Comparing Sinaiticus and Byz in John: 100 Differences

            Having looked at 180 translation-impacting differences between the Byzantine Text and the text in Codex Sinaiticus in the Synoptic Gospels (60 in Matthew, 60 in Mark, 60 in Luke), today we complete the set, looking at 100 translation-impacting differences between the Byzantine Text and the text that was written by the copyist of Codex Sinaiticus in the Gospel of John. 

            The readings from Sinaiticus in this list vary in size and in the amount of impact that they have on translation – in one case, 12 verses are affected; in some other cases, a single word is changed.  In several cases, the reading in Codex Sinaiticus constitutes a historical error.

            Red dots accompany cases where the Byzantine Text and the Nestle-Aland compilation both disagree with the reading written by the copyist of Codex Sinaiticus.  Black dots accompany cases where Codex Sinaiticus and the Nestle-Aland compilation agree with each other and disagree with the Byzantine reading; there are fourteen such cases (among these particular 100 variant-units).

● 1.  In John 1:15, does John the Baptist say that Jesus is the One he was speaking of before?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 2.  Does John 1:17 affirm that grace and truth come from Jesus Christ?

            ﬡ:  no (the word “Christ” is absent)

            Byz:  yes

● 3.  Does John 1:18 refer to “the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father” or to “only begotten God in the bosom of the Father”?

            ﬡ:  only begotten God in the bosom of the Father

            Byz:  the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father

● 4.  Does John 1:20 emphasize John the Baptist’s confession by mentioning twice that he confessed?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 5.  In John 1:34, does John the Baptist affirm that Jesus is the Son of God, or that Jesus is the chosen one of God?

            ﬡ:  chosen one of God

            Byz:  Son of God

● 6.  Does John 2:3 contain a phrase which says that they did not have wine, because the wine for the marriage-feast was finished?

            ﬡ:  yes

            Byz:  no

● 7.  Does John 2:6 say that the waterpots were standing there?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 8.  Does John 2:10 specifically say that Jesus manifested His glory?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 9.  Does John 2:12 mention Jesus’ disciples?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

               

● 10.  Does John 2:21 specify that Jesus spoke of the temple of His body?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 11.  In John 3:8, does Jesus describe “everyone who has been born of water and of the Spirit”?

            ﬡ:  yes

            Byz:  no (Jesus describes “everyone who has been born of the Spirit”)

● 12.  Does John 3:13 mention “the Son of Man who is in heaven”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 13.  Does John 3:16 affirm that God gave His only begotten Son?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 14.  Does John 3:20 affirm that everyone who hates the light does not come to the light?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 15.  Does John 3:21 affirm that the one who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 16.  Does John 3:31 affirm that He who comes from heaven is above all?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 17.  Does John 4:1 refer to Jesus as “the Lord”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 18.  Does John 4:9 say that Jews have no dealings with Samaritans?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 19.  In John 4:19, does the Samaritan woman refer to Jesus as “Lord”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 20.  Does John 4:39 specify that many of the Samaritans believed on Him?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 21.  Does John 4:45 say that the Galileans received Him?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 22.  Does John 5:3 mention that the sick people were waiting for the moving of the waters?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 23.  Does John 5:4 say that an angel stirred up the waters, and that the one who first entered the pool after the waters were stirred up would be healed?

            ﬡ:  no (the entire verse is absent)

            Byz:  yes

● 24.  Does John 5:9 say that the man immediately became whole?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes        

● 25.  Does John 5:14 mention that the healed man found Jesus healing in the temple?

            ﬡ:  yes

            Byz:  no

● 26.  Does John 5:16 say that the Jews sought to kill Jesus?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 27.  In John 5:25, does Jesus refer to an hour that is coming and now is?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 28.  Does John 5:26 say that the Father has given to the Son to have life in Himself?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 29.  In John 6:10, how does John describe the place where Jesus fed the five thousand?

            ﬡ:  there was much place in that place

            Byz:  there was much grass

● 30.  In John 6:10, about how many men were present?

            ﬡ:  three thousand

            Byz:  five thousand

● 31.  Does John 6:11 say that Jesus gave the loaves to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to those who were sitting down?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 32.  Does John 6:15 say that Jesus withdrew from the crowd, or that He escaped the crowd?

            ﬡ:  He escaped

            Byz:  He withdrew

● 33.  In John 6:26, does Jesus’ statement begin, “You seek me”?

            ﬡ:  no
            Byz:  yes  

● 34.  Does John 6:27 say that God the Father has sealed the Son of Man?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 35.  In John 6:39, does Jesus say something specifically about the will of the One who sent Him?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 36.  In John 6:42, do the Jews affirm that they know Jesus’ mother?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 37.  In John 6:46, does Jesus say that He who is from God has seen the Father?

            ﬡ:  no; Jesus says that He who is from the Father has seen God.

            Byz:  yes

● 38.  In John 6:47, does Jesus say that the one who believes in Him has eternal life?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 39.  In John 6:55, does Jesus say that His blood is truly drink?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 40.  Does John 6:64 refer to Jesus as “the Savior”?

            ﬡ:  yes

            Byz:  no

● 41.  In John 6:69, does Simon Peter describe Jesus as “the Christ, the Son of the living God,” or as “the Holy One of God”?

            ﬡ:  the Holy One of God

            Byz:  the Christ, the Son of the living God

● 42.  In John 7:6, does Jesus say “My time is not yet come,” or “My time is not come”?

            ﬡ:  My time is not (ου) come

            Byz:  My time is not yet (ουπω) come

● 43.  In John 7:7, does Jesus say specifically that He testifies concerning the world?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 44.  In John 7:8, does Jesus say, “I am not going up to this feast,” or “I am not yet going up to this feast”?

            ﬡ:  I am not (ουκ) going up to this feast

            Byz:  I am not yet (ουπω) going up to this feast

            (Papyrus 66, Papyrus 75, and Codex Vaticanus agree with Byz here)

● 45.  Does John 7:22 begin with “Therefore”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 46.  In John 7:26, do the people ask a question about the high priest?

            ﬡ:  yes

            Byz:  no

● 47.  In John 7:27, do the people raise a question about the signs the Messiah will do?

            ﬡ:  yes

            Byz:  no

● 48.  Does John 7:35 say that the Jews said something among themselves?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 49.  In John 7:37, does Jesus say, If anyone thirsts, “let him come to Me and drink”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 50.  Does John 7:50 say anything about Nicodemus’ previous encounter with Jesus?

             ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 51.  Does the Gospel of John contain an episode about Jesus and a woman caught in adultery, in which Jesus says “Go and sin no more”?

            ﬡ:  no (John 7:53-8:11 is absent)

            Byz:  yes

● 52.  Does John 8:20 say that Jesus was teaching in the temple?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 53.  In John 8:26, does Jesus specifically say that the Father has sent Him?

            ﬡ:  yes

            Byz:  no

● 54. Does John 8:27 specifically say that Jesus was speaking of God as the Father?

            ﬡ:  yes

            Byz:  no

● 55.  In John 8:35, does Jesus affirm that the Son abides forever?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 56.  In John 8:52, does Jesus say something about death?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 57.  In John 8:57, did the Jews ask Jesus, “Have you seen Abraham,” or “Has Abraham seen You”?

            ﬡ:  has Abraham seen You?

            Byz:  have you seen Abraham? 

● 58.  Does John 8:59 report that Jesus went through their midst, and so passed by” as He left the temple?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 59.  Does John 9:10 specifically mention the Jews?

            ﬡ:  yes

            Byz:  no

● 60.  In John 9:38, does the formerly blind man say to Jesus, “Lord, I believe”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 61.  In John 9:39, does the formerly blind man worship Jesus?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz: yes

● 62.  Does John 10:10 specifically refer to eternal life?

            ﬡ:  yes

            Byz:  no

● 63.  In John 11:31, were the Jews thinking that Jesus was going to the tomb to weep there, or were they Jews saying that Mary was going to the tomb to weep there?

            ﬡ:  they were thinking that Jesus was going to the tomb

            Byz:  they were saying that Mary was going to the tomb

● 64.  In John 11:50, does Caiaphas say “It is profitable for us that one man should die,” or does he say, “It is profitable that one man should die”?

            ﬡ:  it is profitable

            Byz:  it is profitable for us

● 65.  Does John 12:1 specify that the individual named Lazarus is “the one who had died”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 66.  In John 12:25, did Jesus say that he who hates his life in this world shall keep it?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 67.  In John 12:31, does Jesus say something about the prince of this world?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 68.  Does John 13:1 say that Jesus loved “His own” who were in the world, or “the Jews” who were in the world?

            ﬡ:  the Jews

            Byz:  His own

● 69.  In John 13:6, does Simon Peter address Jesus as “Lord”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 70.  In John 13:9, does Simon Peter address Jesus as “Lord”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 71.  In John 13:10, does Jesus say something about washing feet?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 72.  In John 13:12, did Jesus take their garments, or His garments?

            ﬡ:  their garments

            Byz:  His garments

● 73.  Does John 13:22 say that the Jews looked, one another, upon the disciples?

            ﬡ:  yes

            Byz:  no

● 74.  In John 13:24, does Simon Peter (a) motion to the disciple whom Jesus loved to ask Jesus to whom He referred, and (b) tell the disciple to ask Him of whom He spoke?

            ﬡ:  yes

            Byz:  no; only the first action is mentioned

● 75.  How does John 13:32 begin?

            ﬡ:  “Also God shall glorify Him in Himself” 

            Byz:  “If God has been glorified in Him”     

● 76.  In John 13:37, Does Simon Peter address Jesus as “Lord”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes  

● 77.  In John 14:16, does Jesus say that He will keep the Father, or that He will ask the Father?

            ﬡ:  keep

            Byz:  ask

● 78.  In John 15:10, does Jesus say, “If you keep My commandments, you shall abide in My love”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 79.  Does John 15:21 say that people will do these things “to you”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 80.  In John 16:9, does Jesus say that the Comforter will convict the world concerning sin because “they believe on Me” or “because they do not believe on Me”?

            ﬡ:  because they believe on Me

            Byz:  because they do not believe on Me

● 81.  In John 16:15, does Jesus say, “All things that the Father has are Mine; therefore I said that He will take of Mine, and shall show it to you”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 82.  Does John 16:16 end with the phrase “because I go to the Father”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 83.  In John 16:17, does Jesus mention the phrase, “A little while, and you shall not see Me”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 84.  In John 17:8, does Jesus affirm that the people who were given to Him have known truly that He came from the Father?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 85.  Does John 17:10 begin with the phrase, “And all Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 86.  Does John 17:17 include the phrase, “Your word is truth”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 87.  In John 17:26, does Jesus refer to “the love in which You loved Me” or to “the love in which You loved them”?

            ﬡ:  the love in which You loved them

            Byz:  the love in which You loved Me

● 88.  In John 19:13, is the judgment seat in a place that is called Gabbatha, or Golgotha?

            ﬡ:  Golgotha

            Byz:  Gabbatha      

● 89.  Does John 19:20 say that the title was read by many of the Jews, and that it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin?

            ﬡ:  no (the whole verse is absent)

            Byz:  yes

● 90.  Does John 19:21 say that the chief priests told Pilate not to write “King of the Jews”?

            ﬡ:   no

            Byz:  yes

● 91.  Does John 19:23 mention that the soldiers also took Jesus’ tunic?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 92.  In John 19:26, does John say that Jesus saw His mother?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 93.  Does John 19:38 say that Joseph of Arimathea “took the body of Jesus,” or that Joseph of Arimathea “took Him”?

            ﬡ:  took Him

            Byz:  took the body of Jesus

● 94.  Does John 20:3 say that Peter and the other disciple came to the tomb?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 95.  Does John 20:5 mention that the other disciple did not enter the tomb?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 96.  Does John 20:6 say that Simon Peter came and entered the tomb?
            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 97.  In John 21:15, does Jesus call Simon “son of Jonah”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes (the Alexandrian Text has “son of John” – but ﬡ has neither)

● 98.  In John 21:20, did Peter see the disciple whom Jesus loved, following?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 99.  In John 21:21, did Peter address Jesus as “Lord”?

            ﬡ:  no

            Byz:  yes

● 100.  Does John 21:23 end with the phrase, “What is that to you”?

            ﬡ: no

            Byz:  yes

Please explain, Dr. White.

● Bonus:  Does the Gospel of John end with a statement to the effect that the world could not contain the books that would be written if all of Jesus’ deeds were written down?

            ﬡ:  no (the copyist concluded the text at the end of John 21:24, and wrote the closing-title after that.  However, his supervisor apparently overruled his decision to remove verse 25; the closing title was erased, and verse 25 was added along with the closing title below it.)

            Byz:  yes

(There are more than 100 readings in Codex Sinaiticus which mean something different than what the Byzantine reading means; I just tried to keep things tidy by limiting it to 100.)

For reference:
60 Passages in Matthew Where the Byzantine Text and Codex Sinaiticus Mean Different Things

60 Passages in Mark Where the Byzantine Text and Codex Sinaiticus Mean Different Things

60 Passages in Luke Where the Byzantine Text and Codex Sinaiticus Mean Different Things

Readers are invited to double-check the accuracy of the data in this post.

Fortunatianus Speaks!

            Fortunatianus’ Latin commentary on the Gospels, written c. 350 – about the same time as the production of Codex Sinaiticus, “The world’s oldest Bible” – has been found, edited, and translated!  The announcement of its discovery by Dr. Lukas Dorfbauer in 2012 is old news to regular readers; that was mentioned here a couple of years ago, and Roger Pearse had spread the news about it before that.  But now its text has been thoroughly studied and edited, and it has been translated into English.  Dr. Hugh Houghton tells about what has been done with the commentary of Fortunatianus since its rediscovery in an article at The Birmingham Brief.
          

            This discovery is highly significant, because Fortunatianus quoted from the New Testament over and over.  A quick survey of the Scripture-index in Hugh Houghton’s translation of Fortunatianus’ Commentary on the Gospels indicates that he made over 300 utilizations of New Testament passages, especially from the Gospel of Matthew.  This abundance of Scripture-quotations allows analysts to get a pretty good idea of the kind of Latin text that was used by Fortunatianus.  Here are some passages in which Fortunatianus’ Scripture-citations involve passages in which textual variants occur:

            ● Mark 1:1 – Fortunatianus reads, “In Isaiah the prophet,” disagreeing with the reading in most Greek manuscripts, “in the prophets.”

            ● Matthew 1:25 – Fortunatianus reads “she gave birth to a son,” disagreeing with the reading in most Greek manuscripts, “she gave birth to her firstborn son.”

            ● Matthew 13:55 (or Mark 6:3) – Fortunatianus reads “Is this not the son of Joseph the craftsman [or, carpenter],” thus adding Joseph’s name.

            ● Matthew 2:18 – Fortunatianus reads “weeping and much wailing,” disagreeing with the reading in most manuscripts, “grieving and weeping and much wailing.”

            ● Matthew 8:28 – Fortunatianus reads “Gerasenes,” not “Gergasenes.”

            ● Matthew 9:13 – Fortunatianus reads “to repentance,” agreeing with the majority of manuscripts and disagreeing with the Alexandrian base-text of the ESV, NIV, NLT, etc.

            ● Matthew 10:8 – Fortunatianus includes the phrase “raise the dead.” 

            ● Matthew 10:10 – Fortunatianus reads “staff” instead of “staffs.”

            ● Matthew 16:2-3 – Fortunatianus confirms the inclusion of all of these two verses.

            ● Matthew 20:28 – Fortunatianus uses a text which, like Codex Bezae, contains a brief passage at this point resembling Luke 14:8-10.

            ● Matthew 21:31 – In the text cited by Fortunatianus, the answer to Jesus’ question is given as “The latter,” instead of “The first.”

            ● Matthew 24:26 – Fortunatianus’ Latin text had an apparently unique addition which referred to false claims of the Messiah’s appearance not only in the wilderness, and in inner rooms, but also “in the mountains.” 

            ● Matthew 24:36 – Fortunatianus’ text includes “or the Son,” and he expounds upon this reading in his commentary, proposing that this statement should not be taken literally.

John 1:18, quoted in Fortunatianus'
commentary, with "only-begotten Son."

            ● John 1:18 – Fortunatianus very clearly uses “only-begotten Son,” and not “only-begotten God.”

            ● John 1:28 – Fortunatianus reads “Bethany,” but – echoing Origen somewhat – he proposes that “Here, then, we find a mistake either of the Latin translator of the copyists.”  And he proceeds to mention that “Bethara” (rather than Bethabara) is the “house of preparation,” and is the name of the place where John began to baptize. 

            ● John 1:34 – Fortunatianus reads “the chosen one of God” instead of “the Son of God,” but then continues with something else:  “And I have seen and borne witness that this is the chosen one of God.  And this is the Son of the highest God, begotten of him.” 

Who Was Fortunatianus?

            How much is known about Fortunatianus?  Unfortunately, not much, except that he was a bishop in Aquileia in the mid-300’s.  Jerome mentions him in De Viris Illustribus, in chapter 97:  “Fortunatianus, an African by birth, bishop of Aquileia during the reign of Constantius [reigned 337-361], composed brief commentaries on the Gospels arranged by chapters, written in a rustic style.  And he is held in detestation because when Liberius, bishop of Rome, was driven into exile for the faith, he was induced by the urgency of Fortunatianus to subscribe to heresy.” 

            Depite giving such a negative appraisal of Fortunatianus’ theology, Jerome was willing to praise Fortunatianus’ commentary in Epistle X (To Paul of Concordia), as he requested a copy of it, stating, “You are asked to give me the pearl of the Gospel, the words of the Lord, pure words, even as the silver which from the earth is tried, and purified seven times in the fire; I mean the commentaries of Fortunatianus and – for its account of the persecutors – the History of Aurelius Victor, along with the Letters of Novatian, so that, learning the poison set forth by this schismatic, we may the more gladly drink of the antidote supplied by the holy martyr Cyprian.”  (This could be understood, I think, as a cautious compliment, as if to say that Fortunatianus’ commentary contains fine silver if one is willing to go through the trouble of refining it, or that it is a pearl, if one is willing to pick out the valuable part from the unclean material around it.)

Where Was Fortunatianus?

            Before describing the commentary, a brief description of Aquileia may be helpful.  During the time when Fortunatianus served as its bishop, the city of Aquileia, along the coast of the northeastern corner of Italy (on a modern map, northeast of Venice and northwest of Trieste), was one of the most prominent and prosperous cities of the Roman Empire.  An imperial palace was among its buildings, and Constantine himself visited there, and in 340, Constantine II was killed near the city.  It remained one of the empire’s finest cities until it was attacked and destroyed by the Huns in 452.

What Book Does Fortunatianus Comment on the Most?

            Fortunatianus focused mainly on the Gospel of Matthew.  His method of commenting is far from systematic or exhaustive.  Those who approach this Latin text – which is extant, mostly, in a manuscript which can be viewed page by page at the Codices Electronici Ecclesiae Coloniensis (CEEC) website – expecting a verse-by-verse analysis of all four Gospels will be disappointed.  Fortunatianus’ main focus is the Gospel of Matthew.  He spends hardly any time on the Gospel of Mark, and although he covers John chapter 1 very thoroughly, most of John’s Gospel receives only spotty attention.  The episodes in Luke which are not repeated in the Gospel of Matthew receive some attention from Fortunatianus; almost all the rest is set aside.  In addition, except for parenthetical uses, the chapters which one might assume would be a commentary’s zenith – those about Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection – do not receive close attention.

Does Fortunatianus Use John 7:53-8:11 or Mark 16:9-20?

               Fortunatianus gives no hint that he is aware of the pericope adulterae, but this should not be overplayed:  Fortunatianus only used a single verse from John 6, and a single verse from John 7, and four verses from John 8, none from John 9, and two from John 10, and none from John 11.  We do not therefore conclude that Fortunatianus was unaware of the healing of the man who was born blind, or of the resurrection of Lazarus.  Fortunatianus’ sequential, focused commentary on the Gospel of John stops after his description of Jesus’ first miracle.  After John 2:11, the rest of Fortunatianus’ utilizations of passages from the Gospel of John are fairly random and sporadic, not systematic. 

            Fortunatianus does not explicitly quote from Mark 16:9-20; however, in a passage which inexactly echoes the comments of Irenaeus about the symbols of the Evangelists, Fortunatianus states that “it is not inappropriate that he [that is, Mark] bears the image of an eagle, since he demonstrates that Christ flew to heaven.”  The only reference in the Gospel of Mark to Jesus’ ascent to heaven is, of course, 16:19.  And in another place, Fortunatianus writes, “Jesus showed that, after he had trampled down death, and risen from the dead, he himself would preach everywhere through his apostles” – which, while not a quotation of Mark 16:20, seems like a strong allusion to it.  And, near the start of his commentary, Fortunatianus mentions that the evangelist Mark “lists his [that is, Christ’s] Passion and Ascension and sitting at the right hand of the Father.”

How Does Fortunatianus Organize the Text?

            Fortunatianus begins his commentary with a summary of each Gospel’s thematic emphasis, metaphorically expressed as one of the faces of the cherubim (Matthew as a man, Luke as an ox, Mark as an eagle, and John as a lion) and as one of the rivers of Eden.  Fortunatianus proceeds to build an allegorical case for the inevitability that the apostolic gospel should be fourfold, arguing that a divine pattern, in which the gospel of the twelve apostles is displayed in four parts, is shown in the high priest’s breastplate (which had three rows of four gemstones) and in the shape of a walnut shell, and via various typologies in the Old Testament.    

            He then shifts directly into a interpretation of the first two chapters of Matthew, offering reasons why Matthew’s genealogy and Luke’s genealogy go in different chronological directions, and why Matthew mentions 42 generations but only names 41, and why Matthew 1:25 does not imply that Joseph and Mary were intimate, and so forth. 

            After finishing his comments on Matthew 1-2, Fortunatianus introduces a list of the sections of each Gospel which he proposes to interpret:  129 sections from Matthew (consisting of material from 1:17 to 27:51), thirteen sections from Luke (consisting of material from 2:1 to 5:12 (or 5:16, where the episode concludes)), and 18 sections from John (consisting of material from 1:1 to 2:11).  Fortunatianus mentions that he will also comment on a few things that the other Gospels do not cover.  Having this established the borders of the territory to be explored, he proceeds.

What Kind of Interpretation Does Fortunatianus Give?

            While Fortunatianus does not deny the historicity of the reports of events in the Gospels, he consistently interprets them so as to convey a spiritual, typological, or allegorical lesson; as he says in the course of commenting on Matthew 15:  “Even though we can see that these were fulfilled on a literal level, they also have a spiritual meaning” – and this spiritual meaning is his constant quarry. 

A few forms of
the quadrans.

           Two examples may illustrate the quality of Fortunatianus’ interpretive method.  Commenting on Matthew 5:26, he writes:  “The quadrans [the Roman coin that is called a “farthing” in the KJV] is the smallest sin.  It says that you will not come out from there except when the account of all your sins, even of the smallest, has been paid off.  For a quandrans has three dots on it. What do these three dots represent, if not the Trinity?  It is necessary that if anyone does not acknowledge wholeheartedly that the Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is made of one substance, they are called to account for this.  For just as a quadrans consists of one, so the Trinity is of one substance.”

            Modern commentators of all theological persuasions may chuckle at the notion that the true lesson of Jesus’ statement in Matthew 5:26 is about the necessity of belief in the Trinity.  And yet, while we may prefer historically grounded commentaries, how many historically grounded commentaries have you read that mentioned the dots on a quadrans?  

            Occasionally Fortunatianus shares genuinely interesting data-nuggets, and makes some edifying connections.  However, most of what he sees requires some extreme squinting.  Commenting on Matthew 15:28, where Jesus addresses the foreign woman with the words, “O woman,” Fortunatianus perceives that Jesus’ answer began with the letter Ω (that is, in Greek, omega), and that because omega is the last letter of the Greek alphabet, this signifies that it is in the last days that the church has believed in the Son of God, and given Him his due worship.

What Is Fortunatianus’ Canon?

             Fortunatianus described the Septuagint with approval; he quoted Habakkuk 3:2 with its distinct reading; he utilized passages from Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, the Letter of Jeremiah, and Susanna.  This shows that he recognized an Old Testament canon broader than the 39-book canon; yet it cannot be safely assumed that he regarded texts such as First and Second Macabees as authoritative. 

            Fortunatianus utilized passages from Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, First Corinthians, Second Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, First Thessalonians, Second Thessalonians, First Timothy, Second Timothy, Titus, First John, and Revelation.  It is plausible that he simply did not have an occasion to quote from Philemon, Second John, Third John, and Jude – but the lack of quotations from Hebrews is interesting.  Fortunatianus took for granted the authority of Revelation, citing its contents 14 times.

What Theology Does Fortunatianus Promote?

            Fortunatianus affirms orthodox beliefs.  He describes Trinitarian theology as apostolic, and Arianism as deviant.  For the most part, he is more interested in drawing out intellectually stimulating or spiritually edifying lessons from specific passages, one by one.  Although the paths he takes to his conclusions are twisted – any occurrence of the number three will serve as the basis for a lesson about the Trinity – the conclusions themselves are orthodox or, at least, benign.  He affirms that baptism is for the remission of sins; commenting on John 1:12-13 he states that the church bears children of God “through the baptismal font.”

            Fortunatianus seems like a complete stranger to the tradition about the dormition of Mary, expressing a belief that Mary was put to death with a sword, as suggested by the prophecy of Simeon in Luke 2:35.  Another unusual belief to which he subscribes is that the John, though included among the twelve apostles, was quite young during Jesus’ ministry – young enough to be the little child mentioned in Matthew 18:2-4.

            It should probably be noted, in response to some sensationalistic and inaccurate news-reports about Fortunatianus and how he interpreted the Gospels, that Fortunatianus did not deny the historicity of the Gospels’ accounts about Jesus; he simply emphasized the spiritual lessons that he saw in the typological aspect of things.  (Peter Williams has made some brief comments on this theme.)       

                

How Can Fortunatianus’ Commentary Be Accessed?

Dr. Hugh Houghton describes some
of the work involved in translating
Fortunatianus' commentary in a short video.

            DeGruyter has released Dr. Lukas Dorfbauer’s critical edition of Fortunatianus’ commentary on the Gospels as Volume 103 in the Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum series.  It is currently priced at $114.99 and is described as “of extraordinary significance for patristics.”  A most welcome item for academic libraries.  A volume containing analytical essays about Fortunatianus’ work is also available.

            Dr. Hugh Houghton has completed an English translation of Fortunatianus’ commentary.  The translation is also distributed by DeGruyter, and hardcover copies of it may be purchased for $68.99.  The English translation was part of a project funded by the European Research Council, and its funds also made possible the provision of digital versions of Dr. Houghton’s English translation of Fortunatianus’ commentary on the Gospels which are available to download for free in Open Access via a series of links at their website (just scroll down a bit on that page to see the links).  Thank you to all concerned, and congratulations to Dr. Dorfbauer and Dr. Houghton upon the completion of this important work!