The Presbyters Project

Print:

ER 2064

Anonymous author of the "Incomplete Commentary on Matthew" says that priests are obliged to preach the orthodox faith, and the lay to defend it in uncontaminated form. He chastises those laymen who seek patronage of heretical priests. The mid-5th c., the Danubian provinces or Constantinople.

Homilia 24

Et nolite timere eos, qui occidunt corpus. Ne forte propter timorem mortis non libere dicatis quod audistis, nec fiducialiter praedicetis in omnibus, quod in aure soli audistis. Sic ergo ex his uerbis ostenditur, quod non solum ille proditor est ueritatis, qui transgrediens ueritatem palam mendacium pro ueritate loquitur, sed etiam ille qui non libere pronunciat ueritatem, quam libere pronuntiare oportet, aut non libere ueritatem defendit, quam libere defendere oportet, proditor est ueritatis. Nam sicut sacerdos debitor est, ut ueritatem quam audiuit a deo libere praedicet: sic laicus debitor est, ut ueritatem quam audiuit quidem a sacerdotibus probatam in scripturis, defendat fiducialiter. Quod si non fecerit, proditor est ueritatis. Corde enim creditur ad iustitiam, ore autem confessio fit ad salutem [Rom. 10:10]. Haec autem diximus, quoniam multi Christianorum palam quidem transgredi ueritatem putant peccatum, tacere autem ueritatem coram infidelibus non putant esse peccatum, et propterea multi inueniuntur in isto reatu. Ideo nos conuenit apertius dicere, quoniam nihil de ueritate neganda praesens loquitur sermo, sed de ueritate non libere praedicanda, dicens: Quod dico uobis in tenebris, dicite in lumine: et nolite timere eos, qui occidunt corpus, quo minus dicatis in lumine, quod audistis in tenebris. Vide quoniam non solum ille transgressor est ueritatis, qui palam denegat ueritatem, sed etiam ille, qui propter timorem eorum, qui possunt occidere corpus, tacet ueritatem. Et quid dicam? Quia propter timorem mortis tacent homines ueritatem, et propter miserum uentrem, et propter spem uani honoris, in conspectu infidelium tacent homines ueritatem. Vtputa, eunt homines ad conuiuium impiorum sacerdotum, et confugiunt ad patrocinium malorum haereticorum, fit sermo de fide, ille sacerdos impius, uel patronus, blasphemat ueritatem tuam, quasi mendacium, fidem tuam, quasi perfidiam, ut aut seducat, aut uulneret conscientiam tuam, et faciat eam infirmam, et si ad plenum capere non potuerit: tu autem etsi non denegaueris palam ueritatem, tamen non contendis cum persona eius, cujus panem inanem manducas, ut non perdas spem patrocinii, aut rapacitatis, ueritatem quam oportebat te libere defendere, tacens confundis eam in conspectu inimicorum eius, ut uideatur a te tacente, falsa quae uera est. Et quomodo non es tu proditor ueritatis? Sed forte dicis: Si taceo ueritatem ante aduersarios, nunquid consentio mendacio eorum? Dic mihi, si princeps aliquis imperatoris, uidens ciuitatem Romanam ab hostibus expugnari, cum possit liberare eam, et neglexit defendere, num ipse uidebitur tradidisse, quam potuit liberare, si uoluisset? Sic et tu uidens ueritatem ab impiis expugnari, cum eam potuisses defendere, si loqui uoluisses, tacens expugnasti, per hoc ipsum quod compassus es expugnari. Et si propter timorem eorum qui occidunt corpus tacere ueritatem, sicut praesens scriptura testatur, impietas est: quomodo non sit impietas maior, tacere ueritatem propter miserum uentrem, et spem uani honoris, et meliorem facere gratiam panis, et honoris quam gloriam ueritatis Dei?

(ed. Desiderius Erasmus 1530: 599; cf. PG 56, col. 761-62, ed. B. Montefaucon)

Homily 24

"And do not fear those who kill the body." [Matt 10:28] That is, "Do not refrain from speaking freely what you have heard because of fear of death; not refrain from preaching faithfully in all matters what you alone heard whispered." Thus by these words he shows that not only is he a traitor to the truth who goes beyond the bounds of truth and openly speaks a lie instead of the truth, but so also is he who does not freely proclaim the truth that he ought to proclaim or does not freely defend the truth that he ought to. For just as a priest is obligated to preach freely the truth that he has heard from God, so also a lay person is obligated to defend faithfully the truth that he has heard from the priests and that has been proven in the Scriptures. But if he does not do this, he is a traitor to the truth. "For man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved." [Rom 10:10]

We have said these things because many Christians think that it is a sin to openly go beyond the truth, but do not think that it is a sin to keep quiet about the truth before unbelievers and for that reason many are found to be indicted under that charge. So it is appropriate for us to speak openly because the present instruction says nothing about a truth that is being denied but about a truth that is not being freely proclaimed, since he says, "What I tell you in the dark, utter in the light... and do not fear those who kill the body," which otherwise might give you grounds to say less in the light what you have heard in the dark.

Look how he is not only a transgressor of the truth who openly denies the truth, but so also is he who keeps silent about the truth out of fear of those who can kill the body. And what will I say? People keep quiet about the truth because of their fear of death, and because of their wretched belly and their hope for vain honour they keep silent about the truth in the presence of unbelievers. For example, people come to the banquet of godless priests and flee to the patronage of evil heretics. A sermon on faith takes place; that godless priest or patron blasphemes your truth as a lie and your faith as treachery so that he can either seduce or wound your conscience and make it weak, even if he cannot fully succeed. But even though you do not openly deny the truth, nonetheless you do not strive with his person, since you eat his bread—all so chat you do not lose the hope of your patronage or greed. You keep silent about the truth, which you ought to freely defend, and you obscure the truth in the sight of its enemies so that by your silence it seems chat what is true is really false. And how is it that you are not a traitor to the truth?

(trans. Kellerman 2010: 182-83)

Place of event:

Region

Danubian provinces and Illyricum
East

City

Constantinople

About the source:

Author: Ps.-John Chrysostom
Title: Incomplete Commentary on Matthew, Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum
Origin: Danubian provinces and IllyricumConstantinople (East),
Denomination: Arian

"Incomplete Commentary on Matthew" (Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum) is the name given to a Latin exegetical commentary on the Gospel of Matthew which has been handed down under the attribution to John Chrystostomus. The name of the Opus imperfectum also served to distinguish it from another commentary, John Chrystostomus' Homilies on Matthew (CPG 4424), which is complete. The Opus imperfectum does not contain a commentary on Matthew 8:10 to 10:15, Matthew 13:14 to 18:35, and Matthew 25:37 to the end of the Gospel. Therefore, the commentary can be divided into three parts: commentaries (called "homilies" in the mss.) 1-22 (up to Matthew 8:10), commentaries 24-31 (Matthew 10:13-13:13) and commentaries 32-54 (Matthew 19-25). In order to facilitate the description of the manuscript families and the transmission, Van Banning has proposed to divide the third section into two parts, so that he speaks of four parts in all:

- part A (hom. 1-22)

- part B (hom. 24-31)

- part C (hom. 32-46)

- part D (hom. 46-54)

Commentary (homily) 23, included in early modern editions (and printed in PG 56, 754-756), has been identified as one of the homilies to Matthew by Chromatius of Aquileia. New fragments of the commentary were identified by Étaix in 1974.

The editio princeps was published by Johannes Koelhof in Cologne in 1487. The next one, of much better quality, appeared in Venice in 1503. At that time, the work was still considered to be written by Chrysostom, but translated by an unknown person. The first doubts about its authorship were expressed by Andreas Cartander in the preface to the 1525 edition. The next editor, Erasmus of Rotterdam, made only minor changes to the text of the previous edition, but was the first to firmly reject the authorship of John Chrysostom on the basis of the text fragments he described as "Arian". He was also convinced that the commentary was not the translation from Greek, but was originally written in Latin, albeit possibly by a person who knew Greek.

To this day, the questions of authorship, date and the region in which the commentary was written remain unresolved, and many different hypotheses have been put forward in scholarship. Stiglmayr (1909, 1910) and Nautin (1972) argued that the Opus was a translation from Greek and suggested Timothy, the deacon of Constantinople mentioned in Socrates, as a possible author; Morin (1942) suggested that the author of the Opus could be identified with the translator of Origen's Homilies on Matthew into Latin; Meslin (1967: 174-180) attributed it to Bishop Maximinus, who translated it from the so-called Arian scholia in ms. Parisinus Latinus 8907; Schlatter (1988) suggested the attribution to Ananius of Celeda. The various passages reveal the author's hostility to Nicene theology, which maintains that the Father and the Son are consubstantial. He thus seems to have belonged to a non-Nicene theology that modern scholarship calls "Homoian" (referring to the creeds of Rimini 359 and Constantinople 360). Schlatter, on the other hand, focused on the passages he considered "Pelagian" and wanted to place the author in the context of the controversies about grace. Further research is needed to clarify the doctrinal position and theological context of the work, but one promising avenue is to search Homoian circles in fifth-century Constantinople or in the Danubian provinces.

The author has made an extensive use of the commentary on Matthew by Origen (Mali 1991) but he was also using a very wide range of sources both in Latin and Greek (see for example Dulaey 2004).

The author of the commentary mentions the Emperor Theodosius I as already deceased (PG 56, column 907). Furthermore, he refers to teaching held at the Capitol in Constantinople, and we know that the "university" there was founded in 425 (Codex Theodosianus 16.9.3). It is therefore likely that the enactment took place in the second half of the reign of Theodosius II (408-450).

However, the uniformity of the work is also not certain, and it has not yet been proven beyond doubt that parts A-D were written by the same person at the same time. Piemonte (1996) even claims that parts of the commentary were written in the 8th century by Johannes Scotus Eriugena.

The great obstacle in clarifying many questions about the nature of the text is the lack of a contemporary critical edition. Joop van Banning published an excellent introduction to the planned edition in 1988, in which he explains the intricacies of the manuscript tradition. The complexity of the tradition and the large number of manuscripts (about 200) contributed to the immense scope of the edition project, which is still not completed today (autumn 2023). The research group in Fribourg (Switzerland) is currently working on the edition of Part A, which will hopefully be completed in the next few years. Until then, the text can be read in early modern editions (1525, 1530) and in Patrologia Graeca 56, which reproduces the text of Bernard de Montefaucon's 17th century edition.

Edition:

Tertius tomus operum divi Ioannis Chrysostomi archiepiscopi Constantinopolitani in quo homiliae in Matthaeum et Ioannem praeterea commentarii digni lectu in Matthaeum incerto autore, ed. Desiderius Erasmus, Basilea 1530, 474-752

Patrologia Graeca 56, col. 611-946

Translation:

Incomplete Commentary to Matthew, ed. T.C. Oden, trans. J.A. Kellerman, 2 vols., Downers Grove 2010

Bibliography:

J. van Banning, Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum: its provenance, theology and influence (D.Phil diss., University of Oxford, 1983)

J. van Banning, Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum. Praefatio, Corpus Christianorum Series Latina 87B, Turnhout 1988

M. Dulaey, "Les sources latines de l’Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum dans le commentaire de la parabole des dix vierges (Mt 25, 1–13)”, Vetera Christianorum 41 (2004), 295–311.

R. Étaix, "Fragments inédits de l’Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum”, Revue Bénédictine 84 (1974), 271–300.

F. Mali, Das "Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum" und sein Verhältnis zu den Matthäuskommentaren von Origenes und Hieronymus, Innsbruck Wien 1991.

M. Meslin, Les Ariens d’Occident: 335–430, Paris 1967

G. Morin, "Les homélies latines sur S. Matthieu attribuées à Origène”, Revue Bénédictine 54 (1942), 3–11.

P. Nautin, "M. Meslin. Les Ariens d’Occident (335-430) [compte rendu]," Revue de l’histoire des religions 177 (1970), 74-80.

P. Nautin, "L’Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum et les Ariens de Constantinople”, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 67 (1972), 380–408; 745–766.

G.A. Piemonte, "Recherches sur les „Tractatus in Matheum” attribués à Jean Scot”, [in :] Iohannes Scottus Eriugena. The Bible and Hermeneutics, 1996, 321–350.

F.W. Schlatter, “The Author of the Opus Imperfectum in Matthaeum,” Vigiliae Christianae 42 (1988), 365-375

F. W. Schlatter, “The Pelagianism of the ‘Opus Imperfectum in Matthaeum”’, Vigiliae Christianae 41 (1987), 267-284

J. Stiglmayr, "Ist das Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum ursprünglich lateinisch abgefaßt?”, Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie 33 (1909), 594–597

J. Stiglmayr, "Das Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum: Zur Frage über Grandsprache, Entstehungszeit, Heimat und Verfasser des Berkes”, Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie 34 (1910), 1–38

Categories:

Entertainment - Feasting

Described by a title - Sacerdos/ἱερεύς

Relation with - Heretic/Schismatic

Religious grouping (other than Catholic/Nicene/Chalcedonian) - Unspecified 'heretic'

Reasons for ordination - Patronage

Pastoral activity - Preaching

Please quote this record referring to its author, database name, number, and, if possible, stable URL: M. Szada, Presbyters in the Late Antique West, ER2064, http://www.presbytersproject.ihuw.pl/index.php?id=6&SourceID=2064