not without labor and expense—of adapting these to this new edition, which is thus enriched with both the Greek and Latin languages. From the press of MIGNE, at Petit-Montrouge. and therefore he might have occupied his leisure with this work: but all these things are uncertain, and cannot be brought forward except by way of conjecture.
Why the work should have remained imperfect, who can ascertain even by conjecture? The parts that remain extend only to the middle of the eighth chapter. Here I would have you observe that the division into chapters, which is followed in these Commentaries, was introduced by a certain modern, according to the division of our contemporary Vulgate. For in former times, especially among the Greeks, other and different divisions into chapters held sway. I judge, indeed, that the Commentary was never completed and brought to perfection by Chrysostom; but that, having begun it with the intention of completing it, he was perhaps drawn away by pressing business.
Furthermore, we have rejected the Latin translation of Godefrid Tilmann, as it is adorned in a paraphrastic manner and redundant with useless words, and we have prepared a new one. Certainly, he seems to fight against reason who translates Chrysostom—than whom no one is richer in expression—out of Greek into Latin in such a way that a new redundancy of words appears in the interpretation.
As regards the Homilies on Uzziah and the Seraphim, we have nothing new to bring forward; rather, those things which we stated in the Monitum, col. 93-98, are sufficient. Nor is there anything that suggests itself to be added regarding the two following homilies to those things which we related individually in the Monita there; and the same we say concerning the two Homilies on the Obscurity of the Prophecies.
We have placed the Commentary on Daniel among the genuine works of our John not without some misgivings. The diction is certainly that of Chrysostom; the manner of interpreting does not depart from the custom of Chrysostom, but you would scarcely find such a summary narrative in the works of the holy doctor; he is not, indeed, accustomed to discourse so jejunely and meagerly. Wherefore we must say, with Cotelier and Tillemont, that the work was attempted by Chrysostom, but not completed. Yet I do not think this opinion of ours is such that it can remove every adverse suspicion.
As to the two following homilies, which not long ago the learned Benzelius had unearthed from Manuscripts, we have said as much as was sufficient in the Monita. One thing it is pleasant to add: that we have edited the former, which is to be numbered among the most excellent, based on the Ottobonian Codex, from which I copied it at Rome, which Codex is far more accurate than the English one which Benzelius used.
But as regards the Homily against the Circensian games and the theaters, than which there is no finer work in the writings of Chrysostom, and which we have now published for the first time after having unearthed it, we have already said in the Monitum for it what we felt, and what we thought should be determined regarding the year—or rather, the day—on which it was delivered. But because second thoughts are often better, we have discovered a new and very serious difficulty concerning the time and day the sermon was delivered, arising from the very words of Chrysostom, a matter which now falls to us to address.
§ II. Inquiry concerning the time and day on which that excellent Sermon against the Circensian games and the theaters was delivered, which we have recently unearthed and published, col. 263 et sqq.
In order that it may be understood in what point the difficulty lies, those things which we stated in the Monitum must be retracted, and those things which are said at the beginning of the homily regarding the time and day of the delivered sermon must be repeated. Chrysostom had already passed one year in the episcopate of Constantinople; for at last a year had elapsed since I was brought to your city: since, therefore, he had been ordained in the year 398, and, as Socrates says, on the 26th of February, he was already passing his second year of episcopate. In that year, therefore, on the fourth day of a certain week, a heavy rain broke out, pulling everything along with it, and stealing from the mouth, so to speak, the food of the farmers, beating down the ripe ears of corn, and devastating everything else through the abundance of humid matter; litanies and supplications were held, etc.
But we said that these things happened after Chrysostom [became bishop]: for he says that, with only one day intervening after such a deluge, the Circensian games were held on Parasceve (Good Friday). Therefore, on Parasceve, some from the flock of Christians, having abandoned the sermon in the church, fled to the spectacle of the competing horses, and thus they acted in such an unrestrained manner that they filled the whole city with their voices and shouts... not even revering that very day on which the symbols of the salvation of our race were fulfilled. But on Parasceve (a), when your Lord was being crucified for the world, and such a sacrifice was being offered, Paradise was being opened, and the thief was being led back to his ancient homeland, the curse was being dissolved, sin was being blotted out, the long-standing war was being removed, and God was being reconciled with men, and all things were being changed: on that day on which it was fitting to fast, to confess, and to return thanks in prayer to Him who brought so many benefits to the world—then you, having abandoned the church and the spiritual sacrifice, and the assembly of the brothers, and the solemnity of the fast, were carried off by the devil to that spectacle.
Chrysostom expresses these things so pathetically that I have thought that that Parasceve, which he celebrates so much, is the Friday of Holy Week, and consequently all those things which the holy prelate recounts at length happened in Holy Week: and I confess to have embraced this opinion. But against it, very serious difficulties arise, the first of which I perceived and set forth in the Monitum, and it is of this kind: In the sermon Chrysostom says, "three days ago a heavy rain." But that rain fell on the fourth day of the week; nothing is mentioned as having happened on the fifth day; on Parasceve the equestrian games led many of the Catholics away; on the Sabbath those same Christians went to the spectacles of the theaters. Hence, indeed, it seems to follow that this homily was delivered on the Sunday itself, between which day and the preceding fourth day, counting backward, three intervene...