Catena Aurea vs ACCS on the four gospels

Sleiman

I'm considering purchasing the Ancient Christian Commentary Series (on CD-ROM). Sorry I'm not sure if this has been asked before but does anyone have both the Catena Aurea and ACCS and can help shed some light or give an example (or 2) on the main difference between the two with regards to the gospels? Thank you.

Milford Charles Murray

Peace to you, Brother!   *smile*                     To you ...   a man of Peace ...             I have both!

This post is one small portion of Catena (John):

 

παθητὴν) generation, he makes mention of the Word in the first place, in order to destroy the dangerous suspicion, and shew that the Son was from God impassibly. And a second reason is, that He was to declare unto us the things of the Father. (John. 15:15) But he does not speak of the Word simply, but with the addition of the article, in order to distinguish It from other words. For Scripture calls God’s laws and commandments words; but this Word is a certain Substance, or Person, an Essence, coming forth impassibly from the Father Himself.

 

1:1

Ver. 1. In the beginning was the Word,

Chrysostom. (Hom. iv. [iii.] in Joan) While all the other Evangelists begin with the Incarnation, John, passing over the Conception, Nativity, education, and growth, speaks immediately of the Eternal Generation, saying, In the beginning was the Word.

Augustine. (lib. lxxxiii. Quæst. q. 63) The Greek word "logos" signifies both Word and Reason. But in this passage it is better to interpret it Word; as referring not only to the Father, but to the creation of things by the operative power of the Word; whereas Reason, though it produce nothing, is still rightly called Reason.

Augustine. (Tract. super Joan. i. c. 8) Words by their daily use, sound, and passage out of us, have become common things. But there is a word which remaineth inward, in the very man himself; distinct from the sound which proceedeth out of the mouth. There is a word, which is truly and spiritually that, which you understand by the sound, not being the actual sound. (de Trin. l. xv. c. 19. [x.]). Now whoever can conceive the notion of word, as existing not only before its sound, but even before the idea of its sound is formed, may see enigmatically, and as it were in a glass, some similitude of that Word of Which it is said, In the beginning was the Word. For when we give expression to something which we know, the word used is necessarily derived from the knowledge thus retained in the memory, and must be of the same quality with that knowledge. For a word is a thought formed from a thing which we know; which word is spoken in the heart, being neither Greek nor Latin, nor of any language, though, when we want to communicate it to others, some sign is assumed by which to express it.… (Ibid. cap. 20. [xi.]). Wherefore the word which sounds externally, is a sign of the word which lies hid within, to which the name of word more truly appertains. For that which is uttered by the mouth of our flesh, is the voice of the word; and is in fact called word, with reference to that from which it is taken, when it is developed externally.

Basil. (Hom. in princ. Joan.) This Word is not a human word. For how was there a human word in the beginning, when man received his being last of all? There was not then any word of man in the beginning, nor yet of Angels; for every creature is within the limits of time, having its beginning of existence from the Creator. But what says the Gospel? It calls the Only-Begotten Himself the Word.

Chrysostom. (Hom. in Joan. ii. [i.] §. 4) But why omitting the Father, does he proceed at once to speak of the Son? Because the Father was known to all; though not as the Father, yet as God; whereas the Only-Begotten was not known. As was meet then, he endeavours first of all to inculcate the knowledge of the Son on those who knew Him not; though neither in discoursing on Him, is he altogether silent on the Father. And inasmuch as he was about to teach that the Word was the Only-Begotten Son of God, that no one might think this a passible (

Basil. (Hom. in Princ. Joan. c. 3) Wherefore then Word? Because born impassibly, the Image of Him that begat, manifesting all the Father in Himself; abstracting from Him nothing, but existing perfect in Himself.

Augustine. (xv. de Trin. c. 22. [xiii.]) As our knowledge differs from God’s, so does our word, which arises from our knowledge, dif

This post is one small portion of ACCS (John): 

1:1 THE WORD IN THE BEGINNING

Overview

: With the wisdom of an enlightened fisherman (Chrysostom), John brings us the firstfruits of the gospel (Origen). He begins his gospel with the eternal generation of the Son (Chrysostom, Augustine), leaving his human birth from Mary to be understood in the context of this first birth (Hilary). He speaks of the Son as the Word "in the beginning," which, by its very definition, means there can be nothing prior (Cyril of Alexandria). Scripture uses "beginning" in a number of different senses, but here the apostle speaks of the eternal beginning, linking the Word’s generation with the creative wisdom present at the beginning, which, according to Proverbs 8:22, brought about the creation of the world (Origen). He is the light before the world came into being, the intellectual and essential Wisdom existing before the ages (Eusebius), the living Word that was in the beginning with the Father and who was himself God and the voice of God (Cosmas).

Thus, John cannot be dealing strictly with time (Cyril of Alexandria) or ordered sequence, except in the sense of indicating by "beginning" what is before everything else, as Moses wrote at the beginning of his account of creation. In this sense, he contrasts Moses’ account of the beginning of created things with his own account of the beginning when their Creator was already in existence as the author of existence (Theodore). John points to the Father as the archē, that is, the source of the Son (Cyril of Alexandria), who himself as the Son and agent of creation is the source and cause, or "beginning," of all that exists (Augustine).

John’s paradoxical combination of "was" with "in the beginning" leaves us contemplating nothing short of eternity and infinity (Chrysostom, Hilary). In the case of human beings, the word was signifies the past; with God it declares eternity (Chrysostom). The Word of God always was in the beginning and always was (Ambrose) even as he always is (Hilary). The same verb is predicated of the Word when he "was in the beginning" and when he "was with God" (Origen).

The word Logos, which John chooses to use, can signify both "reason" and "word," but here the better translation is "word" because of the power it connotes. A word already exists in our minds even before it is spoken or conceived. But we should not think that the Word of which John speaks is like our human word. In a sense, it is incomprehensible because it is speaking of that which is before form, shape or conception of the mind (Augustine). And yet, just as our words declare what is on our minds (Basil), so also the Word declares to us the mind of God (Tertullian) and those things that were hidden (Ephrem). We forget the power that words have, let alone that the Word has (Augustine). The eternal, creative, divine Word of the Father accomplishes whatever it says, while human words disappear as soon as they are spoken (Athanasius), which is why this Word is set apart from human words that did not even exist in the beginning (Basil).

Sleiman, I can send more!                 If you want more, let us know; and one of us will be glad to oblige you!