A DOCTRINAL MODIFICATION
OF A TEXT OF THE GOSPEL
II. MATTHEW, ch. xxviii. Verse 19.
No other text has counted for so much in the dogmatic
development of the Church as the text at the end of Matthew, ch. xxviii. verse
19:
"Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all nations,
baptising them into the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the holy
Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you."
Prof. Swete, Regius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, in
his book on the Apostles' creed (London, 1894), points out that the triple
formula "forms the framework" of the so-called Apostles' creed. He
writes: "Thus the Baptismal creed is seen to rest on the Baptismal words.
It was the answer of the Church to the Lord's final revelation of the Name of
God."
And Prof. Moberly of Oxford in a recent work refers to the
verse as a 'solemn precept to baptise in the of the holy Trinity, which fell
from the divine lips of the newly risen Lord.' I quote his words from memory.
Until the middle of the nineteenth century the test of the
three witnesses 1 John v. 7, 8, shared with Matthew xxviii. 19 the onerous task
of furnishing scriptural evidence of the doctrine of the Trinity. This text ran
thus: "Three there are that bear witness in Heaven, the Father, the
Word, and the holy Spirit. And these three are one. And three are there that
bear witness on earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood, and the
three are in the one."
The words italicised are now abandoned by all authorities
except the Pope of Rome, and are not admitted even marginally into the English
revised version. By consequence the entire weight of proving the Trinity has of
late come to rest on Matthew xxviii. 19. This is also the sole saying of the
Lord in which the duty of baptism is enforced; and divines have also found in it
scriptural authority for the innovation of infant baptism.
Thus the late Dean Alford wrote in his Commentary as follows:
"It will be observed that in our Lord's words, as in the
church, the process of ordinary discipleship is from baptism to instruction-i.e.
is, admission in infancy to the covenant and growing up into
τηρєώ πаντа κ.т.λ.─the
exception being, what circumstances rendered so frequent in the
early church, instruction before baptism in the case of adults."
There has been no general inclination on the part of divines
to inquire soberly into the authenticity of a text on which they builded
superstructures so huge. Nevertheless, an enlightened minority had their doubts.
Prof. Gardner, in his Exploratio Evangelica, ch 35, wrote that they were
"little in the manner of Jesus." James Martineau, in his Seat of
Authority, remarks that "the very account which tells us that at last,
after His resurrection, He commissioned His apostles to go and baptise among all
nations, betrays itself by speaking in the Trinitarian language of the next
century, and compels us to see in it the ecclesiastical editor, and not the
evangelist, much less the founder himself."
Harnack in his History of Dogma (German edit., i. 69),
dismisses the text almost contemptuously as being "no word of the
Lord." Lastly, Canon Armitage Robinson, a cautious critic, in his article
on Baptism in the Encyclopedia Biblica, inclines to the view that Matthew
"does not here report the ipissima verba of Jesus, but transfers to
him the familiar language of the church of the Evangelist's own time and
locality."
In the course of my reading I have been able to substantiate
these doubts of the authenticity of the text, Matthew xxviii. 19, by adducing
patristic evidence against it so weighty that in future the most conservative of
divines will shrink from resting on it any dogmatic fabric at all, while the
more enlightened will discard it as completely as they have its fellow-text of
the three witnesses.
Of the patristic witnesses to the text of the New Testament
as it stood in the Greek MSS, from about 300-340, none is so important as
Eusebius of Caesarea, for he lived in the greatest Christian library of that
age, that namely which Origen and Pamphilus had collected. It is no exaggeration
to say that from this single collection of manuscripts at Caesarea derives the
larger part of the surviving ante-Nicene literature. In his library, Eusebius
must have habitually handled codices of the Gospels older by two hundred years
than the earliest of the great uncials that we have now in our libraries. He was
also familiar with the exegesis of Origen, of Clement of Alexandria, of
Pantaenus, and of many another ancient exegete whose works have only come down
to us in fragments or in uncertain Latin versions.
It is therefore import to ask how Eusebius read this text. He
cites it again and again in his works written between 300 and 336, namely in his
long commentaries on the Psalms, on Isaiah, his Demonstratio Evangelica, his
Theophany only preserved in an old Syriac version in a Nitrian codex in the
British Museum written in AD 411, in his famous history of the Church, and in
his panegyric of the emperor Constantine. I have, after a moderate search in
these works of Eusebius, found eighteen citations of Matthew xxviii. 19, and
always in the following form:
"Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in my
name, teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever I commanded you."
I have collected all these passages except one which is in a
catena published by Mai in a German magazine, the Zeitschrift fur die
neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, edited by Erwin Preuschen in Darmstadt in
1901.
And Eusebius is not content merely to cite the verse in this
form, but he more than once comments on it in such a way as to show how much he
set store by the words "in my name." Thus in his Demonstratio
Evangelica he writes thus (col. 240, p. 136):
"For he (i.e. J. C.) did not enjoin them 'to make
disciples of all nations' simply and without qualification, but with the
essential addition 'in his name.' For so great was the virtue attached to his
appellation that the Apostle says, God bestowed on him the name above every
name, that in the name of Jesus every knee shall bow of things in heaven and on
earth and under the earth. It was right therefore that he should emphasise the
virtue of the power residing in his name but hidden from the many, and therefore
say to his Apostles, Go ye and make disciples of all nations in my name."
The Greek words are:
πορενθέντες
μαθητύσατε
πάντα τά έθνη
έν τώ όνόματί
μον
It is evident that this was the text found by Eusebius in the
very ancient codices collected fifty to a hundred and fifty years before his
birth by his great predecessors. Of any other form of text he had never heard,
and knew nothing until he had visited Constantinople and attended the Council of
Nice. Then in two controversial works written in his extreme old age, and
entitled, the one, "Against Marcellus of Ancyra," the other
"About the Theology of the Church," he used the common reading. One
other writing of his also contains it, namely a letter written after the council
of Nicea was over to his see of Caesarea. Socrates the historian preserves this
letter, but the portion of it which the citation of Matthew xxviii. 19 is made
does not seem above suspicion.
In the writings of Origen and Clement of Alexandria there is
no certain instance of Matthew xxviii. 19 being
cited in its usual form. In Origen's works, as preserved in Greek, the first
part of the verse is thrice adduced, but his citation always stops short at the
words τά έθνη, the nations"; and that in
itself suggest that his text has been censured, and the words which
followed "in my name" struck out. In the pages of Clement of
Alexandria a text somewhat similar to Matthew xxviii. 19 is once cited; but from
a gnostic heretic named Theodotus, and not as from the canonical text, as
follows (Excerpta, cap. 76, ed. Sylb. p. 987):
"And to the apostles he gives the command. Going around
preaching ye and baptise those who believe in the name of father and son and
holy spirit."
In Eusebius' citations there is also some trace of
περμόντες "going around"
having been read for
πορενθέντες. And the word
explains the title given to the early gnostic romances in which the lives and
activity of the Apostles was decked out with miracles and absurd legends. For
these romances were called the περιόδοι
or "periods"
i.e. "goings around" of the
Apostles, or "circuits."
In Justin Martyr, who wrote between A.D. 130 and 140, there
is a passage which has been regarded as a citation or echo of Matthew xxviii. 19
by various scholars, e.g. Resch in his Ausser canonische
Parallelstellen, who sees in it an abridgement of the ordinary text. The
passage is in Justin's dialogue with Trypho 39, p. 258:
"God hath not yet inflicted no inflicts the judgment, as
knowing of some that still even to-day are being made disciples in the name
of his Christ, and are abandoning the path of error, who also do receive
gifts each as they be worthy, being illumined by the name of this Christ."
The italicised are in the Greek;
μαθητενομένονς
είς τό όνομα
τού Χριστού
The objection hitherto to these words being recognised as a
citation of our text was that they ignored the formula "baptising them in
the name of the Father and Son and holy Spirit." But the discovery of the
Eusebian form of text removes this difficulty; and Justin is seen to have had
the same text as early as the year 140, which Eusebius regularly found in his
manuscripts from 300-340.
That the ordinary text is of great antiquity no one will
deny. We find it twice in Tertullian, in slightly divergent forms, in the
treaties on Baptism, ch. xiii., thus:
"Ite, inquit, docete nationes, tinguentes eas in nomen
Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti."
And in the De Praescriptione haereticorum, ch. xx, thus:
"Undecim digrediens ad patrm et n filium et in Spiritum
Sanctum."
Here he omits the words in nomen, as also in his work
against Praxeas, ch. xxvi.:
"Novissime mandans ut tinguertent in Patrem et filium et
Spiritum Sanctum."
We may infer that the text was not quite fixed when
Tertullian was writing early in the third century. In the middle of that century
Cyprian could insist on the use of the triple formula as essential in the
baptism even of the orthodox. The pope Stephen answered him that the baptisms
even of heretics were valid, if the name of Jesus alone was invoked. However,
this decision did not prevent the popes of the seventh century from
excommunicating the entire Celtic Church for its adhesion to the old use of
invoking the one name.
In the last half of the fourth century the text "in the
name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Ghost" was used as a
battle-cry by the orthodox against the adherents of Macedonius, who were called pneumao-machi
or fighters against the Holy Spirit, because they declined to include the Spirit
in a trinity of persons as co-equal, consubstantial and co-eternal with the
Father and Son. They also stoutly denied that any text of the N.T. authorised
such a co-ordination of the Spirit with the Father and Son. Whence we infer that
their texts agreed with that of Eusebius.
There is one other witness whose testimony we must consider.
He is Aphraates the Syriac father who wrote between 337 and 345. He cites our
text in a formal manner as follows:
"Make disciples of all nations, and they shall
believe in me."
The last words appear to be a gloss on the Eusebius reading
"in my name." But in any case they preclude the textus receptus with
its injunction to baptise in the triune name. Were the reading of Aphraates an
isolated fact, we might regard it as a loose citation, but in presence of the
Eusebian and Justinian text this is impossible. It is worth considering,
however, whether the original text of the gospel did not end at the word
"nations," and whether the three rival endings of the text were not
developed independently, viz:
- "in my name," in Justin, Eusebius, and perhaps Pope Stephen of
Rome and the Pneumato-machi.
- "and they shall believe in me," in Aphraates, representing the
older Syria version.
- "baptising them in the name of the Father, the Son and the holy
Ghost," or similar in the Greek gnostic Theodotus, Tertullian, Latin
version of Irenaeus, and the surviving Greek MSS.
The exclusive survival of (3) in all MSS., both Greek and
Latin, need not cause surprise. In the only codices which would be even likely
to preserve an older reading, namely the Sinaitic Syriac and the oldest Latin
MS., the pages are gone which contained the end of Matthew. But in any case the
conversion of Eusebius to the longer text after the council of Nice indicates
that it was at that time being introduced as a Shibboleth of orthodoxy into all
codices. We have no codex older than the year 400, if so old; and long before
that time the question of the inclusion of the holy Spirit on equal terms in the
Trinity had been threshed out, and a text so invaluable to the dominate party
could not but make its way into every codex, irrespectively of its textual
affinities.
Some edited concluding remarks of Fred. C. Conybeare's...
First, it is quite erroneous to assert, as Westcott and Hort
have in their introduction asserted, that the text of the gospels bears no trace
of having been altered anywhere for dogmatic or doctrinal reasons. And, what is
more, the interpolated texts have been regularly appealed to for centuries and
centuries in defense of the very doctrines in behalf of which they were
inserted.
Secondly, it is useless, as a rule, to look for these old
texts in manuscripts, for the Church has exercised too vigilant a censorship for
them to survive.
The best chance of recovering these ancient but discarded
text is to apply ourselves to the fathers. But even here we are the constant
victims of the unconscious and pious fraud of editors and scribes, who in
copying and publishing have regularly substituted a form of text with which they
were acquainted for one with which they were not. This substitution has occurred
in thousands of passages, where the older readings were from a doctrinal
standpoint perfectly neutral. How much more must it have occurred where the
older text was, as in [this case] examined in the above pages, in glaring
contradiction with conceptions and usages long adopted by the Church? It may be
confidently predicted that when the Greek and Latin fathers who wrote before 400
have been more carefully edited than hitherto from the best codices, scores of
old readings will be restored in the text of the N.T. of which no trace remains
in any Greek MS.
FRED. C. CONYBEARE
OXFORD
THE HIBBERT JOURNAL
Vol. I. No. 1 OCTOBER 1902, PAGES 102-108