Matthaeus[1] enim dixit: Amen dico tibi quia in hac nocte antequam Gallus cantet, ter me negabis. Lucas[2] autem, dico tibi, Petre, non cantabit hodie Gallus, donec ter abneges, nosse me: Ioannes[3] autem: Amen, amen dico tibi, non cantabit Gallus donec ter me neges.

For Matthew said: Verily I tell you that on this night before the cock crows you will deny me thrice. And Luke, I say to you, Peter, the cock will not crow today until you thrice deny that you know me. And John: Verily, verily I tell you, the cock will not crow until you deny me thrice.

Divus Augustinus[4] hanc tractans difficultatem, sic eam putat dissolvendam, ut dicantur tres Evangelistae dixisse trinam Petri negationem futuram ante Galli cantum, quia ante {illam} <illum> coepta fuit, et in ipso etiam animo consummata, ut sic sit dictum: Ter me negabis, quomodo si alicui diceretur; Antequam cantet Gallus ad me scribes epistolam, in qua mihi ter {convitiaberis} <conviciaberis>. Id enim vere quis dixerit, etiamsi epistola non fuerit absolvenda ante omnem cantum Galli, sed ante cantum Galli incoepta.

Saint Augustine, discussing on this difficult passage, thinks it should be resolved in this way, so that the three Gospel writers may be said to have affirmed that a threefold denial of Peter would take place before cockcrow, because it had been commenced and also consummated in his mind, so that words could run thus: You will deny me three times, as if it were said to someone: Before the cock crows you will write me a letter in which you will revile me three times. Someone would rightly affirm that, even if the letter were not to be completed before any cockcrow, nevertheless was started  before the cockcrow.

Quo vero dilucidiora haec videantur D. Augustini verba ascribere non gravabor, quae talia sunt. Diversis <enim> verbis, et verborum ordine eandem explicaverunt sententiam dixisse Dominum, quod antequam Gallus cantaret, ter eum Petrus esset negaturus. Rursus si totam trinam negationem ante peregisset, quam cantare Gallus inciperet superfluo dixisse Marcus deprehenderetur ex persona Domini. Amen dico tibi quia tu hodie in nocte hac prius quam Gallus bis vocem dederit, ter me negaturus es. Quid enim attinebat dicere prius quam bis, quando si ante primum Galli cantum tota illa trina negatio compleretur simul, et ante secundum, et ante tertium, et ante omnes Galli cantus eiusdem noctis completa inveniretur, quae ante ipsum primum impleta probaretur. Sed quia ante primum Galli cantum coepta est illa trina negatio, attenderunt illi tres, non quando eam completurus esset Petrus, sed quanta futura esset, et quando coeptura, id est, quia trina, et quia ante Galli cantum, quamquam in animo eius, et ante primum Galli cantum, peracta sit tota illa trina negatio: tamen affectione animi, et timore Petri ante primum tota coepta est. Nec interest quantis morarum intervallis trina voce enunciata sit, cum cor eius etiam ante primum Galli cantum tota possiderit: tam magna scilicet formidine imbibita ut posset Dominum non solum semel, sed et iterum, et tertio interrogatus negare. Et rectius diligentiusque attendentibus, quomodo iam moechatus est mulierem in corde suo, qui eam viderit ad concupiscendum: sic Petrus quandocumque verbis {a}ederet timorem, quem tam vehementem animo conceperat, ut perdurare possit usque ad tertiam Domini negationem, tota trina negatio ei tempori deputanda est, quando eum trinae negationi sufficiens timor invasit. Ex quo etiam, si post primum Galli cantum {inciperet pulsatio interrogationibus potuere} <inciperent, pulsato interrogationibus pectore,> verba illa negationis erumpere, nec si<c> absurde, atque mendaciter ante Galli cantum ter negasse diceretur, quando, et ante Galli cantus timor obsederat mentem, qui eam posset usque ad tertiam negationem perducere. Multo minus igitur movere debet, quia trina negatio etiam trinis negantis vocibus ante Galli cantum coepta, etsi non ante primum Galli cantum peracta est. Tanquam si alicui diceretur, hac nocte antequam Gallus cantet, ad me scribes epistolam, in qua mihi ter conviciaberis: non utique si eam ante omnem Galli cantum finiret, ideo dicendum erat, falsum fuisse praedictum. Marcus ergo de ipsarum vocum intervallis planius elocutus est, qui dixit ex persona Domini. Priusquam bis Gallus vocem dederit, ter me negaturus es. Ita gestum esse apparebit, cum ad eundem locum narrationis Evangelicae venerimus, ut etiam illic ostendatur Evangelistas sibi congruere. Si autem quaeruntur ipsa omnino verba, quae Petro Dominus dixerit, neque {invenire} <inveniri> possunt, et superfluo quaeruntur, cum sententia eius, propter quam cognoscendam verba proferuntur, etiam in diversis Evangelistarum verbis possit esse {novissima} <notissima>. Sive ergo diversis sermonum Domini locis commotus Petrus singillatim ter enunciaverit praesumptionem suam, et ter ei Dominus suam negationem praedixerit, sicut probabilius {indicatur} <indagatur>: sive aliquo narrandi ordine possint omnium Evangelistarum commemorationes in unum redigi, quibus demonstretur semel Dominum praedixisse Petro praesumenti, quod eum negaturus esset, nulla hic Evangelistarum repugnantia deprehendi poterit, sicut nulla est. Hactenus D. Augustinus.

But since these words of Saint Augustine seem rather clear, I won’t regret to quote them so as they are. For they - the Evangelists - related with different words and with a different sequence of words the same phrase the Lord said, that is, before the cock should crow, Peter was to deny Him thrice. Furthermore if he went through the whole triple denial before the cock began to crow, Mark would be embarrassed personally by the Lord for having spoken beyond the reality. Verily I say unto thee, that today, during this night, before the cock crowed twice, thou will deny me thrice. For, of what importance would it be to say before the second time, since that entire threefold denial would have been totally fulfilled, and would have found itself totally fulfilled both before the second and the third and before all the cockcrowings of that same night, being that it would have proved itself fully realized before the first crowing itself. But since that threefold denial was started before the first crowing of the rooster, those three Evangelists did not pay attention to when Peter would have carried out it, but of what entity would have been, and when it would have been started, that is, since it would have been threefold and before the crowing of the rooster, nevertheless all that threefold denial had been completed in his mind and before the crowing of the rooster: nevertheless it all was begun before the first crowing by the disposition of mind and by the fear of Peter. Neither it does matter at how many intervals of time it has been enunciated because of a triplex crowing, since it all possessed also his heart before the first crowing of the rooster: it was certainly imbued by such a big fear that, questioned, he was able to deny the Lord not only once, but twice and thrice. And for those who rather better and with more diligence pay attention, it is as when in his hearth has by now committed adultery with a woman he who has looked her to covet her: thus Peter in any moment would declare the fear he had conceived so strong in the mind so that he succeeded in withstanding up to the third negation of the Lord, all the threefold denial is to be ascribed to that time when a sufficient fear of the third negation invaded him. Therefore if even those words of denial, having been his heart struck by doubts, had begun to burst out after the first crowing of the rooster, it could not be told so absurdly and mendaciously that he had denied three times before the crowing of the rooster, since also before the crowings of the rooster the fear had occupied the mind and the former could lead it up to the third negation. Therefore it has to shake very less, since the threefold denial was started before the crowing of the rooster also with a triplex voice of he who denies, even if it has not been completed before the first rooster’s crowing. As if to someone it was said, this night before the rooster crows you will write me a letter in which you will insult me thrice: not necessarily if he had carried out it before whatever crowing of the rooster, therefore it was necessary to say that the forgery had been foretold. Then Mark has spoken more clearly with regard to the intervals of the crowings themselves since he told it taking it from the Lord himself. Before the rooster has crowed twice, you will have denied me thrice. It will be clear that things occurred in this way when we will reach the same verse of the evangelical narration, so that also here is shown that the Evangelists are in agreement. For if the words themselves the Lord would have said to Peter are inquired into depth, they cannot even be found, and they are in vain investigated, since his affirmation, to know which the words are alleged, also in the different words of the Evangelists it could be very well known. Or therefore Peter moved by different passages of the discourses of the Lord could have expressed singularly thrice his rashness and the Lord would have foretold to him thrice his denial, as with great probability it is discovered: or through a some order of narration all the Evangelists could be made as only a thing, through which it could be shown that only once the Lord foretold to Peter that he was foreseeing that since he would have denied him, in this regard no contrast of the Evangelist would have been detected, as no one is existing. Until here the words of Saint Augustine.

Verum eiusmodi eius solutionem non esse convenientem ex eo patere vult Cornelius Iansenius[5] Episcopus Gandavensis, quod tres illi Evangelistae, qui dicunt Dominum dixisse, Petrum negaturum se ter, antequam Gallus cantaret, postea ostensuri impletam fuisse Domini praedictionem, omnes tres Petri negationes narrent ipso opere impletas priusquam tradant Gallum cecinisse. Unde, inquit, patet eos non illo sensu accepisse, quod nunc dicunt, Dominum dixisse Petrum se negaturum ante Galli cantum: quia ante eum trina negatio erat incipienda, sed quia ante eum erat consummanda. Proinde omissis aliis rationibus, quibus quidam student conciliare Evangelistas, dicendum est tres Evangelistas de illo loqui cantu Galli, qui ab hominibus maxime solet observari, a quo scilicet ultima noctis pars, quae quarta olim dicebatur vigilia, dicitur Gallicinium[6]. Duabus enim potissimum vicibus Galli in nocte canere {consuevernnt} <consueverunt>: semel non diu post medium noctis, et secundo, cum iam adhuc duo, aut tres, vel circiter noctis horae supersunt: quoniam in cantu perseverant usque ad tempus, quod conticinium[7] dicitur, a quo secundo cantu quarta noctis vigilia [264] dicitur Gallicinium.

Really, Cornelis Jansen bishop of Gent thinks that such his solution clearly turns out not suitable since those three Evangelists, who affirm that the Lord said that Peter would have denied him three times before the rooster crowed, who subsequently would have shown that the prediction of the Lord had come fully true, all three of them narrate that the denials of Peter just fulfilled themselves before reporting that the rooster had crowed. Then, he says, it is clear that they didn’t mean it in that sense, since they now say that the Lord said that Peter would have denied him before the crowing of the rooster since the triplex denial had to begin before it, but because it had to have ended before it. Insofar, laid aside the other lucubrations with which some try hard to reconcile the Evangelists, we must say that the three Evangelists speak of that crow of the rooster which mostly is usually taken into consideration by human beings, and precisely that one thanks to which the last part of the night, that once was said fourth watch, is called gallicinium - crow of the rooster, dawn. For the roosters get into the habit of crowing twice in succession during the night: once not very afterwards the midnight and the second time when are still remaining almost two or three hours, or approximately, of the night: since they are perseverant in crowing up to that moment that is said conticinium - the moment of the silence, the first part of the night -, and the fourth nighttime watch is said gallicinium from second crow.