t Here, too, there may be later or editorial elements, v4 in particular. But Lk’s divergent arrangement by no means proves that these subjects were no part of the Matthiwan Logia.
¢ On the other hand, 7% (-11). f- are out of place.
MATTHEW, GOSPEL OF
MATTHEW, GOSPEL OF 299
of the Church’s echoed counsels to the Messianic missionaries in general, on the lines laid down by Jesus for His first disciples. | Weizsiicker seesin Mt 10°56) the original tradition as to the apostolic mission, once current as an independent piece (cf. Mk 67-13, Lk 9! 10211), and here given in a form retaining the restricted scope of Christ’s own earthly ministry—the form in which the Matthzan Logia were current in our evangelist’s region. A secondary formation follows in the section on persecution, which reflects the experience of the Apostolic age at least as late as St. Paul’s trials before Roman courts at Cesarea. Its originally detached character is shown by its appearing in the eschatological discourse in Mk 139, Lk 21°, where Mt faintly echoes Mk. Here, however, Mt seems independent of Mk’s form, having points in common with Lk’s ‘doublet’ (124%), and being the more original in its basis (apart from the evan- gelist’s own colouring). These two sections Weiz- siicker calls ‘the fundamental law for the mission- ary activity of the Church.’ He adds that they were naturally extended by analogous sayings, like Mt 102+ (many of which are clearly misplaced, see Lk 12%9.51-53 ]4%-27), either by Mt or in the tradi- tional form under which he was wont to teach the Matthean Logia.
(y) The Parables of ch. 13.—As to these parables, where Mt’s love of the number seven (ef. the double sevens of the genealogy) attracts our attention, it appears that all three evangelists possessed collections of parables, beginning with ‘ the funda- mental parable,’ the Sower. ΤῸ this main parable there were two types of sequel: one as in Mk and Lk, where it is combined with the simile of the Lamp, whereby Jesus explained to the disciples (in the actual course of events) the function of parable as a test of hearers’ receptivity ; the other, as in Mt, where it is followed didactically by other parables more or less related in thought. These appear to come from different sources. The pen- dent parable (to the Sower) of the Wheat and Tares has a peculiar opening, ὡμοιώθη ἡ Bac., which recurs in parables in 1873 222, and may point to the three having been once a didactic whole, re- presenting a late stage of Logian teaching. On the other hand, the remaining five begin with ὁμοία ἐστὶν ἡ Bao., probably the usual opening in parabolic collections.*
Weizsiicker’s ‘reflexions’ deserve attention. Viewing the Wheat and ares as a later supplement to the Sower, he says: * From the very nature of this form of instruction, the discu sion of one parabie leads naturally to the invention of others: interpretations develop into fresh parabolic material.’ Thus this parable reflects ‘an experience from the life of the Church,’ which may be the case also with the Drag-net and some others. But ‘in any case the collection gives us an insight, not only into the way in which the tradition operated, but also into the method of editing passages for definite didactic purposes.’ Its object is to set forth not so much distinct commands, as ‘the fruits of the teaching received, the perfection and divine nature of the cause.’ It is, in any case, characteristic of Mt’s stand- point that his first special parables—the Tares and the Leaven— ‘carry us involuntarily into the primitive Church. They found
their most direct use in the relations of that Church to the nation.’
(6) The Discourse in ch. 18.—I the discourse on the ‘little ones’ and fraternal treatment of all brethren, even the least, Weizsiicker thinks 18: is an organie unity. ‘The whole refers to the conduct of the disciples to each other: the sayings teach the nature of their communion,’ even if some took shape rather later than others. It seems a proof of the general justice of these remarks that
* Weizsiicker thinks ἄλλην παραβολήν (13%. 81, 35) and πάλιν (45.47) original parts of special collections. But they rather show Mt’s compiling hand. He also thinks that the reflexions in 155,4. coming in the middle of things, must be due to a source used. But against this minust be set Mt’s favourite formula in vy.%%. He inserts them from Mk and practically where Mk has them. Then he returns to explain the Wheat and Tares, and adds other parables.
the parable of the Lost Sheep, which Lk gives as an apology for Jesus’ own attitude to outeasts, came to Mt as a lesson for believers, in relation apparently to converts from among such ‘little ones’ of society. It had lost its original appli- cation and gained another in the Church’s life. Moreover, already in 18** Mt has made humility the note of the kingdom, in place of the spirit which thinks of ‘greater’ and ‘lesser’ among brethren. Each must be ready to sink all ‘superiority,’ to re- ceive even a young child on the ground of Christ’s name, and to avoid wounding the feelings of the humblest believer—one of no more account than a child (cf. Mk 955). Hence, however much our Mt may be influenced in the wording of 181-6. 8f by Mk 98-37-4247, yet his mind is already filled with a Logian piece of didactic which asserts itself both in idea and in phrasing, as well asin 18% asa whole: ‘The intention of its original form’ shines through ; and ‘the apostles are thought of as patterns for the Church.’