Chapter XXV.—Of Christ’s Subsequent Manifestations of Himself to the Disciples, and of the Question Whether a Thorough Harmony Can Be Established Between the Different Narratives When the Notices Given by the Four Several Evangelists, as Well as Those Presented by the Apostle Paul and in the Acts of the Apostles, are Compared Together.

70. We must take up the consideration of the manner in which the Lord showed Himself to the disciples after His resurrection, and that with the view not only of bringing out clearly the consistency of the four evangelists with each other on these subjects, but also of exhibiting their agreement with the Apostle Paul, who discourses of the theme in his First Epistle to the Corinthians. The statement by the latter runs in the following terms: “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures; and that He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:1021    Some editions read undecim = the eleven. after that He was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this day, but some are fallen asleep. After that, He was seen of James; then of all the apostles. And last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.”1022    1 Cor. xv. 3–8. Now this succession of the appearances is one which has been given by none of the evangelists. Hence we must examine whether the order which they have put on record does not stand in antagonism to this. For neither has Paul related all, nor have the evangelists included everything in their reports. And the real subject for our investigation, therefore, is the question, whether, among the incidents which do come under our notice in these various narratives, there is anything fitted to establish a discrepancy between the writers. Now Luke is the only one among the four evangelists who omits to tell us how the Lord was seen by the women, and confines his statement to the appearance of the angels. Matthew, again, informs us that He met them as they were returning from the sepulchre. Mark likewise mentions that He appeared first to Mary Magdalene; as also does John. Only Mark does not state how He manifested Himself to her, while John does give us an explanation of that. Moreover, Luke not only passes by in silence the fact that He showed Himself to the women, as I have already remarked, but also reports that two disciples, one of whom was Cleophas, talked with Him, before they recognised Him, in a strain which seems to imply that the women had related no other appearance seen by them than that of the angels who told them that He was alive. For Luke’s narrative proceeds thus: “And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs. And they talked together of all these things which had happened. And it came to pass that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus Himself drew near, and went with them. But their eyes were holden, that they should not know Him. And He said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad? And the one of them, whose name was Cleophas, answering, said unto Him, Art thou only a stranger 1023    [Tu solus peregrinus es, agreeing with the Greek text: “Art thou the only sojourner,” etc. But comp. Revised Version.—R.] in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? And He said unto them, What things? And they said unto Him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people; and how the chief priests and our rulers delivered Him to be condemned to death, and have crucified Him. But we trusted that it had been He that should have redeemed Israel: and besides all this, to-day is the third day since these things were done. Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre; and when they found not His body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that He was alive. And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women said; but Him they saw1024    Another reading occurs here, non invenerunt = Him they found not. not.”1025    Luke xxiv. 13–24. All these things they relate, according to Luke’s narrative, just as they were able to command their recollections and bethink themselves of what had been reported to them by the women, or by the disciples who had run to the sepulchre when the intelligence was conveyed to them that His body had been removed from the place. It is at the same time true that Luke himself reports only Peter to have run to the tomb, and there to have stooped down and seen the linen clothes laid by themselves, and then to have departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass. This notice about Peter, moreover, is introduced previous to the narrative of these two disciples whom He found on the way, and subsequently to the story of the women who had seen the angels, and who had heard from them that Jesus had risen again; so that this position might seem to mark the period at which Peter ran to the sepulchre. But still we must suppose that Luke has inserted the passage about Peter here in the form of a recapitulation. For the time when Peter ran to the sepulchre was also the time when John ran to it; and at that point all that they had heard was simply the statement conveyed to them by the women, and in particular by Mary Magdalene, to the effect that the body had been carried away. Furthermore, the period at which the said woman brought such tidings was just the occasion when she saw the stone rolled away from the sepulchre. And it was at a later point that these other things occurred, connected with the vision of the angels, and the appearance of the Lord Himself, who showed Himself twice over to the women, namely, once at the sepulchre, and a second time when He met them as they were returning from the tomb. This, however, took place previous to His being seen by those two upon the journey, one of whom was Cleophas. For, when this Cleophas was talking with the Lord, before he recognized who He was, he did not say expressly that Peter had gone to the sepulchre. But his words were these: “Certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women said;” which last statement is also to be understood as introduced in the form of a recapitulation. For the reference is to the report brought first of all by the women to Peter and John about the removal of the body. And thus, when Luke here informs us that Peter ran to the sepulchre, and also states how Cleophas mentioned that some of those who were with them went to the tomb, he is to be taken as attesting John’s account, which bears that two persons proceeded to the sepulchre. But Luke has specified Peter alone in the first instance, just because it was to him that Mary had brought the earliest tidings. A difficulty, however, may also be felt in the circumstance that the same Luke does not say that Peter entered, but only that he stooped down and saw the linen clothes hid by themselves, and that thereupon he departed, wondering in himself; whereas John intimates that it was rather himself (for he is the disciple whom Jesus loved) that looked at the scene in this fashion, not going within the sepulchre, which he was the first to reach, but simply bending down and beholding the linen clothes laid in their place; although he also adds that he did enter the tomb afterwards. The explanation, therefore, is simply this, that Peter at first did stoop down and look in after the fashion which Luke specifies, but to which John makes no allusion; and that he went actually in somewhat later, but still before John entered. And in this way we shall find that all these writers have given a true account of what occurred in terms which betray no discrepancies.1026    [Luke xxiv. 12 is omitted by Tischendorf, on the authority of codices allied to the text of the Vulgate. The omission was probably occasioned by the difficulties discussed above.—R.]

71. Taking, then, not only the reports presented by the four evangelists, but also the statement given by the Apostle Paul, we shall endeavour to bring the whole into a single connected narrative, and exhibit the order in which all these incidents may have taken place, comprehending all the Lord’s appearances to the male disciples, and leaving out His earlier declarations to the women. Now, in the entire number of the men, Peter is understood to be the one to whom Christ showed Himself first. At least, this holds good so far as regards all the individuals who are actually mentioned by the four evangelists, and by the Apostle Paul. But, at the same time, who would be bold enough either to affirm or to deny that He may have appeared to some one among them before He showed Himself to Peter, although all these writers pass the matter over in silence? For the statement which Paul also gives is not in the form, “He was seen first of Cephas.” But it runs thus: “He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: after that He was seen of above five hundred brethren at once.” And thus it is not made clear who these twelve were, just as we are not informed who these five hundred were. It is quite possible, indeed, that the twelve here instanced were some unknown twelve belonging to the multitude of the disciples. For now the apostle might speak of those whom the Lord designated apostles, not as the twelve, but as the eleven. Some codices, indeed, contain this very reading. I take that, however, to be an emendation introduced by men who were perplexed by the text, supposing it to refer to those twelve apostles who, by the time when Judas disappeared, were really only eleven. It may be the case, then, that those are the more correct codices which contain the reading “eleven;” or it may be that Paul intended some other twelve disciples to be understood by that phrase;1027    The text has, Sive alios quosdam duodecim discipulos Paulus, etc. In the mss. another reading is found: Sive alios quosdam duodecim apostolus, etc. = it may be that the Apostle Paul intended some other twelve to be understood, etc. or, once more, the fact may be that he meant that consecrated number1028    For sacratum illum numerum, five mss. give sacramentum illius numeri = the mystical symbol of that number. to remain as before, although the circle had been reduced to eleven: for this number twelve, as it was used of the apostles, had so mystical an importance, that, in order to keep the spiritual symbol of the same number, there could be but a single individual, namely, Matthias, elected to fill the place of Judas.1029    Acts i. 26. But whichever of these several views may be adopted, nothing necessarily results which can appear to be inconsistent with truth, or at variance with any one most trustworthy historian among them. Still, it remains the probable supposition, that, after He was seen of Peter, He appeared next to those two, of whom Cleophas was one, and regarding whom Luke presents us with a complete narrative, while Mark gives us only a very brief notice. The latter evangelist1030    Mark xvi. 12. reports the same incident in these concise terms: “And after that He appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked and went to a country-seat.”1031    In villam. For it is not unreasonable for us to suppose that the place of residence1032    Castellum. referred to may also have been styled a country-seat;1033    Villam. just as Bethlehem itself, which formerly was called a city, is even at the present time also named a village, although its honour has now been made so much the greater since the name of this Lord, who was born in it, has been proclaimed so extensively throughout the Churches of all nations. In the Greek codices, indeed, the reading which we discover is rather “estate”1034    Agrum = field, domain, as the equivalent for ἀγρόν. than “country-seat.” But that term was employed not only of residences,1035    Castella. but also of free towns1036    Municipia. and colonies beyond the city, which is the head and mother of the rest, and is therefore called the metropolis.

72. Again, if Mark tells us that the Lord appeared to these persons in another form, Luke refers to the same when he says that their eyes, were holden, that they should not know Him. For something had come upon their eyes which was suffered to remain until the breaking of the bread, in reference to a well-known mystery, so that only then was the different form in Him made visible to them, and they did not recognise Him, as is shown by Luke’s narrative, until the breaking of the bread took place. And thus, in apt accordance with the state of their minds, which were still ignorant of the truth, that it behoved Christ to die and rise again, their eyes sustained something of a similar order; not, indeed, that the truth itself proved misleading, but that they were themselves incompetent to perceive the truth, and thought of the matter as something else than it was. The deeper significance of all which is this, that no one should consider himself to have attained the knowledge of Christ, if he is not a member in His body—that is to say, in His Church—the unity of which is commended to our notice under the sacramental symbol of the bread by an apostle, when he says: “We being many are one bread and one body.”1037    1 Cor. x. 17. So was it that, when He handed to them the bread which He had blessed, their eyes were opened, and they recognised Him, that is to say, their eyes were opened for such knowledge of Him, in so far as the impediment was now removed which had prevented them from recognising Him. For certainly they were not walking with closed eyes. But there was something in them which debarred them from seeing correctly what was in their view,—a state of matters, indeed, which is the familiar result of darkness, or of a certain kind of humour. It is not meant by this, however, that the Lord could not alter the form of His flesh, so that His figure might be literally and actually different, and not the one which they were in the habit of beholding. For, indeed, even before His passion, He was transfigured on the mount so that His countenance “did shine as the sun.”1038    Matt. xvii. 2. And He who made genuine wine out of genuine water can also transform any body whatsoever in all unquestionable reality into any other kind of body which may please Him. But what is meant is, that He had not acted so when He appeared in another form unto those two individuals. For He did not appear to be what He was1039    The text gives, Non enim sicut erat, apparuit, etc. Some editions make it non enim aliter quam erat, sed sicut erat apparuit = for He did not really assume another form, but appeared in that which He had. to these men, because their eyes were holden, so that they should not know Him. Moreover, not unsuitably may we suppose that this impediment in their eyes came from Satan, with the view of precluding their recognition of Jesus. But, nevertheless, permission that it should be so was given by Christ on to the point at which the mystery of the bread was taken up. And thus the lesson might be, that it is when we become participants in the unity of His body, that we are to understand the impediment of the adversary to be removed, and liberty to be given us to know Christ.

73. Besides, it is necessary to believe that these were the same persons to whom Mark also refers. For he informs us, that they went and told these things to the rest: just as Luke states, that the persons in question rose up the same hour and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, saying, “The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.”1040    Luke xxiv. 33, 34. And then he adds that these two also told what things were done on the way, and how He was known of them in breaking of bread.1041    Luke xxiv. 35. By this time, therefore, a report of the resurrection of Jesus had been conveyed by those women, and also by Simon Peter, to whom He had already shown Himself. For these two disciples found those to whom they came in Jerusalem talking of that very subject. Consequently, it may be the case that fear made them decline mentioning formerly, when they were on the way, that they had heard that He had risen again, so that they confined themselves to stating how the angels had been seen by the women. For, not knowing with whom they were conversing, they might reasonably be anxious not to let any word drop from them on the subject of Christ’s resurrection, lest they should fall into the hands of the Jews. But again, we must remark that Mark states that “they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them:”1042    Mark xvi. 13. whereas Luke tells us that these others were already saying that the Lord was risen indeed, and had appeared unto Simon. Is not the explanation, however, simply this, that there were some of them there who refused to credit what was related? Moreover, to whom can it fail to be clear that Mark has just omitted certain matters which are fully set forth in Luke’s narrative,—that is to say, the subjects of the conversation which Jesus had with them before He recognised them, and the manner in which they came to know Him in the breaking of the bread? For, after recording how He appeared to them in another form, as they went towards a country-seat, Mark has immediately appended the sentence, “And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them;” as if men could tell of a person whom they had not recognised, or as if those to whom He had appeared only in another form could know Him! Without doubt, therefore, Mark has simply given us no explanation of the way in which they came to know Him, so as to be able to report the same to others. And this, then, is a thing which deserves to be imprinted on our memory, in order that we may accustom ourselves to keep in view the habit which these evangelists have of passing over those matters which they do not put on record, and of connecting the facts which they do relate in such a manner that, among those who fail to give due consideration to the usage referred to, nothing proves itself a more fruitful source of misapprehension than this, leading them to imagine the existence of discrepancies in the sacred writers.

74. Luke next proceeds with his narrative in the following terms: “And as they thus spake, Jesus Himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you: it is I; be not afraid.1043    The words Ego sum, nolite timere, are thus inserted. But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. And He said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. And when He had thus spoken, He showed them His hands and His feet.”1044    Luke xxiv. 36–40. It is to this act, by which the Lord showed Himself after His resurrection, that John is also understood to refer when he discourses as follows: “Then, when it was late on the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus, and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when He had so said, He showed unto them His hands and His side.”1045    John xx. 19, 20. Thus, too, we may connect with these words of John certain matters which Luke reports, but which John Himself omits. For Luke continues in these terms: “And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, He said unto them, Have ye here any meat? And they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And when He had eaten before them, He took what remained,1046    Et cum manducasset coram eis, sumens reliquias dedit eis. and gave it unto them.”1047    Luke xxiv. 41–43. Again, a passage which Luke omits, but which John presents, may next be connected with these words. It is to the following effect: “Then were the disciples glad when they saw the Lord. Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.”1048    John xx. 20–23. Once more, we may attach to the above section another which John has left out, but which Luke inserts. It runs thus: “And He said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me. Then opened He their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures, and said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things. And I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city, until ye be endued with power from on high.”1049    Luke xxiv. 44–49. [Many harmonists place this passage in connection with this appearance (evening of the Resurrection day); but part of it may belong to the final appearance, or be a summary of the teaching during the forty days.—R.] Observe, then, how Luke has here referred to that promise of the Holy Spirit which we do not elsewhere find made by the Lord, save in John’s Gospel.1050    John xiv. 26, xv. 26. And this deserves something more than a passing notice, in order that we may bear in mind how the evangelists attest each other’s truth, even on subjects which some of them may not themselves record, but which they nevertheless know to have been reported. After these matters, Luke passes over in silence all else that happened, and introduces nothing into his narrative beyond the occasion when Jesus ascended into heaven. And at the same time he appends this [statement of the ascension], just as if it followed immediately upon these words which the Lord spake, at the same time with those other transactions on the first day of the week, that is to say, on the day on which the Lord rose again; whereas, in the Acts of the Apostles,1051    Acts i. 2–9. the self-same Luke tells us that the event really took place on the fortieth day after His resurrection. Finally, as regards the fact that John states that the Apostle Thomas was not present with these others on the occasion under review, whereas, according to Luke, the two disciples, of whom Cleophas was one, returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven assembled and those who were with them, it admits of little doubt that we must suppose Thomas simply to have left the company before the Lord showed Himself to the brethren when they were talking in the terms noticed above.

75. This being the case, John now records a second manifestation of Himself, which was vouchsafed by the Lord to the disciples eight days after, on which occasion Thomas also was present, who had not seen Him up to that time. The narrative proceeds thus: “And after eight days again His disciples were within, and Thomas with them. Then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. Then saith He to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. Thomas answered and said unto Him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto Him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.”1052    John xx. 26–29. This second appearance of the Lord among the disciples—that is to say, the appearance which John records in the second instance—we might also recognise as alluded to by Mark in a section concisely disposing of it, according to that evangelist’s habit. A difficulty, however, is created by the circumstance that his terms are these: “Lastly,1053    Novissime. [The Greek is ὕστερον, “afterwards,” not necessarily “lastly.”—R.] He appeared unto those eleven as they sat at meat.”1054    Mark xvi. 14. The difficulty does not lie in the mere fact that John says nothing about their sitting at meat, for he might well have omitted that; but it does rest in the use of the word “lastly,” for that makes it seem as if He did not show Himself to them after that occasion, whereas John still proceeds to record a third appearance of the Lord by the sea of Tiberias. And then we have to keep in view the fact that the same Mark tells us how Jesus “upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen Him after He was risen.” In these words he refers to the two disciples to whom He appeared after He was risen, as they went toward a country-seat, and to Peter, to whom the examination of Luke’s narrative has shown us that He manifested Himself first of all [among the apostles],—perhaps also to Mary Magdalene, and those other women who were along with her on the occasion when He was seen by them at the sepulchre, and again when He met them as they were returning on the way. For the said Mark has constructed his record in a manner which leads him first to insert his brief notice of the two disciples to whom He appeared as they went toward the country-seat, and of their giving a report to the residue and obtaining no credit, and then to subjoin in the immediate connection this statement: “Lastly, He appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen Him after He was risen.” How, then, is this phrase “lastly” used, as if they did not see Him subsequently to this occasion? For the last time that the apostles saw the Lord upon the earth was really the time when He ascended into heaven, and that event took place on the fortieth day after His resurrection. Now, is it likely that He would upbraid them at that period on the ground that they had not believed those who had seen Him after He was risen, when by that time they had seen Him themselves so often after His resurrection, and especially when they had seen Him on the very day of His resurrection,—that is to say, on the first day of the week, when it was now about night, as Luke and John record? It remains for us, therefore, to suppose that, in the passage under review, it was Mark’s intention to give a statement, in his own concise fashion, simply on the subject of the said day of the Lord’s resurrection; that is to say, that first day of the week on which Mary and the other women who were along with her saw Him after daybreak, on which also Peter beheld Him, on which likewise He appeared to the two disciples, of whom Cleophas was one, and to whom Mark himself also seems to refer; on which, further, when it was now about night, He showed Himself to the eleven (Thomas, however, being excepted) and those who were with them; and on which, finally, the persons already instanced reported to the disciples the things which they had seen. Hence it is that he has employed the term “lastly,” because the incident mentioned was the last that took place on this same day. For the night was now coming on by the time that the two disciples had returned from the place where they had recognised Him in the breaking of bread, and had made their way into Jerusalem and found the eleven, as Luke tells us, and those who were with them, speaking to each other about the Lord’s resurrection and about His having appeared to Peter; to whom these two also related what had occurred on the way, and how they came to know Him in the breaking of bread. But, assuredly, there were also there some who did not believe. Hence we see the truth of Mark’s words, “Neither believed they them.” When these, therefore, were now sitting at meat, as Mark informs us, and when they were talking of these subjects, as Luke tells us, the Lord stood in their midst, and said unto them, “Peace be unto you,” as Luke and John both record. Moreover, the doors were shut when He entered among them, as John alone mentions. And thus, among the words which, as Luke and John have reported, the Lord spoke to the disciples on that occasion, this expostulation also comes in, which is instanced by Mark, and in which He upbraided them for not believing those who had seen Him after He was risen.

76. But, again, a difficulty may also be felt in understanding how Mark says that the Lord appeared to the eleven as they sat at meat, if the time referred to is really the beginning of the night of that Lord’s day, as is indicated by Luke and John. For John, indeed, tells us plainly that the Apostle Thomas was not with them on that occasion; and we believe that he left them before the Lord entered among them, but after the two disciples who returned from the village had been conversing with the eleven, as we discover from Luke. Luke, it is true, presents a point in his narrative, at which we may fairly suppose, first, that Thomas went out while they were talking of these subjects, and then that the Lord came in. Mark, however, who says, “Lastly, He appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat,” compels us to admit that Thomas also was there. But it may be the case, perhaps, that he chose to style them the eleven, although one of the company was absent, because the same apostolic society was designated by this number at the time previous to the election of Matthias in the place of Judas. Or, if there is a difficulty in accepting this explanation, we may still suppose that, after the many manifestations in which He vouchsafed His presence to the disciples during the forty days, He also showed Himself on one final occasion to the eleven as they sat at meat,—that is to say, on the fortieth day itself; and that, as He was now on the point of leaving them and ascending into heaven, He was minded on that memorable day specially to upbraid them with their refusal to believe those who had seen Him after He had risen until they should first have seen Him themselves; and this particularly because it was the case that, when they preached the gospel subsequently to His ascension, the very Gentiles would be ready to believe what they did not see. For, after mentioning this upbraiding, Mark at once proceeds to subjoin this passage: “And He said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”1055    Mark xvi. 15, 16. If, therefore, they were charged to preach that he who believes not shall be condemned, when that indeed which he believes not is just what he has not seen, was it not meet that they should themselves first of all be thus reproved for their own refusal to believe those to whom the Lord had shown Himself at an earlier stage until they should have seen Him with their own eyes?

77. In what follows we have a further recommendation to take this to have been the last manifestation of Himself in bodily fashion which the Lord gave to the apostles. For the same Mark continues in these terms: “And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.”1056    Mark xvi. 17, 18. Then he appends this statement: “So then, after the Lord had spoken unto them, He was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word by signs following.”1057    Mark xvi. 19, 20. Now, when he says, “So then, after the Lord had spoken unto them, He was received up into heaven,” he appears probably enough to indicate that this was the last discourse He held with them upon the earth. At the same time, the words do not seem to shut us up to that idea absolutely. For what he says is not, “after He had spoken these things unto them,” but simply, “after He had spoken unto them;” and hence it would be quite admissible, were there any necessity for such a theory, to suppose that this was not the last discourse, and that that was not the last day on which He was present with them upon the earth, but that all the matters regarding which He spake with them in all these days may be referred to in the sentence, “After He had spoken unto them, He was received up into heaven.” But, inasmuch as the considerations which we have detailed above lead us rather to conclude that this was the last day, than to suppose that the allusion is specifically to the eleven at a time when, in consequence of the absence of Thomas, they were only ten, we are of opinion that after this discourse which Mark mentions, and with which we have to connect in their proper order those other words, whether of the disciples or of the Lord Himself, which are recorded in the Acts of the Apostles,1058    Acts i. 4–8. we must believe the Lord to have been received up into heaven, to wit, on the fortieth day after the day of His resurrection.

78. John, again, although he tells us plainly that he has passed over many of the things which Jesus did, has been pleased, nevertheless, to give us a narrative of a third manifestation of Himself, which the Lord granted to the disciples after the resurrection, namely, by the sea of Tiberias, and before seven of the disciples,—that is to say, Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the sons of Zebedee, and two others who are not mentioned by name. That is the occasion when they were engaged in fishing; when, in obedience to His command, they cast the nets on the right side, and drew to land great fishes, a hundred and fifty and three: when He also asked Peter three times whether He was loved by him, and charged him to feed His sheep, and delivered a prophecy regarding what he would suffer, and said also, with reference to John, “Thus1059    Some editions read si = if I will, etc. But the best editions and mss. give sic, as above. And that Augustin read it so, is clear also from what occurs further on in Book iv. 20. I will that he tarry till I come.” And with this John has brought his Gospel to its conclusion.

79. We have next to consider now what was the occasion of His first appearance to the disciples in Galilee. For this incident, which John narrates as the third in order, took place in Galilee by the sea of Tiberias. And one may perceive that the scene was in that district, if he calls to mind the miracle of the five loaves, the narrative of which the same John commences in these terms: “After these things Jesus went over the sea of Galilee, which is the sea of Tiberias.”1060    John vi. 1. And what should naturally be supposed to be the proper locality for His first manifestation to the disciples after His resurrection but Galilee? This seems to be the conclusion to which we should be led when we recollect the words of the angel who, according to Matthew’s Gospel, addressed the women as they came to the sepulchre. The words were these: “Fear not ye; for I know that ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay: and go quickly, and tell His disciples that He is risen from the dead; and, behold, He goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see Him: lo, I have told you.”1061    Matt. xxviii. 5–7. Mark presents a similar report, whether the angel of whom he speaks be the same one or a different. His version runs thus: “Be not affrighted: ye seek Jesus of Nazareth which was crucified; He is risen; He is not here: behold the place where they laid Him. But go your way, tell His disciples and Peter that He goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see Him, as He said unto you.”1062    Mark xvi. 6, 7. Now the impression which these words seem to produce is, that Jesus was not to show Himself to His disciples after His resurrection, but in Galilee. The appearance thus referred to, however, is not recorded even by Mark himself, who has informed us how He showed Himself first to Mary Magdalene in the early morning of the first day of the week; how she went and told them that had been with Him as they mourned and wept; how these persons refused to believe her; how, after this, He was next seen by the two disciples who were going to the residence in the country; how these twain reported what had occurred to them to the residue, which, as Luke and John agree in certifying, took place in Jerusalem on the very day of the Lord’s resurrection, and when night was now coming on. Thereafter the same evangelist comes next to that appearance which he calls His last, and which was vouchsafed to the eleven as they sat at meat; and when he has given us his account of that scene, he tells us how He was received up into heaven, which event took place, as we know, on the Mount Olivet, at no great distance from Jerusalem. Thus Mark nowhere relates the actual fulfilment of that which he declares to have been announced beforehand by the angel. Matthew, on the other hand, confines his statement to a single occurrence, and refers to no other locality whatsoever, whether earlier or later, where the disciples saw the Lord after He was risen, but the Galilee which was specified in the angel’s prediction. This evangelist, in short, first introduces his notice of the terms in which the women were addressed by the angel; then he subjoins an account of what happened as they were going, and how the members of the watch were bribed to give a false report; and then he inserts his statement [of the appearance in Galilee], just as if that were the very event which followed immediately on what he has been relating. For, indeed, the angel’s words, “He is risen; and behold, He goeth before you into Galilee,” were really such as might make it seem reasonable to suppose that nothing would intervene [before that manifestation in Galilee]. Matthew’s version, accordingly, proceeds as follows: “Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw Him, they worshipped Him: but some doubted. And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.”1063    Matt. xxviii. 16–20. In these terms has Matthew closed his Gospel.

80. Thus, then, were it not that the consideration of the narratives given by others of the evangelists led us inevitably to examine the whole subject with greater care, we might entertain the idea that the scene of the Lord’s first manifestation of Himself to the disciples after His resurrection, could be nowhere else but in Galilee. In like manner, had Mark passed over the angel’s announcement without notice, any one might have supposed that Matthew was induced to tell us how the disciples went away to a mountain in Galilee, and there worshipped the Lord, by his desire to show the actual fulfilment of the charge, and of the prediction which he had also recorded to have been conveyed by the angel. As the case now stands, however, Luke and John both certify with sufficient clearness, that on the very day of His resurrection the Lord was seen by His disciples in Jerusalem, which is at such a distance from Galilee as makes it impossible for Him to have been seen by these same individuals in both places in the course of a single day. In like manner, Mark, while he does report in similar terms the announcement made by the angel, nowhere mentions that the Lord actually was seen in Galilee by His disciples after He was risen. These, therefore, are considerations which strongly force upon us an inquiry into the real import of this saying, “Behold, He goeth before you into Galilee! there shall ye see Him.” For if Matthew himself, too, had not stated that the eleven disciples went away into Galilee into a mountain, where Jesus had appointed them, and that they saw Him there and worshipped Him, we might have supposed that there was no literal fulfilment of the prediction in question, but that the whole announcement was intended to convey a figurative meaning. And a parallel to that we should then find in the words recorded by Luke, namely, “Behold I cast out devils, and I do cures to-day and to-morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected;”1064    Luke xiii. 32. See above, Book ii. chap. 75, § 145. which prediction certainly was not accomplished in the letter. In like manner, if the angel had said, “He goeth before you into Galilee, there shall ye see Him first;” or, “Only there shall ye see Him;” or, “Nowhere else but there shall ye see Him;” unquestionably, in that case, Matthew would have been in antagonism with the rest of the evangelists. As the matter stands, however, the words are simply these: “Behold, He goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see Him;” and there is no statement of the precise time at which that meeting was to take place—whether at the earliest opportunity, and before He was seen by them elsewhere, or at a later period, and after they had seen Him also in other places besides Galilee; and, further, although Matthew relates that the disciples went away into Galilee into a mountain, he neither specifies the day of that departure, nor constructs his narrative in an order which would force upon us the necessity of supposing that this particular event must have been actually the first appearance. Consequently, we may conclude that Matthew stands in no antagonism with the narratives of the other evangelists, but that he makes it quite competent for us, in due consistency with his own report, to understand the meaning and accept the truth of these other accounts. At the same time, as the Lord thus pointed, not to the place where He intended first to manifest Himself, but to the locality of Galilee, where undoubtedly He appeared afterwards; and as He conveyed these instructions about beholding Himself at once through the angel, who said,” Behold, He goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see Him;” and by His own words, “Go, tell my brethren, that they go into Galilee, and there shall ye see me;”—in these facts we find considerations which make every believer anxious to inquire with what mystical significance all this may be understood to have been stated.

81. In the first place, however, we must also consider the question of the time at which He may thus have shown Himself in bodily form in Galilee, according to the statement given by Matthew in these terms: “Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them; and when they saw Him, they worshipped Him; but some doubted.” That it was not on the day of His resurrection is manifest. For Luke and John agree in telling us most plainly that He was seen in Jerusalem that very day, when the night was coming on; while Mark is not so clear on the subject. When was it, then, that they saw the Lord in Galilee? I do not refer to the appearance mentioned by John, by the sea of Tiberias; for on that occasion there were only seven of them present, and they were found fishing. But I mean the appearance detailed by Matthew, when the eleven were on the mountain, to which Jesus had gone before them, according to the announcement made by the angel. For the import of Matthew’s statement appears to be this, that they found Him there just because He had gone before them according to appointment. It did not take place, then, either on the day on which He rose, or in the eight days that followed, after which space John states that the Lord showed Himself to the disciples, when Thomas, who had not seen Him on the day of His resurrection, saw Him for the first time. For, surely, on the supposition that the eleven had really seen Him on the mountain in Galilee within the period of these eight days, it may well be asked how Thomas, who had been of the number of these eleven, could be said to have seen Him for the first time at the end of these eight days. To that question there is no answer, unless, indeed, one could say that they were not the eleven, who by that time bore the specific designation of Apostles, but some other eleven disciples singled out of the numerous body of His followers. For those eleven were, indeed, the only persons who were yet called by the name of Apostles, but they were not the only disciples. It may perhaps be the case, therefore, that the apostles are really referred to; that not all but only some of them were there; that there were also other disciples with them, so that the number of persons present was made up to eleven; and that Thomas, who saw the Lord for the first time at the end of those eight days, was absent on this occasion. For when Mark mentions the said eleven, he does not use the general expression “eleven,” but says explicitly, “He appeared unto the eleven.”1065    Illis undecim = those eleven. Luke, likewise, puts it thus: “They returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them.” There he gives us to understand that these were the eleven—that is to say, the apostles. For when he adds, “and those who were with them,” he has surely indicated plainly enough, that those with whom these others were, were styled “the eleven” in some eminent sense; and this leads us to understand those to be meant who were now called distinctively Apostles. Consequently, it is quite possible that, out of the body of apostles and other disciples, the number of eleven disciples was made up who saw Jesus upon the mountain in Galilee, within the space of these eight days.

82. But another difficulty in the way of this settlement arises here. For, when John has recorded how the Lord was seen, not by the eleven on the mountain, but by seven of them when they were fishing in the sea of Tiberias, he appends the following statement: “This is now the third time that Jesus showed Himself to His disciples, after that He was risen from the dead.”1066    John xxi. 14. Now, if we accept the theory that the Lord was seen by the company of the eleven disciples within the period of these eight days, and previous to His being seen by Thomas, this scene by the sea of Tiberias will not be the third but the fourth time that He showed Himself. Here, indeed, we must take care not to let any one suppose that, in speaking of the third time, John meant that there were in all only three appearances of the Lord. On the contrary, we must understand him to refer to the number of the days, and not to the number of the manifestations themselves; and, further, it is to be observed that these days are not presented as coming in immediate succession after each other, but as separated by intervals in accordance with intimations given by the evangelist himself. For, keeping out of view His appearance to the women, it is made perfectly plain in the Gospel that He showed Himself three several times on the first day after He was risen; namely, once to Peter; again to those two disciples, of whom Cleophas was one; and a third time to the larger body, while they were conversing with each other as the night came on. But all these John, looking to the fact that they took place on a single day, reckons as one appearance. Then he identifies a second—that is to say, an appearance on another day—with the occasion on which Thomas also saw Him; and he particularizes a third by the sea of Tiberias, that is to say, not literally His third appearance, but the third day of His self-manifestations. Thus the result is, that after all these incidents, we are constrained to suppose this other occasion to have occurred on which, according to Matthew, the eleven disciples saw Him on the mountain in Galilee, to which He had gone before them according to appointment, so that all that had been foretold, both by the angel and by Himself, should be fulfilled even to the letter.

83. Consequently, in the four evangelists we find mention made of ten distinct appearances of the Lord to different persons after His resurrection. First, to the women near the sepulchre.1067    John xx. 14. Secondly, to the same women as they were on the way returning from the sepulchre.1068    Matt. xxviii. 9. Thirdly, to Peter.1069    Luke xxiv. 35. Fourthly, to the two who were going to the place in the country.1070    Luke xxiv. 15. Fifthly, to the larger number in Jerusalem, when Thomas was not present.1071    John xx. 19–24. Sixthly, on the occasion when Thomas saw Him.1072    John xx. 26. Seventhly, by the sea of Tiberias.1073    John xxi. 1. Eighthly, on the mountain in Galilee, of which Matthew speaks.1074    Matt. xxviii. 16, 17. Ninthly, at the time to which Mark refers in the words, “Lastly, as they sat at meat,” thereby intimating that now they were no more to eat with Him upon the earth.1075    Mark xvi. 14. Tenthly, on the same day, not now indeed upon the earth, but lifted up in the cloud, as He ascended into heaven, as Mark and Luke record. This last appearance, indeed, is introduced by Mark, directly after he has told us how the Lord showed Himself to them as they sat at meat. For his narrative goes on connectedly as follows: “So then, after the Lord had spoken unto them, He was received up into heaven.”1076    Mark xvi. 19. Luke, on the other hand, omits all that may have passed between Him and His disciples during the forty days, and, after giving the history of the first day of His resurrection-life, when He showed Himself to the larger number in Jerusalem, he silently connects therewith the closing day on which He ascended up into heaven. His statement proceeds in this form: “And He led them out as far as to Bethany; and He lifted up His hands, and blessed them; and it came to pass, that while He blessed them, He was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.”1077    Luke xxiv. 50, 51. Thus, therefore, besides seeing Him upon the earth, they beheld Him also as He was borne up into heaven. So many times, then, is He reported in the evangelical books to have been seen by different individuals, previous to His completed ascension into heaven, namely, nine times upon the earth, and once in the air as He was ascending.

84. At the same time, all is not recorded, as John plainly declares.1078    John xxi. 25. For He had frequent intercourse with His disciples during the forty days which preceded His ascension into heaven.1079    Acts i. 3. He had not, however, showed Himself to them throughout all these forty days without interruption. For John tells us, that after the first day of His resurrection-life, there elapsed other eight days, at the end of which space He appeared to them again. The appearance which is identified [in John] as the third—namely, the one by the sea of Tiberias—may perhaps have taken place on an immediately succeeding day; for there is nothing antagonistic to that. And then He showed Himself when it seemed the proper time to Him, as He had appointed with them (which appointment had also been conveyed in the previous prophetic announcement) to go before them into Galilee. And all throughout these forty days, He appeared on occasions, and to individuals, and in modes, just as He was minded. To these appearances Peter alludes when, in the discourse which he delivered before Cornelius and those who were withhim, he says, “Even to us who did eat and drink with Him after He rose from the dead, for the space of forty days.”1080    Acts x. 41—the words, per quadraginta dies, being added. It is not meant, however, that they had eaten and drunk with Him daily throughout these forty days. For that would be contrary to John’s statement, who has interposed the space of eight days, during which He was not seen, and makes His third appearance take place by the sea of Tiberias. At the same time, even although He [should be supposed to have] manifested Himself to them and lived with them every day after that period, that would not come into antagonism with anything in the narrative. And, perhaps, this expression, “for the space of forty days,” which is equivalent to four times ten, and may thus sustain a mystical reference to the whole world or the whole temporal age, has been used just because those first ten days, within which the said eight fall, may not incongruously be reckoned, in accordance with the practice of the Scriptures, on the principle of dealing with the part in general terms as the whole.

85. Let us therefore compare what is said by the Apostle Paul with the view of deciding whether it raises any question of difficulty. His statement proceeds thus: “That He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen of Cephas.”1081    1 Cor. xv. 4, 5. He does not say, “He was seen first of Cephas.” For this would be inconsistent with the fact that it is recorded in the Gospel that He appeared first to the women. He continues thus: “then of the twelve;” and whoever the individuals may have been to whom He then showed Himself, and whatever the precise hour, this was at least on the very day of His resurrection. Again he goes on: “After that He was seen of above five hundred brethren at once.” And whether these were gathered together with the eleven when the doors were shut for fear of the Jews, and when Jesus came to them after Thomas had gone out from the company, or whether the reference is to some other appearance subsequent to these eight days, no discrepancy is created. Again he says, “after that He was seen of James.” We ought not, however, to suppose this to mean that this was the first occasion on which He was seen of James; but we may take it to allude to some special appearance to that apostle by himself. Next he adds, “then of all the apostles,” which does not imply that this was the first time that He showed Himself to them, but that from this period He lived in more familiar intercourse with them on to the day of His ascension. Finally he says, “And last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.” But that was a revelation of Himself from heaven some considerable time after His ascension.

86. Consequently, let us now take up the subject which we had postponed, and inquire what mystical meaning may underlie the report given by Matthew and Mark, namely, that on rising He made this statement, “I will go before you into Galilee: there shall ye see me.” For this announcement, if it was fulfilled at all, was certainly not fulfilled till a considerable interval had elapsed; whereas it is couched in terms which seem to lead us (although such a conclusion is not an absolute necessity) most naturally to expect that the appearance referred to would be either the only one or the first that would ensue. We observe, however, that the words in question are not given as the words of the evangelist himself, in the form of a narrative of a past occurrence, but as the words of the angel, who spoke according to the Lord’s commission, and subsequently also as the words of the Lord Himself; that is to say, the words are used by the evangelist in his narrative, but they are presented by him as a direct statement of what was spoken by the angel and by the Lord. This, therefore, unquestionably compels us to accept them as uttered prophetically.1082    [The discussion of the appearances of the Risen Lord is so clear and candid, that one must regret that it finds its conclusion in the allegorizing exegesis of this section.—R.] Now Galilee may be interpreted to mean either “Transmigration” or “Revelation.” Consequently, if we adopt the idea of “Transmigration,” what other sense occurs to us to put upon the sentence, “He goeth before you into Galilee, there shall you see Him,” but just this, that the grace of Christ was to be transferred from the people of Israel to the Gentiles? That in preaching the gospel to these Gentiles, the apostles would meet with no acceptance unless the Lord prepared a way for them in the hearts of men,—this may be what is to be understood by the sentence, “He goeth before you into Galilee.” And, again, that they would look with joy and wonder at the breaking down and removing of difficulties, and at the opening of a door for them in the Lord through the enlightenment of the believing,—this is what is to be understood by the words, “there shall ye see Him;” that is to say, there shall ye find His members, there shall ye recognise His living body in the person of those who shall receive you. Or, if we follow the second view which takes Galilee to signify “Revelation,” the idea may be, that He was now no more to be in the form of a servant, but in that form in which He is equal with the Father;1083    Phil. ii. 6, 7. as He promised to those who loved Him when He said, according to the testimony of John, “And I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.”1084    John xiv. 21. That is to say, He was afterwards to manifest Himself, not merely as they saw Him before, nor merely in the way in which, rising as He did with His wounds upon Him, He was to give Himself to be touched as well as seen by them, but in the character of that ineffable light, wherewith He enlightens every man that cometh into this world, and in virtue of which He shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehends Him not.1085    John i. 5–9. Thus has He gone before us to something from which He withdraws not, although He comes to us, and which does not involve His leaving us, although He has preceded us thither. That will be a revelation which may be spoken of as a true Galilee, when we shall be like Him; there shall we see Him as He is.1086    1 John iii. 2. Then, also, will there be for us the more blessed transmigration, from this world into that eternity, if we embrace His precepts so as to be counted worthy of being set apart on His right hand. For there, those on the left hand shall go away into eternal burning, but the righteous into life eternal.1087    Matt. xxv. 33–46. Hence they shall pass thither, and there, shall they see Him, as the wicked do not see Him. For the wicked shall be taken away, so that he shall not see the brightness of the Lord;1088    Isa. xxvi. 10. and the unrighteousness shall not see the light. For He says, “And this is life eternal, that they might know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent;”1089    John xviii. 3. even as He shall be known in that eternity to which He will bring His servants by the form of a servant, in order that in liberty they may contemplate the form of the Lord.

CAPUT XXV. In eo quod se postea discipulis manifestavit, quomodo sibi omnes Evangelistae non adversentur, collatis testimoniis et de apostolo Paulo et de Actibus Apostolorum.

70. Jam post resurrectionem quemadmodum apparuerit Dominus discipulis, considerandum est, non solum ut elucescat etiam ex hac re convenientia quatuor Evangelistarum (Matth. XXVIII, Marc. XVI, Luc. XXIV, et Joan. XX, XXI), verum etiam ut cum Paulo apostolo consonent, qui de hac re in prima ad Corinthios Epistola ita loquitur: Tradidi enim vobis in primis quod et accepi, quia Christus mortuus est pro peccatis nostris, secundum Scripturas, et quia sepultus est, et quia resurrexit tertia die secundum Scripturas: et quia apparuit Cephae, postea duodecim , deinde apparuit plus quam quingentis fratribus simul, ex quibus plures manent usque adhuc, quidam autem dormierunt; postea apparuit Jacobo, deinde Apostolis omnibus; novissime autem omnium quasi abortivo apparuit et mihi (I Cor. XV, 3-8). Hunc autem ordinem nullus Evangelistarum tenuit: unde considerandum est utrum ordo quem illi tenuerunt, huic non adversetur: nam nec ille omnia, nec isti omnia dixerunt; quae autem dixerunt omnes utrum nihil inter se repugnent tantum videndum est. Lucas enim solus quatuor Evangelistarum, non dicit a mulieribus visum Dominum, sed tantummodo angelos: Matthaeus autem dicit quod eis occurrerit redeuntibus a monumento: Marcus quoque dicit primo visum esse Mariae Magdalenae, 1204 sicut et Joannes; sed quomodo sit ei visus non dicit, quod explicatur a Joanne. Lucas autem non solum tacet, ut dixi, eum apparuisse mulieribus, sed etiam duos, quorum unus fuit Cleophas, talia dicit locutos cum illo antequam agnoscerent eum, tanquam mulieres nihil se aliud quam angelos vidisse nuntiaverint, qui dicebant eum vivere. Ita enim narrat: Ecce duo ex illis ibant ipsa die in castellum, quod erat in spatio stadiorum sexaginta ab Jerusalem, nomine Emaus; et ipsi loquebantur ad invicem de his omnibus quae acciderant: et factum est dum loquerentur, et secum quaererent, et ipse Jesus appropinquans ibat cum illis; oculi autem illorum tenebantur ne eum agnoscerent. Et ait ad illos: Qui sunt hi sermones, quos confertis ad invicem ambulantes, et estis tristes? Et respondens unus cui nomen Cleophas, dixit ei: Tu solus peregrinus es in Jerusalem, et non cognovisti quae facta sunt in illa his diebus? Quibus ille dixit: Quae? Et dixerunt: De Jesu Nazareno, qui fuit vir propheta, potens in opere et sermone coram Deo et omni populo; et quomodo eum tradiderunt summi sacerdotes et principes nostri in damnationem mortis, et crucifixerunt eum. Nos autem sperabamus quia ipse esset redempturus Israel: et nunc super haec omnia, tertia dies est hodie quo haec facta sunt. Sed et mulieres quaedam ex nostris terruerunt nos, quae ante lucem fuerunt ad monumentum, et non invento corpore ejus, venerunt, dicentes se etiam visionem angelorum vidisse, qui dicunt eum vivere. Et abierunt quidam ex nostris ad monumentum, et ita invenerunt sicut mulieres dixerunt, ipsum vero non viderunt. Haec secundum Lucam ita narrant, ut meminisse ac recolere potuerunt quod a mulieribus dictum erat, vel a discipulis qui cucurrerant ad monumentum, quando eis nuntiatum est quod ablatum inde sit corpus ejus. Et ipse quidem Lucas Petrum tantum dicit cucurrisse ad monumentum, et procumbentem vidisse linteamina sola posita, et abiisse secum mirantem quod factum fuerat. Hoc autem de Petro commemorat, priusquam narret de his duobus quos invenit in via, posteaquam narravit de mulieribus quae viderant angelos, et ab eis audierant quod resurrexisset Jesus, tanquam tunc Petrus ad monumentum cucurrerit. Sed intelligitur hoc Lucas recapitulando posuisse de Petro. Tunc enim cucurrit Petrus ad monumentum, quando et Joannes, cum tantummodo a mulieribus, praecipue a Maria Magdalene nuntiatum eis fuerat de corpore ablato; tunc autem illa nuntiaverat, quando vidit lapidem avulsum a monumento: et postea facta sunt haec de visione angelorum, atque ipsius Domini, qui bis numero apparuerat mulieribus; semel ad monumentum, et iterum occurrens revertentibus a monumento. Hoc autem antequam duobus illis in via visus fuisset, quorum erat unus Cleophas. Namque et Cleophas loquens cum Domino quem nondum agnoscebat, non Petrum dixit isse ad monumentum; sed, abierunt quidam ex nostris, inquit, ad monumentum, et ita invenerunt sicut mulieres dixerunt: quod et ipse recapitulando 1205 intelligitur dixisse, illud scilicet quod primo mulieres nuntiaverant Petro et Joanni de ablato corpore Domini. Ac per hoc cum ipse Lucas Petrum dixerit cucurrisse ad monumentum, et Cleopham dixisse ipse retulerit quod quidam eorum ierant ad monumentum, intelligitur attestari Joanni, quod duo ierint ad monumentum; sed Petrum solum primo commemoravit, quia illi primitus Maria nuntiaverat. Item potest movere quod Petrum non intrantem, sed procumbentem dicit idem Lucas vidisse sola linteamina, et discessisse mirantem; cum Joannes dicat se potius ita vidisse, hoc est discipulum illum quem diligebat Jesus, non intrasse in monumentum, quo prior venerat, sed cum se inclinasset vidisse posita linteamina: sed et seipsum postea dicit intrasse. Ita et Petrus intelligendus est primo procumbens vidisse, quod Lucas commemorat, Joannes tacet; post autem ingressus, sed ingressus tamen antequam Joannes intraret, ut omnes verum dixisse sine ulla repugnantia reperiantur.

71. Ordo ergo rerum qui esse potuit, quemadmodum Dominus, excepto quod jam mulieribus locutus erat, etiam maribus discipulis visus fuerit, secundum testimonia non solum quatuor Evangelistarum, sed etiam Pauli apostoli, contexendus et demonstrandus est. Omnium ergo virorum primo apparuisse intelligitur Petro, ex his duntaxat omnibus quos Evangelistae quatuor et Paulus apostolus commemoraverunt. Caeterum si apparuit alicui eorum prius quam Petro, quod omnes tacuerunt, quis vel dicere audeat vel negare? Neque enim et Paulus dixit, Apparuit primo Cephae; sed, Apparuit, inquit, Cephae, postea duodecim, deinde apparuit plus quam quingentis fratribus simul. Sic autem non apparet quibus duodecim, quemadmodum nec quibus quingentis. Fieri enim potest ut de turba discipulorum fuerint isti duodecim nescio qui. Nam illos quos Apostolos nominavit, non jam duodecim, sed undecim diceret, sicut nonnulli etiam codices habent; quod credo perturbatos homines emendasse, putantes de illis duodecim Apostolis dictum, qui jam Juda exstincto undecim erant. Sed sive illi codices verius habeant qui undecim habent, sive alios quosdam duodecim discipulos Paulus velit intelligi , sive sacratum illum numerum etiam in undecim stare voluerit; quia duodenarius in eis numerus ita mysticus erat, ut non posset in locum Judae nisi alius, id est Matthias, ad conservandum sacramentum ejusdem numeri subrogari (Act. 1, 26); quodlibet ergo eorum sit, nihil inde existit quod veritati vel istorum alicui veracissimo narratori repugnare videatur: probabiliter tamen creditur posteaquam Petro apparuit, deinde apparuisse istis duobus, quorum erat unus Cleophas, de quibus Lucas totum narrat, Marcus autem breviter ita perstringit: Post haec autem, inquit, duobus ex eis ambulantibus ostensus est in alia effigie, euntibus in villam. Castellum quippe illud non 1206 absurde accipimus etiam villam potuisse appellari; quod nunc jam appellatur ipsa Bethleem, quae civitas antea vocitata est; quamvis nunc sit honoris amplioris, nomine Domini, qui in illa natus est, sic per Ecclesias omnium gentium diffamato. Et in codicibus quidem graecis magis agrum invenimus quam villam: agri autem nomine non castella tantum, verum etiam municipia et coloniae solent vocari extra civitatem, quae caput et quasi mater est caeterarum, unde metropolis appellatur.

72. Quod autem ait Marcus, eis in alia effigie Dominum apparuisse; hoc Lucas dicit, quod eorum oculi tenebantur ne agnoscerent eum. Oculis quippe eorum acciderat aliquid, quod ita manere permissum est usque ad fractionem panis, certi mysterii causa, ut eis in illo alia ostenderetur effigies, et sic eum non nisi in fractione panis agnoscerent, sicut Luca narrante monstratur. Pro merito quippe mentis eorum, adhuc ignorantis quod oportebat Christum mori et resurgere, simile aliquid eorum oculi passi sunt, non veritate fallente, sed ipsis veritatem percipere non valentibus, et aliud quam res est opinantibus; ne quisquam se Christum agnovisse arbitretur, si ejus corporis particeps non est, id est Ecclesiae, cujus unitatem in sacramento panis commendat Apostolus, dicens, Unus panis, unum corpus multi sumus (I Cor. X, 17): ut cum eis benedictum panem porrigeret, aperirentur oculi eorum, et agnoscerent eum; aperirentur utique ad ejus cognitionem, remoto scilicet impedimento, quo tenebantur ne eum agnoscerent. Neque enim clausis oculis ambulabant; sed inerat aliquid quo non sinerentur agnoscere quod videbant: quod scilicet et caligo et aliquis humor efficere solet. Non quia Dominus non poterat transformare carnem suam, ut alia revera esset effigies, non quam solebant illi contueri; quandoquidem et ante passionem suam transformatus est in monte, ut facies ejus claresceret sicut sol (Matth. XVII, 2): quale vult enim corpus de qualicumque corpore verum de vero facit, qui de aqua vera verum vinum fecit (Joan. II, 7-11); sed non ita fecerat, cum apparuit illis duobus in alia effigie. Non enim sicut erat apparuit eis , quorum oculi tenebantur ne agnoscerent eum. Non autem incongruenter accipimus hoc impedimentum in oculis eorum a satana fuisse, ne agnosceretur Jesus: sed tamen a Christo est facta permissio usque ad sacramentum panis; ut unitate corporis ejus participata, removeri intelligatur impedimentum inimici, ut Christus possit agnosci.

73. Nam ipsos esse istos de quibus et Marcus narrat, credendum est; quia dicit ipsos euntes nuntiasse caeteris: sicut Lucas dicit eos surgentes eadem hora, 1207 regressos esse Jerusalem, et invenisse congregatos undecim, et eos qui cum ipsis erant, dicentes quod surrexit Dominus vere, et apparuit Simoni; et tunc etiam ipsos narrasse quae gesta erant in via, et quomodo eum cognoverint in fractione panis. Jam ergo erat fama quod resurrexerat Jesus, ab illis mulieribus facta, et a Simone Petro, cui jam apparuerat: hoc enim isti duo invenerunt loquentes ad quos in Jerusalem venerunt. Fieri itaque potest ut timore prius in via noluerint dicere quod eum audierant resurrexisse, quando tantummodo angelos dixerunt visos esse mulieribus: ignorantes enim cum quo loquerentur, merito possent esse solliciti ne quid passim de Christi resurrectione jactantes in manus inciderent Judaeorum. Quod autem ait Marcus, Annuntiaverunt caeteris, nec illis crediderunt; cum Lucas dicat, quod jam inde loquebantur vere resurrexisse Dominum, et Simoni apparuisse: quid intelligendum est, nisi aliquos ibi fuisse qui hoc nollent credere? Cui autem non eluceat praetermisisse Marcum quae Lucas narrando explicavit, hoc est, quae cum illis locutus fuerit Jesus antequam agnoscerent eum, et quomodo eum in fractione panis agnoverint? Quandoquidem mox ut dixit eis apparuisse in alia effigie euntibus in villam, continuo conjunxit, Et illi euntes nuntiaverunt caeteris, nec illis crediderunt: quasi possent nuntiare quem non agnoverant; aut possent agnoscere, quibus alia effigies ejus apparuerat. Quomodo ergo eum agnoverint, ut nuntiare possent, Marcus sine dubio praetermisit. Quod ideo memoriae commendandum est, ut assuescamus advertere Evangelistarum morem ita praetermittentium quae non commemorant, et conjungentium quae commemorant, ut eis qui usum in hac consideratione non habent, non aliunde maxime error oriatur, quo putent eos non sibi congruere.

74. Lucas ergo sequitur, et dicit: «Dum haec autem loquuntur, Jesus stetit in medio eorum, et dicit eis: Pax vobis; ego sum, nolite timere. Conturbati vero et conterriti existimabant se spiritum videre. Et dixit eis: Quid turbati estis, et cogitationes ascendunt in corda vestra? Videte manus meas et pedes meos, quia ipse ego sum: palpate, et videte, quia spiritus carnum et ossa non habet, sicut me videtis habere. Et cum hoc dixisset, ostendit eis manus et pedes.» Hanc ostensionem Domini post resurrectionem intelligitur et Joannes commemorare, sic loquens: «Cum esset ergo sero die illo una sabbatorum, et fores essent clausae ubi erant discipuli congregati propter metum Judaeorum, venit Jesus, et stetit in medio, et dicit eis: Pax vobis. Et hoc cum dixisset, ostendit eis manus et latus.» Ac per hoc his verbis Joannis possunt conjungi ea quae Lucas dicit, idem autem Joannes praetermittit. Ita enim Lucas sequitur: «Adhuc autem illis non credentibus, et mirantibus prae gaudio, dixit: Habetis hic aliquid quod manducetur? At illi obtulerunt ei partem piscis assi et favum mellis. Et cum manducasset coram eis, sumens reliquias dedit eis.» His item verbis possunt adjungi quae Lucas tacet, dicit autem Joannes: «Gavisi sunt ergo discipuli 1208 viso Domino. Dixit ergo eis iterum: Pax vobis; sicut misit me Pater et ego mitto vos. Hoc cum dixisset, insufflavit, et dixit eis: Accipite Spiritum sanctum: quorum remiseritis peccata, remittuntur eis, et quorum detinueritis, detenta sunt.» His rursus adjungamus quae Joannes praetermisit, Lucas commemorat: «Et dixit ad eos: Haec sunt verba quae locutus sum ad vos, cum adhuc essem vobiscum, quoniam necesse est impleri omnia quae scripta sunt in Lege Moysi et Prophetis et Psalmis de me. Tunc aperuit illis sensum, ut intelligerent Scripturas, et dixit eis: Quoniam sic scriptum est, et sic oportebat Christum pati, et resurgere a mortuis die tertia; et praedicari in nomine ejus poenitentiam et remissionem peccatorum in omnes gentes, incipientibus ab Jerusalem: vos autem estis testes horum. Et ego mitto promissum Patris mei in vos: vos autem sedete in civitate quoadusque induamini virtutem ex alto.» Ecce quomodo commemoravit et Lucas promissionem Spiritus sancti, quam non invenimus a Domino factam, nisi in Evangelio Joannis (Joan. XIV, 26, et XV, 26). Quod non praetereunter advertendum est, ut meminerimus quemadmodum sibi Evangelistae invicem attestantur de quibusdam etiam quae ipsi non dicunt, et tamen dicta noverunt. Post haec Lucas quae gesta sunt omnia praetermittit, nec omnino commemorat, nisi quando Jesus ascendit in coelum: atque id tamen ita conjungit quasi hoc sequatur haec verba quae dixit, cum hoc gestum sit una sabbatorum, quo die Dominus resurrexit; illud autem quadragesimo die, sicut idem ipse Lucas in Apostolorum Actibus narrat (Act. I, 2-9). Quod autem dicit Joannes, non cum illis fuisse tunc apostolum Thomam, cum secundum Lucam duo illi, quorum erat unus Cleophas, regressi Jerusalem, invenerint congregatos undecim, et eos qui cum ipsis erant; procul dubio intelligendum est quod inde Thomas exierit, antequam eis Dominus haec loquentibus appareret.

75. Hinc jam Joannes aliam commemorat sui demonstrationem a Domino discipulis factam post dies octo, ubi erat et Thomas qui prius eum non viderat. «Et post dies octo,» inquit, «iterum erant discipuli ejus intus, et Thomas cum eis: venit Jesus januis clausis, et stetit in medio, et dixit: Pax vobis. Deinde dicit Thomae: Infer digitum tuum huc, et vide manus meas, et affer manum tuam, et mitte in latus meum, et noli esse incredulus, sed fidelis. Respondit Thomas et dixit ei: Dominus meus et Deus meus. Dicit ei Jesus: Quia vidisti me, credidisti: beati qui non viderunt, et crediderunt.» Hanc secundam Domini visionem erga discipulos factam, id est quam secundo loco Joannes commemorat, apud Marcum possemus agnoscere, breviter eam sicuti assolet perstringentem, nisi moveret quod ibi ait, Novissime recumbentibus illis undecim apparuit: non ideo quia Joannes tacuit recumbentes, potuit enim hoc praetermittere; sed quia iste dixit, Novissime, quasi ultra jam non eis apparuerit; cum adhuc Joannes tertiam sit ejus narraturus demonstrationem 1209 ad mare Tiberiadis: deinde quod dicit idem Marcus, Exprobrans illis incredulitatem illorum, et duritiam cordis, quia his qui viderant eum resurrexisse, non crediderant: illis videlicet duobus, quibus in villam euntibus apparuit, posteaquam resurrexit; et Petro, cui primitus eum apparuisse apud Lucam investigatum est; fortasse et Mariae Magdalenae, et aliis mulieribus quae cum illa erant, quando eis et ad monumentum apparuit, et inde redeuntibus in itinere occurrit. Nam ita contexit narrationem idem Marcus, cum commemorasset breviter de duobus illis, quibus apparuit in villam euntibus, quod nuntiassent caeteris, nec illis creditum esset: Novissime, inquit, recumbentibus illis undecim apparuit, et exprobravit incredulitatem eorum et duritiam cordis, quia his qui viderant eum resurrexisse non crediderant. Quomodo ergo novissime, quasi jam ultra cum non viderint? Novissimum quippe illud est, quo Dominum Apostoli in terra viderunt, quando ascendit in coelum; quod factum est quadragesimo die post ejus resurrectionem. Numquidnam tunc exprobraturus erat quod non credidissent eis qui eum viderant resurrexisse, quando jam et ipsi post resurrectionem toties eum viderant, et maxime ipso die resurrectionis ejus, id est una sabbati jam circa noctem, sicut Lucas Joannesque commemorant? Remanet igitur ut intelligamus eumdem diem resurrectionis ejus, id est unam sabbati, quando eum post diluculum vidit Maria et aliae cum illa mulieres, quando etiam Petrus, quando et illi duo quorum unus erat Cleophas, quos videtur etiam idem Marcus commemorare, quando jam circa noctem illi undecim (praeter Thomam) et qui cum eis erant, quando eis et isti quod viderant narraverunt, nunc etiam Marcum more suo breviter commemorare voluisse; et ideo dixisse, Novissime, quia ipso die hoc novissimum fuit, jam incipiente nocturno tempore, posteaquam illi de castello, ubi eum in fractione panis agnoverant, redierunt in Jerusalem, et invenerunt, sicut dicit Lucas, illos undecim, et eos qui cum illis erant, jam colloquentes de resurrectione Domini, et quod visus fuerit Petro: quibus et ipsi narraverunt quod in via gestum erat, et quomodo eum cognoverint in fractione panis. Sed erant ibi utique non credentes: unde verum est quod Marcus dicit, Nec illis crediderunt. His ergo jam, sicut Marcus dicit, discumbentibus, et adhuc inde, sicut Lucas dicit, loquentibus, stetit in medio eorum Dominus, et ait illis, Pax vobis, sicut Lucas et Joannes: fores autem clausae erant, cum ad eos intravit, quod solus Joannes commemorat. Verbis itaque Domini quae tunc eum locutum esse discipulis Lucas Joannesque dixerunt, interponitur et illa exprobratio de qua Marcus dicit, quod non crediderint eis qui eum resurrexisse viderant.

76. Sed hoc rursus movet, quomodo discumbentibus undecim dicit Dominum apparuisse Marcus, si illud tempus est diei dominici jam noctis initio, quod Lucas Joannesque meminerunt. Aperte quippe Joannes dicit non cum eis tunc fuisse apostolum Thomam, quem credimus exiisse inde antequam Dominus ad eos intraret, posteaquam illi duo redeuntes de castello 1210 cum ipsis undecim collocuti sunt, sicut apud Lucam invenitur. Sed Lucas in sua narratione dat locum quo possit intelligi, dum haec loquerentur, prius inde exiisse Thomam, et postea Dominum intrasse. Marcus autem qui dicit, Novissime recumbentibus illis undecim apparuit, etiam Thomam illic fuisse cogit fateri. Nisi forte, quamvis uno absente, undecim tamen voluit appellare, quia eadem tunc apostolica societas hoc numero nuncupabatur, antequam Matthias in locum Judae subrogaretur. Aut si hoc durum est sic accipere, illud ergo accipiamus, post multas demonstrationes ejus quibus per dies quadraginta discipulis praesentatus est, eum etiam novissime recumbentibus illis undecim apparuisse, id est ipso quadragesimo die: et quoniam jam erat ab eis ascensurus in coelum, hoc eis illo die maxime exprobrare voluisse, quia his qui viderant eum resurrexisse non crediderant, antequam ipsi eum viderent; cum utique post ascensionem suam praedicantibus illis Evangelium, etiam gentes quod non viderunt fuerant crediturae. Post illam quippe exprobrationem, secutus ait idem Marcus: Et dixit eis: Euntes in mundum universum, praedicate Evangelium omni creaturae: qui crediderit, et baptizatus fuerit, salvus erit; qui vero non crediderit, condemnabitur. Hoc ergo praedicaturi, quoniam qui non crediderit condemnabitur, cum id utique non crediderit quod non vidit; nonne ipsi primitus fuerant objurgandi, quod antequam Dominum vidissent, non crediderunt eis quibus prius apparuisset?

77. Hanc autem novissimam fuisse corporaliter in terra repraesentationem Domini Apostolis etiam illud admonet ut credamus, quod ita sequitur idem Marcus: Signa autem eos qui crediderint, haec sequentur: in nomine meo daemonia ejicient, linguis loquentur novis: serpentes tollent, et si mortiferum quid biberint, non eis nocebit; super aegrotos manus imponent, et bene habebunt. Deinde subjungit: Et Dominus quidem postquam locutus est eis, assumptus est in coelum, et sedit a dextris Dei. Illi autem profecti, praedicaverunt ubique, Domino cooperante, et sermonem confirmante sequentibus signis. Cum ergo dicit, Et Dominus quidem postquam locutus est eis, assumptus est in coelum; satis videtur ostendere novissimum cum illis in terra hunc eum habuisse sermonem: quamvis non omnimodo ad id coarctare videatur. Non enim ait, Postquam haec locutus est eis; sed, postquam locutus est eis: unde admittit, si necessitas cogeret, non istam fuisse novissimam locutionem, nec istum fuisse novissimum diem quo eis in terra praesens fuit, sed ad omnia quae cum eis omnibus illis diebus locutus est, posse pertinere quod dictum est, postquam locutus est eis, assumptus est in coelum. Sed quia ea quae supra diximus, magis suadent hunc novissimum diem fuisse, quam ut intelligantur undecim qui Thoma absente decem fuerunt; ideo post hanc locutionem quam Marcus commemorat, adjunctis etiam consequenter illis verbis, vel discipulorum vel ipsius, quae commemorantur in Actibus Apostolorum (Act. I, 4-8), credendum est assumptum Dominum in coelum, quadragesimo 1211 scilicet die post diem resurrectionis ejus.

78. Joannes autem, quamvis fateatur multa se praetermisisse quae fecit Jesus, voluit tamen etiam tertiam ejus repraesentationem discipulis post resurrectionem factam commemorare ad mare Tiberiadis, septem scilicet discipulis, Petro, Thomae, Nathanaeli, filiis Zebedaei, et aliis duobus quos nominatim non expressit, cum piscarentur; quando jussu ejus retia mittentes in dextram partem, extraxerunt magnos pisces centum quinquaginta tres; quando etiam Petrum ter interrogavit utrum ab illo amaretur, et ei pascendas commendavit oves suas, et de ejus ipsius passione praedixit, et de ipso Joanne ait, Sic eum volo manere donec veniam. Ad hoc Joannes Evangelium suum terminavit.

79. Jam nunc quaerendum est quando primum visus sit a discipulis in Galilaea; quia et hoc quod tertio narrat Joannes, in Galilaea factum est ad mare Tiberiadis: quod facile videt qui recolit illud miraculum de quinque panibus, quod ita narrare incipit idem Joannes: Post haec abiit Jesus trans mare Galilaeae, quod est, Tiberiadis (Joan. VI, 1). Ubi autem putari potest primum a discipulis post resurrectionem videri debuisse, nisi in Galilaea? si recolantur verba illius angeli qui secundum Matthaeum venientibus ad monumentum mulieribus ita loquitur, Nolite timere, vos: scio enim quod Jesum qui crucifixus est quaeritis; non est hic, surrexit enim sicut dixit: venite, et videte locum ubi positus erat Dominus. Et cito euntes dicite discipulis ejus quia surrexit; et ecce praecedit vos in Galilaeam; ibi eum videbitis: ecce dixi vobis: item secundum Marcum, sive ipse sit angelus sive alius, Nolite, inquit, expavescere: Jesum quaeritis Nazarenum crucifixum; surrexit, non est hic: ecce locus ubi posuerunt eum. Sed ite, dicite discipulis ejus et Petro, quia praecedit vos in Galilaeam: ibi eum videbitis sicut dixit vobis? Haec verba ita videntur sonare, quod Jesus non erat se demonstraturus post resurrectionem discipulis, nisi in Galilaea. Quam demonstrationem nec ipse Marcus commemoravit, qui eum dixit mane prima sabbati apparuisse primo Mariae Magdalenae, et illam nuntiasse discipulis, his qui cum eo fuerant lugentibus et flentibus; illos autem non credidisse: post haec deinde duobus ex his apparuisse euntibus in villam, et illos caeteris nuntiasse, quod factum est, sicut Lucas et Joannes coattestantur, in Jerusalem, eodem ipso die resurrectionis, jam noctis initio: deinde venit ad illam ejus manifestationem, quam novissimam dicit, recumbentibus illis undecim: post hanc dicit eum assumptum in coelum; quod factum scimus in monte Oliveti, non longe ab Jerusalem: nusquam igitur commemorat Marcus completum quod ab angelo praenuntiatum esse testatur. Matthaeus vero nihil aliud dicit, nec ullum alium locum omnino commemorat, vel ante vel postea, ubi discipuli, posteaquam resurrexit, viderint Dominum, nisi in 1212 Galilaea secundum angeli praedictionem. Denique cum insinuasset quid ab angelo mulieribus dictum sit, et illis abeuntibus subjecisset quid de corruptis ad mentiendum custodibus gestum sit; continuo tanquam nihil aliud sequeretur (quia et revera sic erat dictum ab angelo, Surrexit, et ecce praecedit vos in Galilaeam; ibi eum videbitis, ut nihil aliud sequi debuisse videatur), Undecim autem, inquit, discipuli abierunt in Galilaeam, in montem ubi constituerat illis Jesus: et videntes eum, adoraverunt; quidam autem dubitaverunt. Et accedens Jesus locutus est eis, dicens: Data est mihi omnis potestas in coelo et in terra: euntes ergo docete omnes gentes, baptizantes eos in nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus sancti; docentes eos servare omnia quaecumque mandavi vobis. Et ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus usque ad consummationem saeculi. Ita Matthaeus clausit Evangelium suum.

80. Ac per hoc, si aliorum consideratae narrationes ad diligentiorem inquisitionem non compellerent, nihil aliud arbitraremur nisi Dominum post resurrectionem nusquam praeter in Galilaea primum esse a discipulis visum. Item, si Marcus de illa praenuntiatione angeli tacuisset, posset cuiquam putari Matthaeus ideo dixisse discipulos abiisse in Galilaeam in montem, atque ibi adorasse Dominum, ut impletum videretur quod ipse per angelum mandatum ac praenuntiatum esse narraverat. Nunc autem et Lucas et Joannes satis dilucide manifestantes ipso die resurrectionis ejus visum esse Dominum in Jerusalem a discipulis suis, unde ita longe est Galilaea, ut uno die ab eis utroque loco videri non posset; et Marcus illam quidem praedictionem angeli similiter narrans, in Galilaea vero visum a discipulis Dominum post resurrectionem nusquam commemorans: vehementer cogunt quaerere quemadmodum dictum sit, Ecce praecedit vos in Galilaeam; ibi eum videbitis. Nam et ipse Matthaeus si omnino non diceret undecim discipulos abiisse in montem in Galilaeam, ubi constituerat eis Jesus, et illic eum vidisse atque adorasse, nihil ex hac praedictione completum ad litteram putaremus, sed totum figurata significatione praedictum: sicut illud secundum Lucam, Ecce hodie et cras ejicio daemonia, et sanitates perficio, et tertia consummor; quod ad litteram certum est non esse completum . Item si angelus dixisset, Praecedit vos in Galilaeam; ibi primum eum videbitis; aut, ibi tantum eum videbitis; aut, nonnisi ibi eum videbitis; caeteris Evangelistis Matthaeus sine dubio repugnaret: cum vero dictum est, Ecce praecedit vos in Galilaeam; ibi eum videbitis; nec expressum est quando id futurum esset, utrum quamprimum antequam alibi ab eis visus esset; an posteaquam eum alicubi etiam praeterquam in Galilaea vidissent: idque ipsum quod discipulos Matthaeus dicit isse in Galilaeam in montem, non exprimit diem, nec narrandi ordinem ita contexit, ut necessitatem ingerat nihil aliud intelligendi, quam hoc primitus factum: non adversatur quidem narrationibus caeterorum, et dat eis intelligendis atque accipiendis locum; verumtamen quod 1213 Dominus non ubi primum se demonstraturus erat, sed in Galilaea, ubi necessario postea visus est, se videndum mandavit, et per angelum dicentem, Ecce praecedit vos in Galilaeam; ibi eum videbitis; et per seipsum dicens, ite, nuntiate fratribus meis ut eant in Galilaeam; ibi me videbunt; quemvis fidelem facit intentum ad quaerendum in quo mysterio dictum intelligitur.

81. Sed prius considerandum est quando etiam corporaliter in Galilaea videri potuerit, dicente Matthaeo: Undecim autem discipuli abierunt in Galilaeam, in montem ubi constituerat illis Jesus: et videntes eum adoraverunt; quidam autem dubitaverunt. Quia enim non ipso die quo resurrexit manifestum est: nam in Jerusalem visum esse eo die initio noctis Lucas et Joannes apertissime consonant; Marcus autem non aperte. Quando ergo viderunt Dominum in Galilaea? non secundum id quod dicit Joannes, ad mare Tiberiadis; tunc enim septem fuerunt, et piscantes inventi sunt: sed secundum id quod dicit Matthaeus, ubi erant undecim in monte, quo eos secundum praedictionem angeli Jesus praecesserat. Nam ita narrare apparet, quod illic eum repererint, quia utique secundum constitutum praecesserat. Non ergo ipso die quo resurrexit, neque in consequentibus octo diebus, post quos dicit Joannes discipulis apparuisse Dominum, ubi eum primo vidit Thomas, qui eum non viderat die resurrectionis ejus. Nam utique si intra eosdem octo dies eum in monte Galilaeae jam illi undecim viderant, quomodo post octo dies eum primum vidit Thomas, qui in illis undecim fuerat? Nisi quis dicat non illos undecim qui jam tunc Apostoli vocabantur, sed discipulos illic undecim fuisse, ex multo numero discipulorum. Soli quippe adhuc vocabantur Apostoli illi undecim, sed non soli erant discipuli. Potest ergo fieri ut non omnes, sed aliqui eorum ibi fuerint; alii vero discipuli cum eis, ita ut undecim complerentur: ac sic non ibi fuisse Thomam, qui post illos dies octo primo Dominum vidit. Marcus quippe quando illos undecim memoravit, non utcumque undecim, sed illis, inquit, undecim apparuit. Lucas etiam, Regressi sunt, inquit, Jerusalem, et invenerunt congregatos undecim, et eos qui cum ipsis erant. Et iste ostendit illos undecim, hoc est, Apostolos fuisse. Nam cum adjunxit, et eos qui cum ipsis erant; satis utique declaravit eminentius illos undecim appellatos cum quibus erant caeteri: ac per hoc illi intelliguntur qui jam vocabantur Apostoli. Hoc proinde fieri potuit, ut ex numero Apostolorum et aliorum discipulorum, undecim discipuli complerentur, qui viderint intra illos octo dies in Galilaeae monte Jesum.

82. Sed occurrit aliud quod obsistat: Joannes enim quando commemoravit non in monte ab undecim, sed ad mare Tiberiadis a septem piscantibus visum esse Dominum, Hoc jam tertio, inquit, manifestatus est Jesus discipulis suis, cum resurrexisset a mortuis. Si autem acceperimus intra illos octo dies, antequam Thomas eum vidisset, ab undecim quibusque discipulis Dominum visum; non erit hoc ad mare Tiberiadis tertio manifestatum 1214 esse, sed quarto. Quod quidem cavendum est, ne quis existimet tertio Joannem dixisse, tanquam tres solae factae fuerint manifestationes ejus: sed hoc intelligendus est ad numerum dierum retulisse, non ad numerum ipsarum manifestationum; nec continuorum dierum, sed per intervalla, sicut idem ipse testatur. Nam primo ipso die resurrectionis suae, excepto quod a mulieribus visus est, id est quod in Evangelio claret, ter se manifestavit; semel Petro, iterum duobus illis quorum unus erat Cleophas, tertio plurimis jam inde colloquentibus noctis exordio: sed hoc totum Joannes ad unum diem referens semel computat; iterum autem, hoc est alio die, quando eum vidit et Thomas; tertio vero ad mare Tiberiadis, hoc est tertio die manifestationis ejus, non tertia manifestatione. Ac per hoc post haec omnia cogimur intelligere factum esse, quod eum in monte Galilaeae secundum Matthaeum discipuli undecim viderunt, quo eos secundum constitutum praecesserat, ut impleretur etiam ad litteram quod et per angelum et per seipsum praedixerat.

83. Invenimus itaque apud quatuor Evangelistas decies commemoratum Dominum visum esse ab hominibus post resurrectionem. Semel, ad monumentum mulieribus (Joan. XX, 14). Iterum, eisdem regredientibus a monumento in itinere (Matth. XXVIII, 9). Tertio, Petro (Luc. XXIV, 35). Quarto, duobus euntibus in castellum (Ibid. 15). Quinto, pluribus in Jerusalem ubi non erat Thomas (Joan. XX, 19-24). Sexto, ubi eum vidit Thomas (Ibid. 26). Septimo, ad mare Tiberiadis (Id. XXI, 1). Octavo, in monte Galilaeae, secundum Matthaeum (Matth. XXVIII, 16, 17). Nono, quod dicit Marcus, Novissime recumbentibus, quia jam non erant in terra cum illo convivaturi (Marc. XVI, 14). Decimo, in ipso die, non jam in terra, sed elevatum in nube, cum in coelum ascenderet; quod Marcus et Lucas commemorant: Marcus quidem post illud, quod eis discumbentibus apparuit, ita continuans ut diceret: Et Dominus quidem postquam locutus est eis, assumptus est in coelum (Ibid. 19): Lucas autem praetermissis omnibus quae per quadraginta dies agi ab illo cum discipulis potuerunt, illi primo diei resurrectionis ejus quando in Jerusalem pluribus apparuit, conjungit tacite novissimum diem quo ascendit in coelum, ita narrans: Eduxit autem illos foras in Bethaniam, et elevatis manibus suis benedixit eis: et factum est, cum benediceret eis, recessit ab eis, et ferebatur in coelum (Luc. XXIV, 50, 51). Viderunt ergo eum praeter quod in terra viderant, etiam dum ferretur in coelum. Toties ergo in evangelicis Libris commemoratus est ab hominibus visus, antequam ascendisset in coelum; in terra scilicet novies, et in aere semel ascendens.

84. Sed non omnia scripta sunt, sicut Joannes fatetur (Joan. XXI, 25). Crebra enim erat ejus cum illis conversatio per dies quadraginta, priusquam ascendisset in coelum (Act. I, 3): non tamen eis per omnes quadraginta dies continuos apparuerat. Nam post diem primum resurrectionis ejus, alios octo dies intervenisse dicit Joannes, post quos eis rursus apparuit. Tertio autem ad mare Tiberiadis, fortassis continuo consequenti 1215 die; nihil enim repugnat: et deinde quando voluit, constituens eis, quod et ante praedixerat, ut eos in Galilaeae montem praecederet: atque omnino per illos quadraginta dies quoties voluit, quibus voluit, quemadmodum voluit; sicut Petrus dicit, quando eum Cornelio et iis qui cum illo fuerant, praedicabat, Qui simul, inquit, manducavimus et bibimus cum illo, posteaquam resurrexit a mortuis, per dies quadraginta (Act. X, 41): non quod quotidie per dies quadraginta cum illo manducassent et bibissent; nam erit contrarium Joanni, qui octo illos dies interposuit quibus eis visus non est, ut tertio manifestaretur ad mare Tiberiadis. Inde jam etiamsi quotidie illis visus et cum illis convivatus est, nihil repugnat. Et fortasse ideo dictum est, per quadraginta dies, qui quater deni sunt in mysterio vel totius mundi vel totius temporalis saeculi, quia et illi primi decem dies, in quibus erant illi octo dies, a parte totum possunt more Scripturarum non dissone computari.

85. Conferatur ergo et quod ait apostolus Paulus, utrum nihil afferat quaestionis: Resurrexit, inquit, tertio die secundum Scripturas, et apparuit Cephae. Non dixit, Primo apparuit Cephae; nam esset contrarium, quod primo mulieribus apparuisse in Evangelio legitur. Postea, inquit, duodecim : quibuslibet, qua hora libet, ipso tamen resurrectionis die. Deinde apparuit plusquam quingentis fratribus simul: sive isti cum illis undecim erant congregati clausis ostiis propter metum Judaeorum, unde cum exiisset Thomas, venit ad eos Jesus; sive post octo illos dies quando libet; nihil habet adversi. Postea, inquit, apparuit Jacobo: non tunc autem primum accipere debemus visum esse Jacobo, sed aliqua propria manifestatione singulariter. Deinde Apostolis omnibus: nec illis tunc primum, sed jam ut familiarius conversaretur cum eis usque ad diem ascensionis suae. Novissime autem omnium, inquit, quasi abortivo apparuit et mihi (I Cor. XV, 4-8): sed hoc jam de coelo post non parvum tempus ascensionis suae.

86. Nunc jam videamus quod distuleramus, cujus mysterii gratia secundum Matthaeum et Marcum resurgens ita mandaverit, Praecedam vos in Galilaeam; ibi me videbitis (Matth. XXVI, 32, XXVIII, 7, et Marc. XIV, 28, XVI, 7): quod et si completum est, tamen post multa completum est, cum sic mandatum sit (quanquam sine praejudicio necessitatis), ut aut hoc 1216 solum, aut hoc primum exspectaretur fieri debuisse. Procul dubio ergo quoniam vox est ista non Evangelistae narrantis quod ita factum sit, sed angeli ex mandato Domini et ipsius postea Domini, Evangelistae autem narrantis, sed quod ita ab angelo et a Domino dictum sit, prophetice dictum accipiendum est. Galilaea namque interpretatur vel Transmigratio, vel Revelatio. Prius itaque secundum transmigrationis significationem, quid aliud occurrit intelligendum, Praecedit vos in Galilaeam; ibi eum videbitis; nisi quia Christi gratia de populo Israel transmigratura erat ad Gentes? Quibus Apostoli praedicantes Evangelium nullo modo crederentur, nisi eis ipse Dominus viam in cordibus hominum praepararet: et hoc intelligitur, Praecedit vos in Galilaeam. Quod autem gaudentes mirarentur disruptis et evictis difficultatibus, aperiri sibi ostium in Domino per illuminationem fidelium; hoc intelligitur, ibi eum videbitis, id est, ibi ejus membra invenietis, ibi vivum corpus ejus in iis qui vos susceperint agnoscetis. Secundum illud autem quod Galilaea interpretatur Revelatio, non jam in forma servi intelligendum est, sed in illa in qua aequalis est Patri (Philipp. II, 6, 7): quam promisit apud Joannem dilectoribus suis, cum diceret, Et ego diligam eum, et ostendam me ipsum illi (Joan. XIV, 21). Non utique secundum id quod jam videbant, et quod etiam resurgens cum cicatricibus, non solum videndum, sed etiam tangendum postmodum ostendit: sed secundum illam ineffabilem lucem, qua illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum, secundum quam lucet in tenebris, et tenebrae eum non comprehendunt (Id. I, 9, 5). Illuc nos praecessit, unde ad nos veniens non recessit, et quo nos praecedens non deseruit. Illa erit revelatio tanquam vera Galilaea, cum similes ei erimus; ibi eum videbimus sicuti est (I Joan. III, 2). Ipsa erit etiam beatior transmigratio ex isto saeculo in illam aeternitatem, si ejus praecepta sic amplectamur, ut ad ejus dexteram segregari mereamur. Tunc enim ibunt sinistri in combustionem aeternam, justi autem in vitam aeternam (Matth. XXV, 33, 46). Hinc illuc transmigrabunt, et ibi eum videbunt, quomodo non vident impii. Tolletur enim impius, ut non videat claritatem Domini (Isai. XXVI, 10): et impii lumen non videbunt. Haec est autem, inquit, vita aeterna, ut cognoscant te unum verum Deum, et quem misisti Jesum Christum (Joan. XVII, 3); sicut in illa aeternitate cognoscetur, quo servos perducet per formam servi, ut liberi contemplentur formam Domini.