110 KATA MATOAION Vv.
b bere and αὐτῇ " ἀποστάσιον" 32. ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ 1 τὴν xix.7. γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, " παρεκτὸς λόγου πορνείας, ποιεῖ αὐτὴν μοιχᾶσθαι 2 - c Acts xxvi. ‘ , ΄ - 29. 2Cor. καὶ ὃς ἐὰν ἀπολελυμένην Ὑαμήσῃ, μοιχᾶται.Σ 33. Πάλιν ἠκούσατε d here only ὅτι ἐρρέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις, Οὐκ * ἐπιορκήσεις, ἀποδώσεις δὲ τῷ Κυρίῳ twice in τοὺς ὅρκους σου” 34. ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν μὴ »ὀμόσαι Shws* μήτε ἐν . rats τῷ οὐρανῷ ὅτι θρόνος ἐστὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ" 35. µήτε ἐν τῇ γῇ, ὅτι
16-22(with ¢ «
ἐν). Heb. * ὑποπόδιόν ἐστι τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ: pyre eis Ἱεροσόλυμα, ὅτι © wdhus ue «oth τοῦ μεγάλου βασιλέως: 36. µήτε ἐν τῇ κεφαλῇ σου ὀμόσῃς, ὅτι
«ara), ver.
35 (with eis). f Lk. xx. 43. Heb.i-13 κε this title for J. here and in Ps. xivii. 3
l πας ο απολνων in MBLAal. Text in D al.
2 NBD have µοιχενθηναι. 3 The clause Kat os εαν . . In B it runs ο απολελυµενην Ύαμησας.
the corresponding word in Greek authors is ἀποπέμπειν.-- ἀποστάσιον = βιβλίον ἀποστασίον in Deut. xxiv. The husband is to give her her dismissal, with a bill stating that she is no longer his wife. The singular form in tov is to be noted. The tendency in later Greek was to substitute tow for τα, the plural ending. Vide Lobeck, Phryn., p. 517. παρ. λ. πορνείας: a most important exception which has given rise to much controversy that will probably last till the world's end. The first question is: Did Christ really say this, or is it not rather an explanatory gloss due to the evangelist, or to the tradition he
jllowed? De Wette, Weiss, Holtz- mann (H. C.) take the latter view. It would certainly be in accordance with Christ’s manner of teaching, using strong, brief, unqualified assertions to drive home unfamiliar or unwelcome truths, if the word as He spoke it took the form given oh ok ty wy * Every one putting away his wife an ng another pte: ἄν adultery "’. This was the fitting word to be spoken by one who hated putting away, in a time when it was common and sanctioned by the authorities. A second question is: What does πορνεία mean ὃ hanz, a master, as becomes a Catholic, in this class of
uestions, enumerates five senses, but decides that it means adultery committed by a married woman. Some, including Déllinger (Christenthum und Kirche: The First Age of Christianity and the Church, vol. ii., app. iii.), think it means fornica- tion commi before marriage. The predominant opinion, both ancient and modern, is that adopted by Schanz. A third question is: Does Christ, assuming the words to have been spoken by Him,
- µοιχαται is wanting in D and bracketed in W.H.
recognise adultery as a ground of absolute divorce, or only, as Catholics teach, of separation a toro et mensa ? Is it possible to be quite sure as to this point? One thing is certain. Christ did not come to be a new legislator making laws for social life. He came to set up a high ethical ideal, and leave that to work on men’s minds. The tendency of His teaching is to create deep aversion to rupture of married relations. That aversion might even go the length of shrinking from severance of the tie even in the case of one who had forfeited all claims. The last clause is bracketed b
W. H. as of doubtful genuineness. It states unqualifiedly that to marry a dis- missed wife is adultery. Meyer thinks that the qualification “unjustly dis- missed,” i.e., not for adultery, is under- stood. Weiss (Meyer) denies this.
Vv. 33-37- Fourth illustration: con- cerning oat A new theme, therefore formally introduced as in ver. 421. πάλιν points to a new series of illustrations (Weiss, Mt.-Evan., p. 165). The first series is based on the Decalogue. Thou shalt not swear falsely (Lev. xix. 12), and thou shalt perform unto the Lord thy vows (Num. xxx.3: Deut. xxiii. 22)— what is gs, these dicta ? Nothing save what is unsaid. The scribes misplaced the emphasis. They had a great deal to say, in sophistical style, of the oaths that were binding and not binding, nothing about the fundamental requirement of truth in the inward parts. Again, therefore, Jesus goes back on the previous question: Should there be any need for oaths? —Ver. 34. Srus: emphatic = παντελῶς, don’t swear at all, Again an unqualified statement, to be taken not in the letter as a new law,