The book of Tobit, found in Orthodox and Catholic Bibles, is not just a story about Tobit and his son Tobias (during the Assyrian captivity in the eighth century BC), but it is a wonderful source of moral instruction, liturgical typology, and prophecy. Many of the Early Church Fathers believed that the book of Tobit was Old Testament canonical Scripture, starting with Apostolic Fathers such as Clement of Rome and Polycarp of Smyrna. Greek Fathers such as Clement of Alexandria and John Chrysostom also believed it was canonical, as well as the Syriac Father Ephrem, and Latin Fathers such as Ambrose of Milan and Augustine of Hippo, etc. Origen and Jerome quoted from the book of Tobit for various reasons, but they took issue with its canonicality. Unlike many of the more popular Biblical books such as Psalms, the Gospels, and Paul’s epistles, verse-by-verse commentary on Tobit is near to non-existent among the Early Church Fathers. Ambrose of Milan did an exposition on Tobit that mainly focuses on lending, which is very lengthy and is by no means a user-friendly text to look up passages and their interpretations. An allegorical interpretation was written on the book of Tobit by Bede the Venerable. Lots of good interpretations and insights can be gleaned from the Church Fathers despite the lack of verse-by-verse commentaries on Tobit, because when many of the Fathers would teach about various topics, they would quote from or reference to the book of Tobit and oftentimes elaborate on those passages. In this commentary on the book of Tobit, many quotes are drawn from the Early Church Fathers that form sort of a catena or a compilation of annotations. Many passages in Tobit have multiple annotations from different Church Fathers, and they are not intended to be systematic to support one sense or school of thought. Rather the intention is for the reader to have on hand quotes that provide interpretations and patristic usages that allow the readers to decide for themselves what they want to glean from. Many sources from various Church Fathers collections of writings were consulted from English translations, Latin, and Greek collections. The Bibliorum Sacrorum cum Glossa Ordinaria (Venice, 1603, volume 2) was a helpful resource because it is a version of the Glossa Ordinaria that has many interpolations that were added much later than the original glosses of the Glossa Ordinaria, and they were generally all Church Fathers quotes. There are plenty of annotations in this commentary that have been translated for the first time into English, most notably the synopsis of Athanasius of Alexandria and a couple of sermons by Augustine of Hippo. The book of Tobit is found in the Greek Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate, as well as among other early Bible versions. Tobit is also found among the fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls, four in Aramaic and one in Hebrew. It is not certain whether the book of Tobit was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic. The English translation of the Greek Septuagint made by Sir Lancelot Charles Lee Brenton (Published in 1851) was used as the Scripture text for this commentary. Minor changes were made to make it easier on the ears by replacing the thee’s, thou’s, thine’s, etc. into their modern equivalence. In this introduction, little detail has been given about the story of Tobit and has been limited (by design) for the sake of letting the Early Church Fathers do the talking on the book of Tobit. The sole purpose for this commentary is not a study on the Church Fathers themselves, but rather a study of the Scriptures through the eyes of the Fathers for enlightenment of the Sacred Scriptures. Why are the Early Church Fathers so important when studying the Bible These words of John Henry Newman explains their importance as witnesses. “When they (Early Church Fathers) speak of doctrines, they speak of them as being universally held. They are witnesses to the fact of those doctrines being received, not here or there, but everywhere. We receive those doctrines which they thus hold, not merely because they hold them, but because they bear witness that all Christians everywhere then held them. We take them as honest informants, but not as a sufficient authority in themselves, though they are an authority too. If they were to state these very same doctrines, but say, “These are our opinions; we deduced them from Scripture, and they are true,” we might well doubt about receiving them at their hands. We might fairly say, that we had as much right to deduce from Scripture as they had; that deductions of Scripture were mere opinions; that if our deductions agreed with theirs, that would be a happy coincidence, and increase our confidence in them; but if they did not, it could not be helped-we must follow our own light. Doubtless no man has any right to impose his own deductions upon another, in matters of faith. There is an obvious obligation, indeed, upon the ignorant to submit to those who are better informed; and there is a fitness in the young submitting implicitly for a time to the teaching of their elders; but beyond this, one man’s opinion is not better than another’s. But this is not the state of the case as regards the primitive Fathers. They do not speak of their own private opinion; they do not say, “This is true, because we see it in Scripture” -about which there might be differences of judgments-but, “this is true, because in matter of fact it is held, and has ever been held, by all the Churches, down to our times, without interruption, ever since the Apostles:”-where the question is merely one of testimony, whether they had the means of knowing that it had been and was so held; for if it was the belief of so many and independent Churches at once, and that as if from the Apostles, doubtless it cannot but be true and Apostolic.” [John Henry Newman, Tracts for the Times, Volume 5, page 1-2, J. G. F. & J. Rivington, & J. H. Parker, Oxford, 1840]