Codex Fuldensis Gospel

[Voco_proTatiano]

Hi, I’m Dave, a heretic.
This looks like an interesting site, and I have seen some names I know, so I thought I would look in. My screen name is Voco pro Tatiano: I speak for Tatian: another heretic, but one long gone to another place. But I have to omit a space to get it all in!
Here is a little tale about what I am about…
I am no longer sure how this came about, I was bored, and got on the net, found myself talking to Jews and Muslims, and not a few Christians of many colo(u)rs, about how various peoples had changed their scriptures, and somehow, the Diatessaron was mentioned, as the Gospel, (singular), referred to in the Koran. Then everything went a little blurred, and three years and more passed, and somehow, I, being totally unschooled in Latin, found myself translating the Latin text of the Codex Fuldensis Gospel into English.
My work on this text has convinced me that this is an original compilation, and not a Latin translation from a Semitic tongue.
Thus I am convinced, that though the Latin closely, indeed, for 85% of the text, for Matthew and John, word - for - word, if not letter - for - letter, matches the Clementine Vulgate text, yet this text, if Victor of Capua is to be believed, is from the hand of Tatian himself, so this text must date from AD 200, or thereabouts.
So this is the great mystery which I am now trying to solve.
I have the tiger by the tail, and I cannot release him!

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Dear Friends,
I first posted this in the intro - forum, but quite rightly, it was deemed to be out of place, so I will continue here, and try to amplify on how I think that I come to be here…
Looking back, and oh, how clear hind-sight is, I see that I have been well blessed, though at the times of my blessings, they felt more like cursings.
I tried hard at junior school, but though I made the grade to high-school, I was entered into a lower stream, and was not set to read Latin, only French.
Throughout my schooling, I never achieved my potential, dyslexia was unheard of then: I could read and write, and my spelling and comprehension were adequate. However, my script would have shamed a spider with DTs, and when called upon to produce imaginative word, the spider became comatose.
So I finished high school with the very basics, of Maths, Physics, and Technical Drawing. French, like English, fell at the first fence.
So I started a mechanical apprenticeship, which likewise collapsed, and looking utter failure in the face, I joined the Air-Force.
Lord, it was rough. I would not do it again. But I had put my hand to this plough, and sworn an oath, and I had it to face.
I was an acceptable marksman with the Lee Enfield 303, but hopeless with the Bren. My drill and uniform passed, but only just.
Soon I was allocated a trade, and for the first time, I was treated as something other than a failure, and so I took to it as a duck to water.
My nine year’s service was not easy, and I was never far from trouble. I was a confirmed rebel, but that was no bad thing, as I was always able to see improved ways of doing things, and got several awards for innovation.
After rejoining civil society, I drifted from job to job, starting as a mercenary engineer with the Saudi Arabian Airforce. They were good times, and I learned a smattering of Arabic, and struggled with Arabic script. I bought a copy of an English interpretation of the Koran, and discussed Islam with some of the Saudi Airmen I met. Then Beirut happenned, and as we had to transit Beirut to get to and from Saudi, I decided that it was no longer a safe situation.
So ‘misfortune’ brought me back to UK, I re-established a friendship with a girl I had been acquainted with years earlier, and soon we were married.
Margaret soon gave me a son and daughter, and though I was still drifting in jobs, there was real progress in my career, and a mechanic grew into an engineer.
I had always been fascinated by control systems and instrumentation, and my last work prior to unwelcome early retirement was in the field of digital signal processing.
So I was on the industrial scrap-heap at just 57. No-one wanted an electronic engineer at that age, they all wanted ‘wet-behind-the-ears’ university graduates. Yes, I had become an old ‘stick-in-the-mud’, and yes this was/is a time for new ideas.
Nevertheless, early retirement did bring a small pension, so I was not facing serious hardship, a few temporary jobs later, I took a temporary job as a Lab assistant at our local school. That lasted a couple of years in all, then Margaret’s mother had a stroke. We could not face putting her in a home, so as neither of us were tied down, we both agreed that we would put our lives on hold, and care for her.
End of Part One

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

So part two starts, about four years ago, with us moving to Yorkshire to look after Margaret’s mother, Annie.
To my shame, I have a poor personal interface, and there had always been not the best of relations between Annie and me. I had taken her daughter away from her, and now, as her reasoning was becoming hazy, I was from time to time seen as an enemy. I was thus consigned to the shed, and called upon, only when needed.
So I had much spare time, and so, to ease the boredom, I was most evenings on-line.
My interest in the Middle East drew me into discussion forums where I met up with Muslims, Jews, and Christians of all colours. Before long, I found myself investigating the Diatessaron, as this seems to have been the single Gospel which the Koran mentions.
So I searched the net for this document, and found a very badly scanned and OCRed version on the net. I tried very hard to clean up the OCR errors, and after much effort, I was able to post my results, which though a vast improvement, were still far from satisfactory. This was my first foray into the Diatessaron:
members.aol.com/GospelOfTatian/
I discussed the Diatessaron with not a few other interested parties, and being told that the text was accurate in terms of sequence, but inaccurate in terms of content of the sections, I foolishly thought to substitute, verse for verse, equivalent texts from the KJV Gospels. Though this looked better, I was forced to conclude that this was no more than familiarity with the KJV text making it seem more comfortable. In cold analysis, this was purely subjective. I tried the same procedure with the Douay-Rheims Gospels, and even with Murdock’s translation of the Pesheeta Gospels. The Douay-Rheims was a very poor fit, but the Pesheeta translation was very natural. I felt quite pleased with the latter result, but again, in cold analysis, the text was not actually improved. All this work indeed was futile.
But what I had learned was that I could substitute Gospel verses, or fragments of for fragments of the Diatessaron. This was Fragment Substitution in action. Yes, it was English to English, but the procedure was well defined.
About this time, now about two years ago, I found an electronic version of Sievers’ transcription of the Codex Sangallensis, witnessing the Codex Fuldensis. The text was Latin, and Old High German.
I remembered the Douay-Rheims Gospels, and how stilted the English was, and guessed that this was a very literal translation of Jerome’s Latin, so I set out a two column set of the Gospels, carefully matching verse for verse, and correcting verse boundaries where needful, then using this as a key. I started translating by Fragment Substitution. I was amazed at how easy it was. Looking back, I can see how I have been led from stage to stage, learning skills, and facing tasks only when ready.
This has made me feel uncomfortable. I feel like one who has been led by the nose. My feeling is ‘Why me? I am no linguist, certainly I am no Latinist! Why have I been given this task?’
What I do know is that no-one else wants to do it.
There exists to this date no other translation, save that which I have been guided to effect.
So this is my tale.
You can find my latest work at:
sangallen56.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
I invite you to criticise it
I have done the translation honestly, and I am offering it to Catholics because it is a Catholic document.

 

[The_Augustinian]

Excuse me, I find it hard to understand what you are talking about. Can you use proper paragraphs? Frankly, if you are a heretic, I don’t even know what heresy you support.

 

[Whiggamore]

Fascinating.

Tatian was not a heretic, despite his reputation; he was the missionary of the countries around the Euphrates. Therefore following his teachings wouldn’t necessarily make you a heretic.

It seems unlikely that Tatian’s Diatessaron would be the harmony of the gospels mentioned in the Koran, known by Muslims, as the former document was replaced by the four canonical gospels individually by Theodoret 200 years before Muhammed. It is possible that Muslims were familiar with Ammonius Saccas Diatessaron, a revision of Tatian’s. Either are possible.

There are of course already translations of the Diatessaron, but yours is still quite interesting.

Did you also translate the rest of the Codex Fuldensis aside from the Diatessaron?

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Excuse me, I find it hard to understand what you are talking about. Can you use proper paragraphs?

Do you mean a blank line between paragraphs?

Frankly, if you are a heretic, I don’t even know what heresy you support.

Dear friend,
Thankyou for looking. Yes my postings are confused. That is because I am confused. I know a picture is crystalizing, but I cannot yet recognise it.
As to my heresy, well, nominally, I am Anglican, but my beliefs are quite heterodox, and somewhat of a mish-mash, yes, confused. I do not support any particular heresy, but I do feel sympathy for Nestorians and Arians, but not in great detail, certainly the dualistic implications of Arian Gnosticism, I totally reject.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Fascinating.

Tatian was not a heretic, despite his reputation; he was the missionary of the countries around the Euphrates. Therefore following his teachings wouldn’t necessarily make you a heretic.

It seems unlikely that Tatian’s Diatessaron would be the harmony of the gospels mentioned in the Koran, known by Muslims, as the former document was replaced by the four canonical gospels individually by Theodoret 200 years before Muhammed. It is possible that Muslims were familiar with Ammonius Saccas Diatessaron, a revision of Tatian’s. Either are possible.

I am not the first to postulate that both ‘Tatian’ and ‘Ammonius’ are both ‘noms de plume’ of the same person. Their skills, characters, interests and histories seem to be excessively consecutive. Tatian disappears into hyperspace about the same time as Ammonius, a man with no past appears from nowhere. Yes that theory requires Tatian to meet with Justinian at about the age of 14, and to live to the ripe old age of 120. Both of these are unlikely, but neither is impossible.

There are of course already translations of the Diatessaron, but yours is still quite interesting.

Did you also translate the rest of the Codex Fuldensis aside from the Diatessaron?

No, I only had access to the transcription by Sievers, or rather an electronic version thereof, taken from the Codex Sangallensis witness of the Codex Fuldensis.
My belief though is that the rest of the CF is quite normal, apart from Loadacians, which can be found on-line.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Fascinating.

There are of course already translations of the Diatessaron, but yours is still quite interesting.

Hi Whiggamore,
I have to clear up one point here.
The Diatessaron translation commonly found on the net is that of Hope W Hogg of the Arabic of Ibn at Tayyib.
My translation is of the Codex Fuldensis gospel, and there is not at present, to the best of my knowledge, any other English translation of this work.
It has been suggested by some cognocenti, that the Codex Fuldensis gospel is Tatian’s Diatessaron, translated into Latin, by substituting Vulgate phrases for the equivalent Syriac in the Tatianic Diatessaron.
I can refute this, for not only has the sequence of sections been changed, including additions and deletions, further, the fine detail of the weaving in nominally equivalent sections is very different. I have to conclude that the CF Gospel is an original work in its own right. It might have been inspired by Tatian’s work, as a plethora of so-called diatessarons seem to be, or it might indeed have been Tatian’s Diatessaron reworked on the basis of new information. I believe this new information was in the form of Latin Gospels. Victorius Africanus, the first African Pope, who died in AD 199, had the liturgy translated into Latin. Shortly after his death, in his home town of Carthage, a set of Latin Gospels was in use. These were the Vetus Latina of Carthage.
Can it be that the CF Gospel is a witness of the Carthaginian VL?

 

[rr1213]

As to my heresy, well, nominally, I am Anglican, but my beliefs are quite heterodox…

I hate to say it, but “of course”.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

I hate to say it, but “of course”.

You are entitled to your throw-away line.
I invited it by confessing to heresy.
I would, though, have expected something more positive from a senior member.
My search for the Truth is primarily Gospel based, and my faith in the ‘Tent Maker’ is limited.

 

[rr1213]

You are entitled to your throw-away line.
I invited it by confessing to heresy.
I would, though, have expected something more positive from a senior member.
My search for the Truth is primarily Gospel based, and my faith in the ‘Tent Maker’ is limited.

I said “of course” because I am a former Episcopalian and I have some idea of the apostacy that takes place in Anglican circles. All very disheartening to see a once great Church rejecting the Scriptures and engaging in heresy. I also see no valid way to separate the Four Gospels from Pauls’ letters since they both teach the Gospel of Christ.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

I said “of course” because I am a former Episcopalian and I have some idea of the apostacy that takes place in Anglican circles. All very disheartening to see a once great Church rejecting the Scriptures and engaging in heresy. I also see no valid way to separate the Four Gospels from Pauls’ letters since they both teach the Gospel of Christ.

Dear RR,
If you read the Gospel carefully, it soon becomes clear that Our Lord treated the women especially those in his circle as nearer equals that did Paul: remember Him sending forth the Samaritan woman whom he had spend some time instructing. It is clear also, maybe from necessity, that he commissioned some to ministry. How else could He minister to harems, which of course did then exist, and also to children.
Paul’s attitude was, on the other hand, to present the teaching as friendly to Rome, and as inoffensive to the synogogues. More spin than substance. Nevertheless, there are those who take complexion as color. The commandment of Paul against women, was not to disturb the peace in the Jewish synogogues. Taking it to cover all aspects of teaching is not well founded. Even today, Jews accept that women teach the children.
Paul can I accept, be relied upon to reflect the atmosphere of the time, and his agent, Luke, presents his witness in that vein, but it is the words of Our Lord which interest me, not the words and the subsequent actions of those followers who were not witnesses.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Hi Friends, I just posted this on another Catholic site, and I thought you might like to see it here. If I have done wrong by mirroring a posting I appologise, and will not repeat the offense, but if you like the idea, I will continue.

Using data publicly available from:
catholic-ew.org.uk/liturgy/Calendar/2006/Oct06.html
and The Sunday Missal to cross-check
This Week’s Gospel: Mk 10: 35/42 - 45 in Vulgate reckoning
(22nd-October-2006) Twenty-nineth Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year B

The Son of Man came to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
sangallen56.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Page182.htm#CXII
and following pages to 185.
Start at second paragraph fo the longer reading, and the second sentence in the last paragraph of page 183 for the shorter reading.
The text here given is the complete capitum, starred with the alternative start points.

CXII. Ubi Ihesus de passione sua discipulis suis iterum indicavit et mater filiorum Zebedæi rogat pro filiis suis.
Then taking again the twelve, he said to them: Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and all things shall be accomplished which were written by the prophets concerning the Son of man. He shall even be betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes, and they shall deliver him to the Gentiles and he shall be mocked and scourged and spit upon and crucified, and the third day shall rise again.
*Then came to him the mother of the sons of Zebedee with her sons, worshipping and asking something of him. He said to her: What wilt thou? She saith to him: say that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left, in thy kingdom. And Jesus answering, said: You know not what you ask. Can you drink the chalice that I shall drink, or be baptised with the baptism wherewith I am baptised? They say to him: We can. He saith to them: My chalice indeed you shall drink; and with the baptism wherewith I am baptised you shall be baptised. But to sit on my right or left hand is not mine to give to you, but to them for whom it is prepared by my Father.
And the ten, hearing it, were moved with indignation against the two brethren. **But Jesus called them to him and said: You know that the princes of the Gentiles lord it over them; and that they that are the greater, exercise power upon them. It shall not be so among you: but whosoever is the greater among you, let him be your minister, and he that will be first among you shall be your servant. Even as the Son of man is not come that he might be ministered unto, but that he might minister and to give his life a redemption for many.

The introductory paragraph is heavily woven from all three synoptics, but the main reading is witnessed by Matthew with minor additions from Mark.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Since no-one has objected, I will continue the posting…

Using data publicly available from:
catholic-ew.org.uk/liturgy/Calendar/2006/Oct06.html
and The Sunday Missal to cross-check
This Week’s Gospel: Mk 10: 46 - 52 in Vulgate reckoning
(29th-October-2006) Thirtieth Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year B

** Master, let me see again.**
sangallen56.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Page187.htm#CXV
and the next page.
The reading closely corresponds to the following capitum

CXV. Ubi Ihesus iterum duos cæcos curavit.

And when they went out from Jericho, a great multitude followed him. And behold two blind men, of whom was Bartimeus the son of Timeus, sitting by the way side heard that Jesus the Nazarene passed by. And they cried out, saying: O Lord, thou son of David, have mercy on us. And the multitude rebuked them that they should hold their peace. But they cried out the more, saying: O Lord, thou son of David, have mercy on us.
And Jesus stood and called them and said: What will ye that I do to you? They say to him: Lord, that our eyes be opened. And Jesus having compassion on them, touched their eyes, and immediately they saw and followed him glorifying God. And all the people, when they saw it, gave praise to God.

The capitum is mainly witrnessed by Matthew, with minor additions from Mark and Luke.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Using data publicly available from:
catholic-ew.org.uk/liturgy/Calendar/2006/Oct06.html
and The Sunday Missal to cross-check
This Week’s Gospel: Mk 12: 28 - 34 in Vulgate reckoning
(5th-Novemberber-2006) Thirty First Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year B

** This is the first commandment. The second is like it.**
This reading is witnessed in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Luke, however continues with the tale of the Good Samaritan. I mark the beginning of Luke’s unique addition to this reading with **, otherwise, the reading corresponds with the capitum.

CXXVIII. Ubi scriba interrogat Ihesum: quod mandatum maximum est in lege?

But the Pharisees, hearing that he had silenced the Sadducees, came together. And there came one of the scribes, a doctor of the law, tempting him and saying: Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said to him: The first commandment of all is:
Hear, O Israel:
the Lord our God is one God,
and thou shalt love the Lord
thy God
with thy whole heart
and with thy whole soul
and with thy whole mind
and with thy whole strength.
This is the first and the greatest commandment.
And the second is like to this:
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
On these two commandments dependeth the whole law and the prophets.
And the scribe said to him: Well, Master, thou hast said in truth that there is one God and there is no other besides him. And that he should be loved with the whole heart and with the whole understanding and with the whole soul and with the whole strength. And to love one’s neighbour as one’s self is a greater thing than all holocausts and sacrifices.
And Jesus seeing that he had answered wisely, said to him: Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. Thou hast answered right. This do: and thou shalt live.**
But he willing to justify himself, said to Jesus: And who is my neighbour?
And Jesus answering, said: A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho and fell among robbers, who also stripped him and having wounded him went away, leaving him half dead.
And it chanced, that a certain priest went down the same way: and seeing him, passed by. In like manner also a Levite, when he was near the place and saw him, passed by.
But a certain Samaritan, being on his journey, came near him: and seeing him, was moved with compassion: and going up to him, bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine: and setting him upon his own beast, brought him to an inn and took care of him. And the next day he took out two pence and gave to the host and said: Take care of him; and whatsoever thou shalt spend over and above, I, at my return, will repay thee.
Which of these three, in thy opinion, was neighbour to him that fell among the robbers? Thereupon he said: He that shewed mercy to him. And Jesus said to him: Go, and do thou in like manner.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Using data publicly available from:
catholic-ew.org.uk/liturgy/Calendar/2006/Nov06.html
and The Sunday Missal to cross-check
This Week’s Gospel: Mark 12: 38,(41) - 44 in Vulgate reckoning
(12th-Novemberber-2006) Thirty Second Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year B

Part one.

** This poor widow has put in more than all.**
The shorter reading corresponds well with the first paragraph of:

** CXVIII. Ubi Ihesus prætulit ceteris viduam propter duo æra minuta adiungens parabulam de Phariseo et publicano contra eos qui se extollunt.**

**And looking on, he saw the rich men cast their gifts into the treasury. And he saw also a certain poor widow casting in two brass mites, which make a farthing. And calling his disciples together, he saith to them: Verily, I say to you that this poor widow hath cast in more than they all. For all these have of their abundance cast into the offerings of God: but she of her want hath cast in all the living that she had.
**And to some who trusted in themselves as just and despised others, he spoke also this parable: Two men went up into the temple to pray: the one a Pharisee and the other a publican. The Pharisee standing, prayed thus with himself: O God, I give thee thanks that I am not as the rest of men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, as also is this publican. I fast twice in a week: I give tithes of all that I possess.
And the publican, standing afar off, would not so much as lift up his eyes towards heaven; but struck his breast, saying: O God, be merciful to me a sinner. I say to you, this man went down into his house justified rather than the other: because every one that exalteth himself shall be humbled: and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
And leaving them, when now the eventide was come, he went out of the city into Bethania and remained here. And the multitude, knowing he had left the city, followed him: and he receiving them, healed them who had need of healing.

This reading is primarily witnessed by Luke, with minor insertions from Mark and Matthew.

End of part one: Part two follows immediately.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Part two:
The first four verses of the longer reading, corresponding to Canon135 of Mark, are found in an entirely different place:

** CXLI. Ubi Ihesus loquitur ad turbas et discipulos de scribis et Pharisæis.**

Then Jesus spoke to the
multitudes and to his disciples, saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses: all things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not. For they say, and do not.
For they bind heavy and insupportable burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders: but with a finger of their own they will not move them.
**And all their works they do for to be seen of men. For they make their phylacteries broad and enlarge their fringes and love to walk in long robes.
And they love the principal places at feasts and the principal chairs in the synagogues, and salutations in the market place, and to be called by men, Rabbi.
** And all the people heard him gladly.
But be not you called Rabbi. For one is your master: and all you are brethren.
And call none your father upon earth; for one is your father, who is in heaven.
Neither be ye called masters: for one is your master, Christ.
He that is the greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled: and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
** Woe to you, Pharisees, because you love the uppermost seats in the synagogues and salutations in the marketplace.
Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, lawyers, hypocrites, for you have taken away the key of knowledge, and you shut the kingdom of heaven against men: for you yourselves do not enter in and those that are going in, you suffer not to enter.
Woe to you Pharisees, hypocrites, who devour the houses of widows under the pretence of long prayer, you shall receive greater damnation.
** Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you go round about the sea and the land to make one proselyte. And when he is made, you make him the child of hell twofold more than yourselves.
Woe to you, blind guides, that say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but he that shall swear by the gold of the temple is a debtor. Ye foolish and blind: for which is greater, the gold or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?
And whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gift that is upon it is a debtor. Ye blind: for which is greater, the gift or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?
He therefore that sweareth by the altar sweareth by it and by all things that are upon it, and he that sweareth by the temple sweareth by it and by him that dwelleth in it, and he that sweareth by heaven sweareth by the throne of God and by Him that sitteth thereon.
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you tithe mint and anise and cumin and rue and every herb, and have left the weightier things of the law: judgement and mercy and faith and the charity of God.
These things you ought to have done and not to leave those undone. And leaders of the blind, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel.
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you make clean the outside of the cup and of the dish, but within you are full of rapine and uncleanness.
Thou blind Pharisee, first make clean the inside of the cup and of the dish, that the outside may become clean.
Woe to you, because you are as sepulchres that are not visible: and men that walk over are not aware.
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you are like to whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear to men beautiful but within are full of dead men’s bones and of all filthiness.
So you also outwardly indeed appear to men just: but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
And one of the lawyers answering, saith to him: Master, in saying these things, thou reproachest us also.
But he said: Woe to you lawyers also, because you load men with burdens which they cannot bear and you yourselves touch not the packs with one of your fingers.
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, that build the sepulchres of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the just, and say: If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
Wherefore you are witnesses against yourselves, that you are the sons of them that killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
You serpents, generation of vipers, how will you flee from the judgement of hell?

This reading is primarily witnessed by Matthew with minor insertions from Luke and Mark.

End of part two. The last paragraph had to be omitted due to character count. Part three follows immediately.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Part three, the final paragraph.
The first four verses of the longer reading, corresponding to Canon135 of Mark, are found in an entirely different place:

** CXLI. Ubi Ihesus loquitur ad turbas et discipulos de scribis et Pharisæis.**

For this cause also the wisdom of God said: I will send to them prophets and apostles: and wise men and scribes: and some of them you will put to death and crucify: and some you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city, that upon you may come all the just blood that hath been shed upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the just, even unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias, whom you killed between the temple and the altar.
Indeed I say to you, all these things shall come upon this generation.

This reading is primarily witnessed by Matthew with minor insertions from Luke and Mark.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Using data publicly available from:
catholic-ew.org.uk/liturgy/Calendar/2006/Nov06.html
and The Sunday Missal to cross-check
This Week’s Gospel: Mark 13: 24 - 32 in Vulgate reckoning
(19th-Novemberber-2006) Thirty Third Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year B

** He will gather his chosen from the four winds…**
The last two paragraphs of the capitum referenced below, (only those quoted), and the next capitum complete.

** CXLV. Ubi sedente Ihesu in monte Oliveti interrogant eum discipuli: quod signum erit adventus tui vel eorum quæ dixisti? et prædicat eis de eversione Hierusalem et signis et prodigiis.**

And immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun shall be darkened and the moon shall not give her light and the stars shall fall from heaven and the powers of heaven shall be moved. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven. And then shall all tribes of the earth mourn: and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with much power and majesty. And then he shall send his angels with a trumpet and a great voice: and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the farthest parts of the heavens to the utmost bounds of them.
But when these things begin to come to pass, look about and lift up your heads, because your redemption is at hand.

The above is primarily witnessed by Matthew, with a single verse from Luke.

** CXLVI. De parabola ficulneæ.**

And from the fig tree learn a parable: When the branch thereof is now tender and the leaves come forth, and all the trees, when they now shoot forth their fruit, you know that summer is nigh.
So you also, when you shall see all these things have happened, know ye that it is nigh, even at the doors.
Indeed I say to you that this generation shall not pass until all these things be done. Heaven and earth shall pass: but my words can not pass.
And take heed to yourselves, lest perhaps your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting and drunkenness and the cares of this life: and that day come upon you suddenly: for as a snare shall it come upon all that sit upon the face of the whole earth.
Watch ye, therefore, praying at all times, that you may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that are to come and to stand before the Son of man.
For ye know not when the time is. For of that day and hour no one knoweth, neither the Son nor the angels in heaven, but the Father alone.

The above is primarily witnessed by Matthew and Luke, with a small (name removed by moderator)ut from Mark.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Dear Friends,
I have decided that the Codex Fuldensis is part of the set of Sacred Scripture, so have decided to continue the illustration of the translation on that sub-forum of tis forum.
Any points raised by the readings will be commented on in this forum.
This week, the comment will be on the translation of the Latin ‘Iudaeus’, commonly translated as ‘Jew’.
Tgose reading the Gospel with an open mind will see that when this word, so translated is used, it is in comparison, or opposition to Gallileans, Samaritans or Romans. In other words it is used in the context of nationality, not of religion or race.
Hence I have translated the word as ‘Judean’.

Best regards,
Dave.