Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum
Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum ("Incomplete work on Matthew") is a Latin commentary on the Gospel of Matthew , which was wrongly ascribed to John Chrysostom . It is incomplete because there are two larger gaps (between Mt 8:14 and Mt 10:15 and between Mt 14 and Mt 18). The work also breaks off after the interpretation of chapter 25, i.e. does not comment on the Passion and Easter stories.
Author, place and time of origin
Pseudo-Chrysostom, a cleric, wrote in Latin and used the Vulgate but mastered the Greek language and used Greek loanwords. The place of compilation should therefore be found in a contact zone between the Latin and Greek-speaking population, possibly in the Balkans ( Dacia , Moesia , Illyricum ). He mentions an emperor Theodosius in his work without further definition, so that he wrote either before Theodosius II's reign (408-450) or during the same, because after the end of his reign he should have specified which Theodosius he meant.
Three candidates for the identity of Pseudo-Chrysostom are discussed:
- Timothy, an Arian priest in Constantinople , from the exegetical school of Origen ;
- Maximinus, Arian bishop, who was probably not a Goth himself , but accompanied them on their migration from the Balkans to North Africa;
- Anianus of Celeda , a deacon and Pelagian .
content
For a modern reader it is astonishing that the opus imperfectum in the Middle Ages could be ascribed to the Orthodox Doctor of the Church Chrysostom, although the author obviously takes Arian positions. This was possible because Arian views do not shape the commentary as a whole, but individual interpretations, essentially four:
- to Mt 8,9 ZB : The son is less than the father.
- to Mt 20,8 ZB : If in the parable the father is the master of the house and the son the caretaker, he is less than the father.
- to Mt 20,23 For example , the Son derives its authority from the Father.
- to Mt 23,32 For example : Belief in three consubstantial divine persons is paganism in Christian garb.
reception
In the Middle Ages the opus imperfectum was highly regarded; Thomas Aquinas said he would rather have a full copy of this incomplete comment than be Mayor of Paris. In addition to Thomas Aquinas, the book was also received by Abelard and Bonaventure , the Devotio moderna , John Wycliff and Jan Hus . The history of the impact of the Opus imperfectum broke off in 1530 when Erasmus of Rotterdam proved that the author was an anonymous Arian. Biblical interpretations by an ancient heretic were not quotable during the Reformation.
Work editions
- Joop van Banning (Ed.): Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum. Praefatio (= Corpus Christianorum Series Latina. (CCSL) 87B). Brepols, Turnhout 1988.
- Thomas C. Oden (Ed.): Incomplete Commentary on Matthew (Opus imperfectum). 2 volumes. Translated by James A. Kellerman. InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove 2010.
- Bernard de Montfaucon et al. a (Eds.): Sancti patris nostri Joannis Chrysostomi, archiepiscopi constantinopolitani, opera omnia quae exstant, vel quae ejus nomine circumferuntur , Volume 6, new edition, Paris and Leipzig 1836, pp. 741–972 ( digitized version )
literature
- Joop van Banning, Franz Mali : Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum. In: Theological Real Encyclopedia . Volume 25. De Gruyter, Berlin / New York 1995, pp. 304-307.
- Franz Mali: The “Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum” and its relation to the commentaries on Matthew by Origen and Hieronymus (= Innsbruck theological studies. Volume 34). Tyrolia, Innsbruck 1991.
Individual evidence
- ↑ Thomas C. Oden: Incomplete Commentary on Matthew , Downers Grove 2010, pp. Xviii.
- ↑ Thomas C. Oden: Incomplete Commentary on Matthew , Downers Grove 2010, pp. Xix f.
- ^ In the Montfaucon edition (1836) p. 932.
- ↑ Thomas C. Oden: Incomplete Commentary on Matthew , Downers Grove 2010, pp. Xvii.
- ↑ Thomas C. Oden: Incomplete Commentary on Matthew , Downers Grove 2010, pp. Xxiv.
- ↑ Thomas C. Oden: Incomplete Commentary on Matthew , Downers Grove 2010, pp. Xxiii.