although it is only in his own Gospel1 that the despised term "publican" is associated with his apostolic name of Matthew ("the gift of God"), which was probably given to him when he was called to the apostleship, as Simon's name was changed to Peter. He seems to have been a man of worldly means and of a generous disposition, judging from the fact that on the occasion of his apostolic call, when "he forsook all, and rose up and followed" Jesus, he made “a great feast" to which he invited a number of his old associates. It is noteworthy that he leaves it to the other evangelists to mention him as the giver of this feast, and to record his sacrifice of property in following Christ; while we have a further token of his modesty in the fact that he puts the name of Thomas before his own in the list of apostles, reversing the order followed in the other Gospels.2 Traces of the writer's profession as a taxgatherer have been found in his use of the term “tribute money," where the other evangelists employ the more common word "penny "3 and in his use of the word 'publicans," where Luke employs the word "sinners." 4 But perhaps the latter instance, like his use of the word "Gentiles" in the same passage, is an indication rather of his Jewish nationality.

According to an ancient tradition derived from Papias, Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew,5-to which Irenæus adds that he published it among the Jews "while Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome and founding the

1 x. 3: "Thomas, and Matthew the publican." 2 X. x. 3; Mark iii. 18; Luke vi. 15. 3 xxii. 19: "Shew me the tribute money. Mark xii. 15: "Bring me a penny, that I may see it." Luke xx. 24: Shew me a penny."

4 v. 46, 47: "For if ye love them that love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the Gentiles the same?" Luke vi. 32-34: "And if ye love them that love you, what thank have ye? for even sinners love those that love them," &c.

5 Ματθᾶιος μὲν δυν Ἑβραΐδι διαλέκτῳ τὰ λόγια συνεγράψατο, ἡρμήνευσε δ αὐτὰ ὡς ἠδύνατο ἕκαστος. This statement of Papias that "each one interpreted them (i.e., oracles) as he could" seems to imply that the case was different when he wrote, there being then an authoritative translation in general use. As a matter of fact, we find no traces of any other Greek version of St. Matthew, at any time, to compete with the Gospel bearing his name, which is found in the New Testament canon. This is a very important fact in any question affecting the authority of our first Gospel.

Church there." Eusebius, in the beginning of the fourth century, tells us that Matthew wrote it when he was about to leave the Jews and preach also to other nations, in order to "fill up the void about to be made in his absence." If this tradition be correct, the Hebrew original must have been very soon superseded by the Greek Gospel which we now possess. This was only to be expected, considering the growing disuse of Hebrew, and the gradual lapse of the Jewish Christians into a heresy which alienated them from the rest of the Church.2 Whether the Gospel was written over again by Matthew in Greek, or translated, perhaps under his supervision, by some other writer, with additions from a Greek source, is a question which we cannot certainly answer.3 That Matthew may have written

1 Eusebius mentions a tradition that when Pantænus of Alexandria (who lived in the latter part of the second century) went to preach to the Indians, he found the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew already in their possession, they having received it from the Apostle Bartholomew when he preached among them. But the story is unsupported by any other evidence, and is not in itself probable, as Greek would be more likely to be known to the Indians than Hebrew. Jerome, in the end of the fourth century, informs us that he found a Hebrew Gospel, which he believed to be the original of Matthew, in the library at Cæsarea, and that he transcribed it and afterwards translated it into Greek. He gives extracts from it, but they are not such as to enable us to identify it with our first Gospel. The same may be said of the quotations from an Ebionite Gospel which are found in the writings of Epiphanius. This writer mentions another Gospel in Hebrew in use among the Nazarenes, who flourished, as he tells us, at Syrian Beroa (Aleppo), the same place where Jerome had received permission to copy the Hebrew Gospel already mentioned. (For a full discussion of the subject see Salmon's Introduction, chap. x).

2 The Ebionite heresy, so named from a Hebrew word meaning poor, the early Jewish Christians being noted for their poverty. Their heresy consisted for the most part in holding the continued obligation of the Jewish Law, and denying

the Divinity of the Saviour while admitting His Messiahship. The name of Nazarenes (originally given to Christians generally; Acts xxiv. 5) was applied in the fourth century to a less heretical sect who continued to observe the Jewish Law.

3 It is now very generally admitted that in our Gospel of Matthew there are features inconsistent with the character of a translation from the Hebrew. These are (a) plays on Greek words (vi. 16; xxi. 41; xxiv. 30); (b) explanations of Hebrew words (i. 23; xxvii. 33, 46); (c) statements regarding Jewish customs, &c., that could not have been intended for Jewish readers contemporary with the apostle (xxii. 23; xxvii. 15; xxviii. 15). We can imagine (a) and (b) to have possibly been introduced by a translator, but (c) can scarcely be thus accounted for. (d) In a number of passages common to this Gospel with the other synoptics, it is evident that the author has drawn directly from a Greek source whether oral or written. It has also been noticed that while the greater part of the quotations in this Gospel are from the Septuagint (occurring chiefly in passages common to the synoptics), a considerable number are taken direct from the Hebrew. In this fact Westcott finds a strong confirmation of his theory that our Gospel of Matthew is the work of an unknown author who worked up the Hebrew or Aramaic record of St Matthew with the oral Greek Gospel.

the Gospel in both languages is in itself not unlikely, as we know that Josephus wrote his history both in Hebrew and in Greek1-these two languages being current in Palestine at that time, as English and Gaelic are now in the Highlands of Scotland. But it must be admitted to be a weak point in this theory that there is no trace of it in the writings of the Fathers.

2. Date of Composition.

From evidence afforded by a study of the book itself (taken in connection with the tradition above mentioned), it has been reasonably inferred that the Gospel in its present form probably appeared before 66 A.D., when the war which was to issue in the destruction of the Jewish capital was on the eve of breaking out. Such evidence is found in the use of the expressions 2 "holy city," "the holy place," "the city of the great King," as well as in the mysterious nature of the language used by the Saviour in His prediction of the city's coming doom. In particular, the caution given by the writer in xxiv. 15 (“whoso readeth, let him understand,") would have had no force or meaning after the predicted calamity had occurred.

3. Character and Contents.

The leading characteristic of St. Matthew's Gospel, as might be expected in a work intended for the Hebrews, consists in the representation of Jesus as the Messiah, in whom was fulfilled the Law and the Prophets. In this respect it is fitly placed immediately after the Old Testament, as the uniting link between the old and the new covenants.

The first verse strikes the keynote, "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham"-son of David as the heir of the promised

1 Modern instances may also be found; e.g. Bacon published a Latin translation of his "Advancement of Learning," in

an extended form under the title "De Augmentis Scientiarum."

2 iv. 5; v. 35; xxiv. 15; xxvii. 53.

kingdom, son of Abraham as the child of promise in whom all the families of the earth were to be blessed. The whole book may be regarded as depicting the gradual realisation of these claims in a spiritual sense; the culminating point being reached in the glorious declaration by the risen Lord, "All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth.

1

Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing 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 : and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." In the course of the Gospel there are no less than sixty citations of Old Testament prophecy as fulfilled in Jesus, the usual formula of quotation being "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by (the prophet)." Equally significant is the frequency of the expression "kingdom of heaven" (literally "kingdom of the heavens," reflecting the Hebrew idiom), which occurs thirtytwo times, and the designation "Son of David," which occurs seven times as applied to Jesus.

The whole plan of the book is in harmony with its Messianic character. First we have the nativity of Him who was "born King of the Jews" and was, at the same time, to "save his people from their sins," with the strange mingling of light and shadow, of glory and suffering, which was to be typical of the whole life.2 Then comes the Prelude to the Ministry, when the approach of the kingdom of heaven is announced by the predicted Forerunner, and the Baptism of Jesus, as the fulfilment of all righteousness and the consecration to His public ministry, becomes the signal for a manifestation of the divine favour in the voice from heaven, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased,"-followed by the Temptation, in which the decisive choice is made between the "kingdoms of this world" and the unseen kingdom of the Spirit. The way is thus cleared for successive representations of the Saviour

1 xxviii. 18-20.

2i., ii.

3 iii. iv. II.

as Lawgiver, Prophet, and King. In the Sermon on the Mount,1 the Charter of the new kingdom, He proclaims the Law as from a second Sinai with new meaning and power,

a little later He charges the twelve apostles, whom He commissions to preach the Gospel in His name,2—at another time He delivers the long series of parables in which the origin, progress, and final destiny of the kingdom are shown forth,-anon He lays down the principles that are to guide the members of the Church in their relations to one another, especially to their erring brethren.4 Then as the conflict with hatred and unbelief grows ever fiercer, there break forth His prophetic warnings of the nation's impending doom and His denunciations against the Jewish priests and rulers, while He becomes more and more out-spoken in the assertion of His Messianic claims; till at last there comes the awful tragedy upon the Cross, completing the sacrifice He has to offer as God's High Priest, and giving place in turn to the triumph of the Resurrection. Interspersed throughout the whole are mighty works and gracious words, spoken and wrought for the suffering and the sinful, which bespeak Him as the Sent of God.

There is a wonderful symmetry in the whole narrative, and many subtle contrasts. In xvi. 21, "From that time began Jesus to shew unto his disciples how that he must go unto Jerusalem and suffer . . . and be killed," there is a striking contrast to iv. 17, "From that time began Jesus to preach, and to say, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand"—the one marking the commencement of His Passion, as the other of His active Ministry. There is a correspondence also between the voice from heaven at His Baptism, and that heard at His Transfiguration when His ministry reached its climax and was sealed by the divine testimony in the presence of the two greatest prophets of