as A. Gellius l. 17. c. 8. saith Guttum concussum vehementius iterum in ollam vertit Some say that the box was made of Stone or Marble and could not be easily broken S. Hieron saith that it was a kind of Marble and we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Nonnus And it may be that these Vessels were more frequently made of stone particularly of that Lapis alabastrites in Pliny l. 36. c. 8. but it is manifest that they were also made of other matter as of Gold or Silver yea Epiphanius de mensuris describes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be a Glass-Vessel as also the Etymologic magnum ap Causaubon says that it signifies among other things a certain Vessel of Glass Pliny saith that Ointments are kept best in these boxes l. 13. c. 2. and l. 36. c. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was among the Presents which Cambyses sent to the King of the AEthiopians see Herodotus in Thalia Epiphanius de mensuris makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to hold a pound of Oyl and so Mary took a pound of Ointment for which Nonnus hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A MS. cited by Baronius An. 32. Num. 22. will have the Woman mentioned S. Luc. â— to have been a Gentile arguing from Deut. 23. 17. where it is said There shall be no Whore of the Daughters of Israel But the Iewish Writers understand this of a common Prostitute one that for hire prostituted her self to the Lust of all comers see Seldon de jur natur l. 5. c. 4. whereas it doth not appear that this Woman was such a publicae libidinis victima though she had lived a lewd and dishonest Life and is therefore called Meretrix by S. Hieron in S. Matth. 26. and S. August ser. 58. de tempore and by the Pers. an impure or unclean Woman Mary Magdalen S. Mat. 27. 56,61 28. 1. S. Mar. 15. 47. 16. 1. S. Luc. 8. 2. 24. 10. S. Ioh. 19. 25. 20. 1. I shall not ingage in the Disputes whether she was the same with the Woman mentioned S. Luc. 7. or with Mary the Sister of Martha Some say that she was Marryed to a great Person who was a Native of Magdala or Magdalum others that her Father was a Noble Man of great Estate and left her the Castle of Magdalum for her Inheritance but Origen Hom. 35. says that she was not noble on any Account save only her following Jesus and ministring to him Some in Nicephorus l. 1. c. 33. say that she was the Daughter of the Woman of Canaan S. Matth. 15. others that she was the Bride in the Marriage at Cana and one Anacletus the Bridegroom Sabellicus reports that she was thirty years in the Wilderness after Christs Ascension but more ancient Writers are silent as to these things When S. Matthew c. 28. tells how this Mary and another Mary laid hold of Christ's Feet he says nothing of Christ's forbidding them yet S. Ioh. 20. he forbad her to touch him the reason of which possibly was this that at that time he perceived her to be in such an Ecstasie of Admiration and Joy that she would not barely touch him but embrace and cleave to him whereas he was for her going quickly to tell his Brethren that he was not yet ascended but should shortly ascend to his Father Some of late have contended that there were three Mary Magdalen's and S. Hieron ad Hedibiam qu. 4. tells of those that affirmed that there were two and S. Ambros. in S. Luc. 23. saith that perhaps there were more than one Of one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we read in Sanhedr fol. 67. 1. Shabbath fol. 104. 2. and Chagigah fol. 4. 2. but in all these places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie not any place from which she had the Denomination but plicatrix one that platted or broided viz. Womens Hair see Chagigah Mary Martha and Lazarus S. Luc. 10. 38. S. Ioh. c. 11. and c. 12. It being not agreed upon as certain that this Mary was the same with Mary Magdalen I set her here as distinct The name Martha occurs in Plutarch in Mario and in the Iewish Writings frequently as in Ievamoth fol. 120. 1. Succah fol. 52. 2. and in Misn. in Ievamoth c. 6. § 4. Because it is said S. Luc. 10. that Martha received Jesus into her House S. Bernard de assumptione Mariae ser. 3. conjectures that she was the elder Sister as others do that she was a Widow and kept the House and that her Brother and Sister lived with her Nonnus seems to have thought that Lazarus's distemper was a Fever for he calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is sometimes used by the Physicians to signifie a Fever as in the Chald. and Syr. it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Supper mentioned S. Ioh. 12. was in Martha's House so S. Chysost who yet acknowledgeth that some were of another mind also Theophylact and to them we may add Theodor. Heracleotes inâ—gr caten who says that Lazarus and his Sisters received Christ. Likewise Origen Hom. 35. in S. Matth. and Euthym. thought that Mary and Martha made that Supper though some have supposed that Simon the Leper made it or perhaps the Town of Bethany at a common charge Theophylact says that on the sixth day before the Passover they begun to Feast more plentifully Epiphanius Haer. 66. mentions a Tradition that Lazarus lived thirty years after his being raised from Death and had lived thirty years before Some say that he never laughed after that he was raised The Hist. Lombardica ap Chemnit feigns that he and his Sisters were descended of Kings Mary the Mother of Iames and Ioses S. Matth. 27. 56 61. 28. 1. S. Mar. 15. 40 41 47. 16. 1. S. Luc. 24. 10. Munster's Hebr. and the AEthiop in S. Matth. 27. 56. read Mary of Iames and the Mother of Iose or Ioseph but the rest of the Versions read as we do or to the same sense S. Hieron in S. Matth. and contr Helvid also Euthymius and Euseb. Emiss or Eucherius in die râ—surrect say that she was our Lords Aunt or his Mothers Sister and to these I should rather assent than to those who would have our Lords Mother to be called the Mother of Iames and Ioses because as they say she was Step-mother to them Mary of Cleopas S. Ioh. 19. 25. Our Translation hath The Wife of Cleopas the Arab. The Daughter of Cleopas in the Greek there is not either Wife or Daughter or Mother so that it is uncertain whether Cleopas was her Son or her Father or her Husband Nicephorus l. 1. c. 33. says that she was begat by Ioseph the Blessed â—irgins Husband of the Wife of Cleopas who was his Brother and had dyed without Issue but if she was Ioseph's Daughter how was she our Lords Mothers Sister She was her Daughter not Sister if Ioseph was her Father Euthymius thought that she was the Wife of Cleopas Ioseph's
should be granted to their relations or others that desired them and Vlpian adds that Augustus wrote in the tenth Book of his Life that he observed this But Verres made Men purchase the Liberty of burying the Bodies of such Cicer in Verrem l. 5. and Quintilian declamat 6. and Theophylact says It is probable that Ioseph purchased the Body of Jesus of Pilate but Pilate was guilty enough otherways we need not load him with this S. Chrysost. in S. Ioh. thought that he was known to Pilate and so went in to him more boldly and had his suit granted It was says Metaphrastes by the perswaâ—ion of the Mother of our Lord that he begged the Body They wrapped the Body of a condemned Person in an old worn linen cloth Megilla fol. 26. 2.4 but Ioseph did not wrap the Body of Jesus so Some relate that he was imprisoned that Night in which he buried his Body and that to comfort him our Lord appeared first to him others say that he was put into a Cell and watched there by the Priests themselves yet miraculously delivered but Baronius An. 34. Num. 192. gives little credit to the latter relation and the former seems not to deserve much Cleopas S. Luc. 24. 13. According to Dorotheus he was also called Simon and was the Lords Cousin-germain and the second Bishop of Ierusalem and as to Simon or Simeon the second Bishop of Ierusalam it is possible that he also had the name of Cleopas for Euseb. l. 3. c. 11. says that Simeon the second Bishop of Ierusalem was the Son of Clopas or Cleopas and so he might be called Cleopas after his Father Some have thought that this Cleopas was that very Cleopas who as Hegesippus saith was the Father of Simeon and Brother of Ioseph the Blessed Virgins Husband but this cannot be if that be true which Nicephorus saith that Ioseph marryed the Widow of his Brother Cleopas see him l. 1. c. 33. for then it is clear that that Cleopas was dead long before our Saviours appearing to our Cleopas Of whom S. Hieron de vir illustr saith that he was of Emmaus and in epitaph Paulae that Jesus being known at Emmaus in the breaking of Bread ejus domum in Eccesiam consecravit The Martyrol Sept. 25. adds that he was slain in the same House for the Confession of Christ see the Menolog Octobâ— 13. The Ancients says Grotius probably thought that both he and the other Disciple who went with him to Emmaus were of the number of the LXX but who that other Disciple was there is no Constat He was Nathanael says Epiphan Haer. 23. S. Luke say some ap Theophylact. and Nicephorus l. 1. c. 34. see Anastas Sinaiâ— in Hex l. 10. one Simon as Origen l. 2. contr Celsum S. Basil also in Isa. calls him Simon though some Copies have Menahem instead of Simon S. Ambros. in S. Luc. 12. calls him Amaus in S. Luc. 2â— Ammaon which Grotius will needs have to be put for Simeon The two Disciples mentioned S. Mar. 16. 12. were the same with these two in S. Luc. 24. in the Opinion of Theophylact and all others that I have consulted except Euthymius Five Hundred Brethren 1 Cor. 15. 6. with Others added to them afterward Act. 2. 41. 4. 4. 5. 14. 6. 1,7 21 20. When it is said 1 Cor. 156. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Chrysost. Oecumenius and Theophylact observe the Ambiguity of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it may either signifie Above referring to the number of the Brethren or From above denoting that Jesus appeared to them from Heaven viz. after his Ascension But Theophylact adds that the most are for the former Interpretation making it to refer to the Number of the Brethren and so do the Syr. Arab. and Vulg. as well as our Translators The Tradition is that this famous appearing to so many was in Galilee upon Mount Tabor see S. Matth. 28. 16. The hundred and twenty mentioned Act. 1. 15. were not the whole number of the Disciples which our Lord had at his Ascension but the Disciples then present amounted to so many The Conversion of the three thousand Act. 2. was the Fruit of Christ's Prayer for his Crucifiers Father forgive them so S. Chrysost. Leo de passione Dom. ser. 11. and S. August in Psal. 93. and ser. 4. de Sanctis As to the five thousand Act. 4. the question is whether they were distinct from the three thousand so that eight thousand in all were now gained by the Apostles Sermons or whether they were now made five thousand in all S. Hieron in Isa. 11. S. Chrysost in S. Matth. Hom. 1. and 32. and in Act. Theodoret. in Zach. 13. S. August Tract 39. in S. Ioh. also contr Crescon l. 4. c. 54. and Oecumen seem all to be for the former Opinion that the five thousand are to be taken as distinct from the other and that they were now in all eight thousand Whether the Men alone came into the computation or the Women also I shall not determine They that were added Act. 5. 14. were of the common sort called the People v. 13. for we are told there that the rest i. e. the Wealthier sort or those that were in Office or place of Rule durst not joyn themselves to the Church for fear of losing their Estates and Places though they were moved to it by the notable Miracles which they saw wrought Ioseph surnamed Barsabas and Iustus Act. 1. 21 c. Some have thought him the same with S. Barnabas lead thereto by the Affinity of the Names but Euseb. l. 1. c. 12. Epiphan Haer. 20. and S. Chrysost. in Act. 4. make them distinct Persons Others say that he was the same with Ioses the Lord's Brother S. Mar. 6. 3. If the Epitome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say true he was that Iustus who was the third Bishop of Ierusalemâ— Dionysius de Divin nomin c. 11. alledgeth one Iustus calling him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Greek Scholiasts on Dionysius viz. Maximus and Pachymeres say that it is this Iustus and call him Ioses even as one of Beza's Copies Act. 1. 23. hath not Ioseph but Ioses Papias ap Euseb. l. 3. c. ult reports that he drunk deadly poison and received no harm by it He was Bishop of Eleutheropolis according to Dorotheus He suffered great Persecution from the Iews and being a glorious Conqueror over all finished his course in Iudea so the Martyrolog Iul. 20. Devout Iews out of other Nations Act. 2. If they had their fixed habitation at Ierusalem of which Opinion S. Chrysost. Oecumen and Theophylact seem to have been it is probable that the general expectation of the Messiah's appearing about that time had brought them thither But others are of Opinion as to many of them that they were come thither only upon occasion of the Feast From the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 5. nothing can be concluded for though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 often