 conceals the identity of Matthew with the publican Levi. For Levi seems to have changed his former name into that of Matthew, perhaps in memory of his conversion, since Matthew means in Hebrew "the gift of the Lord," cf. such names as Matthanias, 4 Kings 24:17, Mathathias, 1 Paral. 9:31, and 1 Maccabees 2:1; it corresponds to the once common Latin name Adeodatus, to the Greek Theodore, and the Hebrew Nathaniel.

Less is known of the life of St. Matthew than of almost any other of the Apostles. St. Jerome's brief account in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers is as follows:

"Matthew, who is also Levi, and who from a publican became an Apostle, was the first to put together, in Judaea, for the sake of those of the circumcision who had believed, the Gospel of Christ. He did this in Hebrew characters and words. But who afterwards translated it into Greek is by no means clear. As a matter of fact the Hebrew text is still preserved in the library at Caesarea which Pamphilus the Martyr so laboriously collected. And I myself had an opportunity of copying it afforded me by the Nazarenes of Berœa in Syria who use this edition (volumine). I would only remark here that wherever the Evangelist, whether in his own person or in that of Our Lord and Savior, appears to misquote the Old Testament, he is not following the authority of the Septuagint translation, but the Hebrew, e.g. Out of Egypt have I called my son, and that he shall be called a Nazarite."[1]

Thus Jerome is silent about the Apostle's life. It is a common opinion, however, that St. Matthew evangelized Ethiopia and that he died a martyr, though this latter statement is denied by Heracleon, the author of the earliest Commentary on the First Gospel. Clement of Alexandria has left us one small biographical notice: "the Apostle Matthew partook of seeds, nuts, and vegetables, without flesh-meat."[2]

B. The Authenticity of the First Gospel

Our present First Gospel only exists in Greek, no trace of the Hebrew or Aramaic text has been found. The authorities for the assertion that it was originally composed in Aramaic are numerous; they are all given by Eusebius.

Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis in the early part of the second century, says: "So, then, Matthew wrote the Oracles (λόγια, cf. infra) in the Hebrew language, and everyone interpreted them as he was able."[3] St. Irenaus: "Matthew published his Gospel among the Hebrews in their own language while Peter and Paul were founding the Church in Rome."[4] Origen: "Among the Four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was written by Matthew, who was once a publican, but afterwards an Apostle of Jesus Christ; it was prepared for the converts from Judaism and published in the Hebrew tongue.[5] Eusebius himself: "Matthew, who had first preached to the Hebrews, when he was about to go to other countries, committed his Gospel to writing in his native tongue, and thus compensated for the loss of his presence those whom he was obliged to leave."[6] Pantanus, the teacher of Clement of Alexandria, "found in India the Gospel according to Matthew, which had anticipated his arrival. For Bartholomew, one of the Apostles, had preached to them, and had left with them the writing of Matthew in the Hebrew language; this they had preserved till that time."[7]

In face of such consentient testimony, there seems no reason whatever for doubting that St. Matthew wrote a Gospel in Aramaic, i.e. in that form of Hebrew which was spoken in Palestine in Our Lord's time. But the words of Papias, "Matthew wrote the LOGIA in the Hebrew language," have given rise to endless controversy. What is the precise meaning of the word logia? In Greek classical writers, e.g. in Herodotus, Euripides, and Thucydides, it certainly means "oracles"; and in the New Testament, where it occurs four times, viz. Acts 7:38, Romans 3:2, Hebrews 5:12, and 1 Pet. 4:11, it is rendered in the Vulgate by "verba," "eloquia," or "sermones,"[8] and in practically all these instances it is the equivalent of "oracles." Since, then, the title of Papias great work from which Eusebius quotes, and which is unfortunately lost, was Commentaries on the Logia of the Lord, the question at once arises: since "logia" meant, at least generally, "oracles," does it not follow that this Gospel of Matthew contained nothing more than the Discourses of Our Lord? If this be so, then, since our present First Gospel contains a great deal more than "discourses," it would seem to follow that it does not strictly correspond to the original Aramaic Gospel of Matthew, but is an amplification of it. Moreover, Papias work was, according to Eusebius, divided into five "books" or sections. Now it is remarkable that our First Gospel shows traces of this division. Thus note the refrain, "And it came to pass when Jesus had fully ended these words": it comes after the Sermon on the Mount, 7:28, after the Commission to the Apostles, 11:1, after the Day of Parables, 13:53, at the close of the Galilean ministry, 19:1, and at the close of the discourse on Mount Olivet, 26:1. It has been argued that we have here indications that the original Aramaic Gospel of Matthew was used as a species of framework by the translator of our First Gospel,[9] and that he added to the Aramaic original the accounts of Our Lord's miracles, of His Infancy, and of His Death and Passion. It has also been pointed out that if our First Gospel is really a translation from Aramaic it shows remarkably few signs of it; it really looks much more like an original Greek composition.[10] It is also remarkable that when speaking of St. Mark's Gospel, Papias seems careful to use quite a different expression to describe its contents, for he says that Mark wrote down "the things either said or done by Christ," he does not call them "logia."

We have set forth these points fully because it is evident that if they are solidly based they tend to throw discredit on our First Gospel in its present state, since it will not be the work of St. Matthew, but of someone unknown. In favor, then, of the identity of our First Gospel with the original Aramaic work of Matthew, it must be noted that we have only the fragments of Papias quoted by Eusebius, and that it is, to say the least of it, precarious to attempt to decide on the precise signification he gave to a term unless we know fully the context in which he used it. Now the word "logia" is undoubtedly used by many Greek Fathers as synonymous with Sacred Scripture; thus St. Irenaeus[11] uses Papias own expression, viz. "the oracles of the Lord," and it is indisputable that he thereby understands the Sacred Scriptures as a whole. It is the same with St. Clement of Rome, contemporary with Papias: "You have known, nay, thoroughly known, the Sacred Scriptures, and have looked closely into the Divine oracles."[12] It must, moreover, be acknowledged that the complete disappearance of so precious a work as the Aramaic original of the First Gospel is inexplicable, unless it were known to be faithfully preserved in its Greek dress.[13] It should further be noted that the Fathers quoted above, as well as others, use the word "logia" not merely of passages which might more correctly be described as "oracles," e.g. Genesis 49:10, referred to by Josephus as an "oracle" or "logion,"[14] but also of passages which were purely historical; thus Clement of Alexandria refers to the legendary recovery of the Law by Esdras[15] as "the discovery and restoration of the inspired oracles logia."[16] Nor must we forget the tradition of the Church which has ever regarded our First Gospel as the Greek equivalent of the Aramaic of Matthew; it would demand more solid evidence than that furnished by the questionings of scholars regarding the precise signification which Papias attached to the word "logia" to justify us in rejecting such a tradition. Finally, even if it were proved conclusively that our Greek Gospel is really not the exact equivalent of the Aramaic original, we still have the authority of the Church for the inspiration of this Greek version and that, after all, is the only thing that really matters.

EARLY CITATIONS OF ST. MATTHEW'S GOSPEL.

Previous to the time of St. Irenaeus, d. 202 A.D., the Evangelists are not cited by name; rarely, too, are passages from the Gospels introduced with the formula as it is written. More over, the early Fathers seem generally to quote from memory, and it is often hard to say when parallel passages occur in two or more Gospels whether it is Matthew, Mark, or Luke whom they are quoting. It is of course true, too, that at that early period many spoken utterances of Our Lord must have been in circulation. Hence, when we find the Apostolic Fathers using phrases almost exactly identical with passages from the Gospels, we must not be too prompt to urge that we have here proof that they knew our present Gospels. But with this proviso we are justified in maintaining that these Apostolic Fathers betray an acquaintance with our Gospels, even though we may not be able to insist that each individual parallel is derived from those same Gospels. It goes without saying that the following parallels between the Gospel of St. Matthew and the Apostolic Fathers and their successors must be examined in the Greek text if we would realize their full force:

Clement of Rome, 1 Cor. xlvi. 7-8 and Matthew 5:1, 6:14-15, 7:12; but the likeness to Luke 6:31, 6:35-38, should be noted, as well as the fact that the parallels are all together in Luke, whereas they are separated in Matthew. But in the same passage, i Cor. xlvi. 7-8, note the rare word καταποντισθη there used, cp. Matthew 18:6-7.

Ignatius of Antioch, Smyrn. i. i and Matthew 3:15; Smyrn. vi. i and Matthew 9:42; Ephes. xiv. and Matthew 12:33; ad Polyc. i. i and Matthew 10:16; Philadel. iii. 1 and Matthew 15:13; Trail, ii. i and Matthew 15:13.

Polycarp, Philip, ii. and Matthew 5:3, Matthew 5:10, cp. also Luke 6:38; Philip, vii. and Matthew 26:44.

Epistle of Barnabas iv. 14, "Let us take heed lest we be found, AS IT IS WRITTEN: many called, but few chosen," cp. Matthew 22:14. This is the first occasion on which the expression "as it is written" is used of a portion of the New Testament, cp. Barn. v. and Matthew 9:13. The Epistle of Barnabas is referred at the latest to A.D. 120-130.

Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, in viii. 2 we have the Lord's Prayer practically as in Matthew 6:9-13, and it is introduced by the formula: "neither pray ye as the hypocrites" (Matthew 6:5), "but as the Lord in His Gospel bade, so pray"; in i. 2-5 we have a string of precepts taken from the Sermon on the Mount; in ver. 5 note the unusual word ayyaptvw as in Matthew 5:41.

The Shepherd of Hermas is full of passages which embody or at least recall Matthew's Gospel, e.g. Shepherd, Sim. V. v. 2, cp. Matthew 13:37. For Papias see above.

It is commonly conceded now that St. Justin used our present Matthew and Luke as two of his principal sources. That his apparent quotations from the Gospels are really such, and not mere reminiscences of Christ's teaching, is best shown by a comparison between Justin's citations of Messianic texts and Matthew's citations of the same passages. For Matthew often quotes from memory, or at least so paraphrases the original that his quotation follows neither the Hebrew nor the LXX.; the fact, then, that Justin's quotations often agree with those in Matthew would seem to show that Justin had our present Gospel before him. Thus cp. 1 Apol. 33 (Isaiah 7:14) with Matthew 1:23; 1 Apol. 34 (Mich. v. 2) with Matthew 1:26; Dial. 78 (Jeremiah 31:15) with Matthew 2:18; 1 Apol. xxxv. (Zach. ix. 9) with Matthew 21:5, etc.

C. The Date at which St. Matthew's Gospel was written.

As this question is of great importance it will be well to give the declarations of the early Fathers on the point:

Clement of Alexandria is quoted by Eusebius[17] as saying in his Hypotyposes, or "Outlines" a work now lost that the Gospels containing the Genealogies were written first. Origen: "Among the Four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learnt from tradition that the first was written by Matthew."[18] St. Jerome: "Matthew ... first composed the Gospel of Christ, in Judaea, for the Jews of the circumcision who had believed."[19]

St. Irenaeus has left a declaration on this point, which has been a source of endless controversy. He says:

"After Our Lord had risen from the dead, and they (the Apostles) had been clothed with power from on high by the Holy Spirit that came upon them, and had been filled with all things, and had perfect knowledge, they went forth to the ends of the earth announcing the good tidings from God to us and declaring the peace of heaven to men; and they indeed had all and each of them alike the Gospel of God."

So far we have only the Latin text to guide us, but at this point Eusebius[20] has preserved for us the Greek text of what follows; we translate it literally:

"Matthew indeed among the Hebrews and in their own tongue; and he brought out (with him) the writing of the Gospel when Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome and founding the Church. But after their departure Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, he too, having written what was preached by Peter, delivered it to us. So also Luke, the follower of Paul, committed (to writing) in a book the Gospel preached by the latter. Then John, the disciple of the Lord, who also reposed upon His breast, he too published the Gospel when living in Ephesus of Asia."[21]

Irenaeus' purpose here is to show how fully equipped were the Apostles for their task: they had the Holy Spirit, and they had each of them the text of the Gospels. But he has to explain how it was that each of them had this Gospel text at the time of their dispersion. This he does by showing under what circumstances the individual Gospels were written. Still it must be acknowledged that Irenaeus words are far from plain. In the first place we note the redundant "and."[22] This is passed over in the Latin and English translations of Irenseus and of Eusebius (H.E. V. viii. 2), so that Irenaeus is made to say that "Matthew published his Gospel among the Hebrews in their own language while Peter and Paul were preaching and founding the Church in Rome."[23] As St. Paul arrived in Rome at the earliest in A.D. 57-60, this appears an impossible statement. Further, Irenasus seems to say that Mark only wrote "after the departure of Peter and Paul," i.e. after their martyrdom in A.D. 64 or 67;[24] and this is emphasised by the Latin version and the ordinary translations, which have "quse a Petro annunciata erant," whereas the Greek has a present participle both here and in the account of St. Luke's Gospel,[25] thus making the preaching contemporary with its committal to writing.

To return to the redundant "and" with which the Greek extract is cumbered. It seems to show that a clause has been omitted, and that the verb of the first clause has vanished. That this is not an impossible supposition will be clear to anyone who reads carefully the chapter of Eusebius History whence this extract is taken, H.E. V. viii.; in section 5 in particular we have a very mutilated sentence. We feel justified, then, in inserting some such verb as "wrote," and thus reading, "Matthew indeed wrote among the Hebrews, and in their own tongue." We are next faced with the difficulty arising from the word ἐξένεγκεν, which we have ventured to render "brought out (with him)." According to the above interpretation a verb has to be supplied for the first clause, viz. "wrote." But if we are justified in this conjecture, then it is practically impossible to translate ἐξένεγκεν by "published," as is generally done. The key to the whole passage lies in Irenaeus desire to explain how the Apostles were individually furnished with the Gospel when they separated and "went forth to the ends of the earth." We do not know what Greek word Irenaeus used to express this "going forth," the Latin has exierunt. But it is to this exierunt that Irenaeus seems to refer when he says : "But after their departure, ἔξοδον, excessum." Thus he would be referring here not to the "departure," i.e. death, of Peter and Paul, but to the "going out" of the Apostles. If this interpretation is justified everything will fall into line. For Irenaeus will simply be saying that Matthew wrote his Gospel in Palestine, that he brought it with him when Peter and Paul were at Rome, and that after the separation of the Apostles Mark wrote what Peter was actually preaching. And all this will be in harmony with what Eusebius elsewhere states, viz. that Peter was cognizant of Mark's action, H.E. II. xv. 1-2, where he quotes Clement of Alexandria as saying in the Hypotyposes:

"So greatly did the splendour of piety illumine the minds of Peter's hearers that they were not satisfied with hearing once only, nor were they content with the unwritten teaching of the divine Gospel; but with all sorts of entreaties they besought Mark, a follower of Peter, and the one whose Gospel is extant, that he would leave them a written monument of the doctrine which had been orally communicated to them. Nor did they cease until they had prevailed with him, and had thus become the occasion of the written Gospel which bears the name of Mark. And they say that Peter, when he had learned through a revelation of the Spirit what had been done, was pleased with their zeal, and that the work obtained the sanction of his authority for the purpose of being used in the Churches."[26]

Similarly Tertullian, when insisting that the Gospels have Apostolic authority, says:

"The same authority of the Apostolic Churches will afford evidence for the other Gospels also, for we possess these equally through their means and according to their usage I mean the Gospels of John and Matthew; whilst that which Mark published may be affirmed to be Peter's, whose interpreter Mark was. Even Luke's form of the Gospel is usually ascribed to Paul; and it may well seem that the works which disciples publish belong to their masters."[27]

These authorities, then, enable us to refer the composition of the First Gospel to a period anterior to the martyrdom of SS. Peter and Paul, which took place either A.D. 64 or 67.[28] An ancient tradition says that the Lord commanded the Apostles not to disperse till the twelfth year after His Ascension, i.e. about A.D. 41; but it is impossible to trace this tradition further back than the time of Clement of Alexandria, who apparently refers to it when he quotes from The Preaching of Peter: "If any one of Israel, then, wishes to repent, and by My Name to believe in God, his sins shall be forgiven him after twelve years.[29] Go forth into the world, that no one may say, We have not heard." Eusebius, too, says[30] that a certain Apollonius, who lived about A.D. 200, testified to the same tradition. If we could pin our faith to this tradition, we could say that the First Gospel was written before A.D. 41, and those of SS. Mark and Luke before A.D. 64 or 67.[31]

As for the present Greek translation of Matthew's Aramaic original, we can only say that the often striking parallels between it and the Greek text of the Apostolic Fathers, e.g. the Epistle of Barnabas and the Teaching of the Twelve quoted above, show that the translation into Greek was made before the close of the first century. But, as St. Jerome has said, who made it is an open question. It is worth noting that St. Jerome suggests,[32] apropos of Matt, xxviii. 1, that the Greek translator has misunderstood the original Aramaic.

D. The Sources used by St. Matthew.

The commonly accepted opinion is, as stated already, that the present Greek Gospel of Matthew is a compilation from the so-called Logia collected by Matthew in Aramaic; these are supposed to have been worked into a framework derived from Mark, and were then rounded off by the insertion of certain details which are at present only found in Matthew in conjunction with Luke, or solely in Matthew. For the question of the Logia and their relation to the Greek Matthew see above; for the relation subsisting between Matthew and Luke see s.v.- Synoptic Problem. But whatever truth there may be in these theories, it is possible to indicate certain other "sources" from which Matthew drew, e.g. the Old Testament, which he quotes copiously. Again, it is a commonplace that Luke drew his knowledge of the events detailed in chaps, i. and ii. from the Blessed Virgin, see Introduction to the Gospel according to St. Luke; but it should at the same time be conceded that an impartial study of Matthew 1 and 2 shows us that the author was as much indebted to St. Joseph as Luke was to the Blessed Virgin. Whether the material common to Matthew and Luke, e.g. the story of the centurion, Matthew 8:5-13, Luke 7:1-10, the account of the two who would follow Christ, Matt. 8:18-22, Luke 9:57-60, etc., as also certain longer passages, e.g. the Sermon on the Mount and the Discourse about the Last Things, as well as many lesser "sayings" by Christ, is due to Matthew's dependence on Luke, or to Luke's acquaintance with Matthew, or to their mutual dependence on common oral tradition, will perhaps never be finally settled. Matthew's genealogical table shows that he had access either to family records[33] or possibly to State archives.[34]

E. Linguistic Features of the Gospel.

Matthew has certain characteristic expressions, as is only to be expected. Thus note his constant use of the Greek τότϵ, or "then," as an opening formula, also his use of the verb προσϵρχέσθαι which occurs more often in Matthew than in all the rest of N.T. It is the same with the opening formula ἰδού, "behold," which occurs close upon fifty times. The phrases, "the kingdom of heaven," "your Father in heaven," are equally characteristic; for the former Luke and Mark generally have "the kingdom of God."

F. The Historical Trustworthiness of Matthew's Gospel.

i. In General. In his dispute with St. Augustine, Faustus the Manichee maintained that Matthew was not to be believed when declaring that Christ had said that He came not to destroy the Law, but to establish it (v. 17). For he argued that at the time the Sermon on the Mount was delivered only Peter, Andrew, James, and John, were present, the rest including Matthew had not yet received their call; that, moreover, John, who also wrote a Gospel, nowhere tells us that Christ made this declaration; while Matthew, it must be confessed, wrote long after the event. Indeed, so Faustus urged, the First Gospel was not written by Matthew at all, for in his account of Matthew's call, 9:9, the writer does not say: "He saw me, and called me" but makes use of the third person, as though desirous to show that the writer was not Matthew himself.

Augustine prefaces his answer by remarking that it is absurd to prefer the testimony of Manichaeus to that of Matthew, since

"if Matthew is not to be credited merely on the ground that he was not present on the occasion when he says that Christ declared that He had not come to destroy the Law and the Prophets, but to establish them, neither can anyone say that Manichaeus was present when Christ appeared amongst men in fact, he was not even born!"

And Augustine continues :

"Now we do not say that Manichaeus is not to be believed simply because he was not present when Christ was working and discoursing, and was indeed only born long after. But we do maintain that Manichaeus is not to be believed because he speaks of Christ in a fashion contrary to that employed by Christ's disciples, and contrary also to the tone employed in the Gospel which is established by their authority. ... If none could tell the truth about Christ save those who were present and saw Him and heard Him, then nowadays none could tell us the truth about Him. Moreover, if today the faithful are truthfully taught about Christ simply because those who saw and heard Him have, by preaching or writing, spread abroad the truth concerning Him, why should not Matthew have been able to learn the truth about Christ from his fellow-disciple John on occasions when John was present and Matthew absent ? For from John's volume we can learn the truth about Christ; and not only we who were born so much later, but also those who are to come after us and who are not born yet. It is for this reason that the Gospels, not only of Matthew, but of Luke and Mark, who followed these same disciples, are accorded an authority not unequal to that of John. Further still, the Lord Himself could have told Matthew what He had done amongst those disciples whom He had called before His call of Matthew."[35]

Principles are here invoked which are too frequently disregarded by modern critics.

ii. Recent Views. The main grounds for impugning the historicity of our first Gospel may be summarized as follows : (a) Matthew wrote in Hebrew, but that Hebrew or rather Aramaic text no longer exists; we only possess a Greek translation by an unknown author, (b) It is uncertain when this translation was made, perhaps as late as the second century, (c) The work is a compilation from the so-called Logia attributed to Matthew the Apostle, as well as from the second Gospel, attributed to Mark, though it is uncertain whether we have even Mark's Gospel as he wrote it. (d) Matthew's whole arrangement, as the first Gospel now stands, shows that he merely collected parables, miracles, discourses, etc., and welded them into a narrative which has no claims to originality.

This constitutes a formidable indictment. But in the first place there exists no positive argument for referring the Greek translation to the second century; it would be difficult, it is true, to find any positive quotation of it in the first century, but though the allusions contained in the extant works of the Apostolic Fathers do not amount to quotation, and may possibly be explicable as echoes of oral tradition, yet the one sentence in the Epistle of Barnabas, where a passage found in Matthew is quoted under the formula as it is written, must always be taken into account. It is at least remarkable that Matthew in Greek should agree so closely with Mark and Luke, and yet at the same time differ from them in so many particulars and show so independent a spirit, if it is nothing but a plagiarism on them. It is still more remarkable that in early Patristic Commentaries on the first Gospel no trace should exist of doubts as to its conformity with the original, even though St. Jerome does in one place suggest that perhaps the translator did not understand the Aramaic original which he rendered vespere.[36] Moreover, a study of the existing first Gospel will show that it savours rather of the middle than of the close of the first century. For the Saviour of the world is depicted therein as a person who has not yet passed into the realm of history. He is nowhere spoken of, as in Luke, for example, as "the Lord." What is recorded of Him has but just taken place: He has only recently "walked amongst men"; He has but just now died, been buried, and risen from the tomb. When we pass to Luke's narrative we are in quite another world. A halo is already cast round the central Figure. As regards the question of the Logia, it cannot be too strongly insisted that the basis for this view is of the slightest; it rests on nothing more than a possible interpretation of a fragmentary passage from Papias. The pretended "lack of originality" in our First Gospel is but the corollary of the preceding statement about the Logia; it stands or falls with it.

iii. The Gospel according to the Hebrews. We saw above that St. Jerome in his account of St. Matthew[37] said that "the Hebrew text is still preserved in the library at Cæsarea . . . and I myself had an opportunity of copying it afforded me by the Nazarenes of Bercea in Syria who use this edition (volnmine)." At first sight it might seem as though Jerome really held that this Hebrew text at Caesarea and in the possession of the Nazarenes was the original Gospel com posed by Matthew. He frequently refers to it, and, as his remarks are often conflicting, it is difficult to arrive at a definite conclusion regarding his real opinion on the subject. Thus he speaks of this Gospel as "that according to the Hebrews";[38] he says it is that "used by the Nazarenes."[39]

He himself translated it into Greek and Latin.[40] Thus St. Jerome had a first-hand acquaintance with this work, and quotes it often as containing passages not found in the Greek Matthew.[41] But when he speaks of this Hebrew edition as "ipsum Hebraicum"[42] when he says that the Nazarene and Ebionitic Gospel which he has recently translated from Hebrew into Greek vocatur a plerisque Matthcei authenticum,[43] he would appear to be using the word authenticum in a peculiar sense. For had he really held that this Nazarene Gospel according to the Hebrews was really the original Hebrew text of Matthew, he would not have merely alluded to the divergences existing between it and the Greek text in his Commentary, he would have urged them as authentic. At the same time Jerome seems convinced that the Hebrew original of Matthew did exist in his time, i.e. not Matthew's autograph, but a copy of it made by St. Bartholomew, and brought by Pantænus from India.[44] This may have been the copy preserved in the library at Cæsarea. But the precise relationship existing between this copy and those possessed by the Nazarenes of Syria is not discussed by Jerome; they vaunted their copy as "authentic." Jerome nowhere confirms this view, but neither does he deny it. He seems content to record certain divergent readings contained in it, and it must be presumed that he regarded these simply as excrescences. That he held to the existence of "a fifth Gospel," as Theodore of Mopsuestia maintained,[45] is an absurd conclusion. The work interested him sufficiently to make him translate it, though, as Origen must presumably have had a Greek translation of it,[46] it is hard to believe that Jerome had in view anything more than practice in translating from Hebrew or Aramaic.

G. Divisions and Analysis of the Gospel.

Divisions of the Gospel of St. Matthew.

Broadly speaking the Gospel falls into the following divisions:

Chapters 1 -thru- 4:11. The preparation for the ministry.

Chapters 4:12 -thru- 18. The Galilean ministry.

Chapters 19—25. The Peræan and Jerusalem ministry.

Chapters 26—28. The Trial, Passion, Death, and Resurrection.

When, however, we attempt to break up the Gospel according to any scheme of development on the part of the Evangelist, we find it difficult absolutely to justify all the details of any systematic scheme. Still Matthew's theme was "of the King and of His Kingdom," and from this standpoint we may suggest the following divisions:

I—II. The Birth of the King.

III.—IV. 11. The immediate preparation of the Kingdom.

IV. 12—XVI. 12. The works and signs of the Kingdom.

XVI. 13—XX. 28. The founding of the Church which is His Kingdom on earth.

XX. 29—XXV. The triumph of the King; His rejection by the Jews.

XXVI—XXVII. The Humiliation of the King.

XXVIII. The Glory of the King.

The Chronological division of the First Gospel is by no means easy. It must suffice to point out here that with the miracle of the multiplication of the loaves for Five Thousand as coinciding with what was perhaps the third Passover[47] during Our Lord's public ministry, and with the probable identification of the incident of the cornfield, xii. 1-9, with what would then be the second Passover, we can divide the Gospel chronologically as follows:

I—IV. 13. Period previous to the first Passover, cf. John ii. 13.

IV. 13—XI. 30. The interval between the first and second Passovers.

XII. 1—XIV. 12. The interval between the second and third Passovers.

XIV. 13—XXVI. i. The interval between the third and fourth Passovers.

But we must not therefore suppose that Matthew has placed in those intervals only the events which properly belonged to them chronologically. This will be clearer when we have mastered the Aim and Scope of the Gospel. Matthew was "a Hebrew of the Hebrews," and, as St. Jerome has told us, and as is evident from the contents of his Gospel, he wrote essentially for the Jews themselves. This will be evident from the following facts:

1. He has between sixty and seventy quotations of the Old Testament; whereas the remaining three Evangelists together only quote the Old Testament some fifty times. Mark and Luke, indeed, as a rule only give quotations which occur in Our Lord's discourses, they themselves do not argue from the Old Testament.
2. He rarely explains Jewish terms, e.g. Raca, v. 22, Corbona, xxvii. 6; but cp. "gift," xv. 5-6, and Mark vii. 11, corban.
3. He does not trouble to explain, as Luke so constantly does, Palestinian geographical terms, but speaks simply of "His own city," ix. 1, "His own country," xiii. 54.
4. He repeatedly dwells on Our Lord's denunciations of the Pharisees and the Jewish leaders, e.g. chaps, xii., xvi., xxii., xxiii.
5. In his genealogy of Our Lord he goes no further back than Abraham, i. 1-2, unlike St. Luke who goes back to God, iii. 38.
6. He has no account of the mission of the seventy-two disciples, cf. Luke x.
7. And all this accords with the picture of Christ which Matthew has drawn for us. His aim is to prove that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messias, viz. the Christ or the "anointed," and that His Kingdom is the Church which He founded. It is in this way that the ancient prophecies find their fulfilment. Consequently Matthew quotes at least twenty clear Messianic prophecies from the Old Testament. Indeed these prophecies must have formed the staple of all the early Apostolic preaching, cf. Acts xiii. 23, 32, xvii. 3, xviii. 5, 28, etc.

But while thus proving that Jesus is really the long- expected Messias, Matthew has to explain how it came to pass that the Jews, for whom primarily He came on earth, have rejected Him, cf. John vii. 26. The explanation lies in the words of John xii. 37-43, they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God; hence it is that Matthew insists so strongly on the opposition of the Pharisees and chief priests to Christ's teaching.

The First Gospel, then, has an apologetic aim,[48] and this fact must be kept in view when we endeavour to analyze it and ascertain the order and sequence of events which the Evangelist has followed. His aim may be described as threefold. He has to prove that Jesus is the Christ, that the Church is His Kingdom, and that the Pharisees naturally rejected Him, being blinded by prejudice. Bearing this threefold aim in view we may divide the Gospel as follows :

I—IV. 11. The preparation.

IV. 12—XIV. 12. Christ's public life as indicating this threefold end.

XIV. 13—XX. 28. The last year of His public life, a period devoted to the preparation of the Apostles as the foundation on which the Church was built, cf. Ephes. ii. 19-22.

XX. 29—XXVIII. 20. His final rejection of the Synagogue which has rejected Him.

In accordance with this threefold end Matthew has presented us with various pictures of Christ; throughout as the King, cf. the Psalms of the King, e.g. xci-xcviii.; also as The Great Teacher, in the Sermon on the Mount, v-vii.; and as the Great Wonderworker, viii-ix. 34. With this end in view he has grouped together—in the Sermon on the Mount—points in our Lord's teaching, points which are found scattered throughout Luke's Gospel, e.g. chap. vi. and chap, xii. He has also grouped together the miracles, viii- ix. 34; and especially the parables, xiii. To do this Matthew has had, of course, to desert the chronological older, but we should have an altogether false idea of the Evangelists if we mentally compared them to writers of history in the twentieth century. The Evangelists proceeded on different lines and wrote as Orientals write, i.e. without that minute attention to details of order to which we in the West are accustomed.

Analysis of the Gospel of St. Matthew

A. Chapters 1-2. The Birth and the Infancy of Christ

(a) The Genealogy of Christ, i. 1-17.

(b) The Conception of Christ; Joseph's doubts, i. 18-25.

(c) The Birth of Christ; the visit of the Wise men, ii. 1-12.

(d) The Flight into Egypt; the murder of the Innocents, ii. 13-18.

(e) The return to Nazareth during the reign of Archelaus, ii. 19-23.

B. Chapters 3:1-4:11. The Preparation for the Christ's Ministry.

(a) The Preaching of John the Baptist, iii. 1-12.

(b) The Baptism of Christ, iii. 13-17.

(c) The Temptation of Christ, iv. 1-11.

C. Chapters 4:12—7:27. The Opening of the Public Mimistry, from the Imprisonment of the Baptist to the Sermon on the Mount.

(a) On the Baptist's imprisonment Christ retires to Galilee and Nazareth; He dwells in Capharnaum and preaches, iv. 12-17.

(b) The call of Simon and Andrew, of James and John, iv. 18-22.

(c) A missionary circuit in Galilee, iv. 23-25.

(d) The Sermon on the Mount, v-vii.

(1) The Beatitudes, v. 1-12.

(2) Comparison between the Old and the New Law, v. 13-48.

(3) Single-mindedness in prayer and fasting, vi. 1-23.

(4) Dependence on God alone, vi. 24-34.

(5) Warnings against hypocrisy, vii. 1-5.

(6) On prayer, vii. 6-12.

(7) The narrow way, vii. 13-14.

(8) Beware of false prophets, vii. 15-20.

(9) Be ye doers of the word, vii. 21-23.

(10) The concluding parable : the doers of His word are likened to men who have built their house on the rock and not on the sand, vii. 24-27.

D. Chapters 8—9. From the Sermon on the Mount to the Call and Commission of the Twelve Apostles.

(a) He heals a leper, viii. 1-4.

(b) In Capharnaum He heals the centurion's servant who is lying sick at a distance, viii. 5-13.

(c) He heal's Peter's wife's mother of a fever, viii. 14-15.

(d) He works many cures, viii. 16-17.

(e) Because of the multitude He gives orders to cross over the water, i.e. to the east side of the Sea of Galilee; two aspirants come and offer themselves to Him; they enter the boat, the storm is stilled, viii. 18-27.

(f) They arrive at Gerasa, where He liberates two men who are possessed; the devils enter into a herd of swine, which at once rush into the sea and are drowned; the Gerasenes beg Him to withdraw, viii. 18-34.

(g) He crosses back to the west side; cures a man sick of the palsy; the Scribes condemn Him in their hearts, v-ix. 1-8.

(h) He calls Levi (Matthew); a supper is made Him in the house (of Levi), many publicans and sinners sit down with Him, at which the Pharisees are scandalized, ix. 10-13.

(i) The question of fasting is raised by the disciples of John; He explains why His disciples do not fast at present; two parables the patch on the old garment, the new wine in old bottles illustrate His teaching, ix. 14-17.

(j) He goes to raise the daughter of a ruler (Jairus); on the way a woman who is afflicted with an issue of blood is healed by touching His garment, ix. 18-26.

(k) He heals two blind men in the house, ix. 27-31.

(l) He heals a possessed dumb man; the Pharisees say that He does so by the power of Beelzebub, ix. 32-34.

(m) A missionary circuit accompanied by many cures; they are told to pray for fresh laborers for the harvest, ix. 35-38.

E. Chapters 10—16:12. From the Call of the Twelve to the Confession of St. Peter.

(a) The names of the Twelve: His commission to them, x. i xi. i.

(b) The message of St. John the Baptist from his prison, xi. 2-7.

(c) Christ's testimony to the Baptist, xi. 8-19.

(d) He upbraids Corozain, Bethsaida, and Capharnaum for that they have not done penance at His preaching, xi. 25-30.

(e) His prayer of thanksgiving to His Heavenly Father; the invitation: Come to Me all ye that labour, xi. 25-30.

(f) The disciples in the cornfield on the Sabbath-day; probably the second Passover in His public life, see Luke vi. i; the opposition of the Pharisees, xii. 1-8.

(g) He heals a man with a withered hand on the Sabbath-day. Renewed opposition of the Pharisees, xii. 914.

(h) He therefore retires, but works many cures which, however, He desires should remain hidden, xii. 15-21.

(i) He heals a man who is blind and dumb; the amazement of the people; the Pharisees again say that He cures by the power of Beelzebub; He retorts, and warns them touching blasphemy against the Holy Spirit : out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh, xii. 22-37.

(j) The Scribes and Pharisees seek a sign; none shall be given save that of Jonas; the Ninivites and the Queen of Sheba shall rise against them in judgment since they did penance and the latter at least venerated Solomon, whereas a greater than Solomon is here; He illustrates their state by the parable of the man from out of whom an unclean spirit is cast, but who goes and takes to himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, xii. 38-45.

(k) His Mother and His brethren stand without, seeking Him; whosoever shall do the will of My Father that is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother, xii. 46-50.

(l) The Day of Parables, xiii. 1-53.

(1) The Sower, xiii. 1-9.

(2) He explains to the disciples why He speaks in parables, and gives them an explanation of that of the Sower, xiii. 10-23.

(3) The Cockle, xiii. 24-30.

(4) The Mustard Seed, xiii. 31-32.

(5) The Leaven, xiii. 33.

(6) He explains the parable of the Cockle, xiii. 36-42.

(7) Other parables : the Treasure, the Pearl, the Net, xiii. 44-50.

(8) Conclusion regarding the teaching by parables, xiii. 51-52.

(m) He visits Nazareth; is rejected, xiii. 53-58.

(n) Herod's fear; the story of the martyrdom of John the Baptist, xiv. 1-12.

(o) Jesus retires by boat to a desert place, and there He multiplies the loaves for 5000 men, xiv. 13-21.

(p) He prays in solitude; He walks on the sea, Peter does the same but loses heart; the adverse wind ceases, they adore Him : Indeed Thou art the Son of God, xiv. 22-33.

(q) They come to the land of Genesar, where He works many cures, xiv. 34-36.

(r) The Scribes and the Pharisees attack Him on the subject of His desertion of their traditions; His teaching, both to them and apart to the disciples, on what defiles a man, xv. 1-20.

(s) He retires to Tyre and Sidon, and there cures the daughter of the woman of Syro-Phoenicia, xv. 21-28.

(t) He returns to the Sea of Galilee, and there He multiplies the loaves for 4000 men; He then comes by boat to Magedan, xv. 29-39.

(u) The Pharisees and Sadducees again demand a sign; none shall be given save that of Jonas, xvi. 1-4.

(v) They again cross the water; on the way He warns them against the leaven of the Pharisees; He upbraids them for their want of faith, and reminds them of the miracles in favor of the 5000 and 4000 men, xvi. 5-12.

F. Chapter 16:13—18:35. From the Confession of St. Peter to the Close of the Galilean Ministry.

(a) At Caesarea-Philippi; St. Peter's Confession. The promise made to him; the power of binding and loosing is conferred upon him, xvi. 13-20.

(b) The first prediction of the Sacred Passion; His rebuke to St. Peter, xvi. 21-28.

(c) The Transfiguration, xvii. 1-13.

(d) The cure of the lunatic boy, xvii. 14-20.

(e) In Galilee, the second prediction of the Passion, xvii. 21-22.

(f) The question of the tribute; the miraculous finding of the stater wherewith Peter is to pay for Me and thee, xvii. 23-26.

(g) The Apostles dispute as to which will be the greatest in the kingdom of heaven; He sets a little child in their midst and gives them a lesson in humility. He warns them against scandals, though these must needs come. On hell-fire. The parable of the hundred sheep, xviii. 1-14.

(h) The obdurate brother is to be referred to the Church; on the power of binding and loosing. On the efficacy of united prayer, xviii. 15-20.

(i) Peter asks how often he is to forgive one who offends him ? The parable of the unmerciful servant illustrates our Lord's answer, xviii. 21-35.

G. Chapters 19:1—20:16. The Preaching in Peraea

(a) The Pharisees attack Him on the question of divorce; His reply to them, and apart to the disciples, xix. 1-12.

(b) Little children are brought to Him, xix. 13-15.

(c) The rich young man, xix. 16-22.

(d) Lessons on the danger of riches, xix. 23-26.

(e) Peter urges that they at least have left all things and followed Him; the promise of the hundredfold to all who do the same, xix. 27-30.

(f) This doctrine is illustrated by the parable of the Labourers in the vineyard, xx. 1-16.

H. Chapter 20:17—25:46. The Final Stage in the Journey towards Jerusalem; the First Three Days of Holy Week.

(a) The last stage; the third prediction of the Passion, xx. 17-19.

(b) The petition of the mother of the sons of Zebedee, xx. 20-23.

(c) Lessons in humility, xx. 24-28.

(d) The cure of two blind men as He goes out from Jericho, xx. 29-34.

(e) The triumphal entry into the city on Palm Sunday, xxi. i-n.

(f) He cleanses the temple, xxi, 12-13.

(g) He works miracles in the temple; the indignation of the priests, xxi. 14-16.

(h) He retires to Bethany; on the following morning He curses the barren fig-tree which at once withers away. Lessons on the need of faith, xxi. 17-22.

(i) The discussion in the temple; the Chief Priests and Elders ask Him: By what authority dost Thou these things? He retorts with a question about the baptism of John, xxi. 23-27.

(1) He proposes to them the parable of the Two Sons, and applies it, xxi. 28-32.

(2) Also the parable of the Husbandmen in the vineyard, xxi. 33-41.

(3) He applies the parable to them: The stone which the builders rejected . . .; their anger is only restrained by their fear of the multitude, xxi. 42-46.

(4) A further parable : The marriage-feast of the King's Son, xxi. 1-14.

(5) The Pharisees endeavor to ensnare Him; they send the Herodians, who propose the question about Tribute to Caesar, xxii. 15-22.

(6) Then come the Sadducees with a question about the resurrection, xxii. 23-33.

(7) The Pharisees then send a Doctor of the Law to ask: Which is the greatest commandment? xxii. 34-40.

(8) Christ now asks the Pharisees in what sense the Messias is the Son of David? xxii. 41-46.

(j) He pronounces terrible woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees,, xxiii. 1-36.

(k) He laments the obduracy of Jerusalem, xxiii. 37-39.

(l) On leaving the temple He goes to Mount Olivet and foretells the destruction of the city and the signs that shall precede the Last Things, xxiv. 1-51.

(m) He also sets forth the parable of The Ten Virgins, xxv. 1-13 : Watch ye therefore for ye know not the day nor the hour, xxv. 1-13.

(n) Also the parable of The Talents, xxv. 14-30.

(o) He describes The Last Judgment, xxv. 31-46.

J. Chapters 26—27. The Story of the Sacred Passion.

(a) Two days before the Passover; the priests plot against Him; a supper is made Him in the house of Simon the Leper at Bethany; a woman anoints Him, xxvi. 1-13.

(b) Judas sells Him to the priests, xxvi. 14-16.

(c) The Last Supper, xxvi. 17-29.

(d) On the way to Gethsemane He foretells Peter's, denials of Him, xxvi. 30-35.

(e) The Agony in the Garden, xxvi. 36-46.

(f) The arrest, xxvi. 47-56.

(g) He is brought before Caiaphas; the mocking, xxvi. 67-68.

(h) Peter denies Him thrice, xxvi. 69-75.

(i) The Council sends Him to Pilate, xxvii. 1-2.

(j) Judas vain repentance, xxvii. 3-10.

(k) He stands before Pilate; Barabbas is preferred before Him; He is scourged and condemned to death, xxvii. 11-26.

(l) He is crowned with thorns, xxvii. 27-31.

(m) He is nailed to the Cross; the bystanders mock Him in His agony; He dies, xxvii. 32-50.

(n) The veil of the temple is rent; the graves are opened; the centurion confesses: Indeed this was the Son of God; the Holy Women who had stood by, xxvii. 51-56.

(o) Joseph of Arimathea takes Him down from the Cross; the burial, xxvii. 57-61.

(p) The Chief Priests and the Pharisees obtain from Pilate leave to set guards about the tomb, xxvii. 62-66.

K. Chapter 28. The Resurrection.

(a) Mary Magdalen and "the other Mary" visit the Sepulchre; the earthquake; the descent of the Angel; the terror of the guards; He will go before you into Galilee, there you shall see Him, xxviii. 1-7.

(b) As they go out from the Sepulchre Jesus meets them; Go tell My brethren that they go into Galilee, there they shall see Me, xxviii. 8-10.

(c) The Chief Priests bribe the guards to keep silence, xxviii. 11-15.

(d) The Eleven disciples go to Galilee; Jesus appears to them; some doubted; His final commission to them : Going . . . teach ye all nations . . . and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world, xxviii. 16-20.

H. Passages Peculiar to St. Matthew.

MIRACLES.

The two blind men, ix. 27-31.

The finding of the stater, xvii. 24-27.

The healing of the man blind and dumb, xii. 22-23.

St. Peter walking on the water, xiv. 28-33.

Besides these there occur various general references to a number of miracles which Christ worked; e.g. xiv. 35-6; xv. 30; xxi. 14.

PARABLES.

The cockle, xiii. 24-30.

The treasure, xiii. 44.

The pearl, xiii. 45-6.

The draw-net, xiii. 47-50.

The unmerciful servant, xviii. 23-35.

The laborers in the vineyard, xx. 1-16.

The two sons, xxi. 28-32.

The wedding-feast of the king's son, xxii. 1-14.

The ten virgins, xxv. 1-13.

The ten talents, xxv. 14-130.

VARIOUS DISCOURSES OF OUR LORD.

The greater portion of the Sermon on the Mount, v-vii.

Come to Me all ye that labour . . ., xi. 28-30.

Every idle word . . ., xii. 36-7.

Thou art Peter . . ., xvi. 17-19.

The denunciation of the Scribes and Pharisees as a connected account, xxiii.

The description of the last judgment, xxv. 31-46.

The final commission to the Apostles, xxviii. 18-20.

HISTORICAL PORTIONS FOUND ONLY IN MATTHEW.

Practically the whole of the narrative of the infancy of our Lord, i-ii.

That the Pharisees and Sadducees had some of them been baptized by John, iii. 7.

Judas compact for thirty pieces of silver, xxvi. 14-16.

The dream of Pilate's wife, xxvii. 19.

The apparition of the saints, xxvii. 52.

The narrative of the guards at the Sepulchre, xxvii. 62-66.

Their bribe to secure silence, xxviii. 11-15.

The earthquake, xxviii. 2.

J. The Theology of the Gospel.

God and the Father.

God alone is Good, xix. 17; He is able to raise up children to Abraham of the stones, iii. g; He clothes the lilies, vi. 30; His power, xxvi. 64; the Living God, xvi. 16, xxvi. 63; the God of the living, xxii. 32; has joined people in matrimony, xix. 6; the way of God, xxii. 16; the God of Israel, xv. 31; the commandment of God, xv. 3, 6; the Temple is the House of God, xii. 4, xxi. 12, 13, xxvii. 40; heaven is His throne, v. 34, xxiii. 22; the Spirit of God, iii. 16, xii. 28; the clean of heart shall see God, v. 8; the children of God, v. 9; the Kingdom of God, vi. 33, xii. 28, xxi. 31, 43; the Kingdom of heaven, preached by the Baptist, iii. i; by Christ, iv. 17, v. 3, 10, 19, 20, vii. 21, viii. n, x. 7, xi. n, 12, xiii. 11, 24, 31, 33, 38, 43, 44, 45, 47, 52, xviii. 23, xx. i, xxii. 2, xxv. i; we cannot serve God and Mammon, vi. 24; the love of God, xxii. 37; the Lord spoke by the Prophets, i. 22, ii. 15; the Angel of the Lord, i. 24, ii. 13, 19, xxviii. 2; the Angels of God, xxii. 30; Christ speaks of "My Father, xii. 50, xxv. 34, xxvi. 29, 39,42, 53; of "My God," xxvii. 46; of "My Father in heaven," vii. 21, x. 33, xv. 13, xvi. 17, xviii. 10, 19, 35; of the Kingdom of My Father, xxvi. 29; the Father sent the Son, xv. 24; the Father is Lord of heaven . . . earth, xi. 25; has hidden things from the wise and revealed them to the simple, xi. 25; He has delivered all to the Son, xi. 27; the mutual knowledge of the Father and the Son, xi. 27, cf. xx. 23, xxiv. 36; Christ trusted in God, xxvii 43; He always does the will of His Father, xii. 50; the will of your Father, xviii. 14; your Father who seeth in secret, vi. 4, 6, 18; your Father in heaven, v. 16, 45, 48, vi. i, 14, vii. ii; your Father knoweth your needs, vi. 8, 32; your Father will forgive, vi. 14- 15; your Father gives good things, vii. ii; the Spirit of your Father, x. 20; no sparrow falls without your Father, x. 29; the Kingdom of their Father, xiii. 43; the glory of the Father, xvi. 27; the prayer "Our Father," vi. 9; the children of the Kingdom, viii. 12, xiii. 38; the Gospel of the Kingdom, xxiv. 14; the Kingdom of the Son, xvi. 28, xx. 21; the keys of the Kingdom, xvi. 19; the Kingdom of heaven is for children, xix. 14; it is not for the rich save with difficulty, xix. 23-24; its door is shut by the Scribes, xxiii. 13; who is the greatest in the Kingdom? xviii. i, 4.

The Christology.

Christ, i. 16, 17, 18, ii. 4, xvi. 16, xxiii. 10, xxvi. 63, 68; Jesus Christ, i. i, xvi. 20; Jesus, i. 16, 21, 25, ii. i; "Jesus the Galilean," xxvi. 69; "Jesus that is called Christ," xxvii. 17, 22; He is the Son of God, ii. 15, iii. 17, iv. 3, 6, viii. 29, xiv. 33, xxi. 6, xxvi. 63, xxvii. 40, 43, 54, xxviii. 19; "My Father," vii. 21, x. 32, 33, xi. 25-27, xii. 50, xv. 13, xvi. 17, xviii. 10, 19, 25, xx. 23, xxv. 34, xxvi. 29, 39, 42, 53; "My Beloved Son," iii. 17; the Son of Man, xii. 8, xiii. 37, 41, xvi. 27-28, xvii. 9, 12, 21, xix. 28, xx. 18, xxiv. 30, 37, 39, 44, xxv. 31, xxvi. 2, 24, 45, 64; all things are delivered to Him by the Father, xi. 27; He cast out devils by the Spirit of God, xii. 28; His Name is Emmanuel, i. 23; "His Mother," i. 18, ii. n, 14, 20, 21, xiii. 55; the Son of David, i. i, ix. 27, xx. 30, 31, xxi. 9, 15, xxii. 42-45; King of the Jews, ii. 2, xxvii. n, 29, 37; King of Israel, xxvii. 42; a Nazarite, ii. 23; the carpenter's son, xiii. 55; His brethren and His sisters, xiii. 55-56; of Nazareth of Galilee, xxi. ii, xxvi. 71; He is baptized, iii. 16; the Holy Spirit descends on Him, iii. 16; He is led by the Spirit into the desert, iv. i; He is the fulfillment of prophecy, i. 23, ii. 6, 15, 18, iii, 3, iv. 15-16, viii. 17, xi. 5, xxvi. 56; is greater than Jonas, xii. 41, than Solomon, xii. 42; is sent by His Father, xv. 24; the will of His Father, vii. 21, xii. 50; foretells His Passion, xvi. 21, xvii. ii, 21, xx. 18, xxvi. 2, 24, 45; is transfigured, xvii. 1-9; shall rise again, xvi. 21, xvii. 9, 22, xx. 19; is a Prophet, xxi. n, 46; a King, xxv. 34; Lord of the Sabbath, xii. 8; "one is your Master, Christ," xxiii. 10, cf. xxvi. 18; the temple is His house, xxi. 13; the Angels are His, xxiv. 31; His time is at hand, xxi. 18; He taught the way of God in truth and with no respect of persons, xxii. 16; came to save us, i. 21, xviii. ii; He forgives sin, ix. 2-6; His Church, xvi. 18; institutes the Holy Eucharist, xxi. 26-29; a ll power is given Him. xxviii. 18; with us to the consummation of the world, xxviii. 20; He will come again, xvi. 27-28, xix. 28, xxiv. 3, 27, 30, 37, 39, 42, 44, xxv. 31, xxvi. 64; false Christs, xxiv. 5, 23-24.

The Holy Spirit.

The Spirit of the Father speaks in us, x. 20; Mary conceives by the Holy Spirit, i. 18, 20; Baptism is conferred in the Spirit, iii. ix, xxviii. 19; the Holy Spirit descends on Christ after His baptism, iii. 16; He leads Christ into the desert, iv. i; Christ casts out devils by the Spirit, xii. 28; the sin against the Holy Spirit, xii. 31-32; David spoke "in the Spirit," xxii. 43.

K. Bibliography.

In addition to the Patristic Commentaries, amongst which those of Origen, St. Chrysostom and St. Hilary should be especially noted, we may refer to Knabenbauer in the Jesuit Series, Maldonatus of course, 1596, and in an English translation 1894, Patrizi, De Evangeliis, Friburg, 1852. Also Carr in the Cambridge Greek Testament, 1901; Plummer, An exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to St. Matthew, Elliot and Stock. This should be read as an offset to the following: Allen, Commentary on the Gospel according to St. Matthew, where the author's views on the Synoptic Problem are allowed too much play, cf. his Critical Studies in St. Matthew's Gospel, Expository Times, March, 1900. Harnack, Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels, Williams and Norgate, 1911. Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament, 3 vols., English translation, 1909.

L. The Greek Text of Irenaeus, Adv. Hær. III. i, cf. H.E. V. viii. 2-4.

ὁ μὲν δὴ Ματθαῑος ἐν τοῑς ῾Εβραίοις τῇ διαλέκτῳ αὐτῶν, καὶ Γραφὴν ἐξήνεγκεν Ευαγγελίου, τοῡ Πέτρου καὶ τοῡ Παύλου ἐν ῾Ρώμη, εὐαγγελιζομένων καὶ θεμελιούντων τὴν ̓Εκκλησίαν. Μετὰ δὲ τὴν τούτων ἔξοδον, Μάρκος ὁ μαθητὴς καὶ ἑρμενευτὴς Πέτρου, καὶ αὐτὸς τὰ υπὸ Πέτρου κηρυσσόμεναἐγγράφως ἡμῑν παραδέδωκε. Καὶ Λουκᾱς δὲ ὁ ἀκόλουθος Παύλου,τὸ ὑπ ἐκείνου κηρυσσόμενον Ευαγγέλιον ἐν βιβλίῳ κατέθετο.῎Επειτα Ιωάννης ὁ μαθητὴς τοῡ Κυρίου, ὁ καὶ ἔπὶ τὸ στῆθος αὐτοῡ ἀναπεσὼν, καὶ αὐτὸς ἐξέδωκε τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον, ἐν Εφέσῳ της ̓Ασίας διατρίβων.

___________________________________
1 Vir. Illustr. III., P.L. XXIII. 614; cf. Prol. to Comment, in Matt., P.L. XXVI. 18.

2 Pæd. II. i; cf. Strom. II. 9.

3 H.E. III. xxix. 16.

4 Adv. Hær. III. i. i; H.E. V. viii. 2. For a discussion of this passage see below.

5 H.E. VI. xxv. 4; cf. Origen, Hom. I. in Matt., ed. Delarue, III. 440; Præf. in Joan, vi., P.O. XIV. 36; Hom. VII. I. in Josue, P.G. XII. 857.

6 H.E. III. xxiv. 6.

7 H.E. V. x. 3; cf. St. Augustine, De Consensu, I. ii. (4), II. Ixvi. (128).

8 Thus note its use in Ps. cxviii., where it is used to render the Hebrew אִמְרׇה as a rule, though sometimes ךָּבׇר is so translated. The Vulgate has eloquia for the former, but generally verbum for the latter.

9 See Stapleton Barnes, J.T.S. January, 1905, pp. 187 ff.

10 The same point is raised aprooos of the Epistle to the Hebrews.

11 Adv. Hær. I. viii. i, τɷν κυριακɷν λογίων, P.G. VII. 521, 524.

12 I Cor. liii.

13 Tertullian, de Came Christi, xxii.; cf. infra, p. 10.

14 Wars, VI. v. 4.

15 See the apocryphal 4 Esdras xiv. 44-46.

16 Strom. I. 22.

17 H.E. VI. xiv. 5.

18 Ibid., VI xxxv. 4.

19 Vir. Illustr. III.; cf. St. Epiphanius, Hær. LI. 5, P.G. XLI. 894.

20 H.E. V. viii. 2.

21 Adv. Hær. III. i.

22 For the Greek text see here.

23 Schaff and Wace, Ante- and Post-Nicene Fathers; Eusebius, H.E., V. viii. 2.

24 The word ἔξοδον, excessum, can either be understood literally of their "departure," or metaphorically of their "death,." For this latter signification cf. Wisd. iii. 2, vii. 6; Luke ix. 31; 2 Pet. i. 15; also St. Cyprian, Ep. xxv. 2.

25 Ibid., where the Latin has much more correctly: "quod ab illo prædicabatur Evangelium."

26 This account is practically taken over by Jerome, De Viris Illustr. viii., cp. H.E. III. xxiv. 14, VI. xiv. 6; for the views of Origen on the point, see H.E. VI. xxv. 5; for those of Papias, see H.E. III. xxxix. 15. See Chapman, J.T.S. July, 1905; but also R.B. October, 1911, p. 617; see too Introduction to the Gospel of St. Mark.

27 Adv. Marcion. IV. 5.

28 See s.v. N.T. Chronology. II 12

29 Strom. VI. 5, P.G. IX. 263. The punctuation is doubtful; the stop should apparently come after "forgiven him," not after "twelve years.

30 H.E. V. xviii. 13.

31 See Expository Times, July, 1910; Harnack, Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels, 1911.

32 "Mihi videtur Evangelista Matthaeus, qui Evangelium Hebraico sermone conscripsit, non tarn vespere dixisse, quam sero, et eum qui interpretatus est, verbi ambiguitate deceptum, non sero interpretatum esse sed vespere." Ep. cxx. 4, P.L. XXII. 968. Elsewhere, Comment. in Isaiam xlii. 4, P.L. XXIV. 422, he points out a probable omission in Matt. xii. 20 of a clause in Isa. xliii. 4 owing to homoioteleuton, the copyist's eye having presumably passed from the first "judgment" to the second "judgment"; still this might have taken place equally well if the writer were copying the LXX. and not the Hebrew.

33 H.E. VI. xxxi. 1-7.

34 Cf. Tertnllian, Scorpiace, xv., P.L. II. 151; Apologeticus, xxi., P.L. I. 401. For these Genealogies see St. Justin, Dial, xxiii., etc.; also Tertullian, Adv. Marcion, III. xx. and IV. i; Origen, Contra Celsum, II. 32; St. Augustine, Sermon LI.; also R.B. July, 1911, p. 443; and Expository Times, August, 1906, and February, 1913.

35 Contra Faustum, XVII. iii., P.L. XLII. 341.

36 See above, note here.

37 Supra, p. 170; De Viris Illustr. III., P.L. XXIII. 613.

38 Viris Illustr. II. and XVI.; in Isaiam xi. 2; in Matt, xxvii. 16 and 51.

39 Adv. Pelag. III. 2, P.L. XXIII. 570, etc.

40 Viris Illustr. II.; Adv. Pelag. III. 2; in Mich. VII. 7, P.L. XXV. 1221; in Matt. XII. 73.

41 In Isaiam xi. 2; in Ephes. v. 4; in Matt. xxvii. 16, 21.

42 Viris Illustr. III.

43 In Matt. xii. 13.

44 Viris Illustr. XXXVI.

45 Photius, Bibliotheca, 177. The same charge was made by Julian the Pelagian; see St. Augustine, Opus Imperfectum contra Julianum, IV. 88 P.L. XXXIX. 1389.

46 Viris Illustr. II. The best summary of St. Jerome's statements on this Gospel is to be found in his own words when writing against the Pelagians: "In the Gospel according to the Hebrews, which, though composed in the Chaldaic and Syrian tongue, is yet written in Hebrew characters, which the Nazarenes use to this day, (which is the Gospel) according to the Apostles, or, as many hold, according to Matthew, and which is in the library at Caesarea. ..." Dial. Adv. Pelagianos. III. 2, P.L. XXIII. 570; cf. H.E. IV. xxii. 7; Origen, Tom. II. 6 in Joan: P.G. XIV. 132. See R.B. October, 1912; J.T.S. April, 1905.

47 See's.v. N.T. Chronology.

48 Thus note Tertullian's words: "Men may obliterate the testimony of the devils who proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of David; but whatever unworthiness there may be in this testimony, men will never be able to efface that of the Apostles. First of all we have Matthew, that most faithful chronicler of the Gospel, since he was the companion of the Lord. For no other reason in the world than to show us clearly the fleshly origin of Christ, he begins his Gospel thus: 'the Book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham,'" De Carne Christi, xxii.