Chapter LXXVI.—Of the Harmony in Respect of the Order of Narration Subsisting Between Matthew and the Other Two Evangelists in the Accounts Given of the Occasion on Which He Foretold the Destruction of the Temple.

146. Matthew proceeds with his history in the following terms: “And Jesus went out and departed from the temple; and His disciples came to Him for to show Him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said unto them, See ye all these things? Verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another which shall not be thrown down.”688    Matt. xxiv. 1, 2. According to Migne, certain codices add here the clause, “when the disciples were asking the Lord privately what was the sign of His coming.” This incident is related also by Mark, and nearly in the same order. But he brings it in after a digression of some small extent, which is made with a view to mention the case of the widow who put the two mites into the treasury,689    Mark xii. 41-xiii. 2. which occurrence is recorded only by Mark and Luke. For [in proof that Mark’s order is essentially the same as Matthew’s, we need only notice that] in Mark’s version also, after the account of the Lord’s discussion with the Jews on the occasion when He asked them how they held Christ to be David’s son, we have a narrative of what He said in warning them against the Pharisees and their hypocrisy,—a section which Matthew has presented on the amplest scale, introducing into it a larger number of the Lord’s sayings on that occasion. Then after this paragraph, which has been handled briefly by Mark, and treated with great fulness by Matthew, Mark, as I have said, introduces the passage about the widow who was at once so extremely poor, and yet abounded so remarkably. And finally, without interpolating anything else, he subjoins a section in which he comes again into unison with Matthew,—namely, that relating to the destruction of the temple. In like manner, Luke first states the question which was propounded regarding Christ, as to how He was the son of David, and then mentions a few of the words which were spoken in cautioning them against the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. Thereafter he proceeds, as Mark does, to tell the story of the widow who cast the two mites into the treasury. And finally he appends the statement,690    Luke xx. 16-xxi. 6. which appears also in Matthew and Mark, on the subject of the destined overthrow of the temple.691    [Many harmonists insert at this point the events narrated in John xii. 20–50. Augustin does not express an opinion in regard to this passage.—R.]

CAPUT LXXVI. Cum praenuntiavit templi eversionem, quomodo aliis duobus narrandi ordine congruat.

146. Sequitur Matthaeus, et dicit: Et egressus Jesus de templo ibat: et accesserunt discipuli ejus, ut ostenderent ei aedificationes templi. Ipse autem respondens dixit illis, Videtis haec omnia? Amen dico vobis, non relinquetur hic lapis super lapidem qui non destruatur (Matth. XXIV, 1, 2). Marcus etiam commemorat hoc eodem pene ordine, post aliquantam digressionem, ad hoc factam, ut commemoraret de vidua, quae misit duo minuta in gazophylacium (Marc. XII, 41; XIII, 2), quod eum eo Lucas solus commemorat. Nam etiam secundum Marcum, posteaquam illud Dominus egit cum Judaeis, quomodo acciperent Christum filium David, ea narrantur quae dicit de cavendis Pharisaeis et hypocrisi eorum: quem locum Matthaeus latissime persecutus est, et plura ibi dicta narravit: atque ideo post eumdem locum quem breviter perstrinxit Marcus, et copiose digessit Matthaeus, nihil amplius Marcus intulit, sicut dixi, quam de illa vidua pauperrima et uberrima; ac deinde 1150 subjungit ea quibus Matthaeo iterum cohaereret, dicens de templi futura eversione. Lucas quoque post illud de Christo, quomodo esset filius David, pauca de cavenda hypocrisi Pharisaeorum commemorat. Inde sicut Marcus pergit ad viduam, quae duo minuta in gazophylacium misit. Deinde subjungit de templi futura eversione, quod Matthaeus et Marcus (Luc. XX, 46; XXI, 6).