LVII. There are then, according to the apostle, those on the summit, [284] the first-created. And they are thrones, although Powers, being the first-created, inasmuch as God rests in them, as also in those who believe. For each one, according to his own stage of advancement possesses the knowledge of God in a way special to himself; and in this knowledge God reposes, those who possess knowledge being made immortal by knowledge. And is not "He set His tabernacle in the sun" to be understood thus? God "set in the sun," that is, in the God who is beside Him, as in the Gospel, Eli, Eli, [285] instead of my God, my God. And what is "above all rule, and authority, and power, and every name that is named," are those from among men that are made perfect as angels and archangels, so as to rise to the nature of the angels first-created. For those who are changed from men to angels are instructed for a thousand years by the angels after they are brought to perfection. Then those who have taught are translated to archangelic authority; and those who have learned instruct those again who from men are changed to angels. Thus afterwards, in the prescribed periods, they are brought to the proper angelic state of the body.
LVIII. "The law of God is perfect, converting souls." [286] The Saviour Himself is called Law and Word, as Peter in "the Preaching," and the prophet: "Out of Zion shall go forth the Law, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem." [287]
LIX. "The testimony of the Lord is sure, making children wise." The covenant of the Lord is true, making wise children; those free from evil, both the apostles, and then also us. Besides, the testimony of the Lord, according to which He rose again after His passion, having been verified by fact, led the Church to confirmation in faith.
LX. "The fear of the Lord is pure, enduring for ever." He says that those who have been turned from fear to faith and righteousness endure for ever.
"The judgments of the Lord are true,"--sure, and incapable of being overturned; and giving rewards according to what is right, bringing the righteous to the unity of the faith. For this is shown in the words, "justified for the same." [288] "Such desires [289] are above gold and precious stone."
LXI. "For also Thy servant keeps them." Not that David alone is called servant; but the whole people saved is called the servant of God, in virtue of obedience to the command.
LXII. "Cleanse me from my secret faults;"--thoughts contrary to right reason--defects. For He calls this foreign to the righteous man.
LXIII. "If they have not dominion over me, then shall I be innocent." If those who persecute me as they did the Lord, do not have dominion over me, I shall not be innocent. For no one becomes a martyr unless he is persecuted; nor appears righteous, unless, being wronged, he takes no revenge; nor forbearing...
[196] [I have prefixed this title, which Mr. Wilson has omitted, possibly because these extracts are themselves somewhat abridged.]
[197] [For all the confusions about Theodotus and the divers persons so called, see Lardner, Credib., viii. 572-579. These are the extracts commonly called the Eclogues or Excerpts of Theodotus; but they do not contain certain passages, which may have been interpolations.]
[198] Spirits.
[199] [See vol. vi., this series, note 9, p. 147.]
[200] Gen. i. 1.
[201] Hos. i. 2.
[202] arche
[203] archen.
[204] Hos. i. 10, 11.
[205] Hos. i. 7.
[206] arche
[207] Hos. v. 2.
[208] "Blow ye the cornet in Gibeah, and the trumpet in Ramah."--A.V.
[209] Hos. v. 8.
[210] Moses who divided the sea, and Joshua who divided the Jordan.
[211] Joshua = Jesus
[212] Gen. i. 2.
[213] [In a quotation which Jones makes from the Excerpts (not found here) the reverse is shamelessly asserted. Canon, vol. i. p. 375.]
[214] diploes--substantive.
[215] Prov. xiii. 24.
[216] hotan oun pistou somatos e.
[217] The sense is hazy, but about as clear as that to be obtained by substituting conjecturally for prosbolen (assault), pros bolen, or epibolen, or epiboulen.
[218] Isa. xl. 6.
[219] 2 Cor. iv. 18.
[220] Matt. vi. 33, 32.
[221] Matt. vi. 27; Luke xii. 25.
[222] Matt. xii. 44.
[223] Deut. xvii. 6.
[224] [This looks as if the text of the three witnesses had been in this compiler's copy of St. John's First Epistle. See vol. iii. Elucid. III. p. 631. St. Augustine also seems to me to sustain the African text in the De Civit., lib. v. cap. xi. p. 154, ed. Migne.]
[225] Matt. v. 6.
[226] Isa. xix. 20.
[227] The reading is, ei me paresei pros to oikeion telos; and the Latin translator renders "si non segnes simus ad finem proprium." It seems better, with Sylburgius, to take ei me as equivalent to ei de me, and to put a comma after me, so as to render as above.
[228] [A happy reference to the Lord's Prayer as connected with St. Paul's reference to the Abba; and it is worth while to compare the use of this word with the prayer as used in the synagogue. Vol. v. Elucid. III. p. 559, this series.]
[229] [A happy reference to the Lord's Prayer as connected with St. Paul's reference to the Abba; and it is worth while to compare the use of this word with the prayer as used in the synagogue. Vol. v. Elucid. III. p. 559, this series.]
[230] Rom. viii. 15; Gal. iv. 6.
[231] Matt. xii. 50.
[232] Matt. xxiii. 9.
[233] Eph. iii. 15.
[234] anthropon.
[235] philanthropos.
[236] 1 Cor. xv. 49.
[237] Matt. iii. 11.
[238] Matt. iii. 12.
[239] Or spirit--pneumatos .
[240] Luke xii. 49.
[241] presbuteroi .
[242] It seems better, with Sylb., to read akribous, qualifying exetaseos (as above), than akribos, adv. qualifying basanizomenon, tested.
[243] 1 Cor. i. 18.
[244] 1 Cor. i. 18.
[245] 1 Cor. i. 18.
[246] gnosis
[247] gnosis
[248] [It is not to be doubted that much sound Alexandrian teaching is here mixed up with folly.]
[249] [Compare Tatian's use of a like figure, vol. ii. note 2, p. 67, this series.]
[250] photes.
[251] photos.
[252] [A Montanist token.]
[253] For ablabes in the text, we must, translating thus, read ablabe. If we translate, as we may, "Gnostic virtue is a thing everywhere good, and meek," etc., no change is required in the reading.
[254] to kalon.
[255] [From some lost work of his.]
[256] Gen. i. 3.
[257] Isa. xliv. 6.
[258] [On these quotations see Lardner, Credib., ii. 256, and Jones, Canon. vol. i. p. 373.]
[259] Wisd. iii. 7.
[260] Ps. xviii. 26.
[261] Luke xxiv. 34.
[262] Ps. xviii. 43.
[263] Ps. xviii. 50.
[264] kteseos, instead of ktiseos, as in the text, and ktesin for ktisin in the next clause.
[265] 'Anastrephei epi monous tous en sarki. For which, as slightly preferable, Sylburg. proposes eti menontas en sarki, as above.
[266] [See note 6, p. 48, supra.]
[267] Adopting the reading moiras, instead of that in the text, peiras.
[268] [See note 6, p. 48, supra.]
[269] Luke i. 43.
[270] Ps. xix. 1. [Here follow notes on successive verses, some not unworthy of an orthodox Father.]
[271] i.e., the covenant.
[272] stereoma .
[273] stereoma .
[274] Ps. xviii. 1.
[275] For ean, which is the reading of the text, Sylburgius' suggestion of eia or eiase has been adopted.
[276] See note 9, p. 3, supra.]
[277] [No doubt he may have said this.]
[278] Or rather, as Sylb. points out, this is a case of the past used for the present, etc.
[279] parousian, katastasin, the reading of the text, is, as Sylburg. remarks, plainly corrupt; parousan, as above, is the most obvious correction.
[280] Matt. xiii. 43.
[281] Gen. i. 18.
[282] meth' here clearly should be kath' or eph'.
[283] If we may venture to change autou into auton.
[284] 'En te akre apokatastasei. The last word yields no suitable sense, and conjecture as to the right reading is vain; and we have left it untranslated. The Latin translator renders "qui in summa arce collocati sunt."
[285] Elios is (with marvellous ignorance of the Hebrew tongue, as Combefisius notices) here identified with Eli, 'ly
[286] Ps. xix. 8.
[287] Isa. ii. 3.
[288] Ps. xix. 12, Septuagint.
[289] hai toiautai epithumiai, for which the Septuagint has epithumeta as in A.V.
Two Epistles Concerning Virginity
Two Epistles Concerning Virginity.
Attributed to Clement of Rome.
[Translated by the Rev. B. P. Pratten.]
Introductory Notice
to
Two Epistles Concerning Virginity.
By Professor M. B. Riddle, D.D.
------------------------
Among the "Pseudo-Clementina" the Two Epistles concerning Virginity must properly be placed. The evidence against the genuineness seems conclusive; yet, with the exception of the homily usually styled the Second Epistle of Clement, [290] no spurious writings attributed to the great Roman Father can be assigned an earlier date than these two letters. Uhlhorn, in view of the reference to the sub-introductæ, thinks they were written shortly before the time of Cyprian; [291] and this seems very probable. Jerome was acquainted with the writings (Ad Jovinum, i. 12), and possibly Epiphanius (Hær., xxx. 15). Hence we may safely allow an early date. Yet these evidences of age tell against the genuineness.
1. Early works of this character would not have disappeared from notice to such an extent, had they been authenticated as writings of Clement. Supporting, as they do, the ascetic tendency prevalent in the Western Church at and after the date when they are first noticed by Christian writers, they would have been carefully preserved and frequently cited, had they been genuine. The name of the great Roman Father would have been so weighty, that the advocates of celibacy would have kept the documents in greater prominence. The silence of Eusebius respecting the letters is an important fact in this discussion.
2. A second argument against the genuineness is derived from the ascetic tone itself. Such pronounced statements are not, we must firmly hold, to be found in the Christian literature of the sub-apostolic age. This historical argument is further sustained by other indications in the epistles. They point to a stage of ecclesiastical development which belongs to a much later period than that of Clement.
3. The use of Scripture in these letters seems to be conclusive against the Clementine authorship. A comparison with the citations in the genuine Epistle of Clement shows that these writings make much greater use of the Pauline (particularly the Pastoral) Epistles; that the Old Testament is less frequently cited, and that the mode of handling proof-texts is that of a later age.
4. The judgment of the most candid patristic scholars is against the genuineness. Of Protestants, Wetstein stands alone in supporting the Clementine authorship; and his position is readily explained by the fact that he discovered the Syriac version which restored the writings to modern scholars (see below). The genuineness is defended by Villecourt and Beelen (see below), also by Möhler, Champagny, and Brück. But such experts as Mansi, Hefele, Alzog, and Funk, among Roman Catholics, unite with Protestant scholars in assigning a later date, and consequently in denying the Clementine authorship.
Translator's Introductory Notice.
While the great mass of early Christian literature bearing the name of Clement of Rome is undoubtedly spurious, the case is somewhat different with regard to the two following epistles. Not only have Roman Catholic writers maintained their genuineness with great ingenuity and learning, but Wetstein, who first edited them, argued powerfully for their being received as the authentic productions of Clement; and even Neander has admitted that they may possibly have been written by that friend and fellow-labourer of the apostles.
Their literary history in modern times is somewhat curious. Wetstein unexpectedly discovered them appended to a copy of the Syriac Peschito version of the New Testament furnished to him by Sir James Porter, then British ambassador at Constantinople. He soon afterwards (1752) published them in Syriac, accompanied by a Latin version of his own, with Prolegomena, in which he upheld their genuineness. This speedily called forth two works, one by Lardner (1753), and a second by Venema (1754), in both of which their authenticity was disputed. To these writings Wetstein himself, and, after his death, Gallandius, published rejoinders; but the question remained as far from positive settlement as ever, and continues sub-judice even at the present day
It is generally admitted (and, of course, asserted by those that maintain their truly Clementine origin) that Greek was the original language of these epistles. Many have argued that they contain plain references to the sub-introductæ spoken of in the literature of the third century, and that therefore they were probably composed in the Oriental Church about that period.
These epistles have been very carefully edited in recent times by the Roman Catholic scholars Villecourt (1853) and Beelen (1856). Both have argued strenuously for the genuineness of the letters, but it may be doubted if they have succeeded in repelling all the objections of Lardner and Venema. Beelen's work is a highly scholarly production, and his Prolegomena are marked by great fulness and perspicuity.