What do you think?
Rate this book
Ancient Christian Texts
Incomplete Commentary on Matthew (Opus imperfectum)
In the translator's introduction to this volume, James Kellerman relates the following story: As Thomas Aquinas was approaching Paris, a fellow traveler pointed out the lovely buildings gracing that city. Aquinas was impressed, to be sure, but he sighed and stated that he would rather have the completeIncomplete Commentary on Matthew than to be mayor of Paris itself. Thomas's affection for the work attests its great popularity during the Middle Ages, despite its significant missing parts--everything beyond the end of Matthew 25, with further gaps of Matthew 8:11--10:15 and 13:14--18:35. Despite the gaps what remains is quite lengthy, so much so that we offer the work in two volumes, comprising fifty-four homilies. While the early-fifth-century author displays a few Arian propensities in a handful of passages, for the most part the commentary is moral in nature and therefore orthodox and generic. The unknown author, who for several centuries was thought to be John Chrysostom, follows the allegorizing method of the Alexandrians, but not by overlooking the literal meaning. His passion, above all, is to set forth the meaning of Matthew's Gospel for his readers. Here for the first time this ancient work is made available in English, ably translated by James A. Kellerman and edited by Thomas C. Oden.
239 pages, Hardcover
First published May 19, 2010
2 people are currently reading
20 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
July 6, 2015
Think about the best book that you have ever read. What makes it so great? How many times have you read it? Is your life changed for the better because of it? Now, imagine if that book had never been finished, or if parts of it were just missing. You saw parts of the picture, but you couldn't see the whole image. How disappointed would you be? Well, that is exactly how Thomas Aquinas felt with the books that I am reviewing today. There exists an incomplete anonymous commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, which Intervarsity Press has published in two volumes as part of their Ancient Christian Texts series. The translator, James A. Kellerman, had this to say in his introduction: "As Thomas Aquinas was approaching Paris, a fellow traveler pointed out the lovely buildings gracing that city. Aquinas was impressed, to be sure, but he sighed and stated that he would rather have the complete Incomplete Commentary on Matthew than to be mayor of Paris itself." Before, I get to what is present in the two volumes, let's cover what is missing. For starters, it abruptly ends at Matthew 25, so that is three chapters missing right there. There are also gaps of Matthew 8:11-10:15 and 13:14-18:35. That's another five complete chapters missing and pieces missing from four other chapters. It's not exactly half of the commentary missing, but I can see how it feels like it.
Volume 1 contains 27 homilies on Matthew, which span from Matthew 1 to Matthew 11, except for those passages I mentioned above. Volume 2 also contains 27 homilies, which span from Matthew 12-25. That is very impressive considering most of the missing texts occur after Chapter 12. The Prologue begins with an explanation of why the Gospel was written. In the time after Jesus' Resurrection and Ascension, there was a great persecution in Palestine, which put Christians at risk of being scattered and without a teacher, i.e, an Apostle or one of his successors, Therefore, they asked Matthew to compose the history of Jesus' life and also "teach the disposition of an evangelical life." For that reason, he ordered his Gospel into seven sections: 1. Christ's birth, 2. His Baptism, 3. His temptation, 4. His teachings, 5. His miracles, 6. His Passion, and 7. His Resurrection and Ascension.
So what do the homilies look like? Let me put it this way, these are not your typical Sunday morning homilies. In fact, the one on Matthew 1 is approximately 30 pages, and with a book that measures 7" x 10" this is truly an impressive feat. In this homily, the anonymous writer chooses not to gloss over the genealogy of Jesus by picking a few big names out to talk about, but instead he explains the importance of over 25 of Jesus' descendants. He then explains the significance of Matthew's genealogy and also why it is divided into three sections of fourteen. Let that sink in for a minute, and think about your average Catholic Mass-goer. Today, some of us get annoyed/antsy in Mass when a priest's homilies goes over five minutes long. Can you imagine them sitting through this homily? You have to truly admire the faith and thirst for spiritual wisdom of the early Christians.
Matthew Chapters 5 through 7 are where the Sermon on the Mount occurs, and thankfully these the homilies for these important chapters remain intact. The commentary on the Beatitudes was beautiful, but I especially enjoyed reading his exposition on The Lord's Prayer. Matthew 7:21-23 are perhaps some of the scariest in the Bible. In this passage, it talks about people who think they will be saved, but at the very end, Jesus tells them that He did not know them and to depart from Him. After reading the homily on this particular section, I felt a little bit comforted with the Scripture passage. Though, I'm not sure if I was supposed to feel this way or not. The commentator equates those who are cast into the fire as eternal liars. Even after their death, they are still liars. Therefore, it made me feel that those cast in the fire were not ones who did good works for the Father but lacked faith, but instead these were ones who lied about doing good works for the Father when in reality they did not.
The depth and beauty of these homilies make them truly a worthwhile read. The commentator applies an allegorical method in them, but unlike strict allegory, he doesn't ignore the literal meaning of the Scripture as well. If you love the Gospel of Matthew and want to read what St. Thomas Aquinas read, then these are two volumes that you won't want to miss out on!
Volume 1 contains 27 homilies on Matthew, which span from Matthew 1 to Matthew 11, except for those passages I mentioned above. Volume 2 also contains 27 homilies, which span from Matthew 12-25. That is very impressive considering most of the missing texts occur after Chapter 12. The Prologue begins with an explanation of why the Gospel was written. In the time after Jesus' Resurrection and Ascension, there was a great persecution in Palestine, which put Christians at risk of being scattered and without a teacher, i.e, an Apostle or one of his successors, Therefore, they asked Matthew to compose the history of Jesus' life and also "teach the disposition of an evangelical life." For that reason, he ordered his Gospel into seven sections: 1. Christ's birth, 2. His Baptism, 3. His temptation, 4. His teachings, 5. His miracles, 6. His Passion, and 7. His Resurrection and Ascension.
So what do the homilies look like? Let me put it this way, these are not your typical Sunday morning homilies. In fact, the one on Matthew 1 is approximately 30 pages, and with a book that measures 7" x 10" this is truly an impressive feat. In this homily, the anonymous writer chooses not to gloss over the genealogy of Jesus by picking a few big names out to talk about, but instead he explains the importance of over 25 of Jesus' descendants. He then explains the significance of Matthew's genealogy and also why it is divided into three sections of fourteen. Let that sink in for a minute, and think about your average Catholic Mass-goer. Today, some of us get annoyed/antsy in Mass when a priest's homilies goes over five minutes long. Can you imagine them sitting through this homily? You have to truly admire the faith and thirst for spiritual wisdom of the early Christians.
Matthew Chapters 5 through 7 are where the Sermon on the Mount occurs, and thankfully these the homilies for these important chapters remain intact. The commentary on the Beatitudes was beautiful, but I especially enjoyed reading his exposition on The Lord's Prayer. Matthew 7:21-23 are perhaps some of the scariest in the Bible. In this passage, it talks about people who think they will be saved, but at the very end, Jesus tells them that He did not know them and to depart from Him. After reading the homily on this particular section, I felt a little bit comforted with the Scripture passage. Though, I'm not sure if I was supposed to feel this way or not. The commentator equates those who are cast into the fire as eternal liars. Even after their death, they are still liars. Therefore, it made me feel that those cast in the fire were not ones who did good works for the Father but lacked faith, but instead these were ones who lied about doing good works for the Father when in reality they did not.
The depth and beauty of these homilies make them truly a worthwhile read. The commentator applies an allegorical method in them, but unlike strict allegory, he doesn't ignore the literal meaning of the Scripture as well. If you love the Gospel of Matthew and want to read what St. Thomas Aquinas read, then these are two volumes that you won't want to miss out on!
July 6, 2015
Think about the best book that you have ever read. What makes it so great? How many times have you read it? Is your life changed for the better because of it? Now, imagine if that book had never been finished, or if parts of it were just missing. You saw parts of the picture, but you couldn't see the whole image. How disappointed would you be? Well, that is exactly how Thomas Aquinas felt with the books that I am reviewing today. There exists an incomplete anonymous commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, which Intervarsity Press has published in two volumes as part of their Ancient Christian Texts series. The translator, James A. Kellerman, had this to say in his introduction: "As Thomas Aquinas was approaching Paris, a fellow traveler pointed out the lovely buildings gracing that city. Aquinas was impressed, to be sure, but he sighed and stated that he would rather have the complete Incomplete Commentary on Matthew than to be mayor of Paris itself." Before, I get to what is present in the two volumes, let's cover what is missing. For starters, it abruptly ends at Matthew 25, so that is three chapters missing right there. There are also gaps of Matthew 8:11-10:15 and 13:14-18:35. That's another five complete chapters missing and pieces missing from four other chapters. It's not exactly half of the commentary missing, but I can see how it feels like it.
Volume 1 contains 27 homilies on Matthew, which span from Matthew 1 to Matthew 11, except for those passages I mentioned above. Volume 2 also contains 27 homilies, which span from Matthew 12-25. That is very impressive considering most of the missing texts occur after Chapter 12. The Prologue begins with an explanation of why the Gospel was written. In the time after Jesus' Resurrection and Ascension, there was a great persecution in Palestine, which put Christians at risk of being scattered and without a teacher, i.e, an Apostle or one of his successors, Therefore, they asked Matthew to compose the history of Jesus' life and also "teach the disposition of an evangelical life." For that reason, he ordered his Gospel into seven sections: 1. Christ's birth, 2. His Baptism, 3. His temptation, 4. His teachings, 5. His miracles, 6. His Passion, and 7. His Resurrection and Ascension.
So what do the homilies look like? Let me put it this way, these are not your typical Sunday morning homilies. In fact, the one on Matthew 1 is approximately 30 pages, and with a book that measures 7" x 10" this is truly an impressive feat. In this homily, the anonymous writer chooses not to gloss over the genealogy of Jesus by picking a few big names out to talk about, but instead he explains the importance of over 25 of Jesus' descendants. He then explains the significance of Matthew's genealogy and also why it is divided into three sections of fourteen. Let that sink in for a minute, and think about your average Catholic Mass-goer. Today, some of us get annoyed/antsy in Mass when a priest's homilies goes over five minutes long. Can you imagine them sitting through this homily? You have to truly admire the faith and thirst for spiritual wisdom of the early Christians.
Matthew Chapters 5 through 7 are where the Sermon on the Mount occurs, and thankfully these the homilies for these important chapters remain intact. The commentary on the Beatitudes was beautiful, but I especially enjoyed reading his exposition on The Lord's Prayer. Matthew 7:21-23 are perhaps some of the scariest in the Bible. In this passage, it talks about people who think they will be saved, but at the very end, Jesus tells them that He did not know them and to depart from Him. After reading the homily on this particular section, I felt a little bit comforted with the Scripture passage. Though, I'm not sure if I was supposed to feel this way or not. The commentator equates those who are cast into the fire as eternal liars. Even after their death, they are still liars. Therefore, it made me feel that those cast in the fire were not ones who did good works for the Father but lacked faith, but instead these were ones who lied about doing good works for the Father when in reality they did not.
The depth and beauty of these homilies make them truly a worthwhile read. The commentator applies an allegorical method in them, but unlike strict allegory, he doesn't ignore the literal meaning of the Scripture as well. If you love the Gospel of Matthew and want to read what St. Thomas Aquinas read, then these are two volumes that you won't want to miss out on!
Volume 1 contains 27 homilies on Matthew, which span from Matthew 1 to Matthew 11, except for those passages I mentioned above. Volume 2 also contains 27 homilies, which span from Matthew 12-25. That is very impressive considering most of the missing texts occur after Chapter 12. The Prologue begins with an explanation of why the Gospel was written. In the time after Jesus' Resurrection and Ascension, there was a great persecution in Palestine, which put Christians at risk of being scattered and without a teacher, i.e, an Apostle or one of his successors, Therefore, they asked Matthew to compose the history of Jesus' life and also "teach the disposition of an evangelical life." For that reason, he ordered his Gospel into seven sections: 1. Christ's birth, 2. His Baptism, 3. His temptation, 4. His teachings, 5. His miracles, 6. His Passion, and 7. His Resurrection and Ascension.
So what do the homilies look like? Let me put it this way, these are not your typical Sunday morning homilies. In fact, the one on Matthew 1 is approximately 30 pages, and with a book that measures 7" x 10" this is truly an impressive feat. In this homily, the anonymous writer chooses not to gloss over the genealogy of Jesus by picking a few big names out to talk about, but instead he explains the importance of over 25 of Jesus' descendants. He then explains the significance of Matthew's genealogy and also why it is divided into three sections of fourteen. Let that sink in for a minute, and think about your average Catholic Mass-goer. Today, some of us get annoyed/antsy in Mass when a priest's homilies goes over five minutes long. Can you imagine them sitting through this homily? You have to truly admire the faith and thirst for spiritual wisdom of the early Christians.
Matthew Chapters 5 through 7 are where the Sermon on the Mount occurs, and thankfully these the homilies for these important chapters remain intact. The commentary on the Beatitudes was beautiful, but I especially enjoyed reading his exposition on The Lord's Prayer. Matthew 7:21-23 are perhaps some of the scariest in the Bible. In this passage, it talks about people who think they will be saved, but at the very end, Jesus tells them that He did not know them and to depart from Him. After reading the homily on this particular section, I felt a little bit comforted with the Scripture passage. Though, I'm not sure if I was supposed to feel this way or not. The commentator equates those who are cast into the fire as eternal liars. Even after their death, they are still liars. Therefore, it made me feel that those cast in the fire were not ones who did good works for the Father but lacked faith, but instead these were ones who lied about doing good works for the Father when in reality they did not.
The depth and beauty of these homilies make them truly a worthwhile read. The commentator applies an allegorical method in them, but unlike strict allegory, he doesn't ignore the literal meaning of the Scripture as well. If you love the Gospel of Matthew and want to read what St. Thomas Aquinas read, then these are two volumes that you won't want to miss out on!
Read
October 6, 2010Book Review: Incomplete Commentary on Matthew
IVP is doing a great service to the Christian community by publishing the works of great men of old. Perhaps I should say the great works of great men of old. As part of the work of publishing these ancient Christian writings IVP has given us the Incomplete Commentary on Matthew.
Having read a little in the Early Church Fathers I knew that the exegesis and commentary would not be exactly as today's is. What I found, however, is that there is great continuity between today's understanding and the understanding of the past. That was good to see.
There are issues in which some of the common views of today would probably not be in sync with the views of the ancient commentator. What is of interest to me, however, is the hermeneutic of the commentator. How did he arrive at his views? What I found was that the commentary shows conclusions that were often the same as mine. Why is that interesting? I subscribe to a literal, or grammatical-historical, hermeneutic. I found that, though the ancients were spoken of as not holding to a literal hermeneutic, this one still held much in common with a literal hermeneutic.
There are times that it seems the commentator employed a hermeneutic that would not do justice to a parable or some other saying of Jesus. Sometimes he seemed to make things into allegories, though they were simple, straightforward narratives. Sometimes parables were pressed beyond their intent. What was gratifying to me is the fact that the commentator still arrived at many of the same conclusions I did. Perhaps I should say that it is gratifying that I arrived at some of the same conclusions as he did.
I have decided that one of the reasons that we have an issue with the hermeneutics of the ancients is the fact that they seem to have not been theologians in the sense that we have theologians today. They were practical theologians. Today's theologians often confine themselves to the realm of ideas. The ancients understood that ideas has consequences. I believe that led them to view things as they did. They sought to apply every text to life. They determined to make every doctrine practical. That is an admirable goal. My opinion is that there was a bit of an imbalance, yet that is characteristic of us all, isn't it?
In the end, I found this to be an excellent window into ancient thought. It is worthwhile for every thinking pastor, teacher, and student of church history to examine this set for the purpose of learning the hermeneutic, doctrine, and practical views of this commentator.
I highly recommend this set to the mature, discerning reader.
IVP is doing a great service to the Christian community by publishing the works of great men of old. Perhaps I should say the great works of great men of old. As part of the work of publishing these ancient Christian writings IVP has given us the Incomplete Commentary on Matthew.
Having read a little in the Early Church Fathers I knew that the exegesis and commentary would not be exactly as today's is. What I found, however, is that there is great continuity between today's understanding and the understanding of the past. That was good to see.
There are issues in which some of the common views of today would probably not be in sync with the views of the ancient commentator. What is of interest to me, however, is the hermeneutic of the commentator. How did he arrive at his views? What I found was that the commentary shows conclusions that were often the same as mine. Why is that interesting? I subscribe to a literal, or grammatical-historical, hermeneutic. I found that, though the ancients were spoken of as not holding to a literal hermeneutic, this one still held much in common with a literal hermeneutic.
There are times that it seems the commentator employed a hermeneutic that would not do justice to a parable or some other saying of Jesus. Sometimes he seemed to make things into allegories, though they were simple, straightforward narratives. Sometimes parables were pressed beyond their intent. What was gratifying to me is the fact that the commentator still arrived at many of the same conclusions I did. Perhaps I should say that it is gratifying that I arrived at some of the same conclusions as he did.
I have decided that one of the reasons that we have an issue with the hermeneutics of the ancients is the fact that they seem to have not been theologians in the sense that we have theologians today. They were practical theologians. Today's theologians often confine themselves to the realm of ideas. The ancients understood that ideas has consequences. I believe that led them to view things as they did. They sought to apply every text to life. They determined to make every doctrine practical. That is an admirable goal. My opinion is that there was a bit of an imbalance, yet that is characteristic of us all, isn't it?
In the end, I found this to be an excellent window into ancient thought. It is worthwhile for every thinking pastor, teacher, and student of church history to examine this set for the purpose of learning the hermeneutic, doctrine, and practical views of this commentator.
I highly recommend this set to the mature, discerning reader.
Read
October 6, 2010Book Review: Incomplete Commentary on Matthew
IVP is doing a great service to the Christian community by publishing the works of great men of old. Perhaps I should say the great works of great men of old. As part of the work of publishing these ancient Christian writings IVP has given us the Incomplete Commentary on Matthew.
Having read a little in the Early Church Fathers I knew that the exegesis and commentary would not be exactly as today's is. What I found, however, is that there is great continuity between today's understanding and the understanding of the past. That was good to see.
There are issues in which some of the common views of today would probably not be in sync with the views of the ancient commentator. What is of interest to me, however, is the hermeneutic of the commentator. How did he arrive at his views? What I found was that the commentary shows conclusions that were often the same as mine. Why is that interesting? I subscribe to a literal, or grammatical-historical, hermeneutic. I found that, though the ancients were spoken of as not holding to a literal hermeneutic, this one still held much in common with a literal hermeneutic.
There are times that it seems the commentator employed a hermeneutic that would not do justice to a parable or some other saying of Jesus. Sometimes he seemed to make things into allegories, though they were simple, straightforward narratives. Sometimes parables were pressed beyond their intent. What was gratifying to me is the fact that the commentator still arrived at many of the same conclusions I did. Perhaps I should say that it is gratifying that I arrived at some of the same conclusions as he did.
I have decided that one of the reasons that we have an issue with the hermeneutics of the ancients is the fact that they seem to have not been theologians in the sense that we have theologians today. They were practical theologians. Today's theologians often confine themselves to the realm of ideas. The ancients understood that ideas has consequences. I believe that led them to view things as they did. They sought to apply every text to life. They determined to make every doctrine practical. That is an admirable goal. My opinion is that there was a bit of an imbalance, yet that is characteristic of us all, isn't it?
In the end, I found this to be an excellent window into ancient thought. It is worthwhile for every thinking pastor, teacher, and student of church history to examine this set for the purpose of learning the hermeneutic, doctrine, and practical views of this commentator.
I highly recommend this set to the mature, discerning reader.
IVP is doing a great service to the Christian community by publishing the works of great men of old. Perhaps I should say the great works of great men of old. As part of the work of publishing these ancient Christian writings IVP has given us the Incomplete Commentary on Matthew.
Having read a little in the Early Church Fathers I knew that the exegesis and commentary would not be exactly as today's is. What I found, however, is that there is great continuity between today's understanding and the understanding of the past. That was good to see.
There are issues in which some of the common views of today would probably not be in sync with the views of the ancient commentator. What is of interest to me, however, is the hermeneutic of the commentator. How did he arrive at his views? What I found was that the commentary shows conclusions that were often the same as mine. Why is that interesting? I subscribe to a literal, or grammatical-historical, hermeneutic. I found that, though the ancients were spoken of as not holding to a literal hermeneutic, this one still held much in common with a literal hermeneutic.
There are times that it seems the commentator employed a hermeneutic that would not do justice to a parable or some other saying of Jesus. Sometimes he seemed to make things into allegories, though they were simple, straightforward narratives. Sometimes parables were pressed beyond their intent. What was gratifying to me is the fact that the commentator still arrived at many of the same conclusions I did. Perhaps I should say that it is gratifying that I arrived at some of the same conclusions as he did.
I have decided that one of the reasons that we have an issue with the hermeneutics of the ancients is the fact that they seem to have not been theologians in the sense that we have theologians today. They were practical theologians. Today's theologians often confine themselves to the realm of ideas. The ancients understood that ideas has consequences. I believe that led them to view things as they did. They sought to apply every text to life. They determined to make every doctrine practical. That is an admirable goal. My opinion is that there was a bit of an imbalance, yet that is characteristic of us all, isn't it?
In the end, I found this to be an excellent window into ancient thought. It is worthwhile for every thinking pastor, teacher, and student of church history to examine this set for the purpose of learning the hermeneutic, doctrine, and practical views of this commentator.
I highly recommend this set to the mature, discerning reader.
April 7, 2022
Excellent. Im looking forward to Volume II, which includes the remaining chapters in Matthew.
There is discussion about the authorship of this work in the general introduction.
There is discussion about the authorship of this work in the general introduction.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews