For the same reason I have not included Marcion"s edition of St. Luke"s Gospel, or Tatian"s Diatessaron, in the list of books and authors, because such representations of the Gospels having been in public use were sure to have been revised from time to time, in order to accord with the judgement of those who read or heard them. Our readers will observe that these were self-denying ordinances, because by the inclusion of the works mentioned the list on the Traditional side would have been greatly increased. Yet our foundations have been strengthened, and really the position of the Traditional Text rests so firmly upon what is undoubted, that it can afford to dispense with services which may be open to some suspicion(117).
And the natural inference remains, that the difference between the witness of the Ethica and the Regulae brevius Tractatae on the one hand, and that of the other works of Basil on the other, suggests that too much variation, and too much which is evidently characteristic variation, of readings meets us in the works of the several Fathers, for the existence of any doubt that in most cases we have the words, though perhaps not the spelling, as they issued originally from the author"s pen(118). Variant readings of quotations occurring in different editions of the Fathers are found, according to my experience, much less frequently than might have been supposed. Where I saw a difference between MSS. noted in the Benedictine or other editions or in copies from the Benedictine or other prints, of course I regarded the pa.s.sage as doubtful and did not enter it.
Acquaintance with this kind of testimony cannot but render its general trustworthiness the more evident. The habit of quotation of authorities from the Fathers by Tischendorf and all Textual Critics shews that they have always been taken to be in the main trustworthy. It is in order that we may be on sure ground that I have rejected many pa.s.sages on both sides, and a larger number of cases of pettier testimony on the Traditional side.
In the examination of the Greek Fathers, Latin Translations have generally been neglected (except in the case of St. Irenaeus(119)), because the witness of a version is secondhand, and Latin translators often employed a rendering with which they were familiar in representing in Latin pa.s.sages cited from the Gospels in Greek. And in the case even of Origen and especially of the later Fathers before A.D. 400, it is not certain whether the translation, such as that of Rufinus, comes within the limit of time prescribed. The evidence of the Father as to whether he used a Text or Texts of one cla.s.s or another is of course much better exhibited in his own Greek writing, than where some one else has translated his words into Latin. Accordingly, in the case of the Latin Fathers, only the clearest evidence has been admitted. Some pa.s.sages adduced by Tischendorf have been rejected, and later experience has convinced me that such rejections made in the earlier part of my work were right. In a secondary process like this, if only the cup were borne even, no harm could result, and it is of the greatest possible importance that the foundation of the building should be sound.
The general results will appear in the annexed Table. The investigation was confined to the Gospels. For want of a better term, I have uniformly here applied the t.i.tle "Neologian" to the Text opposed to ours.
_Fathers._ _Traditional _Neologian._ Text._ Patres Apostolici and Didache 11 4 Epistle to Diognetus 1 0 Papias 1 0 Justin Martyr 17 20 Heracleon 1 7 Gospel of Peter 2 0 Seniores apud Irenaeum 2 0 Athenagoras 3 1 Irenaeus (Latin as well as Greek) 63 41 Hegesippus 2 0 Theophilus Antiochenus 2 4 Testament of Abraham 4 0 Epistola Viennensium et Lugdunensium 1 0 Clement of Alexandria 82 72 Tertullian 74 65 Clementines 18 7 Hippolytus 26 11 Callixtus (Pope) 1 0 Pontia.n.u.s (Pope) 0 2 Origen 460 491 Julius Africa.n.u.s 1 1 Gregory Thaumaturgus 11 3 Novatian 6 4 Cornelius (Pope) 4 1 Synodical Letter 1 2 Cyprian 100 96 Concilia Carthaginiensia 8 4 Dionysius of Alexandria 12 5 Synodus Antiochena 3 1 Acta Pilati 5 1 Theognostus 0 1 Archelaus (Manes) 11 2 Pamphilus 5 1 Methodius 14 8 Peter of Alexandria 7 8 Alexander Alexandrinus 4 0 Lactantius 0 1 Juvencus 1 2 Arius 2 1 Acta Philippi 2 1 Apostolic Canons and Const.i.tutions 61 28 Eusebius (Caesarea) 315 214 Theodorus Heracleensis 2 0 Athanasius 179 119 Firmicus Maternus 3 1 Julius (Pope) 1 2 Serapion 5 1 Eustathius 7 2 Macarius Aegyptius or Magnus(120) 36 17 Hilary (Poictiers) 73 39 Candidus Aria.n.u.s 0 1 Eunomius 1 0 Didymus 81 36 Victorinus of Pettau 4 3 Faustinus 4 0 Zeno 3 5 Basil 272 105 Victorinus Afer 14 14 Lucifer of Cagliari 17 20 t.i.tus of Bostra 44 24 Cyril of Jerusalem 54 32 Pacia.n.u.s 2 2 Optatus 10 3 Quaestiones ex Utroque Test 13 6 Gregory of Nyssa 91 28 Philastrius 7 6 Gregory of n.a.z.ianzus 18 4 Amphilochius 27 10 Epiphanius 123 78 Ambrose 169 77 Macarius Magnes 11 5 Diodorus of Tarsus 1 0 Evagrius Ponticus 4 0 Esaias Abbas 1 0 Nemesius 0 1 Philo of Carpasus(121) 9 2 -- 2630 1753
The testimony therefore of the Early Fathers is emphatically, according to the issue of numbers, in favour of the Traditional Text, being about 3:2.
But it is also necessary to inform the readers of this treatise, that here quality confirms quant.i.ty. A list will now be given of thirty important pa.s.sages in which evidence is borne on both sides, and it will be seen that 530 testimonies are given in favour of the Traditional readings as against 170 on the other side. In other words, the Traditional Text beats its opponent in a general proportion of 3 to 1. This result supplies a fair idea of the two records. The Neologian record consists mainly of unimportant, or at any rate of smaller alterations, such as d?d??a for ?d??a, ? ???????? for ? e? ???a????, f?e?s?e for f????te, disarrangements of the order of words, omissions of particles, besides of course greater omissions of more or less importance. In fact, a great deal of the variations suggest to us that they took their origin when the Church had not become familiar with the true readings, the _verba ipsissima_, of the Gospels, and when an atmosphere of much inaccuracy was spread around. It will be readily understood how easily the text of the Holy Gospels might have come to be corrupted in oral teaching whether from the pulpit or otherwise, and how corruptions must have so embedded themselves in the memories and in the copies of many Christians of the day, that it needed centuries before they could be cast out. That they were thus rooted out to a large extent must have been due to the loving zeal and accuracy of the majority. Such was a great though by no means the sole cause of corruption. But before going further, it will be best to exhibit the testimony referred to as it is borne by thirty of the most important pa.s.sages in dispute. They have been selected with care: several which were first chosen had to be replaced by others, because of their absence from the quotations of the period under consideration. Of course, the quotations are limited to that period. Quotations are made in this list also from Syriac sources. Besides my own researches, The Last Twelve Verses, and The Revision Revised, of Dean Burgon have been most prolific of apposite pa.s.sages. A reference here and there has been added from Resch"s Ausser-Canonische Paralleltexte zu den Evangelien, Leipzig, 1894-5.
1. St. Matt. i. 25. ???t?t????.
On the Traditional side:- Tatian (Diatessaron).
Athanasius (c. Apoll. i. 20; ii. 15).
Basil (Adv. Eunom. iv. (291); in S. Xti. Gen. 5; i. 392; ii. 599, 600).
Didymus (Trin. iii. 4).
Cyril Jerus. (Cat. vii. 9).
Gregory Nyss. (ii. 229).
Ephraem Syras (Commentary on Diatessaron).
Epiphanius (Haer. II. li. 5; III. lx.x.xviii. 17, &c.-5 times).
Ambrose (De Fid. I. xiv. 89)(122).
Against:-I can discover nothing.
2. St. Matt. v. 44 (some of the clauses).
Traditional:-Separate clauses are quoted by- Didache (-- I).
Polycarp (x.).
Justin M. (Apol. i. 15).
Athenagoras (Leg. pro Christian. 11).
Tertullian (De Patient, vi.).
Theophilus Ant. (Ad Autolyc.u.m).
Clemens Alex. (Paed. i. 8; Strom. iv. 14; vii. 14).
Origen (De Orat. i.; Cels. viii. 35; 41).
Eusebius (Praep. Ev. xiii. 7; Comment, in Isai. 66; Comment. in Ps. 3; 108).
Athanasius (De Incarnat. c. Arian. 3; 13).
Apost. Const, (i. 1, all the clauses; vii. I).
Gregory Naz. (Orat. iv. 124).
Gregory Nyss. (In Bapt. Christ.; In S. Stephanum).
Lucifer (Pro S. Athan. ii.).
Philo of Carpasus (I. 7).
Pacia.n.u.s (Epist. ii.).
Hilary (Tract. in Ps. cxviii. 9. 9; 10. 16).
Ambrose (De Abrahamo ii. 30; In Ps. x.x.xviii. 10; In Ps. cxviii. 12. 51).
Aphraates (Dem. ii.).
Apocryphal Acts of the Gospels (p. 89).
Against:- Cyprian (De Bono Patient, v.; De Zelo xv.; Test. ad Jud. iii. 49).
Irenaeus (Haer. III. xviii. 5).
Origen (Comment. on St. John XX. xv.; xxvii.).
Eusebius (Dem. Evan. xiii. 7).
Gregory Nyss. (In Bapt. Christ.).
3. St. Matt. vi. 13. Doxology.
Traditional:- Didache (viii, with variation).
Apostol. Const. (iii. 18; vii. 25, with variation).
Ambrose (De Sacr. vi. 5. 24).
Against (?), i.e. generally silent about it:- Tertullian (De Orat. 8).
Cyprian (De Orat. Dom. 27).
Origen (De Orat. 18).
Cyril Jerus. (Cat. xxiii., Myst. 5, 18).
Gregory Nyss. is doubtful (De Orat. Dom. end).
4. St. Matt. vii. 13, 14. ? p???.
Traditional:- Hippolytus (In Susannam v. 18).
Testament of Abraham(5 times).
Origen (Select. in Ps. xvi.; Comment. in Matt. xii. 12).
Ambrose (Epist. I. xxviii. 6).
Esaias Abbas.
Philo of Carpasus (iii. 73).
Against:- Hippolytus (Philosoph. v. 1. 1-bis).
Origen (Cels. vi. 17; Select. in Ps. xlv. 2; cxvii.; c. Haeres. v. 8).
Cyprian (De Hab. Virg. xxi.; Test. ad Jud. iii. 6).
Eusebius (Eclog. Proph. iii. 4; Comment. in Ps. 3).
Clemens Alex. (Strom. IV. ii.; vi.; v. 5; Cohort. ad Gent. p. 79).
Basil (Hom. in Ps. x.x.xiii. 4; xlv. 2).
Cyril Jerus. (Cat. iii. 7).
Gregory Nyss. (c. Fornicarios).
Ambrose (Exposit. in Luc. iv. 37).
Philo of Carpasus (i. 7).
Macarius Aegypt. (Hom. xxviii.).
Lucifer (De Athan. ii.; Moriendum esse).
5. St. Matt. ix. 13. e?? et????a?. Mark ii. 17.
Traditional:- Barnabas (5).
Justin M. (Apol. i. 15).
Irenaeus (III. v. 2).
Origen (Comment. in Joh. xxviii. 16).
Eusebius (Comment. in Ps. cxlvi.).
Hilary (Comment. in Matt. ad loc.).
Basil (De Poenitent. 3; Hom. in Ps. xlviii. 1; Epist. Cla.s.s. I. xlvi. 6).