being shortened to Mattai in post-Biblical Hebrew. In Greek it is sometimes spelled Maffflaios, B D, and sometimes MarOaws, CEKL, but grammarians do not agree as to which of the two spellings is the original. Matthew is spoken of five times in the New Testament; first in Matt., ix, 9, when called by Jesus to follow Him, and then four times in the list of the Apostles, where he is mentioned in the seventh (Luke, vi, 15, and Mark, iii, Is), and again in the eighth place (Matt., X, 3, and Acts, i, 13). The man designated in Matt., ix, 9, as "sitting in the custom house", and "named Matthew" is the same as Levi, recorded in Mark, ii, 14, and Luke, v, 27, as "sitting at the receipt of cus- tom". The account in the three Synoptics is identical, the vocation of Matthew-Levi being alluded to in the same terms. Hence Levi was the original name of the man who was subsequently called Matthew; the MaSBaTos \ey6fiepo! of Matt., ix, 9, would indicate this. The fact of one man having two names is of frequent occurrence among the Jews. It is true that the same person usuall,y bears a Hebrew name such as " Shaoul " and a Greek name, IlaCXos. However, we have also examples of individuals with two Hebrew names as, for instance, Joseph-Caiphas, Simon-Cephas, etc. It is probable that Mattija, "gift of laveh", was the name conferred upon the tax-gatherer by Jesus Christ when He called him to the Apostolate, and by it he was thenceforth known among his Christian brethren, Levi being his original name. Matthew, the son of Alpheus (Mark, ii, 14) was a Galilean, although Euse- bius informs us that he was a Syrian. As tax-gatherer at Capharnaum, he collected custom-duties for Herod Antipas and, although a Jew, was despised by the Pharisees, who hated all publicans. When summoned by Jesus, Matthew arose and followed Him and ten- dered Him a feast in his house, where tax-gatherers and sinners sat at table with Christ and His disciples. This drew forth a protest from the Pharisees whom Jesus rebuked in these consoling words: "I came not to call the just, but sinners." No further allusion is made to Matthew in the tiospels, except in the list of the Apos- tles. As a disciple and an .\postle he thenceforth fol- lowed Christ, accompanying Him up to the time of His Passion and, in Galilee, was one of the witnesses of His Resurrection. He was also amongst the Apos- tles who were present at the Ascension, and afterwards withdrew to an upper chamber, in Jerusalem, praying in union with Mary, the Mother of Jesus, and with his brethren (.Acts, i, 10 and 14).
Of Matthew's subsequent career we have only inac- curate or legendary data. St. Irena;us tells us that Matthew preached the Gospel among the Hebrews, St. Clement of Alexandria claiming that he did this for fifteen years, and Eusebius maintains that, before go- ing into other countries, he gave them his Gospel in the mother tongue. Ancient writers are not as one as to the countries evangelized by Matthew, but almost all mention Ethiopia to the south of the Caspian Sea (not Ethiopia in Africa), and some Persia and the king- dom of the Parthians, Macedonia, and Syria. Accord- ing to Heracleon, who is quoted by Clement of Alex- andria, Matthew did not die a martyr, but this opinion conflicts with all other ancient testimony. Let us add, however, that the account of his martyrdom in the apocryphal Greek writings entitled " Martyrium 8. Mattha-i in Ponto " and published by Bonnet, " .\cta apostolorum apocrypha " (Leipzig, 1898), is absolutely devoid of historic value. Lipsius holds that this "Martyrium S. Matthsi", which contains traces of Gnosticism, must have been published in the third century. There is a disagreement as to the place of St. Matthew's martyrdom and the kind of torture inflicted on him, therefore it is not known whether he was burned, stoned, or beheaded. The Roman Martyrology simply says: "S. Matth:pi, ([ui in ^Ethio- pia pra?dicans martyrium passus est". Various writ- ings that are now considered apocryphal, have been
attributed to St. Matthew. In the " Evangelia apo- crypha" (Leipzig, 1876), Tischendorf reproduced a Latin document entitled: "De Ortu beata; Maria; et infantia Salvatoris", supposedly written in Hebrew by St. Matthew the Evangelist', and translated into Latin by Jerome, the priest. It is an abridged adapta- tion of the " Protoevangelium " of St. James, which was a Greek apocryphal of the second century. This pseudo-Matthew dates from the middle or the end of the sixth century, and M. Aman has just given us a new edition of it: " Le Prot^vangile de Jacques et ses remanienients Latins" (Paris, 1910). The Latin Church celebrates the feast of St. Matthew on 21 September, and the Greek Church on 16 November. St. Matthew is represented under the symbol of a winged man, carrying in his hand a lance as a char- acteristic emblem.
Matthew, Saint, Gospel op. — I. Canonicity. — The earliest Christian communities looked upon the Books of the Old Testament as Sacred Scripture, and read them at their religious assemblies. That the Gos- pels, which contained the words of Christ and the nar- rative of His life, soon enjoyed the same authority as the Old Testament, is made clear by Hegesippus (Eusebius, " Hist, eccl.", IV, xxii, 3), who tells us that in every cit.y the Christians were faithful to the teach- ings of the law, the prophets, and the Lord. A book was acknowledged as canonical when the Church re- garded it as Apostolic, and had it read at her assem- blies. Hence, to establish the canonicity of the Gos- pel according to St. Matthew, we must investigate primitive Christian tradition for the use that was made of this document, and for indications proving that it was regarded as Scripture in the same manner as the Books of the Old Testament.
The first traces that we find of it are not indubitable, because post-Apostolic writers quoted the texts with a certain freedom, and principally because it is difficult to say whether the passages thus quoted were taken from oral tradition or from a written Gospel. The first Christian document whose date can be hxed with comparative certainty (95-98), is the Epistle of St. Clement to the Corinthians. It contains sayings of the Lord which closely resemble those recorded in the First Gospel (Clement, xvi, 17 = Matt., xi, 29; Clem., xxiv, 5=Matt., xiii, 3), but it is possible that they are derived from Apostolic preaching, as, in chapter xiii, 2, we find a mixture of sentences from Matthew, Luke, and an unknown source. Again, we note a similar commingling of Evangelical texts elsewhere in the .same Epistle of Clement, in the Doctrine of the Twelve Apostles, in the Epistle of Polycarp, and in Clement of Alexandria. Whether these texts were thus coml lined in oral tradition or emanated from a collection of Christ's utterances, we are unable to say. — The I'pist Ics of St. Ignatius (martyred 110-17) contain no literal quotation from the Holy Books; nevcrtlic'icss, St. Igna- tius borrowed expressions and some .sontciicos from Matthew ("Ad Polyc", ii, 2=Matt., x, 16; "Eph.", xiv, 2=Matt., xii, 33, etc.). In his " Epistle to the Philadelphians" (v, 12), he speaks of the Gospel in which he takes refuge as in tlu' Flesh of .Icsus; conse- quently, he had an I';vangelical colN'ciion which he re- garded as Sacred Writ, ami wo caiuiot doul>t that the Gospel of St. .\laltliew formed i)art of it.— In the Epis- tle of St. Polvc.'irp ( 1 10-17), we finil various passages from St. Matthew quoted literally ( xii, 3=Matt., v, 44; vii, 2=Matt., xxvi, 41, etc.). — The Doctrine of the Twelve Apostles contains sixty-six passages that recall the Gospel of Matthew; some of them arc literal i|Uota- tions (viii, 2=Matt., vi, 7-13; vii, l = Matt., xxviii, 19; xi, 7=Matt., xii, 31, etc.).— In the .so-called Epistle of Barnabas (117-30), we find a passage from St. Mat- thew (xxii, 14), intro<luccd by the scriptural formula, <5s y4ypaTrTat, which proves that the author considered