u

THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS

FIRST PART

VOL. II.

i
 Pi 6^6T

:he apostolic fathers

PART I.

S. CLEMENT OF ROME.

A REVISED TEXT
WITH INTRODUCTIONS, NOTES, DISSERTATIONS,
AND TRANSLATIONS.

BY THE LATE

J. B. LIGHTFOOT, D.D., D.C.L., LL.D.,

LORD BISHOP OF DURHAM.

VOL. n.

ILontion :

MACMILLAN AND CO.

AND NEW YORK.
1890

Rigilts

#
\^All rese7-ved.\
 \^

:
ainbrilige

PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS

AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

^(JP^
 TABLE OF CONTENTS.

SECOND VOLUME.

THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT.

PAGE
INTRODUCTION. 14
The authorities for the text. Other sources of evidence. Symbols used.

TEXT AND NOTES. 515

THE SO-CALLED SECOND EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT.

INTRODUCTION. 191210
The attribution to Clement in the manuscripts [191]. External evidence
against this [192, 193]. The designation 'to the Corinthians' [193, 194].
Internal evidence. Not an Epistle, but a homily [194 197]. Probably
delivered in Corinth [197 199]. Harnack's theory of its Roman origin
considered [199 201]. Limits of date [201 204]. Theories of authorship,
(i) Bryennios' theory, Clement of Rome [204 206]. (ii) Hilgenfeld's
theory, Clement of Alexandria [206, 207]. (iii) Harnack's theory, the
Clement mentioned in Hermas [207, 208]. Analysis [208 210].

TEXT AND NOTES. 211 261

The lacuna in the Alexandrian Manuscript. 263 267

Corrigenda in the collation of the Constantinopolitan Manu-
I
script. 268

TRANSLATIONS.
1. THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT TO THE CORINTHIANS. 27 305 r

2. AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 306316

vi TABLE OF CONTENTS.

HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS.
PAGE
INTRODUCTION. 317- 3i8

by his personality and life.

Interesting problems presented
covery of the Philosophumena.
his intimate connexion with (i)
The dis-
His relation to our main subject through
the early history of the Roman Church,

(ii) the earliest

western list of Roman bishops.

1. ANCIENT REFERENCES TO HIPPOLYTUS. 318365

1 Chair of Hippolytus [324326]. 3 Eu-
I Hippolytus [318324].
sebius [326, 327]. 4 Liberian Chronographer [328]. 5 Epiphanius [328].
7 Damasus [328, 329].
6 Apollinaris? [328]. 8 Hieronymus [329331].
Palladius [338]. 12 Theo-
9 Rufinus [331]. 10 Prudentius [332 338].
1 1

doret [338, 339]. 13 Gelasius [340]. 14 Andreas of Cassarea [340]. 15 Li-

ber Pontificalis 16 of Scythopolis [343]. 17 Gregory of

[340342]. Cyrillus
Tours 18 Eustratius of Constantinople [343].
[343]. 19 Stephanus Gobarus
[343]. 20 Leontius of Byzantium [343]. 21 Chronicon Paschale [344]-
22 Concilium Lateranense [344]. 23 Anastatius Apocrisiarius [344,
345]. 24 Anastatius Sinaita [345]. 25 Pseudo-John of Damascus [345].
id Germanus of Constantinople [345]. 27 Pseudo-Chrysostom [346].
28 Georgius Syncellus [346]. 29 Nicephorus [346]. 30 Georgius Hamar-
tolus [347]. 31 Photius [347 349]. 32 CEcumenius [349]. 33 Zonaras
[349]- 34 Suidas [349]. 35 Nicephorus Callistus [349? 350]. 36 Ebed-
Jesu [350]. 37 Inscriptions relating to reliques [351, 352]. 38 Itineraries
[352 354]. 39 Western Service Books [354, 355]. 40 Calendars and
Martyrologies [355, 356]. 41 Florus-Beda [356, 357]. 42 Ado of Vienne

[357 360]. 43 Mencea [361, 362]. 44 S. Petrus Damianus [362].

45 Passio Sancti Sixti Laurentii Hippolyti [363, 364]. 46 Acta SS.
Cyriaci Hippolyti Aureae etc. [364, 365].

2. MODERN LITERATURE. 365370

3. NAMESAKES OF S. HIPPOLYTUS. 370377
Points of contact with the story of the son of Theseus [370]. Five other
namesakes, real or imaginary persons [371]. (i) Hippolytus the martyr
of Antioch [371, 372]. (2) Hippolytus the Alexandrian connected with
Dionysius [372]. Hippolytus the Greek captain of brigands [373 376].
(3)

(4) Hippolytus the soldier, the warder of S. Laurence [376]. (5) Hippolytus
of Thebes [377].

4. GAIUS OR HIPPOLYTUS. 377388

Was there such a person as Gaius? [377]. Works ascribed to him [377].
The 'Refutation of all Heresies' proved not his, but Hippolytus' [378].
' '

Yet the author of the Refutation must have written all the works ascriljed
to Gaius, except the 'Dialogue with Proclus' [378 380]. The 'Dialogue'
too by Hippolytus. Gaius simply the name of the orthodox disputant,
wrongly considered the author [381, 382]. All facts predicated of Gaius i

are predicable of Hippolytus [382, 383]. Testimony of the Letter of the

Smymx-ans [383]. The evidence of Eusebius [383, 384]. Presumption
 TABLE OF CONTENTS. vil

PAGE
that Hippolytus wrote against Montanism [384 386]. The argument from
style [386]. Objections met [386, 387]. The Heads
'

against Gaius' [388].

5. THE LITERARY WORKS OF HIPPOLYTUS. 388405

Introduction [388]. (i) Biblical and Exegetical [389 395]. (2) Theo-
logical and Apologetic [395 399]. (3) Historical and Chronological [399].

(4) Heresiological [400 403]. Spurious Hippolytean works [403 405].

6. THE MURATORIAN FRAGMENT. 405413

Metrical passages embedded Verse employed for
in Irenseus [405 407].
theological teaching and for lists of the scriptures [407]. The Muratorian
Canon, history, date and country [407]. A translation from a Greek
treatise in verse [408 411]- The notice of Hermas common to the Mura-
torian Canon and the Liberian Catalogue, and Salmon's inference [411, 412].
The treatise probably by Hippolytus [412]. Included among the titles on
the Chair [412, 413]. Its date [413].

7. THE COMPENDIUM AGAINST ALL THE HERESIES. 413418

8. THE REFUTATION OF ALL HERESIES. 418

9. TABLE OF THE LITERARY IVORA'S OF HIPPOLYTUS. 419421

10. EARLY AND MIDDLE LIFE OF HIPPOLYTUS. 422, 423
His connexion with Irenxus [422]. With Origen [423].

11. WAS HIPPOLYTUS A NOVA TIAN? 424427

The Damasus' inscription [424].
allegation of Prudentius derived from
Damasus' statement avowedly based on hearsay [425]. Contemporary
ignorance of Hippolytus' history [425]. Considerations on the other side;
(i) the silence of Cyprian and the Liberian Catalogue, (ii) the chronology

[425427]-

12. THE SEE OF HIPPOLYTUS. 427434

Ignorance of early writers on this point [427, 428]. His allocation to
Bostra based on a blunder [428]. Le Moyne's inference untenable [429].
His association with the see of Portus Eastern in origin [429, 430].
Theories of Bunsen and Dollinger [430432]. Most probably 'bishop of
the Gentiles,' with Portus as head-quarters [433, 434]-

13. HIPPOLYTUS THE PRESBYTER. 435,436

Unique position of Hippolytus among contemporaries [435]. The title

'presbyter' represents not office, but dignity [435]. To whom applied [435].
Subsequently misunderstood [436 ].

14. LATER YEARS, BANISHMENT, AND DEATH. 436440

The and Callistus [436]. Peace of the Church,
pontificates of Zephyrinus
internal and external, under Urbanus [437]- Literary activity of Hippo-
lytus [437]. Death of Alexander Severus succeeded by the persecution
under Maximin [437, 438]. Banishment of Ponlianus and Hippolytus
to Sardinia [438, 439]. Their death, and deposition [439, 440].
Vill TABLE OF CONTENTS.
PAGE
15. THE STATUE OF HIPPOLYTUS. 440442
16. POSTHUMOUS HONOURS AND SANCTUARIES. 442468
(1) The cemetery of Hippolytus in the Ager Veranus [44'2]. His
sanctuary there [443 445]- Evidence of Prudentius [445]. The Romanus
commemorated by Prudentius [446 451]. Thesanctuary and festival
described by Prudentius [451 453]. Gradual decadence of this shrine [454,
455]. The adjacent cemetery of S. Laurence [455]- Importance and
architectural history of the basilica of S. Laurence [456 458]. Reliques
of Hippolytus transferred thither [459, 460]. Consequent transformation in
the personality of Hippolytus [460]. Hippolytus the gaoler substituted for
Hippolytus the divine [460 463]. Subsequent history of the cemetery of
Hippolytus [463, 464]. (2) The sanctuary on the Vicus Patricius [464, 465].
(3) The sanctuary at Portus [466]. {4) The castle and commemoration at
Fossombrone [466,
467]. Reverence paid to Hippolytus outside Italy,
especially in France [467, 468].

1
7. SPURIOUS A CTS OF HIPPOL YTUS.
Acts of the Laurentian Cycle. 468 474
Acts of the Portuensian Cycle.
_j^7^__^^y

APPENDIX.
1. S.PETER IN ROME. 481502
2. THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS. 503512

INDICES.
1. INDEX OF SCRIPTURAL PASSAGES. 515517
2. INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER. 518532 J
THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT
TO

THE CORINTHIANS.

CLEM. n.
 number, two Greek manu-
authorities for the text are three in

THE scripts and a Syriac version.

Codex Alexandrbms (A), where the Epistles of Clement
(i)
are added to the New Testament an uncial manuscript probably
;

It is fully described above, i. p. ii6

belonging to the fifthcentury.
sq. It is much blurred and worn, and a leaf has disappeared
towards the end of the First Epistle. Thus it omits from 57 a.v&
wv yap -^liKovv to the end of 63. In the Second Epistle it breaks
off at 12 oiJTe apo-cv ouVe Qy\\v touto, the end of the manuscript
being lost. The so-called v icjjiXKva-TtKov is almost uniformly in-
serted. All deviations from this authority in my text are noted in
the apparatus criticus beneath. The lacunae in this manuscript are
not stated, except where a various reading is concerned ; but a
complete list is given at the end of the Epistles.
(2) Codex Constantinopolitatius (C), a cursive manuscript dated
A.D. 1056, and containing the whole of the Two Epistles. It is

described fully above, i.

p. 121 sq. The v <^Xkuo-tikoi/ is syste-
or two exceptions.
matically omitted, though there are one
All the

variations of this manuscript likewise are recorded beneath, with the

exception of the v c'^eAKvo-TtKov which it seemed unnecessary to

notice.

(3) Syriac Version (S), where the Epistles of Clement are found
incorporated among the Epistles of the New Testament in the
Philoxenian (Harclean) version. The extant manuscript is dated
A.D. 1 170. This authority also is described fully in the introduc-
tion, I.
p. 129 sq. How far this version may be accepted as evidence
for the text, and to what extent it seemed advisable to record
the variations from the Greek, I have there stated with sufficient

precision.

The relations of our three authorities to each other, and the value
to be assigned to each, are considered at length in the general intro-

duction.

I 2
4 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT.

Besides these authorities (the manuscripts and the version) we have

two other sources of evidence; (i) Clement quotes very largely from
the Lxx, and the text of the lxx therefore may be used as a testimony.
But discretion must be exercised since the degree of accuracy in quot-
ing must be a matter of experience
and we cannot even assume, where
;

there are variations, that the reading which agrees with the lxx text
a tendency to restore the actual
gives the actual words of our author,
form of the original being noticeable in transcribers ; (2)Clement him-
self frequently quoted by
is later
fathers, especially by namesake
his

Clement of Alexandria. But here again discretion is needed, for the

fathers notably the Alexandrian Clement often quote very loosely
and from memory.

Where our chief authority (A) deserts us, it is necessary to be espe-

cially careful in dealing with the others.
On this account I have given
the variations of the Syriac version in greater fulness in these parts
than elsev/here as this is the only check on possible errors in the one
;

Greek manuscript (C) which we possess here. In these same parts I '

have uniformly inserted the v icfteXKvaTiKov, though wanting in C, be-

cause it would certainly have had a place in A, and therefore presumably
represents the original text of Clement.

A very few words only are necessary to explain the notation. The
authorities are designated as above A, C, S. Where an authority omits
any word or words,
'
this is signified by om.' ; where it is defective by !

mutilation or otherwise, so that we cannot the reading, this

tell is ex-

pressed by def.'
'
Where the reading is when
doubtful, as for instance |

impossible to say what Greek text the Syriac version represents, the
it is !

abbreviation is 'dub.' The abbreviations 'app.' and 'prob.' stand for '

' '

apparently and probably'. The square brackets [ ] in the text imply

'

that it is doubtful whether the words or letters so enclosed

ought to <

stand as part of the original text. The word Clem in the textual ' '

notes signifies Clement of Alexandria ; and, where necessary, the re-

ference to the page of Potter's edition is added. ;

(
 ....^^r"'^^

]3^, w. y^ -^y-tv Y''

nPOC KOPIN0IOYC.
'H 'GKKAHCIA tov Oeov tj TrapoiKOva-a
'

Pcojuriv

npoc KOpiNGioyc] For the titles of this epistle in the several authorities
see I.
pp. 117, 122, 131.

'The Church of Rome to the inavix^av napoiKel (Toipia, ov KaroiKel,

Church of Corinth, elect and con- de Conf. ling. 17 (l. p. 416) /carw-
secrate greeting in Christ Jesus.'
;
ov^ wf eVi ^fvrjs
Krjaav (OS iv Trarpidi,
On the form of the address, as TrapMKrjaav, Greg. Naz. Oral, xiv (l.
connected with the question of the p. 271) TIS TTjf KaTO) <TKrjvf)U KOI TTjV

authorship, see the introduction, i. avco TToXiv (diaiprjaei) ; tls irapoiKiav

p. 352 sq. Kai KaToLKLOP ; Oral, vii (l. p. 200) (k
The writer's name
suppressed is TTjs napoiKias eis Trjv KaroiKiav p,eTa-
here, as it seems also to have been (rKfva(6p,voi comp. Gen. xxxvi. 44
:

suppressed in another letter of the (xxxvii. l) KUTcoKfi 8e 'laKtu/3 ev rrj yrj ov

Church of Rome to the Church of TrapaKTjaev 6 Trarrip avroii iv yij Xavaav,
Corinth written more than half a Heb. xi. 9, Luke xxiv. 18. Thus ndp-
century later during the episcopate oiKos, rrapoiKflv, TrapoiKia, are said of
of Soter see Dionys. Corinth, in
;
the captivities of Egypt (Acts vii. 6
Euseb. H. E. iv. 23. from LXX, xiii. 17) and of Babylon
This address is imitated in the (Theoph. ad Ant. iii.
25, 28). See
openings of three early Christian especially the uses of irapoiKelv, kutoi-
documents at least; (i) The Epistle Kelv, in reference to the migrations of
of Polycarp^ see I. p. 149 (2) The ; Israel, in Judith v. 7 10. Of these
Letter of the Sniyrnceans, giving an captivities the present earthly condi-
account of Polycarp's martyrdom, tion of the Christian people is the
see Ignat. and Polyc. I. p. 610 sq ; antitype (Heb. iv. i).

(3) T\\& Apostolic Constitutions. For (2) Connected with this primary
other openings which has influenced
it conception the secondary idea of
is

(though in a less degree), see the note no}i-citizensliip. In the inscriptions

on napoiKova-a below. '
the sojourners
'
are opposed to '
the
I.
napoiKovcTa] ^sojourning in.' citizens,' C. I. G. 3595 oi re TroXirai
(i) The primary idea in this word is Koi 01 TvapoiKoi TvavTfs (comp. ib. 1
625,
transitoriness. The distinction be- 1631, 2906, 3049). The Christians are
tween TTapoiKOi a tempora?y and kox- no citizens on earth. They dwell in
oLKosa permanent resident appears the world as aliens, ^ivoi, irapeTVL^-qpoi,
from Philo Sacr. Ab. et Cain % 10 TrapoiKoi, I Pet. i. u comp.
17, ii. ;

(l. p. 170) o yap rots eyKVKkion p-ovoLS Heb. xi. 13. So too Clem. Rom. ii.
 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT

Trj eKK\t]a-ia tov Oeou rfi TrapoLKovari Kopivdov, k\}]-

ToT^f riyiaa-fJievoL^
ev deXruuari Oeov hid rov Kvpiou

3 navTOKparopos] A ;
rod wavTOKpaTopos C (comp. Ap. Const. I. i). 5 ai(t>vi-

tov Tols ciTTo Ta>v TrapoiKiwv ev ais err^peiTO,

^ 5 KaraXeiyJAavTei ttjv TrapoiKiav

Koafiov TovTov (comp. C. I. G. 9474 Apollon. in Euseb. H. E. v. \% ^ I8ia

TOV ^iov TOVTOV Trjv wapoiKiav), Kp. ad napoLKia avrov ZSev rjv ovk ihe^aTo :

whence It seems
Dioi^n. 5 TTorpiSas oiKovaiv I8ias aXX pa7'ochia, parish.
(OS napoiKoi,' ixeTf)^ov(ri navraiv cos no- not strictly correct to say that irapoi-
Xirat Koi travff VTrofifvovaiv cos ^ivoi ira- Kia was equivalent to the later term
aa avrmv kul iracra for irapoiKia, though it is
^ivr] Trarpis ecrriv 8ioiKr]a-ts ;

narpls ievrj, where the writer is de- sometimes a synonyme for SioiKrjo-tr

scribing the Christians. A good (e.g. Conc.Aiicyr.Ca.n. 18), appears to

illustration of this sense of napoiKelv have been used much more generally.
is Orig. c. Ccls. iii. 29 aX 8e rov XpicrTov The explanation often given of rrapoi-

fKukrja-iai, (TVPf^eTa^ofievai Tois (ov Tvap- Kia,as though it denoted the aggre-
oiKOvai drJiJLMV iKKXrjaiais, as (jxaaTrjpis gate of Christian communities in the
elcnv ev Koo-p-w, ib. 2P eKKXrjaias tov ncighboiirJiood of a large town, re-
Qfov napoiKovcras eKKkrjcriais tov Kad ceives no countenance from the earliest
noKiv drjpav.
eicaa-TTjv Compare also usage of TrapoiKos., etc. ; for the prepo-
the parable in Hermas Vz's. i. i. In sition is not local but temporal, and
the prologue to Ecclesiasticus ol ev denotes not proximity but traiisito-
TjinapoiKla are the Jews of the dis- riness. For the accusative after irapoi-

persion, so that napoiKia is almost Kelv see the note on Polyc. Phil, inscr.

equivalent to hacnvopa; and, as the I. kXtjtoIs K.T.X.] Taken from the

latter word is transferred to the salutation in i Cor. i.
i, 2, ijyiaapevois
Christian people, the spiritual Israel ev XpitTTa 'irjcrov, kXtjtoIs ayiois. Cle-
(l Pet. i. I TrapeTTihripoLS diacnropas), SO ment not unnaturally echoes the lan-
is the former. Hence the form of guage of S. Paul's Epistle to the
address here, which appears also Corinthians, even where he does not
Polyc. P/ti/. TJI eKuXrjo-iq. tov Qeov rfi directly quoteit.
Similarly the Epi-
TrapoiKov(TT] ^tXi-mrovs, Mart. Polyc. j)
stleof Ignatius to the Ephesians pre-
TrapoiKoixra '2p.vpvav k.t.\., Dionys. Co- sents parallels to S. Paul's Epistle to
rinth, in Euseb. H. E. iv. 23 ttj napoi- the same church, especially in the
Kovcrr] ropTvvav, Epist. Gall, in Euseb. opening salutation. The same rela-
H.E. V. I o\ ev BuvvT) Koi Aovydovvai ttjs
tion again exists between Polycarp's
TaWias napoiKovvres 8011X01 XptoroC. Epistle to the Philippians and the
From this the substantive irapoiKia corresponding letter of S. Paul. For
came to be used in a concrete sense, the meaning of rjyiaa-pivois, conse- '

'
the body of aliens,' for the Christian crated to be God's people,' see the
brotherhood in a town or district. notes on toIs ayiois Phil. i. i.
The earliest instances which I have 3. X'^P''^ /c.r.X.] xfipif vjjuv KOI elprjvij
observed are J/^zr/./'^'/y^.inscr. naaais is the common
salutation in S. Paul,
Tais Kara navra tottov ttjs excepting the Pastoral Epistles. With
dyias Koi
KaOoXiKTjs eKKXrjaias irapoLKiais, Dionys. the addition oi irXrjGvvBelr] however it
Corinth. [.?] in Euseb. H.E. iv. 23 occurs only in the two Epistles of
ap.a Tais Xoinals Kara Kprp-Tjv napoiKiais, S. Peter, from whom probably Cle-
Iren. in Euseb. //. E. v. 24 elprjvevov ment derived the form, as the First
 i]
TO THE CORINTHIANS. 7

i]luwv'lt]a'ov XpKTTOv. X^P'-'^ vfMV icai eipr]V}] ciTro iravro-

KpaTopo's Oeov dia 'hja-ou XpiCTOv 7r\fj6uv6eit] .

5 I. Aia Ta<s alcpui^lou^ Kai eTraXXtlXovs yevojuii/a^

Siovs] ai<pvTj3iovcr A. yevo/jL^vas'] C ; evaa A. S has a present; comp. 9.

Epistle is frequently quoted by him. were modest ; your wives were quiet
In Jude I we have eXeos vfilv koi and orderly.'
(IpyjVT) KOL dycnrr] TrXr^Bwdfirj. 5. rm al(f)vi8iovs K.r.X.] This lan-
iravTOKparopos] The LXX rendering guage accurately describes the perse-
of niN3^ in the expression the Lord cution which the Roman Christians
'

of Hosts' (see Stanley, Jewish Church endured under Domitian. Theirtreat-

II.
apparently not a classical
p. 87), ment by this emperor was capricious,
word. In the New Testament it and the attacks upon them were re-
occurs once only out of the Apoca- peated. While the persecution of
lypse, 2 Cor. vi. 18,
where S. Paul is Nero was one fierce and wholesale
quoting from the LXX. So again oiislaught in which the passions of the
2, 32 (LXX), 56, 60, 62 (comp. 8 multitude were enlisted on the em-
TravTOKparopiKo), Polyc. Phil, inscr., peror's side, Domitian on the other
Herm. Vis. 3 {Sim. v. 7), Alafi.
iii. hand made use of legal forms and
Polyc. 14. See also Pearson Expo- arraigned the Christians from time
sition of the Creed
p. 78 sq (ed. to time on various paltry charges see ;

Chevalliej-) for its position and signi- above, p. 81, p. 350 sq. Apollonius
i.

ficance in the Latin Creed. As a in Philostr. Vit. Apoll. vii. 4 distin-

Latin translation of TraiTOKparwio, 'om- guishes two kinds of tyrants of which
'

nipotens is the survival of the fittest, Nero and Tiberius respectively are
its defunct rivals
being omnitenens,'
'
the types the one passionate and
'

omnipollens,' etc. Conversely the reckless {opficoarjs koi aKpirov), the

other stealthy and treacherous {vwo-
' '
Latin omnipotens is sometimes
KadT]p.evr]s), the one acting
translated by TravTohyvap-os for ixav- with vio-
TOKparoop comp. Caspari Qucllen z.
; lence, the other using forms of
Gesch. d. Taufsymbols in. pp. vi, 24, justice. Obviously he places the
204 sq, 209212. The two occur to- contemporary tyrant Domitian in
gether in the Liturgy of S. James, this second class. Again Domitian
aytoy et, navroKpuTiop, navToSvvap.e is described by Suetonius {Domit.
(Swainson's Greek Liturgies p. 270 11) in language closely resembhng
sq). Clement's, non solum magnae sed
'

I. 'We should have written sooner, et callidae i)iopinatacque saevitiae.'

but our own troubles have hindered Compare the accounts in Euseb.
us. We are grieved to hear that one H.E. iii. 17 sq, Chron. an. 95, Dion
or two headstrong ring-leaders have Cass. Ixvii. 14, Suet. Domit. 12, 15.
fanned the flame of discord among So Mart. Ign. i
speaks of 01 ttoXXoI
you. This was not your wont in cTTt Ao/Liertafoi; 8iu>yixoi (though this
former days. Your firm faith, your refers especially to Antioch).These
sober piety, your large hospitality, and other passages referring to the
your sound knowledge, were the ad- persecution of Domitian are given in
miration of all. Authority was duly fullabove, I. p. 104 sq. In one of
respected by you. Your young men these attacks the writer's namesake,
8 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT b

rifjLLV (TUfxcpopa^
kcu 7repi7rTW(rei^, dhe\(poi, fipdhiov vo^l-

to/uev eTTicTTpocprji/ TreTroiPja-daL irepl rcHv iTri^rjTovjuevcov

vfiiv irpayixoLTixiv, dya7rf]T0i, r^s re dWorpia^

Trap'
Kal pevt]^ Toh eKkeKToh tov Qeov, juiapds kui dvooriov
1 7)ixiv^ AS; Kad' rjfjLwv C. TrepnrTuxreis] A; irepiffTaaeis C; lapsus et

damna which evidently represents irepLirTuiffeis (see l. p. 136).

S, ddeXipoi] A;

dyawrjTol S om. C. See below 4, where S makes the same change.

; /3pd-

5iov] ppadfiov A. 3 Trap' vpuv TrpayfiaTuv^ A; irpayixaTuiv irap^ vfuv C;

and patron (as 1 venture to think), will mean Owing to

'
and the sudden
Flavius Clemens, a kinsman of the repeated and reverses
calamities

emperor, fell a victim; see I. ;iS sq.
Thus the notice here accords with
external testimony which places the
Corinthian feuds to which this letter
refers in the reign of Domitian see
the introduction, I. p. 347. Volkmar
which have befallen us, we consider
we have been somewhat slow to pay
attention to the questions of dispute
among you.' The reader must be
;
cautioned against the rendering a-
dopted in some translations, English
'

{Theol. Jahrb. 1856, p. 286 sq, and and Latin those thmgs which you
;

elsewhere), who assigns a much later enquired of us,' 'the points respecting
date to this epistle, is obliged to refer which you consulted us,' 'ea quae
the notice here to the sufferings of fuerant quaesita a vobis.' This
the Christians under Trajan; but rendering involves a historical mis-
there is no evidence that this perse- statement. The expression contains
cution extended to Rome. Our epistle no allusion to any letter or other ap-
therefore was probably written to- plication from the Corinthians to the
wards the close of Domitian's reign Romans. Clement does not write
or on the accession of Nerva (about Trap vfxav, but Trap' vfilv; and to eVt-
A.D. 95 or 96). Other notices of time ^tjTovfieva means simply 'the matters
in the body of the letter agree with of dispute,' not 'desiderata,' as it is

this result; see above, I.

p. 348 sq. sometimes rendered, e7riC^TTjfj.a being
'

e7raXAj\ovs] successive^ repeated^ 'a question.' It would appear that

a comparatively late but common the Roman Christians had not been
word, e.g. Philo in Flacc. 14 (ll. p. directly consulted by the Church of
534 M.) Tots (Tvvi^iii K(u enaXkiiXovs Corinth, but having heard of the
KaKcotTds, Plut. Foinp. 25 Kivdvvois feuds by common report ( 47 avrtj ij

7raXA.j/Xois Koi TrokepLois ; see Lobeck aKo^) wrote this letter unsolicited.
Paral. p. 471. It is restored indeed 4. ievrjs] Doubtless the right read-
by Hermann but this
in Soph.yi;//. 57, ing; comp, Clem. Hom. vi. lAfOisaKr]-
restoration is very doubtful, and the 6eias dXkoTpiav oxicrav kol ^evrjv. No
word there must have the sense re- '
sense can be made of ^euois. The
ciprocal.' For (naWrfKovi yevofievas doubling of epithets {aXXorpias Ka\
comp. Alciphr. p. 1. 23 _;^ta)i/ ttvkvti ievrjs)is after Clement's manner,
KOI eiraWrjXos (^epo/ie'i/?;. Other- especially in this opening chapter ;

wise we might read (ira\\i]Xcos, which e.g. fiiapas Koi avoaiov, TrpoTrfrfj koi
occurs Epist. Gall. 14 in Euseb. av6a8r], navaperov koi (if(iaiav, etc.
H. E. V. I. 5. Trpoo-ojTra] Not simply ^persons'
I.
j/o/xifo/iej/] The whole passage but 'ringleaders'; comp. 47, and
 I]
TO THE CORINTHIANS.

5 (TTao'ewSy rju oXiya TrpaacoTra TrpoTreTrj Kai avBaht}

viTap')(^ovTa ei^ ToarouTOv. dirovoLa^ epeKavcrav^ coo'Te to

(rejuvoi/ Kai vrepi^otjTOv Kai ttclo'lv

dvOpcoTroi's d^iaya-
TTtjTOv bvofjia v/uLcoi/ jueydXcD^ (^\a(r(pr]iuLr]df]vai.
t/s yap
7rapeTnht]iJLt]a'a<i Trpos i)/xas Ttji/ iravapeTOV Kai f^e^aiav
dub. S. dyaTrrjTol] AC ;
om. S. 4 ^^I'l^s] CS ; ^evoi-a A. 8 p\a<r-

<pT]/ji,r)drivaL] A ; pXaffcpri/j.e'iaOai C ;
ui laederetur or laedatur (513003) S, which
perhaps represents \a(p0i}vai.

see the note on Ign. Magn. 6. The ovofia ^Xaa-^T]p,e2Tai. For this abso-
authors of these feuds are again men- lute use of TO ovofMa, which is not
tioned as few in number, 47 hi iv infrequent in earlier Christian writers,
f)
8vo npocrcoTTa aTacrid^fiv npos rovs see the note on Ign. Ephes. 3, and
npfcr^vrepovs. comp. Phil. ii. 10 (with my note).
6. ToaovTov K.r.X.] have kiiidled
tis
^
It might be thought that to ovap,a
to sttch a pitch of recklessness'' ; comp. vp.cju here would mean 'the name of
46 eis Toaav^Tjv aTTOVoiau epxopieda. Christ which you bear'; but this
Editors have taken offence at the would have been expressed other-
expression, but its awkwardness is wise, e.g. James ii. 7 ^Xaa-^-qp.ovcriv
no sufficient reason for altering the TO KoXov oPOfia TO eTTtKXfjdev (<p vfids,
text comp. ^ 45 els toctovto e^tjpLaav
; Herm. Sim. viii. 6 enaicrxvi'dei^Tes to
6vp.ov. Otherwise vtto dnovolas might ovopa Kvpiov to eTTiKXrjdiv err avTovs.
be read. In ciTrovoui sJuimelessness It is hardly necessary to add that
rather than folly is the prominent ^Xaa-4)ripeli' is frequently used of
idea, so that the dnovevorjpevos is de- calumniating or maligning human
scribed by Theophrastus {Char, xiii) beings; e.g. Rom. xiv. 16 p.r) /3Xao--
as one wholly devoid of self-respect. (f)T]pia-da) vficov to dyaOov (comp. iii,
TO afp-vov Ac.T.A.] So 47 '"o 8).

(Tep.vov TTjs nepi^oijTov (f)iKa8eX<pl.as : TLs yap K.r.X.] The whole pas-
comp. Ign. Eph. 8 eKKXrja-ias Tf]s 8ia- sage as far as inopeveaOe is quoted by
^OTjTov Tois alwaiv. Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 17 (p. 610) vaX
8. ovopa vp.uiv\ ''your reputation'' or p.'qv iv TTj Tfpos Kopivdiovs tTnaToXf] o
''character'' or 'worth.'' See the note dnoaToXos KXr^prjs koi avTos rjfiiv tvttov
on Ign. Ephes. I ro iroKvaydmjTov Tivd Tov yvaxTTLKov vTToypaipcov Xeyei,
ovofxa o KeKTr/a-de (j)v(TeL. The addition Tis yap K.T.X.
of the pronoun seems to require this cj. TTapenihrjfiriaas] This 'bimaris
sense, and the epithets as well as Corinthus' was a natural halting
the whole context, suggest it. On place on the journey between Rome
the other hand the expression fiXaa- and the East, as we see in the case
<l>r]p.el.v TO ovop.a, where there is no of S. Paul companions, and
and his

qualifying pronoun or adjective, somewhat later of

Hegesippus (Eus.
means 'to speak evil of,' 'to blas- //. E. iv. 22). Diogenes is repre-
pheme the Name,' i.e. of Christ or of sented as visiting it (Dion Chrys.
God; e.g. 2 Clem. 13 Ivu to Zvopa fit' Oral. viii. p. 151 ed. Emper) on nXel-
;/xay p,r) ^Xaa(l)rjp.fJTai, Clem. Alex. (TTOi dvOpdiTTOi (Kel (Tvvia(Ti....Kai on t]

Strom, iii. 6 (p. 532) Si' ovs kuI to TToXis ciiaTrfp ev rptofiw r^y 'KXXafior
lO THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [I

TTicTTiv ovK ehoKLfJiaarev ; rriv re (TUi(ppova

Kai
vjucov
eu evcTef^eiav ovk idaufxaa-ev ; kul to
ETTieLKf] XpicTTM
ovk eKripv^ev;
jueyaXoTTpeTre^ rf]^ (piXo^evia^ vfxuiv t)6o^
Kai Tr]v TeXeiav Kai dcrcpaXv, yvcocrii/ ovk efj-aKapicrev ',

d7rpoa-co7roXt]iu7rTCD^ yap Travra eTTOieTre, Kai to?? vo^l- 5

fxoL^ TOO Oeov eTTopevecrde, vTroracroro^evoi rol^ t^yov-

fjievoL^ vjuiMi/ Kai rifxriv ty\v Ka6r]K0V(rav d.Trovefj.ovTe's

I vfidv wiffTiv] AC; iricTTiv v/jlwv Clem 6io. 2 eTneiKTJ iv] CS Clem;
(irieiKTji'v A. 3 ovk] AC ;
om. S. 4 d(T(pa\rj] affcpaX-rjv A. 5 airpocr-

u}Tro\r]ixTTTWs] A; a.irpoaijnro\riirTii}S C Clem (edd.)- CTrotetTe] CTrotetrat A.

rot's cojai'yuois] A; iti lege (ND1D33) S; kv rots vbixois C; ec rots
toi<xpo/j.ol(t

(/o,ai|Ciois approved by Wotton and others. The rendering of S

Clem, which is

shows nothing as regards the reading; for (i) the preposition would be required in
any case; (2) the singular is explained by the accidental omission of ribui;
(3) v6iJ.ifiov is elsewhere translated by XD1D3 {vbfxos) in this version (comp. 3, 40).

(KeiTo. So also it is called the nepl- For the more special sense see the
' '
naros or lounge of Greece see [Dion ;
note on 48.
aTrpocrcoTToki] p.TrT(os] For
this ad-
Chrys.] xxxvii. p. 522 with the context, 5.

0)? eva Tav TToXXoSf kcli kut fviavrov verb see I Pet. i. 17, Barnab. 4. For
KaraipoPTcov eh Keyxpeas efnropov rj
the forms, -XrjpTrT(os, -Xijirrcos, see

Ofcopop Tj TTpecT^evTrjv rj 8iepxop'evov. Winer's Grammar p, 53 (ed. Moulton).

Hence there was an abundant de- For an instance of the capricious
mand for hospitality there see below ; orthography of both our MSS comp.
on 10 <^iKo^eviav, 35 ncf^iKo^evlav. 12 uvKKr^\ji\^o\i,ivov%. (ruXX7;[/x](/)-

navapfTov] Not found either in LXX Qkvras.

or New Testament, but a favourite Toty vojai'/iois] ''by the ordinances'' ;

word with Clement : see 2, 45, 57, so 3 iv Tois vop.ip.ois raiv Trpoix-

60, with the note on 57. He de- rayparcov avrov nopfveadai, 40 rols

lights in such compounds, e.g. irap.- vopipois Toil deanoTov aKoXovdoiivres,

Hfye6r]S, Travdyios, Tvap.irkrjQrjs, navTf- Hermas Vis. i.
3 edv TTjpija-oxnv rd
vopipa Tov Oeov. The phrase toIs
2. iiTifiKrj]^forbearing.'' This yield- vopipois iTOpevea-dai OCCUrs LXX Lev.
ing temper, this deference to the xviii. 3, XX. 23, and eV' rols vopipois

feelings of others, was the quality es- TTopevea-dai Jer. xxvi (xxxiii). 4, Ezek.
pecially needed at such a time. For V. 6, 7, XX. 18. For the dative, de-
fTrieUeia Comp. 13, 56, 58, 62, and noting the rule or standard, see Ga-
see Philippians iv. 5. It was emi- latians v. 16, 25, vi. 16.

nently a characteristic of Clement 6. rots T/youjuei/ots] i.e. the officers

himself; see i. p. 97. of the Church, as 21 tovs -n-porjyov-
TO fieyaXonpeTTei K.r.X.] For the pevovs rjpav :
comp. Heb. xiii. 7 pvt]-
reproof lurking under this allusion povevere tcov rjyovpevcov vpav olrives
to their past hospitality, see the note eXdXTjaav vplv top Xoyov tov Geot), and
on d(j)i\o^fviav 35. again xiii. 17, 24 ;
Hermas Vis. ii.
2,
4. yvaxTiv] Here used generally. iii.
9 o' TvporiyovpevoL ttjs eKKXtjo-ias.
 ^r TO THE CORINTHIANS. 1 1

Toh Trap' vfMv Trpecrf^urepoi^' v60L<i t fJieTpia kui (rejuva

voeiv e7r6Tp67rT6'yvvai^tv re ev djuto/uo) Kai creiaurj
10 Kat dyvP] o'vi/eidrjaei iravTa 67riT6\e7u TraprjyyeWeTe,

crrepyova'a^ Ka6t]K0VTai<s tovs ctvdpa^ eauTwv ev re tw

Kavovi Tt]<i VTroTayt]^ v7rap-)(^ov(Ta^ Ta kutu tov oIkov

cejuvM^ oiKoupyeli/ e'^i^afr/cere, ttuvu ccvcppovovcras.

I have adopted vofxifxais from Clem, but eV is not wanted (see the explanatory
note) and was probably his own insertion. 6 iirope^eade] CS Clem ; iropev-
ecrdai A. 7 iifiuv^ AS ; om. C. KaOriKovcrav^ KadiKovaav A.
8 vfuv^ AS; T]/juv C. 9 a/xw/xy /cat aefivfj Kal ayvrj] AC; ci.jvrj Kal
d/xwixii: S (certainly omitting Kal (refjLvf), but the transposition of ayvfj and afxojfKj}

may be due to the convenience of translation ; see above, i. p. 137. 13 oi-

Kovfryelv'\ A ; oiKovpeiv (but apparently 7 has been erased) C ; curam-gerenics
operwn [studiose agentes in operibus) S. See the lower note.

Similarly oiTrpotcTTa'/xei/oiv/Liwi', I Thess. accordingly. For the change from the

V. 12. The reference therefore is not dative (ywai^lv) to the accusative
to civil officers, as some take it ; and {(TTepyova-as) comp. Mark vi. 39 eV-
the TrpealSvTepois in the next clause fTa^fV avTols avuKKiOr^vai iravras, Acts
refers to age, not to office, as the XV. 22 eBo^eu roli dnoaToXois k.t.X,

following veois shows. The 'pres- iKXf^apevovs av8pas e^ avTcov ivip^ai,

' '

byters or elders,' properly so called, and see Jelf's Gram. 675, 676.
'
are exhausted in to7s ^yovfievois, but u T T(a Kavovi K.T.X.] 1. c. not ovef-
these are not the only seniors to stepping the line, not transgressing
whom reverence is due, and Clement the limits, of obedience '; e.g. 41 /xj)
Xei-
accordingly extends the statement so TrapfK^aivcov tov atpiap-ivov TrjS
as to comprise all older men, thus Tovpyias avTov Kavova. On the me-
preparing the way for the mention of taphor of Kavojv, 'a incasiiri)ig line^
see Galatians vi. 16, and the note on
'
the young' also as a class. Similarly
21, where, as here, Trporjjovfievoi, 7, below.
irpea-^vTepoi, vioi, yvvaiKes, occur in 13. o\Kovpyfiv\ ''to
ply their work
succession. There is the same diffi- ill the housed The classical forms

culty about the use of Trpea^vTcpoi in are oiKovpos, oiKovpelv, and these pre-
connexion with vecorepoi. in i Pet. v. vail even at the Christian era and
1
sq, Polyc P/iil. 5, 6. much later e.g. Philo de Spec. Leg.
;

9. eVerpeVere] '_y<? enjoined^ as 31 (11. p. 327) SijXeiais (iCJiappoCei)

e.g. in Plat. Legg. p. 784 c, Xen. olKovpia, dc Execr. 4 (ll. p. 431) yvvai-
Atiab. vi. 5. II (see Kiihner's note). Kas cro}(f)povas oiKovpoiis
kol (piXavdpovs,

yvvai^ip re k.t.X.]
4 yvvalKas k.t.X., where
cTretra kcll tos
Polycarp follows Clement's language
here and in 21.
II. arepyova-as] It should
probably
be taken with the foregoing clause,
and I have altered the punctuation
See Polyc. PJiil. and the illustrative passages in Wet-
stein on Tit. ii. 5. But in Tit. ii. 5
aaxppovas, ayvas, oiKovpyovs, dyaddi,
inToTaa-(Top.evas Tols Idiots dvdpaaiv,
which passage Clement may have
had in his mind, the great prepon-
derance of the best authorities have
12 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [
II

II. ndures re eraTreivocppoveLTe, ^n^ev d\a^o-

vevofJievoLy vTroTaa-a-Ojuei/oi /udWov h v7rora(T<TovTe<i,

olKovpyovs, not olKovpovs and this

; joiced in doing good. The ordinan-
reading the ablest recent editors ces of God were graven on your
(Tischendorf, Tregelles, Westcott hearts.'
and Hort; have adopted. In this 2. v7roTa(Tcr6p.evoi K.r.XJ] SeeEphes.
passage of Clement also A has otV v. 21, Phil. ii.
3, Rom. and
xii. 10, 16,

ovpyovs, and so apparently it was I Pet. V. 5 (v.l.).

rjbiov K.T.X.] Doubtless
read originally in C, but the y has 3.
a refer-
been erased. Bryennios says 'j/eo)- ence to our Lord's words recorded
Tpa ;^etp to y.' But judg-
aTT^Xef^jre Acts XX. 35, jiaKapiov ecrriv fiaXXov
ing by photograph, I should
the 8i86vai rj Xan^aveiv ;
see below, 13,

imagine that it was impossible to say where the context of the passage is
who erased the letter whether the echoed. It was no new command-

original scribe or some later cor- ment howe^"^r, though instinct with
rector. I am disposed to think that a new meaning. Maxims similarly
the original scribe wrote down olKovp- expressed had been uttered by the
yovs, following an older MS which he two opposite schools of philosophy,
had before him, and then after his starting from different principles and
wont (see above, I. p. i26sq) corrected speaking with different motives. For
it into the more classical form. At the Epicureans see Plut. Afor. p.
all events there is a tendency in the 778 C 'ETTiKovpos rov ev 7racrx' to ev
later scribes and correctors to re- TTOtelv ov p.6vov KoKkiov aWa Kol Tjdiov
turn to the more classical form, as we (Iva'i (pTjo-i, and for the Stoics, Seneca
see from the later corrections of AC Epist. Ixxxi. 17 'Errat si quis bene-
in Tit. ii.
5. The Syriac here is ficium accipit libentius quam reddit'
ITnQUT jD^'Njn, the same rendering (bof-i quoted by Wetstein on Acts
ijeing given in the Peshito and Har- I.C.).
clean in Tit. ii. 5. It seems to repre- To\i {(pobiois K.r.X.] i.e. 'the provi-
sent olKovpyovs rather than oiKovpovs, sion which God has supplied for the
the first element of the word {oIkos) journey of life.' Similarly Seneca
'

having been already exhausted in Epist. Ixvii. Quia quantulum- 3

the translation of the preceding to. cumque haberem, tamen plus jam
Kara tov oIkov and therefore not mihi superesset viatici quam viae,'
needing repetition. Perhaps how- Epictet. Diss. iii. 21. 9 ex'^'^^ "
ever it may be intended to combine e(p6diop TOLoiiTov els tov ^iov, Plut.
the ideas of -ovpyelu and -ovpelu. The A/or. p. 160 B COS fJLTj fXOVOV TOV ^fjv
same verb is more commonly a ren- dWa KoL Toii aTTodvijcrKfiP ttjv rpocprjv

dering of pepip.vav or inineXflcrdai. f(f)68ioi/ ovcrav ; comp. Dionys. Corinth,

II. 'Submission and contentment in Euseb. //. E. iv. 23 fKKXrjo-iais
were the rule of your lives. The TToWais Tciis Kara naaav irokii' e<p68ta
teaching of God was in your breasts ;
Tre fiTTciv. It is the same sentiment
the passion of Christ before your eyes. as I Tim. vi. 8, '4)^ovTes biarpocjias Koi

Peace and good-will reigned among a-KeTraa-p-uTa rovTois dpKadrj(r6pe6a.

you. Spiritual graces and incessant The spiritual sustenance
idea of
prayers distinguished you. You loved seems to be out of place here, though
the brethren you bore no malice to
; '(j)68ia not unfrequentlyhas
this sense.

any ; you loathed faction ; you re- For this and other reasons the words
"] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 13

hAion AiAoNTec H AAMBANONTec, Tols (bodloi^ Tov Oeov

3 TOV GeoO] A ;
tov XpicrToO CS.

Toh (f).
TOV 0. apK. must be connected On the other hand Gains (or rather
with the preceding clauses, so that Hippolytus) early in the third century
the new idea is introduced by koI v!\\}i\& Little Labyrinth{H. E.w.zZ; see

irpoaexovTes. The Syriac version in- Routh Rcl. Sacr. li. p. 129) mentions
deed attaches koI irpoa-exovTes to the Clement with Justin, Miltiades, and
preceding sentence, but
'
it manipu- Tatian, besides several others,' a-
lates the words following, as if it had mong those Iv ols deoXoyelTai 6
read tovs re \6yovs...fV(aTpvicrp,evoi Xpia-Tos. Routh (p. 145) supposes
(om. ^re). Clement of Rome to be meant (as
TOV Qeoi)] The reading tov Xpia- also does Bunsen, HippoL i.
p. 440),
Toii is accepted by Bryennios and because the author of the Little
Hilgenfeld (ed. 2) on the authority Labyrinth refers distinctly to works
of C. On the other hand Harnack written
'

before the time of Victor

'

retains tov Qeov while Donaldson

; who became bishop about 189 a.d.
hesitates between the two readings. or 190, and indeed the whole argu-
As regards external evidence, the ment turns on this point. To this it
balance is fairly even. If the view may be added that Hippolytus after-
maintained above pp. 124 sq, 139(l. wards 131) uses an expression re-
(p.
sq, 142 sq) of the relative value of sembling the language of the Roman
our authorities be correct, is en- A Clement here, o evaiikayxvos Geo?
titled to as great weight as CS to- Ka\. Ki/ptos rjpoav Irjcrovs XpiaTos ovk
gether. Moreover the obvious doc- efSovXeTo ... aTToXfadai fiapTvpa Tav
trinal motive, which in C has led to i8ia>v nadav, and that Clement of
the deliberate substitution of Xoyos- Alexandria (who is the alternative)
for nvivpa in another place (ii. 9), can only have died a few years (ten
must deprive it of much value in or at most twenty) before the passage
the present case. On the other hand was written. On the other side it

it is urged with
probability that, as may be urged that the order of the
Photius {Bibl. 126) complaini of names, 'Tovo-tivov koI MiXTid8ov kciI

Clement's language in this epistle TaTiafoii Koi KXi]p,evTos Koi fTtpcov nXei-
on apxupea Kai Tvpoa-TaTrjv tov Kvpiov ouiov, points to the Alexandrian Cle-
Tjpuiv Irjo'ovv 'KpicrTov e^ovofia^av ov8e ment but ;
this is not conclusive, since
Tcis deoTTpeTvels Koi vyf/'TjXoTepas dcprJKe io the very next sentence the chrono-
TTfoi avTov (pcovds, he cannot have had logical order of Melitoand Irena^us,
Toi) Qeov in his But, as the
text. isinverted, tu yap 'Elprjvalov re Km
declaration of Christ's divinity lurks MeXiTOivos Koi Tav Xonrmv t'ls dyvofl
under the reference of the pronoun ^i^Xia ; The question therefore must
avTov,it
might very easily have es- remain undecided; though the rea-
caped the notice of Photius who in sons in favour of the Roman Clement
the course of this single embassy seem to preponderate. As it is very
read as large a numbei of books as improbable that so early a writer as
would have sufficed many a man not Hippolytus should have recognised
ill-informed for a life-time. Even as genuine any other writings a-
if the inference were more scribed to Clement of Rome, his judg-
certain,
thisevidence would not go far, for ment must have been founded upon
Photius is a late writer. this epistle.
14 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT ["

The external evidence therefore is XpKTTod for TOV Qeov. The language
far from conclusive and if any de- ;
of Anastasius of Sinai i^Hodeg. 12,
cision on the reading is possible, it 13, p. 97 sq) shows that these pas-
must be founded upon internal evi- sages of earlier writers (he mentions
dence. But here the considerations among others \'gx\.Roin. 6) were con-
which present themselves are numer- stantly alleged in favour of
Mono-
ous. physite doctrine, and he himself has
As a question of accidental some trouble in explaining them
(i)
error in transcription, the probability away. Writing against these same
heretics Isidore of Pelusium {Ep. i.
is evenly balanced for_xu instead of
;

and 6v instead of are equally

1 24) says Qeov Trades ov Xeyerai, Xpia-
dv, ;^v,

common with scribes.

Toi) yap TO ircidos yeyove K.r.X. On tfie
other hand,it might be said that the
(2) On the other hand, if we have
a deliberate alteration, the chances Monophysites themselves would be
under a temptation to alter x'" i^ito
that XpicTTov would be substituted
for Qfoii are, I think, greater than the
dv and accordingly Bryennios sup-
;

chances of the converse change. poses that in this passage the reading
as aifia Qinv,'rTa6r]^aTa of A is due to the Monophysites (or,
Such language
as he adds, perhaps to the Alexan-
Qfov,and the though common
like,
drian divines). This does not seem
in the second and third centuries,
became highly distasteful in later very likely, (a) In the first place, it
would be a roundabout and precari-
ages; and this from various motives.
ous way of getting a testimony in
The great Athanasius himself pro-
favour of their doctrine. If tov Xpia-
tests against such phrases, c. Apollin.
Toii (thus assumed to be the original
ii.
13, 14 (l. p.ovv yypa(f)aTe
758) TTtoy
reading) had been in direct connexion
on Qeos 6 Sta aapKos iradav Koi ava-
with Ta wad^puTa, a change in this
(TTas ;...ov8ap,ov 8e alfia Qeov 8ixa aap-
direction would not be improbable ;

Kos irapahehmKaaiv al ypa(f)al rj Qeov hia

but it would never have occurred to
aapKoi Tvadovra KolavacrTavTa. And how
any one to alter toIs e(f>o8Lois tov
liable to correction such expressions
XpiaTov into toIs e^oSi'ois tov Qeov,
would be, we may infer from the long
because there happened to be the ex-
recension of the Ignatian Epistles,
pression TO. iradrjp.aTa avTov in the
where the original language of the
next sentence, so that avTov would
writer is deliberately altered by the
naturally be referred to the genitive
interpolator, who appears to have after rots It would have
ecj^oSiocs.
lived in the latter half of the fourth been much simpler to change avTov
century {Ephes. i iv
aipari Qfov, where into TOV Qeov at once, (b) Secondly,
Xpta-Toi) is substituted for Qeov Rom.
; the dates are not favourable to this
6 Qeov where this
supposition. The MS which has Qeov
TOii TTadovs Toi) p,ov,

interpolator softens down the lan- is assigned by the most competent

guage by inserting before Xpia-Toii authorities to the fifth century, and

roil Qeov pov, while others substitute by some of them to the earlier half
Toi) Kvpiov pov or roii XpiaToii). At of the century (see above, I. p. 117) ;

this time the heresy to which such
expressions seemed to give counte-
nance was ApoUinarianism. At a
later date, when the Monophysite
controversy arose, there would be a
still greater
temptation on the part of
an orthodox scribe
to substitute tov
and, though not impossible, it is
not probable that the Monophysite
controversy would have influenced
the transcription of the MS at this
date. On the other hand Photius,
our earliest authority for tov Xpia-Toii
(supposing that his evidence be ac-
"]
TO THE CORINTHIANS. 15

It is more to the purpose to

cepted), wrote four centuries later, (4)
when there had been ample time for urge that, though such language is
such manipulation of the text. But, not uncommon in other writers, it has
besides the doctrinal motive which no parallel in Clement that he else-
;

'

might have suggested the change where speaks of the blood of Christ '

from eeov to Xpio-roC, there may also 7, 21, 49) and describes itas
'

( pre-
have been an exegetical reason. The cious to God His Father' ( 7) and ;

word i(^6biov,7'iaticiiin, was used espe- that throughout this epistle he applies
cially of the eucharistic elements (e.g. the term Qtos to the Father as distin-
/.//.D. Marc. p. 29, Lit. D. Jacob, p. guished from Christ. This argument
75, Neale), and there would be a na- has considerable weight, but must
tural desire to fix this sense on S. not be overstrained. The Catholic
Clement here. doctrine of the Person of Christ ad-
(3) The probability that such lan- mits both ways of speaking. Writers
guage as T TTadrj^ara tov Qeov should like Tertullian, who use the most ex-
have been used by an early Chris- travagant and unguarded language
tian writer can hardly be questioned. on the other side, are commonly and
These early writers occasionally used even in the same context found speak-
language strong in expressing
so ing of Christ as distinct from God ;

our Lord's divinity, as

their belief of and the exact proportions which the
almost to verge on patripassianism ; one mode of speakmg will bear to
so Ign. Eplics. I aval^(i>TTvpr]cravTi% iv the other in any individual writer
alixari Oeov, Ign. jRo/n. 6 iniTpi-^are must be a matter of evidence. It is
jwi ^iifxr^rrjv elvat Toii iradovs tov Oeov clear from the newly discovered end-
Melito (Routh Sacr. I. p.
irig (>5 58 Cfl y"P o Qfos K.r.X.) that he
I^el.
nov,
122) o 6eoff iTiTtov6ev vno 8f^i.as la- could have had no sympathy with
par]\iTi8os, Test, xii Patr. Levi 4 Ebionite views of the Person of
eVi rw TTfi^et rov v^'iarov (a very Christ. Moreover, in the passage
ancient writing see Galatiaiis p. 307
;
especially quoted ( 7) one authority,
sq), Tatian ad Grace. 13 rov -KeTtov- which probably preserves the right
QoTo^ eeou, Tertull. de Cam. Chr. 5 reading, omits Qea. And after all the
'

passiones Dei,' ad Uxor. ii. 3 san-

'
alternative remains which Abbot is
'

guine Dei (and so elsewhere Ter- disposed to favour (p. 343), that Cle-
tullianspeaks of God crucified,' '
ment wrote avroi) negligently, not re-
'
God dead,' the flesh of God,' the
' '

membering that rov Qeov had imme-

murderers of God'; see de Cam. diately preceded and referring it in
Chr. adv. Marc. ii. 16, 27, v. 5),
5, his own mind to Christ.
Aiic. Syr. Doc. p. 8 (ed. Cureton) It remains to enquire whether
(5)
'
God was crucified for all men,' etc. the connexion is more favourable to
And similar passages from writers of rov Qeoi) or rov 'Kpicrrov. This will
these and the succeeding generations depend partly on the connexion of
might be multiplied. See Abbot 1. c. the sentences. If the punctuation

p. 340 sq, Otto Corp. Apol. Christ. given in my text be retained, rov
IX. p. 445. The nearest parallel in efou is almost necessary for ra i^6- ;

the New Testament is Acts xx. 28, hia then refers to the ordinary means
TT]v eKKXtjalav rov Qeov rjv Trepienoirj- of subsistence. Hilgenfeld reads and
(raro tea roii aifxaros rov l8iov ; but punctuates ro'is e<po8ioLS rov Xpia-rov
even if roii Qeov be the correct read- apKovfjLtvoL KOI Trpocrexovres, under-
'

ing (as possibly it is), the form of ex- Standing by the term spiritual sus-
pression is far less strong than in tenance.'This seems to me to give
these patristic references. an awkward sense (for the mention
 i6 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT ["

Kai irpoa-exovre^ tov<s Xoyov^

avTOv eVi-
dpKOVjuevoi'
fjieXu)^ evea-TepvLa-fjievoi t]T6 toIs (nrXdyx^^^^f '^^^ '^^

'7raB^]fjiara avrov r}v Trpo 6(f>6a\^cov vfJLWV. Outo)^ el-

fSaOe'ia Kal
Xnrapd e^edoro TrdcTiv kul ciKopecrTO^
p}]V}]

TTodo^ ek dyadoTTOuau, Kal vrXtjpr]^ TrvevjuLaros dyiov 5

2 evearepvifffJL^voi] C ; earepvurixevoi A. 4 \nrapa eSeSoro] XenrapaeSc-

Sero A. ^^ TrXrjprjs .
^KXi'(Tis eylvero] AC; plenae effusiones .erant S, . .

as if irXripeis e:xi'0'e's...e7iVoi'TO, for the plural here cannot be explained by ri/>m.

of 'contentment' is then somewhat itive sense to the preposition.

out of place) and an unnatural punc- TO. iradijiiara avroii (c.r.X.] Compare
tuation (for Kal 7rpo(7e;(OJ'Tfs then be- Gal. iii. I ots kut 6(f)daXfiovs 'irjcrovs
comes a clumsy addition). Xpicrros Trpofypacpi] earavpcap.ivo';, of
1. Tovi \6yovs] For the accusative which Clement's expression is per-
after npoaexovrfs compare e. g. Exod. haps a reminiscence. In this passage
xxxiv. 1 1 'rrpo(rf)(f crv Tvavra acra eya> it has been proposed to read fxadrj-

fvreWofini aoi, Is. i. lO Trpoa-exere v6- fiara for 7ra6rip.ara and the confusion
;

fiov Qeov, Neh.

ix. 34 o^ rrpovicrxov of rradrjTris, in Ign. Polyc.
fiadrjTrjs,
ras evToXcis (v. 1.) crov Koi to. pLaprvpia 7, and p.adj]p,aTa, Tradrip-ara, in Ign.
<rov. Stnyrn. shows that the interchange
5,
2. evfarepviafievoi] ''ye took thcni to would be easy. This emendation was
hearty i.e. tov^ Xoyovy, which is the originally adopted to meet the diffi-
'
accusative to fVfo-Tfpviafxevoi as well culty of the expression the sufferings
as to TTpoirexovTes so v^ 12 ftVSf|a-;
of God.' Among others it found an
fifVT) avToiis eKpv^ev. For evarepul- advocate in the late Ezra Abbot
^eaBai compare Clem. Alex. Paed. 6 i.
{Bibliotlieca Sacra, April 1876, p. 313
(p. 123) rov <T(i>rr\pa ivcrrtpviaacrOai, sq) in a learned paper on Acts xx.
Euseb. Mart. Pal. 8 p.d^ova rov aci- 28. But it has obtained some favour
fiaros Tov Xoyicr/iiw ivecTTepvicrixevri, ib. even since the discoveryof the alterna-
1 1
fjLV^p.as avrSv (tcov ypa(f)coi/) evfo-rep- tive reading rov Xpio-rov. Yet (i) The

vicTTo, ib. Laud. Const. 5 5 rav e'/cel

parallels quoted in the note on rov
(^(i)T<t>v
aXfKTOv TTodov evi(TTepvi<Tp.ivos, Qeov prove that no alteration is need-
Apost. Const, prooem. ve(TTepvicrfj.voi ed, since ra TTaBripLara avrov would be
TOV <}}6^ov avrnv, lb. V. 14 evcrrepviad- a natural expression to a writer of
fievos nvTov. There seems to be no this age; (2) The reading pia6r)p,aTa
such word as a-repvi^eadai, and there- would destroy the propriety of the
fore evea-Tpvi(Tiievoi must be read. If expressions in the parallel clauses as
could Stand, Cotelier's
farepviap-ivoL read in the MS, iveaTepvia-p-evoi refer-
explanation would probably be cor- ring to Tovs Xoyovs and Trpo 6(^6aXp.6^v
'

rect, Clementi {(Trepviap-evoi sunt, to TO. Tra6rjp.aTa, the words in your

'

qui Latinis pectorosi, homines lati //6'ar/j-, the sufferings before y our cyes^;
capacisque pectoris (2 Cor. vi. 11), (3) While TCI Tradijp.ara is a common
as the analogy of anXayxviCfo-dai expression in the Testament, New
suggests ;
and later critics seem to being used especially to denote the
be wrong in making it
equivalent to sufferings of Christ, the word p.a6rjjj.a

fvtaTfpvia-fievoi, which owes its trans- does not once occur either there or
 ii]
TO THE CORINTHIANS. I
7

KXV(Ti9 67ri 7rdvTa<5 eyivero' luecToi, t6 oVta? fSouXfj^

ev dyadf] Trpodvjuia juet ev(ref3ov^ 7re7roi6r](Te(09 ^Ti-
i/are ra? )(^Tpa^ v/ucoi/ vrpos tov iravTOKpaTopa Qeov,
iKETevoi'Te^ avTov tAew? yeveaOai, e'lTi (xkovtc^ rjij.dp-
3 rere. dyiov f]v vjuJi/ rj/uepa^ re kui vvkto^ vwep Trdo-rj^

6 offlas] AS ; deias C : see the lower note. 7 TreTroiOriaews] Trewoi-riOrjaewa-

A. e^ereivare] A; i^eTeivere CS. 9 iX^ws] A ;
'iXeuv C: see the lower
note. aKovres] AC ;
k6vtS S. 7]fxdpTTe] AC; peccabatis (rifiapTdvere) S.

in the Apostolic fathers and in the ;

of two authorities (including the best)
only passage in the LXX where it is against one and (2) the other in-
;

found (Jer. xiii. 21) there is a v.l. stances show that the tendency is to
(for ixadijfinTa), which ap-
fiadrjTcti change oaios into dehs, and not con-
proaches more nearly to the original versely.
Hebrew; (4) Though rh naOrnxaTu tov 9. iXecos
yeveadai] The adverb
Qeov might stand, still al di8axal tov IXecds is recognised by Hesychius, but
Qeov (or some similar expression) no instances are given in the lexicons.
would be more natural. As it appears only to occur in the
3. eipijvr) ^adf'ia] 4 Macc. iii. 20 expression iXecos ylvecrdai {Bull, de
fiaOelav elp^vrjv bia Trjv evvofxiav i^fxwv Corr. Hellen. XI. p. 453 (1887) pJiTe
eixov, Hegesipp.in Euseb. //. . iii.
32 01 deol IXecos avTa yevoivTo, 2 Macc. ii.

yevopiivr^s elprjprji jUadelas ev Trdarj e'/c- 22, vii. 37, X. 26), it is probably a
K\T]a-ia, Athenag. Suppl. I
?) a-vinraa-a grammatical mistake of the later lan-
oiKoviievrj tjj vfxeTepa avvecrei.
^adeias guage, tho true construction being
Liturg. S. Basil.
flpt^vrji ciTro\avov(TLV, forgotten and the word being erro-
p. 165 (Neale) ^aOelav kui dva(paipeTOV neously treated as an adverb (IXeais
elpijvTjv, Euseb. Vzf. Const, ii. 61. instead oClXeas). In this passage it
^

5. dya6oTroi'iav\ bt'ne/icence^ ; SigaAXi may be due to the transcriber and

just below and 33, 34: comp. i Pet. not to Clement himself At all events
iv. 19, Test, xii Patr. Jos. 18. The our MS (A) in the three passages of
allied words occur several times in 2 Maccabees has IXeas, where the
S. Peter: dyaBo-noielv I Pet. ii.
15, 20, common text has a proper grammati-
iii.
6, 17; aya^oTTOioj, I Pet. ii. 14. cal construction tXew yevofievov, iXeco
While KoKonoua regards the abstract yevecrdai, iXeco yevo/xevov. In Herm.
character of the action, dyaOoTroua l^is. ii. 2, Sl/n. ix. 23, we have the ex-
looks to its results and more especi- "iXems yivecrdai, but the Con-
pression
ally to its effect on others. text fails to show whether
IXeas is
6.
oa-ias] For the confusion of treated as an adverb or an adjective.
ocioc and eeioc comp. 14, 21, and E. A. Sophocles Lex. s. v. gives an
see above i.
pp. 138, 140. For oaias instance of the adverb IXeuis from
see J5 45 ev oaia Koi d/JLCOfiu) npodeaei, Moschion, and the inscription above
oaias nai^eias avTov cjuoted proves it to be a possible
56 Si TTJs ;
for
dfias, 40 TO. ^ddr] Trjs 6eias yvwaecos. word.
There might possibly be a question 10. nywv ^v K..T.X.'\ Comp. Col. ii. i.

which of the two words should be read rjfxepas Te

vvktos] Ka\
Hilgenfeld
here but (i) we have a combination
:
calls attention to the fact that the

CLEM. II.
i8 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [
II

Til's ctheXcporriTO^,
ek to a-co^ecrdaL fxeTci deov^ Kai

crvi>eL^^a-eu)9 tov dpidfjiov

tcov e/cAe/cTWJ^ avTOv' 6i\i-

^t6 kui ek dWriXov^'

Kpiveis Kai (XKepaioi dfjivno-'iKaKOi

irdo'a CTTaa-i^ Kai irdv (T~)(LG-\xa ^ZeKvKTOV v^xiv eirl rots

irapaTTTcoiJiaa-iv
Toh TrXncriov eTrevdeiTe' to. v(rTepf]fxaTa 5

I fiera diovs] C; fier' eXiovs {eXaiovcr A) AS. 2 eiXiKpiveis] eiXeiKpL-

A. A. aixprjaiKaKoi] C; afia/xurjacKaKOL A.
peia- 3 cLKipam] aKepeoi
So I read the MS with Tischendorf, but previous editors gave it avafivnaiKaKoi.

^ pSeXvKTov] A; add. tjv C, and so probably S. 5 rots irXrjaiou] A; tQv

writer elsewhere has thesame order the expression /xfra 8eovs Heb. xii. 28
'
S 20, 24, and argues
day and night
'
XarpevoDfiev fvapearas tm Qea /xera ev-
thence scriptorem non e Judaeis, qui
'
Xa^eias Kai Biovs (the correct reading),
noctem anteponunt, sed e gentilibus, an epistle which has largely influ-
enced Clement's language elsewhere.
Rornanisquidem,ortumesse.' This ar-
For the use of crvveiSrja-is here comp.
gument is more specious than sound.
Thus in the Apocalypse the order is 34 (TvvaxdevTes ttj avvfi8i](jei. It de-
notes inward concentration and as-
always day and night,' iv. 8, vii. 15,
'

10; in S. Paul al-

sent. Zahn {Gbtt. Gel. Ans. Nov. 8,
xii. 10, xiv. II, XX.
retains the reading /xer' Iki-
still
night and 1876)
'

ways day,' i Thess. ii. 9,

Thess. iii. 8, i Tim. v. 5, 2 ows, explaining it of brotherly kindness
iii. 10, 2
Tim. while by S. Luke either
i.
shown towards offenders, and pro-
3 ;

order is used indifferently in both the poses (jvvaQ\ri(Ti(miox (jvve{.hr)(jf<ii^. He

Gospel (ii. 2>7, xviii. 7) and the Acts might have quoted Apost. Const, ii. 13
eneira p. era eXeovs kol olKripp.ov Koi
(ix. 24, XX. 31, xxvi. 7).
I. ahekfporr^Tos] A word peculiar to TrpoaKi]\l/ea>s oIkslov vTncT'xyovp.fvos av-

Peter in the New rw (T(orT]piav for this sense. Lipsius

S. Testament; i

Pet. ii. So Polyc. Phil. 10

17, V. 9.
{Jetiacr Lite7'attirs. Jan. 13, 1877)
'
fraternitas,' where the Greek is not
accepts pera 8eovs, but holds by his
extant; Herm. Ma7id. 8. conjecture (rvv8ei]ae(os {Academy, July
1870), though it is now rendered
Seouf] I have ventured to
9,
jLiera
this reading, as other recent unnecessary. Donaldson {Theol.Rev.
adopt
editors have done, on the inferior au- Jan. 1877) suggests p^Tci reXfias avv-
thority of C (mcta Aeoyc for Mere- eXevaecos;.
2. If the
Aeoyc), because it rescues the passage (rvvei8ij(Tf(os] reading
from a difficulty and so commends it- fXeovs be retained, crvveLdija-eois must
self By this combination \i.iTa Seovs kol mean ' with the consent of God,' but
this I had ac-
avvddijcTfcoi the whole clause is trans-
is hardly possible.

ferred from God to the believer, and cordingly hazarded the conjecture
(TweiSj^o-f coy becomes intelhgible. With evSoKifcretoy (eYAoKHcecoc for cyNei-
the whole expression comp. Liturg. AHcecoc), which is less violent than
D. Jacob, p. 55 (Neale) Soy ruCiv, Ki5- crvvaivecreais, (rvvfi^fcos, avv8e^(rfa>s, and
ptf, \xtTa. TravTos (jiojSov kol crvvfi8i]a-e(os other emendations. This conjecture
KaOapas irpo(TKOfiicrai k.t.X. For the struck me before I was aware that
idea of fear as an agent in the work Davis had suggested a-wevSoKijcreais,
of salvation see Phil. ii. 12; and for of whichword I cannot find any in-
 "] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 19

avTwv idLu eKpiveTE' djuerafxeXi^roi r]Te eiri Traorri dya-

doTTOua, eTOiMOi eic nAN eproN ArAGoN* Tr} TravapeTO)
Kai cefiaa'fjiLio TroXiTeia K6KO^jxf]fJievoL iravTa ev tw (f)o^u)
avTOu eneTeXeLTe' tu Trpoo'TayjuiaTa kui tu ^iKaiiajJiaTa
OTOV KvpiOV eni ta nAAXn thc KApAiAC ymoon ererpAnxo.
TrXijcriov C; vicinoriiin S. 6 fSta] C; tSia A; i5ta S. 7 eTot^uoi]

aiToifioi A. 8 ae^acrpLiq}] A, and so apparently S; (Te^affiuiaT&rr) C (see

I.
p. 126). 9 eTrereXetTe] eirereKuTaL A.

Stance. The clause would then mean povs flvai :

comp. 2 Cor. ix. 8, and see
'of His mercy and good pleasure': below 34 with the note.
'

comp. 9 KfTot yiVOjjLevoi rov eXeovs 8. TToKiTiUi] the graces of your

Kai rfji -^prjCTTOTr^TOS avTov. The lexi- heavenly citizenship' see Phil. i. 27, ;

cons supply a few instances of the Ephes. ii. 12, ig. For TroXireia, rro-
form evboKTjais (e.g. Diod. xv. 6, Dion. XiTfiifa-dai, see 3, 6, 21, 44, 51, 54.
Hal. which also occurs below
iii. 13), 9. auToC] i.e. Tov Geov, understood
40 (see the note). In the N. T. the from rfi iravapeTO) kol a-fjiacrpia tto-

allied word eiiBoKia is generally said 'KiTfia ; comp. 54 ''"'7'' dperap.f\r]Tov

of God; Matt. xi. 26 (Luke x. 21), TToXiTeiav TOV Qeov.

Eph. i.
5, 9, Phil. ii.
13. If however TCI wpoa-TdypaTo] The two words
we accept Beovs (see the last note), no occur together frequently in the LXX :

emendation needed. is see esp. Mai. iv. 4, and comp. i Sam.

ToT^dpiOiiov K.T.\I] See the note on XXX. 25, Ezek. xi. 20, xviii. 9, xx. Ii, /
59, where the same expression oc-
etc.

curs. So too in our Burial Service, 10. eVi Ta irXaTT] K.r.X.] Taken from
'

shortly to accomplish the number the LXX of Prov. vii. 3, iiviypa^ov Se

of Thine elect.' 7rt TO TrXaroy rrjg Kap8ias crov, whei'e
iVKiKpivels KoX aKepaioi] For elXiKpi- TrXaroy corresponds to the Hebrew ni7
vfls, see Pliilippians i. 10 ;
for uKepaioi, '
a tablet.' The phrase is repeated in
Pliilippians ii. 15. the LXX with slight modifications in
3. ap.vr](T'[.KaKOL\ So we have a\t.vr]- Prov. xxii. some copies
20, and in
(TiKaKUi^below, 62. Comp. Test, xii also in but there is
Prov. iii. 3 ;

Pat)'. Zab. 8 dfivrjaUaKoi, yivecrde, Clem, nothing corresponding in the Hebrew

Alex. Strom, vii. 14 (p. 883) dp-vrjai- of Prov. xxii. 20. Wotton's state-
KUKov elvai BLbdaKei, Hermas Mand. ix. ment that nXaTos occurs in this sense
auros dpvrjaiKaKos eari, and SO Strom.
'

passim
'
in the LXX is erroneous.
11. 18 (p. 398) St' dpvr]crLK.aKias. From this LXX
reading the expres-
5. To'is 77X770-101'] A brachylogy for sion TO nXuTos Tijs Kap8ias is not un-
Tols tQ)v ttXtjo-lov. Jacobson quotes common in the Christian fathers (e.g.
Eur. Hec. 996 p.ri8' epa ratv Trhrjaiov. Iren. i. and other passages
praef. 3,
When quoted by Wotton), and ra TrXar?;
'
6. dp.eTap.i\-qToi /c.r.X.] i.e.
you had done good, you did not wish was doubtless written by Clement
it undone when there was an oppor-
;
here. But it seems not improbable
tunity of doing good, you seized it.' that the expression arose from a very
The latter clause eroi/not k.tX. is from early corruption of the LXX text (a
Titus iii. I
irpos irdv i'pyov dyaOov iroi- confusion of TrXdrof and nXaKos), since
20 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [III

III. Kal
riacra ^o^a kul 7r\aTV<Tfi6^ edodrj vjuuv,

CTreTeXecrdt] to yeypafjifjievov' "EcfiAreN kai enieN kai

errAATYNGH kai enA)(YN9n kai AneAAKTiceN d HfAnHMeNOc.

'k- tovtov ^t^Xo^
Kai (b6ovo<5, [kuiJ epi^ Kai (TTacri^y

^icoyjuo^ Kai aKaTacrrao'ia, TroAe^os Kai al^iuaXa}(rLa. 5

01/TW9 e7rt}'y6p6t]G'av ol atimoi en'i xoyc eNTiMoyc, 01 aoo^oi

CTTi Tou^ ev^o^ov^^ a<ppove^ol eiri TOv<i
(ppovifJLOv^,
01

Neui eni royc npecBYTepoyc. Cia tovto no^oa AnecTiN

I ^^0^7?] 8o6ri A. 2 ^drreXaKTicTev] CS, Deut. xxxii. 15; aveyaXaKTi-
(Tev A. 4 Kal ^pis] A; ^pis (om. Kal) CS. 8 &Tre(TTw'\ A; ^^^ S
(which probably represents diredTiv) ; &iriaT7} C, which is nearer to the Lxx of Is.

TrXa^ is the natural equivalent of ni? 15, Km alfxa crTa(f)v'Kfjs eniev (v. 1. eniov)
and is frequently used elsewhere in oivov' Ka\ e(f)ayV 'laKcojS Kal eveTrKrjadr)
the LXX to translate it. S. Paul's Kui arreXaKTicrep o rjymrrjpivoi, e\inav6r],

metaphor in 2 Cor. iii. 3 is derived enaxvvdt], iirkarvvBT). It diverges Still

from the original of Prov. vii. 3. more from the original Hebrew.
III. 'But, like Jeshurun of old, Justin Dial. 20 (p. 237 b) quotes the
you waxed wanton with plenty. Hence same passage, but his quotation has
strife and faction and open war. no special resemblances to that of ^

Hence the ignoble, the young, the Clement. If^

foolish, have risen against the highly- 4. CfjXos /c.r.X.] The v/ords occur in
esteemed, the old, the wise. Peace an ascending scale Jirst the inward :

and righteousness are banished. The sentiment of division (^rJXoy develop-

law of God, the life after Christ, are ing into ({)d6vos) ; next, the outward
disregarded. You have fostered jea- demonstration of this (epty develop-

lousy, whereby death entered into the ing into o-rdo-ty) ; lastly, the direct
world.' conflict and its results {8icoyp6s, uku-
1.
TrXarvafjioi] ^enlargement, rootn TctaTaala, iraXepos, alxpaXuKrla).
to move /;// i.e. freedom and plenty, CrjXos Kal (jidovos^ These words oc-
opposed to d\i\j/is, a-Tei/oxcopla, dvdy- cur together also below, 4, 5 :

KT];SiS 2 Sam.
20 7rpot(f)6aadv /xe
xxii. comp. Gal. v. 20, 21, Test, xii Patr.
rjnepai O^i'^eas pov Kol eyevfTO Kv- Sym. 4 OTTO TtavTos ^yjXov Kal (f)66vov.
pios iirtCTTrjpiypa pov Kai e^ijyaytv pe For the distinction between them see
fls nXarvcrpov Kal e^f/Xero pe, Ps. Trench A''. T. Syn. ser. i xxvi, and
'
cxvii. 5 f'f
ffki\j/fas fTTfKaXecrdprjv tov Galatians 1. c. ZijXos is rivalry, am-
KvpLov Ka\ fnrjKov(rev pov is TrXaTva- bition,' the desire of equalling or
pov :
comp. Ps. xvii. 20, cxviii. 45, excelling another. It does not ne-
Ecclus. xlvii. 12. See also the oppo- cessarily involve the wish to deprive
sition of iv evpvx^ipa and him of his advantages, which is im-
arevoxoi-
pf'ia-dai, Hermas Mand. v. i h evpv- plied in (pdovos ; but, if unduly che-
X<^P<^ KaroiKoiiv dyaXXida-erai. Hence rished, it will lead to this 4 Sta ;

the Latin use of dilatare, dilatatio.

^rjXos AauftS (f)d6i>ov eax^v. Plat. Afe-
2.
((jiayev k.t.X.] A very free quota- nex. p. 242 A TrpcoTov pev ^fjXos oTrb
tion from the LXX of Deut. xxxii. 14, (tjXov fie cfidovos, ^sch. Agam. 939
 Ill]
TO THE CORINTHIANS. 21

H AiKAiocyNH Kai eipt}ur]y

eV tm d-rroXeLTrekv eKaa-rov tov
o (bofSop TOV Oeov Kal ev Trj Trio'TeL avTOv dju^\vct}7rf](rai

/ULrjde
eV toI'S pojuijulol's twv Trpoo-TayjULarcoi' avTOu Tropeu-
ecrOai lurj^e TroXiTeveo-Oai Kara to KaSrjKOv tu) XpicTTM,
dWd eKacTTOV (^adi^eiu kutu Tas eTridvjuia^ Trj^ Kaphia^
auTOu Tri<i TTOvrjpd^, ^f]\ov dSiKOv Kal daefiy] dvei\t)(po-
^Tws, CL ov Kal Ganatoc eicHAOeN eic ton kocmon.

lix. 14 d(p^<TT7]Ki', given in the lower note; see above, i.

p. 124 sq. 9 Atto-
XetTreiJ'] inroXenrl A; dTroXi.ire'lv C, and so probably S. 10 Tr/crret] Trtcrrt

A. 13 dXXot] AC, but Bryennios prints d\\\ as if this were the reading
of C. T^s Kapdias] CS ; om. A. 15 Kai] AC; om. S.

6 8' a(f)6(>VT]T6s 7' ovK eVi'fr/Xos TveXfi, ^fjXov aviXr](poTaiv.

Arist. R/ie/. ii. 4 vcf)'
<Sv ^Tj^ova-dai 1
5. Kal 6avaTos k.t.X.] From Wisd. ii.

^ovXovrai Koi firj (pdoveLadai. 24 (pdovu) 8e 8iai36Xov daraTos flafjXdev

els TOV KncTjjLov ; comp. Rom. v. 12. The
'

5. aKaraa-Taa-Lo] '/?/;// /^// ; Comp.

Luke xxi. gTroXejiovs koI aKaracTTaa-ias, following passage of Theophilus con-
2 Cor. xii. 20 eptf, ^riXos...dKaTa(TTa- nects the quotation from the Book of
criai, 16 onov yap ^fjXos Kal
James iii. Wisdom with Clement's application
tpiSfia, eKel duaTaa-raaia k.t.X. of it : ad Autol. ii. 29 (p. 39) o 2ara-
6. 01 aTijxoi K.r.X.] Is. iii.
5 Tvpoa- va.s...e(p^ o) OVK laxvcrev davaTcoaai
Koy^ei To naidiov Trpos tov TTpealivTrjv, avTovs (pdovco (j)ep6iJ,evos, r)viKa ecopa
6 art/10? npOS TOV '4l/TLp.0V. T6v"A^eX evapecFTovvra rw 0ec5, evep-
8. noppoi anecTTLV /c.r.X.]
Is. lix. 1 4 yqaas els tov a8eX(f)ov avTov tov kqXov-
Koi r) diKaioavvT] paKpav a(pe(TTriKev. jxevov Kaiv eTTOirjcrev dnoKTelvat, tov
^
10. dfijj\vo}7rrj<Tai] grotun dii- d8eX(p6v avToii tov AfBeX, Kdl ovtcos

sighted'. The Atticists condemned dp^rj davciTov iyevero eis Tovde tov Kotr-
dpfiXvarrfiv and preferred dpI^XvmT- fJiOV K.T.X.

TfLu ;
Thom. Mag. p. 39. The word IV.
'
Said I not truly that death
and the form dp.j3XvQ}Treiv are as old came into the world through jea-
as Hippocrates, Frogn. I.
p. 38 (ed. lousy? It was jealousy which prompt-
Foes.). In the LXX it occurs i
Kings ed the first murder and slew a
xiv. 4 (displaced and found between brother by a brother's hand jealousy ;

xii. 24 and xii. 25 in B). But in most which drove Jacob into exile, which
places where it occurs there is a v. 1. sold Joseph as a bondslave, which
dp.fiXva>TTeiv. Comp. a Gnostic writer compelled Moses to flee before his
in Hippol. Re/, v. 16 (p. 133 ad tin.). fellow-countryman and before Pha-
12. TO KaQfjKov rc5 Xpicrro)] The ex- raoh, which excluded Aaron and
pression has a close parallel in Phil. Miriam from the camp, which swal-
1.
27 d^i'o)? TOV fvayyeXiov tov Xpia-Toii lowed up Dathan and Abiram alive,
TToXiTfvea-df, from which perhaps it is which exposed David to the malice
taken. The emendations suggested not only of foreigners but even of the
{Xpia-Tiavco or ev XpiaTa for XpiaTco) Israelite king.'
are therefore unnecessary. The idea of jealousy bringing death
14. ^fjXoV K.T.X.] Comp. 45 ddlKOV into the world had a prominent place
 ll
22 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [IV

IV. Mee' hme-

FeypaTTTai yap o'utu)^' Ka'i ereNero
pAC, HNerKCN
KaVn AHO TOON KApna)N THC fH C ByCIAN TO) 080),
KAi "ABeA HNerKeN kai aytoc And toon npcoToxoKooN tojn npo-

Batoon kai atto toon CT6AT00N AYTOON, KAI eneiAeN d 0edc

eni "ABcA kai en'i to?c Acopoic aytoy, eni Ae KaVn kai eni 51

taTc eYciAic aytoy oy npocecx,6N. kai eAYnneH KaVn Ai'an

KAI cYNeneceN tCu npocoonoj aytoy- ka'i eineN d 0edc npdc

KaVn, i'na ti'
nepiAYnoc epf-NOY; ka'i i'na ti cYNeneceN to

I oi'Tws] AS; om. C. 2 t^J ey] AS; t<^ Kvplip C, with the LXX.
3 Trpopdruju] AC; add. avTov S, with LXX. 4 eVerSei/] emde A. 7 ry
7rpo(TU)7ry] A with the LXX; to wpbffwwov CS, in accordance with what follows.

9 eac] A ;
Sj/ C. II dp^eis aiiTov] A aiyroi} dp^eis C. S has the same
;

in the teaching of the Ophites as re- for the form of the Hebrew is the
ported by Iren. i. 30. 9, Ita ut et dum
'
same here as in the following verse,
fratrem suum Abel occideret, primus where it is translated (Twinea-ev to
zeluin et mortem ostenderet': and Ire- TrpocrcoTTov, and the dative though in-
naeus himself also speaks of the f^Xos telligible is awkward.
of Cain, iii. 23. 4, iv. 18. 3 (see the 9. ovK eav 6p6<Si K.T.X.] The mean-
last passage especially). Mill supposes ing of the original is obscure, but the
that the idea was borrowed from LXX which Clement here
translation
Clement. As regards the Ophites follows must be wrong. The words
however is more probable that
it
opdas BaXrjs stand for nns'? 2^D'<n
they derived it from a current inter- ('doest good, at the door'), which the
pretation of the name KaiV :
comp. translators appear to have under-
Clem. Horn. iii. 42 rov ^tv Tvparov '
stood doest right to open unless
'

KoXeaas Kaip, o epiJ,r]veveTai f^Xor, os
Kol ^riXaaas aveTKev tov a8e\cj)ov avTOV
"A/3eX. In a previous passage (iii. 25)
this pseudo-Clement calls Cain
because St^^ ^'x^'
(fioTepi^ov ivofia,
epiJ.T}veias ttjv iichox'qv,
Ka\ KTTjais (njp) Kcu ^^Xor (ii2p) k.t.X.
indeed they read nnj for nHD, as
seems more probable (for in the older
characters the resemblance of J and
d/x- D is very close). At all events it
'''^^ would seem that they intended duXr/s
epjjLrjveveTai yap to refer to apportioning the offerings
12, where it represents
(comp. Lev. i.

The interpretation KTiiais is adopted nnj and is used of dividing the

by Philo de Cherub. 15 (i. p. 148), de victim) and they might have under-
:

Sacr.Ab. et Ca. i (l. p. 163), qtiod Det. stood the offence of Cain to consist
pot. ills. 10 (i. p. 197), etc., and by in reserving to himself the best and

Josephus Aiit. i. 2. i. giving God the worst see Philo :

I. KOLi
eyevero k.t.X.] Gen. iv. 3 8, Qnaest. in Gen. i. 62 64 (l p. 43
quoted almost word for word from sq, Aucher), de Agric. 29 (l. p. 319),
the LXX. The divergences from the and de Sacr. Ah. et Ca. 13, 20 sq,
Hebrew text are very considerable. (l p. 171 sq, 176 sq), in illustration
7. T5 TTpoa-anrco] The case is diffi- of this sense. The Christian fathers
cult to account for, except as a very however frequently give it a directly
early transcriber's error in the LXX ; moral bearing, explaining o^QQ>s fifj
 IV] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 23

npdcoonoN coy; oyknIan opOooc npoceNefKHc 6p0ooc Ae mh

oAieAHc, HMAprec; hcyXAcoN" npoc ce h AnocTpo(|)H ay'toy,
KAi CY Ap^eic AYToy. kai eineN KaVn npdc "ABeA ton aAgA-

(\)6n aytoy' AieAGcoMeN eic to neAi'oN. kai ereNeTo ew tcu

eiNAi AYTOYC eN
' '
Too neAi'oo
I I
ANecTH KaVn fc'n'i "ASeA ton aAsA-
(\)6>i aytoy kai An6KTeiNN AYTON.
OpciTe, dce\(pOL, ^V/A.09
5 Kai <p6oi/0 dheXcpOKTOVLav KaTeipydcraro. dia ^rjXo^
'

6 7raTt]p t'jjucov Iuko)^ dire^pa diro TrpoccoTrov Hcrau

order as A, but this would be most natural in the Syriac. 12 dL^Xdu/j-evI

AC ; add. igitiir (= br\) S. This addition is found in some Mss of the Lxx.
TreSi'oj'] Ko.i^i.ov A. 13 7re5t<ij] iracdM A. 14 dSe\(poi] AC;
dyaTTTjToi S; see above, i. 15 KaTeipyd<raTo\ AS; Kareipydaavro C. iiV^o^^
A ; '^ffKov C.

either to the obliquity

SteXi/s to refer words are plainly wanted for the
of Cain's moral sense or to his un- sense, and can only have been omit-
fairness in his relations with his bro- ted accidentally. The Masoretes
ther, e.g. Iren. iii. 23.4 'Quod non reckon this one of the twenty-eight
recte divisisset earn quae erga fra- passages where there is a lacuna in
trem erat communionem,' iv. 18. 3 the text see Fabric. Cod. Apocr.
:

'
Ouoniam cum zelo et malitia quae V. T. L p. 104 sq. Philo enlarges on
erat adversus fratrem divisionem ha- the allegorical meaning of to nedlou.
bebat in corde, etc.', Origen Sel. in 15. 8ia CfjXos] On the two declen-
Gen. (11, p. 30) ov buTKfv opdcos' rrjs sions of fjjAos see Winer ix. p. 78,

6eias voixoQeaias KaTe(^p6vrj(Tev k.t.\. A. Buttmann p. 20. Clement (or his

ID.
rjavxacTov] The word corre- transcriber) uses the masculine and
sponds to the Hebrew 'lying,' the neuter forms indifferently.
]'2-|
which the LXX have treated as an 16. 6 TraTTjp i^fxaiv] So 310 Trarrjp

imperative 'lie still';

comp. Job xi. Tjficov 'A/3paa/i, 60 kuBcos eSoxay to'is
19. Much stress is laid on rfcrvxafrov TvaTpaaiv rjjjimv,
62 01 TrpoSebr^Xcofiepoi

by Philo dc Soh'. 10 (l. p. 400), and (where see the note).

TTUTepes rjp-av
by early Christian expositors, e.g. From these passages it has been in-
Clem. Hem. iii.
25, Iren. 11. cc. ferred that the writer was a Jewish
12.dieXdmfjLev els to 7re8iov] This Christian. The inference however is

clause is wanting in the Hebrew and not valid ;

since Clement, like S. Paul
Targum of Onkelos, but found in the (Gal. iii. 7, 9, 29, Rom. iv. 11, 18,
LXX, the Samaritan and Peshito ix. or Justin {Dial. 134), might
6^8)
versions, and the later Targums. refer to spiritual rather than actual
Origen's comment is interesting ; parentage; comp. i Pet. iii. 6 'S.appa...
Sel. in Genes, (n. p. 39) iv rw 'E^pdiKw 77s
So tOO Theophi-
iyevTjOr^Te TeKva.
TO Xf^deu VTTo Toil Kaiu npos tov''Aj3(\ Antioch (quoted by Jacobson),
lus of
ov yiypaiTTai xai ol rrepl AKvXav eSei^av though himself a Gentile, speaks of
oTi (V TO)
CLTTOKpiicpa (f)aa\v oi 'E/3paiot Abraham {ad Autol. iii. 28, comp. iii.
Kuadac ToiiTO ivravda Kara rfjv Tap 24) and David (iii. 25) as 'our fore-
f^BofiriKovTa KSo;^r;i/. These or similar father.' To these references add ib>
24 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [IV

Tov d^eXcpou auToi). ^fjXo^^ e7roLf](Tev 'lcoa-n<p ^^XP'-

^"~
vccTOu hico^dfivaL KUL jJiexp^-
^ouXeias elaeXQeiv. ^n\o<i
diro TrpocrojTrou <Papait) ^aa-L-
(hvyeiv rivdyKaa-ev Mcoucrfju
Xews AlyvTrrou ev rco aKOucrai avTov dwo rov 6fj.o(pu\ov
Tic ce KAxecTHceN KpiiHN h Aikacthn ecf)' hmcon; mh ANe-5
Ae?N Me CY OeAeic, on xpdnoN ANeiAec exOec ton AirYTTxiON;
hid 'Aapcov Kal Mapidfji e^o) Tt]^ Trapefx^oXfjs
^riXos
rivXicrdrjcrav. ^t]Xo'i
AaQdv Kal 'A^eipcov ^wi/ra? Kart]-

yayeu ek dhov, hia to (TTao'iacrai avTOo^ npos tov

2 elaeXdelv] A; iXdeiv C, and so probably S. 5 KpLTTji' ^ St/cotrTV] A;

dpxovTa Kal 5i.KaffT7)v CS, with the LXX. See the lower note. 6 ex^fs] ^\
X^'f s C. 7 5td] CS om. A.; f^Aos] A; ^riXov C. 8 yivXiadyjaav']

-qvX-qadriaav A. ^57^0?] S; Sia^rfKoa A; 5td ^rfKov C. lo 5ta ^17X05] A;

5id griXov C. AauetS] 5d5 AC. I have followed the best Mss of the N.T. for

iii. 20 ot 'Ejipaioi, ot kol Trporrdropfs times, e.g. Exod. iv. 10, xiv. 31, Num.
TiiJiwv, d(ji
u>v Ka\ Tas lepas /3//3Xous xii. 7, 8, Josh. viii. 31, 33 :
comp. below
6xo/xef K.T.X. 43, 51, 53, Barnab. 14, Just. Mart.
5. TLs (re x.T-.X.] From the LXX of Dz'a/. 56 (p. 274 d), Theoph. ad Autol.
Exod. ii. 14, which follows the He- iii.
9, 18, etc. 'O 6epa77cov roii Qeov
brew closely, inserting however x^^s was a recognised title of Moses, as
(or e'x^es). Clement has Kpirrju for rj o cf>LXos TOV Qeoxi was of Abraham.

apxovTa Kai, perhaps from confusion 10. AavelS] Or perhaps AauiS.

with Ltike xii. 14 Kpirrjv 77 pepicrrriv There is,so far as I know, no au-
(the best reading, though A and some thority for AajSiS, except in com-
others have biKaa-rrju rj fiepiarrjv). The paratively recent MSS. Yet Hilgen-
LXX is quoted more exactly in Acts feld reads Aa^SiS. says C Aa/3iS
Funk '

vii. 27 and in Apost. Cotist. vi. 2. The ubique,' and a similar statement is
life of Moses supplies Clement with a made by Gebhardt, being misled by
twofold illustration of his point for ; Bryennios. The word is contracted
he incurred the envy not only of the in C in all its three occurrences in
king {ano Trpoa-conov 4>apaa)'), but also Clement; 18, 52, as well as here.
of his fellow-countrymen (eV tS aKov- 11. vTTo Tcov dWo(^vK(ov\ The Phi-
crai avTov as in the parallel
k.t.'X.), listines, I Sam. xxi. 11, xxix. 4 sq.
case of David below. 12. vnh 'S.aovk] I Sam. xviii. 9 'And
7. 'Aapwv K.T.X.] The Mosaic re- Saul eyed (inro^XfTropevos LXX, A)
cord mentions only the exclusion of David from that day and forward.'
Miriam from the camp, Num. xii. 14, V. 'Again, take examples from
15. In this instance and in the next our own generation. Look at the
(Dathan and Abiram) the jealous per- lives of the chief Apostles. See how
sons are themselves the sufferers. Peter and Paul suffered from jea-
9. TOV Oepanoi/Ta k-t-X.^ The ex- lousy; how through many wander-
pression is used of Moses several ings, through diverse and incessant
 v] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 2^

lo
QepaTTOvra tov Qeov Mcoua-rju. hia ^tjXo^ Aaueih (bOo-

vov '(r)(ep ov ijlovov vtto tmv dWofpvXwUj dWd Kai

VTTO CaovX ^(SamXeM's la-parjA^ ehi(jO)(^dr].

V. 'AW iW Twv dp-^aicav uTTodeLy/ULdTcoi/ Travau)-

fjteQa, eXdw/ueu errl tov^ eyyia-ra yeuojULeuovs ddXrjrd^'
15 Xaf^wfjiev T^/9 'yevea<i ti/ucov ra yei/i'aJa VTrodeiy/uara.
Aid (pdovou
^fiXov Kai ol jULeyicTTOL Kai diKaioraroi
(TTvXoL ihiM^drjcrai' Kai ews davdrov tjSXfjo'ai/. Adf^co-
fjiev Trpo 6(J)6aXiu(Joi' tj/mcou tov^ dyadous dirocrToXov^'

the orthography of the word. 11 vTrb] A; airb C 12 virb 2aoi)X]

A; airb TOV "LaovX C
/SatrtX^ws 'Icr/DaTjX] AS ; om. C. 13 vTroSe(.yfj.d-

Twv] inroSty/xaTUJi' A. 15 yevvaia] yevvea A. 16 jJ-eyLCToi.] CS ;

...(TTOL A. The word fMeyiaroL was rejected by Tischendorf and several editors
(myself included) as insufficient for the space, and some other word substituted to
fill the lacuna of A, but the text of the other authorities removes all doubt.

persecutions, they bore testimony to 17. See the note on Gala-

(TTvkoi\
Christ how at last they sealed their
;
tians ii.
9, where
it is used of S. Peter

testimony with their blood, and de- and other Apostles. The accentua-
parted to their rest and to their tion (TTvKoi is there discussed, and it

glory.' has the support of C here.

14. eyy la-To] 'very iiear^ as com- 18. dya6ovs\ So too Clem. Horn.
pared with the examples already i. 16 o S ayados Uirpos npo(m)]8)](ras

quoted. The expression must be K.T.X., quoted by Harnack. Editors

qualified and explained by the men- and have indulged
critics in much
tion of 7; yei/fa r]\x.(i)v jUSt bclow. It licence of suggesting
conjecture,
has been shown that the close of Do- dyiovs, TTpMTovs, Oeiovs, etc., in place
mitian's reign is pointed out both by of dyaQovs. This has led to the state-
tradition and by internal evidence as ment made in Volkmar's edition of
the date of this epistle (i. p. 346 sq).
Credner's Gesch. des N. T. Kanon p.
The language here coincides with 51, that A reads a ovs (a supposed
this result. could hardly be used
It contraction for Trpwrous). Nothing
to describe events which had happen- can be farther from the truth. The
ed within the last year or two, as word dyaQovi is distinctly legible in
must have been the case if the letter full in A, and it confirmed by the
is

were written at the end of Nero's other authorities. Such an epithet

reign. And on the other hand ?) may be most naturally explained on
yei/ea r\^x<iiv would be wholly out of the supposition that Clement is speak-
place, if it dated from the time of ing in affectionate remembrance of
Hadrian, some 50 years or more after those whom he had known person-
the death of the two Apostles. ally. Otherwise the epithet seems
aQXryra^^ See the note on Ign. to be somewhat out of place.
I.
Polyc.
26 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [V

rierpov, 09 did tfjAov aSiKOV ov)(^ eva ouZe

Zvo dWa
TrXe'iOva's v7rt]veyKev ttovov^, kul ovtco fjiapTvpr]a'a^ etto-

I
n^rpoc, 8?] C ;
...oo- A ;
Petrus S. Before the discovery of C, the lacuna of A
was filled up [6 Mirp\o% or [Il^rpjos. The true reading could not have been fore-

seen. 1 viri\v'yKiv\ viTT]veyKe C; and so doubtless S, which has 73D tulit,

portavit (see 14). As regards A, Young read virifieiviv; but Mill and others

I. Uirpov K.T.\.'\ A passage in But not only was this juxtaposition

Peter of Alexandria {de Poenit. 9, see of the two Apostles appropriate as
I.
p. 164), where the two Apostles coming from the Roman Church ;

are mentioned in conjunction, was it would also appeal powerfully to

probably founded on Clement's ac- the Corinthians. The latter commu-

count here, for it closely resembles nity, nothan the former, traced
less
his language. The same is also the its spiritual pedigree to the combined

case with a passage of Macarius teaching of both Apostles and ac- ;

Magnes Apocr. iv. 14, quoted in the cordingly Dionysius (1. c), writing
note on vn-e'Sei^ei' below. This juxta- from Corinth to the Romans, dwells
position of S. Peter and S. Paul, with emphasis on this bond of union
where the Roman Church is con- between the two churches comp. :

cerned, occurs not unfrequently. I Cor. i.

12, iii. 22.
The language of Ignatius, Rom. 4, 2. p.apTvpri<Tas\ ''having borne his
seems to imply that they had both testimony.^ The word
ndprvs was
preached in Rome and ;
half a cen- very early applied especially, though
tury later Dionysius of Corinth (Euseb. not solely, to one who sealed his tes-
H. E. ii. 25) states
explicitly that they timony with his blood. It is so ap-
went to Italy and suffered martyr- plied in the Acts (xxii. 20) to S. Ste-
dom there Kara tov avrbv Kuipov. This phen, and in the Revelation (ii. 13)
is affirmed also a generation later by to Antipas. Our Lord Himself is
Tertullian,who mentions the different styled the faithful and true p.apTvs
manners of their deaths [Scorp. 15, (Rev. i. 5, iii. 14), and His p.aprvpia
de Praescr. 36) and soon after Gaius,
; before Pontius Pilate is especially
himself a Roman Christian, describes emphasized (i Tim. vi. 13). Doubt-
the sites of their graves in the im- less the Neronian persecution had
mediate neighbourhood of Rome done much to promote this sense,
(Euseb. H. E. ii. 25) see also Lac- ; aided perhaps by its frequent oc-
tant. dc Mori. Pers. 2, Euseb. Dem. currence in the Revelation. After
Ev. iii.
3, p. 116. The existing Ada the middle of the second century at
Petri et Pauli {Act. Apost. Apocr. p. all events paprvs, naprvpelv, were used

I, ed. Tischendorf) are occupied with absolutely to signify martyrdom;

the preaching and death of the two Martyr. Polyc. 19 sq, Melito in
Apostles at Rome and this appears ; Euseb. H. E. iv. 26, Dionys. Corinth.
to have been the subject also of a ib. ii.
25, Hegesippus ib. ii.
23, iv. 22,
very early work bearing the same Epist. Gall. ib. v. i, 2, Anon. adv.
name, on which see Hilgenfeld Nov. Cataphr. ib. v. 16, Iren. Haer. i. 28.
Test. extr. Can. Rec. iv. p. 68. This 12. 18. 5, etc.
I, iii. 3. 3, 4, iii.
10, iii.

subject is further discussed in the even at this late date they con-
Still
excursus S. Peter in Rome appended tinued to be used simultaneously of
to the first volume. other testimony borne to the Gospel,
v] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 27

pevOt]
ets Tov ocpeiXojuevov tottov Trj^ ^o'^ti^-. oia ^i]\ov

professed to see the h, and Wotton accordingly says 'proculdubio legendum est
According to Jacobson 'hodie nihil nisi yTT restat'. On the other
inT-f)veyKev\
hand Tischendorf sees part of an h. I could discern traces of a letter, but these
might belong equally well to an e or an h.

short of death by Hegesippus,

:
e.g. this distinction ;
see Euseb. Mart.
Euseb. H. E. by ApoUonius
iii. 20, 32, Pal. II TTpo TOV paprvpiov 8cd Kavrtj-
zb. V. 18 (several times), and in a paiv vTropoffjs rov r^s upoXoyias 8ia6-
document quoted by Serapion id. v. Xi](ras dyatva.

19. A
passage in the Epistle of the Thus the mere use of paprvpelv in
Churches of Gaul (a. D. 177) illustrates this early age does not in itself ne-
the usage, as yet not definitely fixed cessarily imply the martyrdoms of
but tending to fixity, at this epoch ;
the two Apostles but on the other
;

01;;;^ ana^ ov8e 8\s dWa noXXaKis hand we need not hesitate (with
fiapTv prjaavTf s Koi (k dtjpiatv avdts Merivale, Hist, of the Romans vi. p.

dva\r](pdevTfS. .oliT avrol.

paprvpas eav- 282, note 2) to accept the passage
Tovs aveKTjpvTTOv oiiTe prjv rjplv eVeVpe- of Clement as testimony to this fact.
TTOV TovTco Tco ovopuTi TTpouayopeveiv For (i) Clement evidently selects ex-
avTQVs' aXX. evrvoTe Tis r]p(ov bi inKTTO- treme cases of men who etay Oavdrov
y^TJs T]
8id Xoyov pdpTvpas avrovs Trpoa- rjdXrjcrav; The emphatic position
(2)
finev, (nenT^rjcra'ov TTiKpcoi' i]8e(os yap
'
of papTvp)](Tas points to the more defi-
irapexd^povv rrjv rfjs p,apTvpLas irpoa- nite meaning; (3) The expression is
Tjyopiav tcu XptcrTw rcS incrTa Koi akq- the same as that in which Hegesip-
6iva) pdpTvpi...Kdi infpipvrjdKOVTO tcov pus describes the final testimony, the

e^fXrjXvdoTMV i]8i] papTvpcuv nai eXeyov' inar-tyrdo)n, of James (Euseb. H. E.

eKeivoL rj8rj fidprvpes ovs iv rf] ii. 23 Kal ovTa>s i papTvprjaev) and
opoXoyla icttos t]^ icoaev ava-
'X.p of Symeon (Euseb. JP. E. iii. 32 Kai
Xrj(f)drjvai, iTvicrt^payiadpevos av- ovTco papTvpfi); (4) Dionysius of
TU)v 8ia rfjs f^68ov ttjv paprvpiav' Corinth couples the two Apostles to-
i]fils 8e op-oXoyoi, perpioi koi raneL- gether, as they are coupled here, say-
vo'i (Euseb. H. E. v. 2). The distinc- mg epaprvprjcrav Kara tov (wtov Kaipov
tion between pdprvs and 6poXoyr)Ti]s (Euseb. H. E. ii. 25), where martyr-
(more rarely opoXoyos), which the dom is plainly meant and where pro-
humility of these sufferers suggested, bably he was writing with Clement's
became afterwards the settled usage language in his mind. The early
of the Church ;
but that it was not so patristic allusions to the martyrdoms
at the close of the second century of the two Apostles have been already
appears from the Alexandrian Cle- quoted in the last note. It should
ment's comments on Heracleon's be added that S. Peter's martyrdom
account of opoXoyla in S/rof/i. iv. 9, is clearly implied in John xxi. 18,
p. 596; comp. also TertuU. Prax. i and that S. Paul's is the almost in-
'de jactatione martyrii inflatus ob evitable consequence of his position
solum et simplex et breve carceris as described by himself in 2 Tim. iv.
taedium.' Even half a century later 6 sq.
the two titles are not kept apart in 3. TOV 0(f)lX6peU0V TOTTOV^ TllC CX-
Cyprian's language. The Decian pression is copied by Polycarp {Phil.

persecution however would seem to 9), where speaking of S. Paul and

have been instrumental in fixing the other Apostles he says, 6ty rov
28 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [v

Kui epLV flavXo^ V7r0fji0vri<i (^pa^lov vTre^ei^ev, eTrraKi^

I /cat ^piv] CS; def. A. Here again the calculation of the space has proved
fallacious. Editors, before the discovery of CS, filled in the lacuna of with Kal A
6 or Kal simply. ppa^etov^ ISpajBiov A. Vwedei^ev] ?5fef C ; iu/i/ [por-

tavit) "H''D S. As regards the reading of A, there is some doubt. Young printed
dTreVxe", but Mill formerly and Jacobson recently read the MS y CM- Ac-
cordingly Wotton and most later editors have written virecxxev. With respect to the
Y my own observation entirely agrees with Tischendorf 's, post ^pa^iov who says
'

membrana abscissa est neque litterae quae sequebatur vestigium superest'. Indeed
(if
I am right) there can hardly have been any such trace since the MS was bound,

6<^fiKofx.(vov avToli
ronov (ia\ napa tw my edition, and it was accepted by
Kvpico. So Acts i.
25 Tov Torrov tov Gebhardt (ed. i); though in his later
'ibiov (comp. Ign. Magn. 5), Barnab. edition Gebhardt has adopted the
19 TOV (opLCTfiepov Tonov, and below simple verb eSei^ei/ from C. If Mill and
44 '""i'
IBpyfievov avTols tottov. An Jacobson are right, this cannot have
elder in Irenaeus (probably Papias) been the reading of A, as the initial
discourses at length on the different Y was once visible. My reasons for
abodes prepared for the faithful ac- doubting w'hether this was possible, at
cording to their deserving, Haer. v. least in the later condition of the MS,
36. I
sq. are given in the upper note. On the
I. ^pa^fiov\ S. Paul's own word, other hand vneSei^ev is supported by
1 Cor. ix. 24, Phil. iii. 14. See also a passage in the recently discovered
Mart. Polyc. 17 (Bpa^elov dvavTipprj- work of Macarius Magnes Apocr. iv.
Tov diTevr]veyiJ,evov, Tatian ad Graec. 14 (p. 181, Blondel), where speaking
33 aKpnaias ^pa^elov dnrfviyKaTO and :
of S. Peter and S. Paul he says,
comp. Orac. Sib. ii. 45, 149. The fyvaicrav VTrodel^aL tovtois [i.e. Tols
word is adopted in a Latin dress, TTtcrrevovcrti'], Trot'oiy dydcriv 6 ttjs tv'kt-

bravium or brabiuin, and occurs Tecos (TvyKeKpoTTjTOi (rTe(pavos. In the

in TertuUian, in the translation of context, which describes the labours
IrenaDus, and in the Latin versions and martyrdoms of these same two
of the Scriptures. Apostles, the language of Macarius
un-eSfi^fi'] ''pointed out the way to, appears to give many echoes of this
taught by his example'; comp. 6 passage in Clement v7rep,fLvav evae-
;

vn6deiyfj.a KaWitTTOv iytvovro iv r)fuv. 8i8acrKOVTS, tmv dbiKovpevcov virip-

/ScSs
The idea of vntdei^iv is carried out fiaxot, 7roXXa...ra) Koapa prjvvaavTes,
by vnoypafifjios below for the two ; TOV /3tou TO TeXos pfXP''
dTri'jvTijcrev,
words occur naturally together, as in 6avaTov...7rpoKiv8vvevaa>(ri, Ttjs evKXeias
Lucian E/tet. Praec. 9 woSet/ci/vs to TOV enaivov, 01 yevvd8ai, dvd ttjv oIkov-
Arjuoa-devovs ixvr]...']rapa8eiyp,aTa Trupa- pei/Tjv, l3pa(Bflov...KTcop(voi, Tvnoi dv-
Ti.6eLS TU)V \oyoL>v ov pudia p.iptladai. ..
8peLas ...yevopevoi, TroXXa tup koXoiv
(cat TOV xpovov nafiTToXw vnoypay^eL ttjs ay 03 viapar (OV, rffs 8i,8ax^i kcu tov Krjpvy-
'

odoiTTopias so vTTodeiKvveiv eXnidas paTos, papTvpiov 86^av, 7riKpaLS...^acrd-

and vT7oypa(j)iiv eXTrtSas- are converti- voLS, VTTopovfj noXKfj, yf vvai.<A)S (j)epfiv. It
ble phrases, Polyb. ii. 70. 7, v. 36. i. seems highly probable therefore that
This conjecture vnedei^ev, which I the use of vnodeiKviivai. in this some-
offered in place of the vneaxev of what strange connexion was derived
previous editors, occurred indepen- by him from the same source. Comp.
dently to Laurent, who had not seen also p. Gait. ^ 23 in Euseb. //. E.
V] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 29

decrjua (popeaa^, (puyadevdei^, XiSacrBei^y Krjpv^ yevo-

so that Jacobson was certainly mistaken and Mill perhaps so; but I have so far
regarded this statement, as to offer a conjecture which respects the y- On the
other hand the 1 at the beginning of the next line is clearly legible even in the
'

photograph, though it has not been discerned by previous editors. Tisch. says 1
quum paullo minus appareat, possit erasum credi'. The letter is certainly faint,
but though I have inspected the MS more than once, I can see no traces of erasure.
For other reasons which have led me to prefer vir^8ei^ev to ^dei^ev see the lower
note.

V. I els TTjv Tcov \oiwav vnorvnaiaiv flight from Damascus (Acts ix. 25,
inro8eiKvvu)v otl firjdev <poj3p()V oirnv 2 Cor. xi. 33), from Jerusalem (Acts
ix. 30), from Antioch of Pisidia (xiii.
narpos ayanr], firjSe aXyeivov ottov Xpto"-
Tov 86^a. S. Paul himself says (Acts 50), from Iconium (xiv. 6), from Thes-
XX. 35) vTTfSei^a iplv otl k.tX. C is salonica (xvii. 10), from Beroea (xvii.
found in other cases to substitute the 14), and perhaps from Corinth (xx. 3).

simple verb, where A has the com- Some of these incidents would be
pound (see and would
I.
p. 127), described by (f)vya8ev6eis, but it is
naturally do where the
so here, perhaps too strong a word^to apply
meaning of the compound was not to all. On (pvyaSeveiu, which though
obvious. The rendering of S, which found even in Attic writers was re-
also translates /3pa/3eioi/ by certanicn, garded by purists as questionable,
corresponds fairly with iirkvxf^v sug- see Lobeck Phryn. p. 385. The read-
gested by some editors but this was ; ing pa^hevQw (comp. 2 Cor. xi. 25)
certainly not the reading of A. which was proposed to fill the lacuna
fTrraKtr] In 2 Cor. xi. 23 S. Paul in A is objectionable, because the

speaks of himself as eV (pvXaKals ne- form pajidi^dv alone is used in the

pL<TaoTpa)i but the imprisonment at
;
LXX and O. T. (and perhaps else-
Philippi is the only one recorded in where, in this sense).
the Acts before the date of the Se- Xidaadeis] At Lystra (Acts xiv. 19).
cond Epistle to the Corinthians. An attempt was made also to stone
Clement therefore must have derived him at Iconium, but he escaped in
his more precise information from time (xiv. 5). Hence he says (2 Cor.
some other source.
{Theol. Zeller xi. aTra^ iXiddadriv.
25) See Paley
Jahrb. 1848, p. 530) suggests that the Hor. Paul. iv. 9.
writer of this letter added the captivi- K^pu^] S. Paul so styles himself
ties at Caesarea and at Rome to the 2 Tim. i. II. Epictetus too calls his
five punishments which S. Paul men- ideal philosopher /c^pii| r5>v dea>v, Diss.
tions in 2 Cor. xi. 24. But the irevTa- iii. 21. 13, iii. 22. 6g. The Stoics, like
Kiithere has no reference to impri- the Christians, were essentially Ktjpv-
sonments, which are mentioned se- Ks in their mode of action. The
parately in the words already quoted. picture of Diogenes at Corinth, given
I should not have
thought it neces- in Dion Chrysost. Oral, viii, ix, might

sary to call attention to this very stand viuiatis inutandis for S. Paul.
obvious inadvertence, if the statement The word is accentuated KVfpv^ (not
had not been copied with approval KTjpv^) in C in accordance with the
or without disapproval by several rule of the grammarians; see Chand-
other writers. ler's Greek Accentuatiofi p. 181, no.
2. (fivyabfvdfLs^ We read of S. Paul's 669.
30 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [V

juei/05 ev Tf. Trj dvaToKrj kui ev t^ '

^vcreiy to 'yevvaiov
' '

Tr]<i 7rLa-T6(i)<s avTOu kt/Xco? eXaj^ev, ^LKaiocrvvnv ^ida^a^

oXov Tov KOOTfJiOV Kai eirl to Tepjua Trj^ ^vaews eXBcov

I re] AC ;
om. S. 2 Trlcrreus] iriffTaiuxr A. 5t/caio(7i/i'7jj'] A ;
SiKaio-

aivrtsCS, connected by punctuation in both these authorities with ^ajSe. Bryen-

nios had overlooked the reading of C in his edition, but corrects the omission

'
I. TO yevvaiov k.t.X.] the noble re- Se avTr]s {Trjs oiKOvpevrjs) Tidrjcri iTpos

nown which he had won by his faith' ;

8v(Tei pev Tas 'VLpaKkeiovs OTjfXar, 11. 4
i.e. his faith in his divine mission to (p. 106) pe)(pi Tcov oKpcov Tijs l^rjpias
preach to the Gentiles : see Credner's cnrep SvcrpiKmTfpd ecrTi, iii. I (p. 13?)
Gesc/i. dcs N. T. Kanon (i860) p. 52. ToiiTo (to lepbv aKpatTripiov) ecTTi to 8vti-

3. okov TOV Koa-jjiov K.r.X.] In the spu- KuiTaTov ov TTjs EvpcoTTJjs povov oKXa KOl
rious letter of Clement to James pre- Trjs olnovpevrjs aTraarjS arjpeiov' irepa-
fixed to the Homilies it is said of S. TovTui yap VTTO twv hveiv rjirelpcav r/

Peter o rryy Svcrecos- to aKOTeivoTe- oiKOvpevrj irpos hvcriv, toXs re ttjs Eupw-

pov Toi) Koafiov ixepos cos iravTav irrjs aKpois Ka\ toIs TvpaTois ttjs Ai^vr^s,

iKavcoTepns (fxuriaai KeXevadeis ... top iii.

5 (P- 169) e7ri8r] kotu tov nopOpov

fcroixevov dyadov oXa> Ta KO(Tp.co fxrjvv- iyivovTO tov koto Trjv KoXtttjv, vopiaav-
aas ^naiXea, /xe'xP'S' fVTavda Trjs 'Poo/xjys Tas Teppovas eivai Trjs oiKovpevrjs.-.Ta

yfp6iJLevos...avToi tov
vvv j3lov jSiaicos uKpa, tb. (p. 170) ^ryriiv enl Tav Kvpias
TO ^f]v lu.eT^jXXa^ev I, p. 6 Lagarde).
(!:; Xeyopevwv (tttjXcov tovs Trjs olKovpevrjs
This passage is, I think, plainly opovs (these references are corrected
founded on the true Clement's account from Credner's Ka7ion p. 53), and
of S. Paul here and thus it accords
;
see Strabo's whole account of the
with the whole plan of this Judaic western boundaries of the world and
writer in transferring the achieve- of this coast of Spain. Similarly
ments of S. Paul to S. Peter whom Veil. Paterc. i. 2 'In ultimo Hispa-
he makes the Apostle of the Gentiles : niae tractu, in extremo nostri orbis
see Galatians p. 315. termino.' It is not improbable also
'
TO Teppa Tris Svafcos] i/ie extreme that this western journey of S. Paul
west.' In the Epistle to the Romans included a visit to Gaul (2 Tim. iv.
(xv. 24) S. Paul had stated his in- 10; see Galatians p. 31). But for the
tention of visiting Spain. From the patriotic belief of some English wri-
language of Clement here it ap- ters (see Ussher B^'it. Eccl. Ant. c.

pears that this intention was fulfilled. I,Stillingfleet Orig. Brit. c. i), who
Two generations later {c. A.D. 180) an have included Britain in the Apo-
anonymous writer mentions his hav- stle's travels, there is neither evidence
'
ing gone thither; Sed et profec- nor probability comp. Haddan and;

tionem Pauli ab urbe ad Spaniam Stubbs Counc. and Eccles. Doc. i.

proficiscentis,' Fragm. Murat. (pp. p. 22 sq. This journey westward
19, 40, ed. Tregelles, Oxon. 1867; or supposes that S. Paul was liberated
Westcott Hist, of Canoji p. 517, ed. after the Roman captivity related
4). For the expression to Tipp-a t^? in the Acts, as indeed (independ-
Suo-eo)?pointing to the western ex- ently of the phenomena in the Pas-
tremity of Spain, the pillars of Her- toral Epistles) his own expectations
cules, comp. Strab. ii. i (p. 67) iripaTn expressed elsewhere (Phil. ii. 24,
 v]
TO THE CORINTHIANS. 3 1

Kai fJLapTVpr](ra^
eiri twv t^yoviuevcoVf outco's a.TrriWa'yr]

5 Tov KOCfiov Kai ets toi/ ayiov tottov eiropevdr], vTrofiovri's

yevo/JLevo^ fixeyia-To^ vTroypa/ujuios.

Didache p. py .
3 eirt] The word is distinctly legible in AC, and therefore
the conjecture viro (see below) is inadmissible. 5 toO /ciffynou] ab hoc AC ;

mitndo S (see the note on ii. 19). eiropeiiBri] AC; siisceptus est (eirrjpdr]?} S.

Philem. 22) would suggest. Those the passage simply interpreted.

who maintain that this first Roman 4. enl Twv i]yovp,va)v] before rulers^ '

captivity ended in
his martyrdom comp. 37 rots Tjyovpevois iqpa>v...Tov
are obliged to explain to repfia rrjs ^aaikfcos Koi tcov ^yovpevav, $1 ol
bvcrecos of Rome itself. But it is in- rjyovpepoi AlyvTTTOv, ^55 ttoAXoi (iaai-
credible that a writer living in the Aets KOI riyovp,evoi, g6l tois re ap)(ovaiv

metropolis and centre of power and Ka\ riyovp.VOLS rjp,a)v eir\ ttjs yfjs- The
civilization could speak of it as 'the names of Nero and Helius (Dion
extreme west,' and this at a time Cass. Ixiii. 12), of Tigellinus and Sa-
when many eminent Latin authors binus (the praetorian prefects A.D.
and statesmen were or had been have been suggested. In the
67), etc.,
natives of Spain, and when the com- absence of information it is waste of
mercial and passenger traffic with time to speculate. Clement's lan-
Gades was intimate and constant. guage does not imply that the Apo-
(For this last point see Friedlander stle S papTvpia eVi rav ^yovp-evoiv took

Sittengesch. Roins II. p. 43, with his

place in the extreme west (as Hil-
references.) On the other hand Phi- genfeld argues), for there is nothing
lostratus says that, when Nero ban- to show that eVt ro repixa k.t.X. and
ished philosophers from Rome, Apol- papTvprjcras fnl rav rjyovpevtov are in-
lonius of Tyana TpeVerat eVi to. ^a-ire- tended to be synchronous. Indeed
pia rris y^y (iv. 47), and the region the clause koi eVt to reppa Tfjs 8v(Tea>s
which he visited is described imme- f\da>v seems be explanatory of the
to
diately afterwards (v. 4) ra TaSetpa preceding Si/catocn;i/7;i/ SiSa^as oXov tov
(ceTrat Kara to ttJs 'Evpanrrji Tepfxa Koa-pou, and the passage should be
(quoted by Pearson Minor Theol. punctuated accordingly.
Works I. p. 362). This is the natural 6.
vTToypappos] a copy, an example^
'

mode of speaking. It is instructive as for instance a pencil drawing to be

to note down various interpretations traced over in ink or an outline to be
ttjs 8va(ccis which have
of eVi TO Te'ppa filled in and coloured. The word oc-
been proposed: (i) 'to his extreme curs again 16, 33; comp. 2 Mace,
i^i^
'
limit towards the west (Baur, Schen- ii. 28, 29, I Pet. ii. 21, Polyc. Phil. 8,
kel); (2) 'to the sunset of his labours
'

Clem. Horn. iv. 16. The classical

(Reuss); (3) 'to the boundary be- word is inroypa(f)ri. For an explana-
tween the east and west '

(Schrader, tion of the metaphor see Aristot. Gen.

'

Hilgenfeld) ; (4) to the goal or centre An. ii. 6 (l. p. 743) kul yap 01 ypa(j)els
of the west' (Matthies); (5) 'before
vTToypa^avTei Taii ypappals ovtcos fva-
{vTTo for iiTi) the supreme power of Xeicfjovai Tols xpajpucri to ^aov. The
the west' (Wieseler, Schaff). Such sister art of sculpture supplies a simi-

attempts are a strong testimony to lar metaphor in inroTVTrucrii, the first

the plain inference which follows from rough model, i Tim. i.
16, 2 Tim. i.
13.
 32 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [VI

VI. Tourois Tol^ dv^pacriv octlco^ iToXiTevcrajjievoi^

a-vi^}]6poi(r6t]
ttoXu TrXfjOo^ eKXeKTwv, OLTLve<5 ttoWuTs
aiKiai^ Kai /Sacrai'Oi'Sj cia ^r]\o^ TraOouTe^, VTrodeiyiua

3 ^tJXos] a ; tv^ou C, and so again in the next line. 4 diwxOeTirai] 8iu-

xdtaai A. 5 Aavai'des Kal AlpKai] A ; Sava'i'des Kal 5eip Kal C ; danaides et
dircae S. I am not prepared to say now that the word is written AAH&l^ec as I

VI. '
But besides these signal in- which our three extant authorities
stances, many less distinguished were derived. But such testimony,
saints have fallen victims to jea- though very strong, is not decisive,
lousy and set us a like example of since we find this common ancestor
forbearance. Even feeble women at fault in other places ; see above,
have borne extreme tortures without I. p. 145. If correct, it must refer to

flinching. Jealousy has separated those refinements of cruelty, patron-

husbands and wives it has over-
thrown cities, and uprooted nations.'
2. troKv ttX^^os]
must be chiefly, though not solely,
to the sufferers in the Neronian per-
secution, since they are represented
as contemporaries of the two Apo-
fvt]nlv will mean among
Thus
stles.
us RomanChristians,' and the alKiai
Koi ^daavoi are the tortures described
by Tacitus Au7i. xv. 44. The Ro-
man historian's expression 'multi-
'
tudo ingens is the exact counterpart
to Clement's noXii jrA^^of.
TToXXal? aiKuui K.r.X.]
many sitfferings^
have substituted the accusative,
Xas aluias but, as the dative is fre-
; adstructo ').
quently used to denote the means,
and even the accessories, the circum-
stances (see Madvig
sq), I have not felt justified in alter-
ing the reading. In this case hm
C^Xos TradovTfs will be used absolute-
ly, and TToXXms alKiais k.t.X. will ex-
plain VTToSeiyfxa iyivovro.
: izedby Nero and Domitian but not
confined to them, which combined
The reference theatrical representations with judi-
cial punishments, so that the offender
suffered in the character of some hero
of ancient legend or history. For the
insane passion of Nero, more espe-
'
cially, for these and similar scenic
exhibitions, see Sueton. N'ero 11, 12;
and for illustrations comp. Fried-
lander SitiengescJiichtc Roms 11. p.
234 sq. Thus one offender would
represent Hercules burnt in the flames
on CEta (TertuU. Apol. 15 'qui vivus
dj or amid
^
ardebat Herculem induerat'); ano-
Previous editors ther, Ixion tortured on the wheel (cie
ttoK- '
Pudic. 22 puta in axe jam incendio
We
read also of crimi-
nals who, having been exhibited in
the character of Orpheus (Martial.
Gr. Synt. % 39 Sped. 21) or of Daedalus {ih. 8) or of
Atys (TertuU. Apol. 15), were finally
torn to pieces by wild beasts. The
story of Dirce, tied by the hair and
dragged along by the bull, would be
very appropriate for this treatment ;

5. Aavatbei Ka\ AipKai] This read- but all attempts to make anything of
ing is supported by all our authori- the legend of the Danaids entirely
ties, with minor corruptions, and I fail. Arnold {Neromsche Christenver-
have therefore replaced it in the text,
folgjing p. 38, 1888) cuts the knot by
though not without misgiving. If it suggesting that additions were made
be not correct, the error must have to the original legend of the Danaids
existed in the archetypal MS from for the purposes of the amphitheatre;
 VI] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 33

KaXKLG-rov eyevovTO ev f]fMv. hici

^17X0? hLta-x^SeLcrai

formerly read it (h and n being frequently indistinguishable where the MS is creased

and blurred), and I was certainly in error as regards the division of the lines in
my
first edition.

just as in these scenic exhibitions i) which I

placed in the text in my
Orpheus was torn to pieces by a bear first edition, yvi/aiKes, z/edj/tSfj, rratSt-

(Martial Spec/. 21). But after all (TKai.t as highly probable and giving

the difficulty still remains, that the an excellent sense '

Women, tender
j

mode of expression in Clement is maidens, even slave-girls comp.

'
:

altogether awkward and unnatural August. Se7'm. cxliii (v. p. 692 sq)
on this hypothesis. Harnack, who
'
Non solum viri sed etiam mtilieres
however expresses himself doubtfully et pueri et puellae martyres vicerunt,'
on the reading, quotes Heb. x. 32 Leo Semi. Ixxiv (l. p. 294) Non so- '

ttoXKtjv adXrjcriv vTrefifivare Tradrjuarcov, lum viri sed etiam y^^w/;/rt:^ nee tan-
roi'TO fiv oveiSicTfiols re kol 6\L\lrf(Tiv tum impubes pueri sed etiam tenerae
dfarpi^ofievoi, but here dearpi^o- vzrghies usque ad efifusionem sui
'

fievoi is best explained by i Cor. iv. sanguinis decertarunt quoted by ;

9 oeaTpov eyevtjdrjfiei/ ra Koafico K.r.X., Wordsworth (I.e.). To these illustra-

where no literal scenic representation tionsadd Minuc. Fel. 37 viros cum '

is intended. Laurent explains the Mucio vel cum Aquilio aut Regulo
words by saying that the punishment comparo ? pueri et mulierculae nos-
'
of the Danaids and of Dirce in pro- trae cruces et tormenta, feras et
verbium abiisse videtur.' But he can omnes suppliciorum terriculas, in-

only quote for the former e's rov toiv spirata patientia doloris inludunt.'
Aavai8mv rridov iidpocfiopelvhucia-n Tim. For the meaning of nai8ia-Kri in Hel-
18, which is hardly to the point, as it lenistic Greek see the notes Galatians
merely denotes labour spent in vain. iv. 22.

Clement of Alexandria indeed {^Strain. Tischendorf calls it 'liberrima con-

iv, 19,
p. 618) mentions the daughters
of Danaus with several other exam-
ples of womanly bravery among the
heathens, and in the earlier part of
the same chapter he has quoted the
passage of his Roman namesake
( 55) relating to Esther and Judith;
but this does not meet the difficulty.
It has been suggested again, that
these may have been actual names
of Christian women martyred at
Rome but the names are perhaps
:
improbable in themselves, and the
plurals cannot well be explained.
Having regard to the
of this expression I am disposed
still to favour the acute emendation
So it is, but there is a free-
jectura.'
dom which justifies itself; and the
corruption is just such as might have
occurred at an early date, when the
epistlewas written on papyrus. I have
been informed by Mr Basil H. Cooper,
through a common friend, that he
proposed this very same emendation
in the Mojithly Christian Spectator,
January, 1853, p. 16. He assured
me that it had occurred to him inde-
pendently; and that, till quite re-
cently,he believed the credit which
had been assigned to another to be
difficulties due to himself, and wrote to this
effect to the Western Times as lately
as 87 1, not knowing that Words-
1

of Wordsworth (on Theocritus xxvi. worth's emendation was published

CLEM. IL
34 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [VI

dvoa-ia Tradova-ai, eirl (ie^aiov ^po/mov tov Trj^ Trto'Tew?

KaTi']VTt]a'aVy Kal eXaf^ov yepa^ yevvalov al daSevei^ tw

(TtafJiaTL. dTrrjWoTpiwcrev ya/ueTa^ dv^pcov Kai
^\o^
r\\\oL(ti(rev vtto tou Trarpo^ rjfxiov 'AZajj., Toyto
to
prjdev
NYN OCTOYN eK TOON OCTeOON MOy KAI CAp2 eK THC CApKOC MOY.5
tr]\o<i Kal epi's
TroXei^ jmeydXa^ KaTecrTpeylyei> Kal edvt]

fxeydXa e^epl^cocrev.

5 d<TTe(>iv] oaTaiwv A ;
ocrruv C. 6 ^yots] epeia A. Kar^ffrpexJ/ev'] AS ;

KaT^(TKa\{/e C. 7 e^epl^ucrev] A ; i^eppl^uffe C 9 iTo/JLVT^ffKovres] A;

in 1844. The fact of its having 4. TovTo viiv K.T.X.] From the LXX
occurred independently to two minds of Gen. ii. 23, which corresponds with
is a strong testimony in its favour. the Hebrew.
Bunsen {Hippolytus I.
p. xviii, ed. 6. C^Xos KOI f'pis] The two words
2, 1854) enthusiastically welcomes occur together, Rom. xiii. 13, 2 Cor.
this emendation as relieving him xii. 20, Gal. v. 20 see above, 3. :

'
from two monsters which disfigured TToXets p.ey(i\as k.t.'K.] See Ecclus.
a beautiful passage in the epistle of xxviii. 14 TToXets oxvpds KadelXe Kal
the Roman Clement.' Lipsius also oiKias fieyia-rdvcov KareaTpfyfAf. Jacob-
in a review of my edition {^Academy^ son refers to Jortin, who supposes
July 9, 1870) speaks favourably of it; that Clement had in his mind Horace
'
and Donaldson [Apostolical Fathers Cartn. i. Irae Thyesten
16. 17 sq,
p. 122, ed. 2) calls it admirable, exitio gravi stravere, et altis urbibus

though elsewhere {Theol. Rev. Janu- ultimae stetere causae cur perirent
ary 1877, p. 45) he himself offers funditus.'
another conjecture, yewalai re Kal SoC- 7. e|fptfQ)o-6v] For the form see Tis-
\m. Lagarde {Annen. Stud. p. 73) chendorf Nov. Fest. i.
p. Ivi (ed. 7),

conjectures dvakKihfs koI KopiKai ;

A. Buttmann Gramm. p. 28 sq. Most
Haupt {Hermes iii. p. 146, 1869) editors needlessly alter the read-
suggests dfividei dUaiai, comparing ing to e^eppi(u)a-ev. Compare /.leyaXo-
Clem. Alex. Frotr. 12 (p. 92) al roii pi]p.ova 15) (pvXXopoel 23 and ii.

Qeov 6vyaTeps, al dfxvddes al KaXal. For C

31. I. see above,
p. 127.
2. Karr^vTrja-av /c.r.X.] The verb VII. 'While instructing you, we
Kuravrdv signifies to arrive at a desti- would remind ourselves also. We
nation, and the corresponding sub- are all entered in the same lists we ;

'
stantive Karavrrnia isa destination, a must all run on the straight path ;

goal,' Ps. xix. 6 :

comp. Schol.onArist. obeying the will of God and respect-
Raft. 1026 (993) iXaiai (TTixn^ov tarau- ing the blood of Christ. Examples
rai, ovaai Karavrrj fia tov opofiov. of penitence in all ages are before
Thuso^e^aios 8po/ios'the sure course,' our eyes. Noah preached repentance
i.e. the point in the stadium where to his generation Jonah to the men :

the victory is secured, is almost equi- of Nineveh. All whosoever listened

'
valent to the goal.' For Karavrdv eVi to them were saved.'
comp. 2 Sam. iii.
29, Polyb. x. 37. 3, 9. virofjivqa-KovTes] Comp. Orph.
xiv. I. 9. 6
Hymn. Ixxvii. (p. 345, Herm.) ^ikd-
 vii] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 35

VIT. TavTUf dya7rr]Toif ov /uovov vjua^ vovQerovv-

res eTTKTTeWoiuev, dWa kui eavTOv^ fviroiuvtjG'KOVTe^f'
o iv
yap tw uvtm ecrfdev (TKafJifJiaTL, kui 6 ai/To? t]juiv

dywv eTTLKeiTai. Aio dTroXeiTrcvjuev Ta Kefws Kai jua-

Taia^ (ppovTida<Sj Kai eXBvofjiev em tov evKXetj Kai orejuvov
Trj^ 7rapah6(reit)<i tjjucov Kayova. Kai i^wjueu ti kuXov kui

virofiifivriffKOVTes C. lo iv yap] AS ;
Kai yap iv C. tj/mv dyuv] A; dyuiv
Jijuv C ;
dub. S. II diroXeiirojixev^ A; dTroXlircofiev C. 12 evKXerj] evKXaiT] A.

ypvTcvos vTvnpLviqijKovaa t Travra (a refer- notes. In the phrase virip tcl f'aKafi-
ence given by Hefele). So also jivij- p.iva TTT^hav, aXXeaOai (e.g. Plat. Crat.
(TKopLni in Anacr. ap. Athen. xi. p. p. 413 A, Lucian Gall. 6, Clem. Alex.
463 A (which
pLvrjCTKfTaL evcf)po(rvvr]s Strom, v. 1 3, p. 696 see below on ;

'
editors perhaps unnecessarily alter Kavav)., to do more than is required
into nrja-erai or fivr^crerai). But as the or expected,' to. eV/ca/x/xeVa is the trench
scribe of A
blunders elsewhere in add- end of the leap beyond the
cut at the
ingand omitting letters under similar point which it is supposed the great-
circumstances (see above, I. p. 120), est athlete will reach (Find. Ne7n. v.
we cannot feel sure about the read- 36 p,aKpa S17 avTodev aXpiad VTroaKan-
ing. The word occurs again 62, Toi TLs' yovarmv eXacppov opfxav).
e'xco
where C reads viropupLvrja-KovTes, as it Krause indeed {Hellen. i. p. 393)
does here (see I. p. 126 sq). There is interprets to. ia-Kanfieva of the line
the same divergence of form in the marking the leap of the preceding
MSS of the spurious Ignatius, Tars. 9. combatant, but this explanation does
10. (TKcifxpLaTi]
'
lists.^ The aKapL^La not account for the metaphorical use.
isthe ground marked out by digging 6 avTOi rjfuv aymv] See Phil. i. 30
a trench or (as Krause supposes) by TOV avTov dyava exovTes olov ei'Sere eV

lowering the level for the arena of a e/iot.

^
contest : see Boeckh Co7-p. Inscr. no II. eniiceiTai] awaits' y as Ign.
2758, with the references in Krause Rom. 6 6 roKerds p.oL eiriK^LTai :
comp.
Hellen. i. p. 105 sq, and for its meta- Heb. xii. I top TrpoKeifievov i]fjuu
d-

phorical use Polyb. xl. 5. 5 ovhk eVt yava, Clcm. Rom. ii. 7 iv x^P'^'-V o
TOV (TKapLpLOTOS d)V TO dfj Xeyofievov, aymv.
empty and fu-
'

Epict. Diss. iv. 8. 26 ds too-ovto Kevas Koi /Liaraias]

(TKa.p.p.a irpoeKoXelTO navra ovTivaovv. tile' the former epithet pointing to

A large number of examples of this the quality, the latter to the aim or ef-
metaphor in Christian writers is given fect of the action. The combination is
by Suicer s.v. This word and many not uncommon; e.g.LXX Is. xxx. 7,
others referring to the games, as Hos. xii. I, Job XX. 18; comp. The-
agonotheta, epistates, brabium, etc., oph. ad Ant. iii. 3, Plut. Vit. Artax.

are adopted by the Latins (see esp. 15, Mor. p. 1 117 A.

the long metaphor in Tertull. ad 13. TT)^ TTapaho(Ti(s>i\ The lacuna was
Mart. 3), just as conversely military variously filled so long as was our A
terms are naturalised from Latin into only authority, the best suggestions
Greek see Ign. Polyc. 6 with the
; being TeXetwo-ews and d^Xjjcrfcoy. The
36 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [vii

Ti Tepirvov Koi TrpocrdeKTOV ivwTriov

t'i tov 7roir]cravTo^

f^jULci^. drevia-cdfjiev eh to al/ma

tov XpicrTOv kui 'yvw^ev
o)? ea-TLV TLfJLiov Tw TraTpl avTOV, oti dia tyiv f\ixeT6pav
eKX^Gev ttuvti rip Kocrfxa) jueraj/oia^ X^P^^
a-cDTripiav

3 T^J warpl avTov] S ry Trarpl avrov ry 9e(^ C rw6b3[KanraTp]iavTov A,

; ;

An upright stroke (probably l) and a portion of

a preceding letter
presumably.
(which might lie
p)
are visible. See the lower note. 6ti] S translates as

id quod.
if 5 Ti 4 fieravoias x^P"'] AC fxeravolav S. Bensly points out that
;

the omission in S may be easily explained by the homoeoteleuton in the Syriac,

SnUTn, i<ni3''tD. 5 vn-riveyKev'] A ; sustulit 13''D S ; eirriveyKe C. dU\-

true reading could hardly have been I. TTpoabeKTOV iv(07riov'\ So aTTobfK-

anticipated ; but it adds to the close- Tov evtoTTiov, I Tim. n. 3 tovto Kokov Ka\
ness of the parallel in Polycarp PAz/. aTr68eKT0v ivcoiriov tov a-(OTrjpos rjpav

7 Sto aTToXnrovTfs ttjv fiaTaiOTrjTa tSv 9eoG, of which Clement's language

TToXKaiv (cat ras \l/ev8oBi8acrKa\ias eVi here seems to be a reminiscence :

TOV e^ ^PXl^ Tjfuv TrapadoOevra Xoyov comp. I Tim. v. 4, where koKov Ka\ is
a passage already
eniaTpexj/oofjLev, interpolated in the common texts

quoted by the editors. By tov rfjs from the earlier passage. The simple
Clement ap-
Trapa8oa{(os ijfiav Kavova Trpoo-SeKroy appears in the LXX, Prov.
parently means 'the rule(i.e. measure xi. 20, xvi. 15, Wisd. ix. 12 (comp.
of the leap or race) which we have Mart. Polyc. 14), but the compound
received by tradition', referring to evTTpocj-SeKros is commoner in the
the examples of former athletes quo- N. T., and occurs three times in Cle-
ted in the context; comp. 19 eVi tov ment ( 35, 40 twice).
e'l apxV^ TrapadeSopevov rjp'iv Trjs f'P'?'- 3. Tipiov Tca Trarpi] Compare i Pet.
vr)s (TKOTTov (to which passage again i.
19 TLpico alp.uTi as dpvov dpcipov Ka\
Polycarp is indebted), dcnriXov XpiarTov.
51 r^s napa-
8e8npevr]s rjp'iv AcaXcos Km 8iKaL(os opo- Trarpi] The lacuna after rw Qea
(f)covias. Clement's phrase
borrow- is in A must, I
think, be supplied by
ed by his younger namesake, Strom. Ka\ TTOTpl rather than Trarpialone for
i. I
(p. 324) npo^r)a-fTai rjp'iv KaTO. tov two reasons; (i) If Trarpi were con-
fVKXerj Koi aepvov ttjs TrapaSdo-ewf Ka- tracted npi, as is most usual in the
vova. MS, the letters would not be sufficient
Kavova] This is probably a con- to fill the space (2) find 6 Qeos;
We
tinuation of the metaphor in Ka\ naTripfrequently in the Apostolic
a-Kappa:
comp. Pollux iii. 151 to 8e perpov writings followed by tov Kvpiov, etc.
(e.g. Rom. XV. 6, 2 Cor. i. 3, etc.,
TOV TvrjhrjpaTos Kavciv, o 8e opos Tci
ecTKnppeva' odev eVi twv tov opov virep- I Pet. i.
3, Rev. i. 6), whereas 6 Qeos
nrjdcovTcov 01 Trapoipia^opevoi Xeyoucrt nrj- TraTTjp is never so found. In fact with
8av vnep tu eaKappeva. See 41 (with any genitive following, the alternative
the note). Thus Kavmv will be the seems to be 6 Qeos koI naT^p or Qeos
measure of the leap or the race as- rraT-qp. On the other hand o Qeos
signed to the athlete. iraTfjpoccurs once only in the N. T.
Tt Ka\ov K.r.X.] From Ps. cxxxii. i
(Col. iii. 17, with a v.l.), and there it
inov OTj TL KaXov ri Tfpnvov k.t.X.
tj is used On the whole
absolutely.
 VIl]
TO THE CORINTHIANS. 2>1

5 virnveyKey. ZieXdiofJiev ek ts >yeu6a<i Tracra?, Kai Kara-

fjLadwiJLev on ev yevea kul 'yevea jueTai/oia^ tottou eSw/cei/

6 heoTTTorrj^ roh fiovXojuevoL^ e7ri(7Tpa(pnvai eV avrov.

Ncoe eKnpv^eu fj.erdvoiav, kul ol vTraKOvaauTe^ eaiadr]-

euifiev els] w/xeveia A ; 8U\9u}fJLv (om. els) C ;

iranseamus super S (which probably

represents dieXduixev els). In Rom. v. 12 els wavras a.vdpwTrovs 6 davaros SirjXOev

both Pesh. and Hard, have "2 "MV not "pj? inV as S has here. In 4 dieXOelv

els is rendered by "h '\2]}. The verb BuXdeTv is frequent in the LXX. Kai]

AC ;
om. S. 76 Seairdr-ns] AC ; om. S.

however the correct reading is pro- (Luke ii. 29, Acts iv. 24, Rev. vi. 10,
bably preserved in the Syriac, the and one or two doubtful passages),
different positions of ra Qea in the but occurring in this one epistle some
two Greek MSS showing that it was a twenty times or more. The idea of
later addition. subjection to God
thus very pro- is

5. \mr\veyKev\'' offered^ So it is gene- minent in Clement, while the idea of

rally taken, but this sense is unsup- sonship, on which the Apostolic
Xen. Hell. writers dwell so emphatically, is kept
ported ; for iv. 7. 2, Soph.

El in the background see Lipsius p.

834, are not parallels. Perhaps ;

'won {rescued) for the whole world.^ 69. This fact is perhaps due in part
to the subject of the epistle, which
tUXdafiev K.T.\.] This passage is
the
copied in Apost. Const, ii. 55 o yap required Clement to emphasize
Beos, Qeos mv iXenvs, an apxrjS enaar-qv duty of submission but it must be ;

yeveav fierdvoiav KaXel 8ia raiv

fTTi oi- ascribed in some degree to the spirit
Kai(ov...Tovs 8e iv rm (caraicXiicr/Licp Sta of the writer himself.
Tov No), Tovs ev '2ob6jxois Sta tov 8. Nc5e eii^pv^fv (c.r.X.]
The Mo-
(fiiXo^evov Aa)r (see below ii)k.t.\. saic nothing about
narrative says
6. yeuea Ka\ yevea] ''each successive Noah as a preacher of repentance.
generation.^ A
Hebraism preserved The nearest approach to this concep-
in the LXX, Esth. ix. 27, Ps. xlviii. 11, tion in the Canonical Scriptures is
Ixxxix. I, xc. I, etc. :
comp. Luke i. 2 Pet. ii. 5, where he is called St/cato-

50 yeveas Ka\ yeveas (vv. 11.). a-vv-qi KTJpv^. The preaching of Noah
TOTTov] The same expression StSwat however is one of the more promi-
TOTvov fieravolas occurs also in Wisd. nent ideas in the Sibylline Oracles ;

xii. 10; comp. Heb. xii. 17 y-eravoias see especially i. 128 sq. Ncoe 8epas dap-
rortov ovx^ evpev, Tatian. ad Graec. 1
5 (Tvvov re rracn KJjpv^ov
eov Xaoia-i
QVK eyei jieravoias tuttov, Apost. Const. p-erdvoiav This passage,though
k.t.X.
ii.
38 TOTVQV fxeTavoias apiaev, v. 1 9 forming part of a comparatively late
Xa^elv avTov touov p.eTavoias. The poem, was doubtless founded on the
'

corresponding Latin poenitentiae earliest (pre-Christian) Sibylline (iii.

locus' occurs in the celebrated letter 97828 of the existing collection)

of Pliny to Trajan Flin. et Traj. which is mutilated at the beginning
Epist. 96. The emendation rviiov and takes up the narrative of the
is not needed. world's history at a later point than
7. Seo-TTorjys] Very rarely applied the deluge. Indeed this earhest Sibyl
to the Father in the New Testament (if the closing passage
of the book
38 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [vii

(rav. 'I(i3va.<i NivevLTai^ KUTaa-Tpocpriv eKrjpv^ei/f ol ^e

fj.eTavor'jG'avre'S eirl Toh djuapTrj/ULaa-iv avTcov el^LKacravro
Tov Qeov lKeTev(TavTe<i kui eXaf^ov crcoTripLai^, Kaiirep

dWoTpiOL TOV Qeov bvre^. ;:

VIII. 01 XeiTOvpyoL Ttj^ -^dpiro^ tov Qeov dia 5

TTi/evjULaTO^ dylov irepi jueTavoLa^ e\a\r](Tav, kul ai/TOs

I oi 5e] C ; ot5eA; ol'Se S. 3 iKiTeixyavresl A; t/cerei^o^'TejC, and so apparently

S. 5 'Kei.Tovpyoi] \i.Tovpyoi A. 8 iJ.eTa opKov] AC ; Bryennios reads /J.ed' opKov

Stillbelongs to the same poem) con- Meravoe'iTe, l8ov yap KaraKkvanos epx^'
nects herself with the deluge by rai (p. 68, ed. Tisch.). passage A
claiming to be a daughter-in-law of cited by Georg. Syncell. {Chron. p.
Noah (iii. 826). From these Ora- 47 ed. Dind.) from Enoch, but not
cles it seems not improbable that found in the extant book, seems to
Clement, perhaps unconsciously, de- have formed part of Noah's preach-
rived this conception of Noah. To ing of repentance; see Dillmann's
this same source may probably be Henoch pp.xxxviii,lxi. See also below
traced the curious identification in 9, with the note on TraXiyyevea-ia.
Theophilus ad Aictol. iii. 19 Ncoe ko- I.
KaTa(TTpo(j)j]v] '"overthro'dj, rum '

Tois Tore dvdpcoTTOis fieXkfiv comp. Jonah iii. 4 koI Kora-

TayyeWav Nti/et))}

KaTaKXva-nov ea-eadai 7rpoe(f)^TV(Tei> av- aTpacprjcreraL.

'
Tois Xeycov' Aevre KaXel vpLas o 0eoj 4. dWoTpioi Ac.r.X.] aliens from
fls fieravoiav' 810 otVeico? AevKoXLCOv e-
God^ i.e. 'Gentiles': comp. Ephes.
Kkrjdr] for Theophilus has elsewhere
;
ii. 12 avrrjWoT pico fievoi r^s TroXirei-

preserved a long fragment from the as TOV larparjX...Kai ddeoi iv tS> Kocrpico.
lost opening of the earliest Sibylline Both dXXoTpioi and dXX6(})vXoL are
{ad Autol. ii. 36), and this very thus used, as opposed to the cove-
passage incorporates several frag- nant-people.
ments of hexameters, e.g. Aevre Kokfi VIII. 'God's ministers through
...Qeos els jxeTavoiav. As Josephus also the Spirit preached repentance. The
quotes the Sibyllines, he too in his Almighty Himself invites all men to
account of Noah {Anl. i. 3. i 'ineidev repent. Again and again in the
iin TO KpeiTTOV avroiis ttjv biavoiav Koi Scriptures He bids us wash away
ras TJ-pd^eis ^Ta(])4peiv, quoted by Hil- our sins and be clean He proclaims ;

genfeld here) may have been influ- repentance and promises forgiveness.'
enced by them. See on this subject 5. Oi XeiTovpyol] i.e. the prophets ;
I. 178 sq.
p. For the Mohamme- though they are not so called in the
dan legends of Noah, as a preacher of LXX or New Testament.
repentance, see Fabricius Cod. Pseud. 8. Zq) yap eyco k.t.X.] Loosely quoted
Vet. Test. I.
p. 262. To the passages from Ezek. xxxiii. 1 1
^w e'-yw, rdSe
there collected from apocryphal and Xtyei Kvpios, ov ^ovXopai. tov ddvaTov
other sources respecting Noah's Tox) aae^ovs cos aTToaTpeyj/ai tov daf^ij

preaching add this from the Apo- OTTO TJJS 080V aVTOV KOt ^fjv UVTOV.

calypse of Paul 50 (quoted also by diTocTTpoi^f) aTTO(TTpiy\raT dno tyjs obov

Hilgenfeld) e'yco ei/xt Ncoe...:ai ovk vpLwv' Koi Iva tl anodvijaKeTe, oIkos Icr-

enavijafj,r]p rots dvOpdnois KTjpvacreiv' pai]X ;

K.T.X.
 VIIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 39

^e 6 decTTOTri^ twu diravTiav irepi fxeravoia's e\a\t](r6u

jueTa bpKOV Zoa r-^P epoo, Aepei Kypioc, oy BoyAoMAi ton

9ANAT0N TOY AMApTCOAoy, 03C THN MeTANOIAN" TTpOCTTLdei^
o Kai 'yvu}fJiy]V dyaOtji'' MeTANOHCATe, oIkoc 'IcpAHA, And thc
anomi'ac ymoon' elnoN toic y'oTc toy Aaoy Moy 'Ean cocin

which has no manuscript authority. yap] AS ;

cm. C. 9 Trpoffrt^eis]

irpoaTTjOeta A. 11 v/J-uiv] AS toO XaoO /j,ov C. ; elirov] AC dum; diets tu

{dviLv) S. 'Ecii'] AC ;
Kac [?] or /cat ta.v S.

10. Merawncrare /c.r.X.] It is usual afterwards. (2) The expression Trpoo--

to treat these words as a loose quo- Ti6i'i'i KCLi
yvcdprji' ayadrjv seems to im-
tation from Ezek. xviii. 30 sq oikoj ply that, even if not a continuation
'lo-paTjX, Xe'yei KiJpioj, eT7i.aTpd(f)r]Te
Kai of the same passage, they were at all
atroaTpi^aTe (k Traacov rau aaej^eiriv events taken from the same prophet
vfj,wv...Kal Iva rt aTrodvrjCTKeTe, oIkos as the words quoted just before. (3)

'lo-paTy'X ; Stort ov deko) tov Bavarov tov This inference is borne out by the
anodvjja-KOPTos. If taken from the language used just below in intro-
canonical of Ezekiel, the words
Book ducing the passage from Isaiah, Ka\ iv
are probably a confusion of this pas- (Tepm roTTo), implying that the previous
sage with the context of the other words might be regarded as a single
(Ezek. xxxiii. 11), as given in the quotation. (4) A
great portion of
preceding note. See however what the quotation is found in two ditfer-
follows. ent passages of Clement of Alexan-
This passage is
11. 'Eai/coo-ii/K.r.X.] dria, and in one of these the words
generally considered to be made up are attributed to Ezekiel Qut's div. :

of Ps. ciii. Kara ras aiMaprias

10, II ou salv. 39 (p. 957) 0X1 ^ovXopai tov 6d-

iqfiaiv enolrj(TV qpiv

ov8e Kara ras avo- vaTov TOV dpapTcoXov dXXa ttjv peTa-
fxiai -qpav avTaivehuiKiv rjplv' on
Kara voiav' Kav wcriv al dpapTiai vpmv cos
TO vyJAOs Toi) ovpavov ano rrjs yfjs eKpa- (fioivLKOvv epiov^ (MS ;^ioj'a XevKavai, Kav
Taiaxyf Kuptos to eXeos avTov ewL tovs peXdvrepov tov ctkotovs, cos epiov XevKOV
(po^ovfievovs avTov, and Jer. iii. 19, 22 eKVL-^as 7roir]croo, and Paedag. i. 10
Koi (iTra, IlaTepa KoXea-ere pe Koi an (p. 151) (f'^o'i yap diet lf^eKt.r]X' Eav
ipoii ovK dnoaTpa(pricr(r6e . . .
sTricrTpa- eViCTTpac^ijre e'^ oXrjs ttjs Kap8ias Kai

(f)r]Tf viol eTncrTpe(f>ovTes Ka\ laaopai to. e'lTTTjTe, ndrep, dKovcropai, vputv cos Xaov
(TvvTpippaTa vpmv, together with Is. i. dylov. Thus it seems to follow either
18 Kai iav axTiv al apapTiai k.t.X. (i) That
in the recension of the can-
Such fusions are not uncommon in onical Ezekiel used by the two
early Christian writers and occur Clements the passage xxxiii. 11 was
many times in Clement himself. But followed by a long interpolation con-
several objections lie against this taining substantially the words here
solution here (i) ;
No satisfactory quoted by Clement of Rome or ;

account is thus rendered of the words (2) That he is here citing some apo-
iav (oaiv nvppoTepat kokkov Ka\ peXavd- cryphal writing ascribed to Ezekiel,
Tspai (TciKKov K.T.X.for thc passagc of
I which was a patchwork of passages
Isaiah, from which they are supposed borrowed from the canonical pro-
to be loosely quoted, is given as an phets. The latter supposition is fa-

independent quotation immediately voured by the language of Josephus

40 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [viii

Al AMApTIAI YMWN And THC fHC e03C TOY OypANOY, KAI SAN
kai eni-
d)CiN nYppoTepAi kokkoy kai weAANtoTepAi cakkoy,
cTpA(t)HT6 npdc Me e2
oAhc thc KApAiAc KAI ei'nHTe, TTATep,
enAKOYcoMAi YMcoN (ic Aaoy AfioY- Kai ev eTepu) tottw

\eyei AoYCAcee kai KAeApoi reNecee- AcjjeAecOe tags

o'uto)^'

noNHpiAC And toon ^fYX*^"^ ymwn ahcnanti toon 6cI)0AAMa)N

MOY' HAYCAcGe And toon nONHpicoN ymoon, MAOere KAAdN

noieiN, eKZHTHCATe Kpicm, pfcAcOe aAikOymgnon, KpiNATe
dp(t)ANa) KAI AiKAioocATe X^P"^' ^^^ AYTe kai h\e\er)(OciiMeK,

Kapdias] A
3 ^/vxv^ CS.
; 4 XaoO ayiov] C Clem 152 ; Xowa7tw A. 5 X^7t
ovTus] A; oOVws X^yet CS. Xoiaaade] Xovaaadat A. /cat] A; om. GS.
7^j'e(7^e] yevecrdai A. ac^eXecr^e] acpeXecrdat A ; dtpeXere C. 7 Trat^ffair^e]

iravaacdai A. 8 pwacr^e] pvaaadai A. 9 /cat 5t/catw(raTe] AC ;

dLKaiwa-are

(om. /cot) S. XW?] A ; XW'*" C ;

dub. S. /cat SieXeYx^ti^MeJ'] fat . .
eXex-

{A?lt. X. 5. l),
ov jxovov ovTOi ('lepe/xt'as) for TertuUian {de Cam. Chtist. 23;
irpoiOicnncre ravra roii bx^ois
aWa comp. Clem. Alex. Strom, vii. 16,
Koi 6 Trpo(priTr]s 'le^oiirjXos TrptSros p. 890) and others quote as from Eze-

Trepi TOVTCOV 8vo jSi^X la ypa\JAai Kari- kiel words not found in the Canonical
\nrev. This statement however may book : see the passages collected in
be explained by a bipartite division Fabric. Cod. Pseud. Vet. Test. p. 1 1 17.
of the canonical Ezekiel, such as Hilgenfeld points out that one of
some modern critics have made and
'
; these, In quacunque hora ingemue-
as Josephus in his account of the rit peccator salvus erit', is closely
Canon {c. Apion. i. 8) and elsewhere allied to Clement's quotation here.

appears not to recognise this second This apocryphal or interpolated E-

Ezekiel, this solution perhaps more
is zekiel must have been known to Jus-
probable. Or again may be
his text tin Martyr also, for he quotes a
corrupt, /3' {
= hvo) having been merely sentence, eV ots av vp,as KaraXajBo), ev
a repetition of the first letter of ^i- TovTois KoX Kpivo) {^Dial. 47, p. 267),
^\ia. See also the remarks of Ewald which we know from other sources
Gesch. des V. Isr. iv. p. 19. Apocry- to have belonged to this false Eze-
phal writings of Ezekiel are men- kiel (see Fabric. I.e. p. 11 18); though
tioned in the Stichometry of Nice- Justin himself from lapse of memory
phorus (see Westcott Canon p. 504), ascribes it to our Lord, perhaps con-
and from the connexion (Bapou'x) fusing it in his mind with Joh. v.
A^^aKOVfjL, E^fKtrjX, /cat Aavt/jX, \|/'ei/8- 30. (On the other hand see West-
fiTiypa(f)a) it may be conjectured that cott Introd. to Gosp. p. 426.) So too
they were interpolations of or addi- apocryphal passages of other pro-
tions to the genuine Ezekiel, like the phets, as Jeremiah (Justin. Dial. 72,
Greek portions of Daniel. This hy- p. 298) and Zephaniah (Clem. Alex.
pothesis will explain the form of the Strom. V. II, p. 692), are quoted by
quotations here. At all events it the early fathers. The passage of Je-
appears that some apocryphal writ- remiah quoted by Justin must have
ings attributed to Ezekiel existed, been an interpolation, such as I sup-
 IX] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 41

10 Aerei' KAI eAN COCIN AI AMAPTi'aI YMWN 6dC (t)OINIKOYN, UiC

XiONA AeyKANO)' eAN Ae ojcin (xc kokkinon, (x>c epiON Aey-

KANOO. KAI eAN GeAHTe KA! cicAKoycHTe MOy, TA ataGa thc

rflc (})Arecee- eAN Ae mh GeAHxe MHAe eiCAKoycHTe Moy,

MAX^'^iP''^ y/WAc KATeAexAi- TO TAR CTOMA Kypi'oy eAAAHCeN

15 TAYTA. TraVroc? ovu toi)? dyairriTom avTOv j^oyXofj-evo^

fieravoia^ /meTao'^elv, icTTrjpi^ev
tw TravTOKparopLKw
j3ov\t]iuaTi avTOV.
IX. Aio uTraKOucrcojueu Trj /JLeyaXoTrpeTreT Kal ivdo^to

Oufji.ei' A ;
Kal StaXex^'^Mf C ; loquamur cum alteriitro (om. koX with Pesh) S :

see above, I. p. 143. 10 X^7et] A; add. Kvpio^ CS, with Hebrew and
LXX. 13 (p6.-^icde\ (payeffdat A. diX-qnl deXrjTaL A. 14 yap] AC;
om. S with the Pesh.

pose was the case with Clement's word from the LXX. See Hatch
citation from Ezekiel for he writes ; Essays in Biblical Greek p. 177, for
avTT] 7; TrepiKOTrrj rj
eK raiv Xoycov tov the various readings in the MSS of
'lepfjjLLOv en (cttIv (yyeypafi/jLevrj
tv the LXX and in the quotation. It is

TKTiv dvTiypdcjiois Ta>v iv avvayooyaLS twice quoted by Justin Martyr, Apol.

'lovBaicov, TTpo yap oXiyov )(^p6vov ravra i. 44
(p. 81), i. 61 (p. 94), and the first

f^sKO'^av K.T.X. On the apocryphal verse again in a third passage, Dial.

quotations in Clement see below 18 (p. 235); but his quotations do
13, 17, 23, 29, 46 (notes). not agree verbatim one with another.
2. ixeXavcoTepai] The comparative Almost all the various readings of our
p.XavcoTepos occurs Strabo xvi. 4 12 authorities here, KaQapoX (koI icadapol),
(p. 772), but I cannot verify Jacob- d(f)eXf(rd (a(peXTe), koI diKaiwaraTe
son's further statement 'hanc formam ydiKaiaxraTe), XW9- ix'lP'^^)' 8evT Koi
habes saepius in LXX.' It is derived (Sevre), 8i,Xeyx^<^p-ei' (StaXcp^^cD/nei',
from the late form peXapos = peXas, etc.) are found in the MSS of the LXX
on which see Lobeck Paral. p. 139. or in Justin or in both.
''

Another late form of the superlative 9. dimtcoaaTe xVPf] gi'^^ redress

is piXaivoraro^. to the widow^ preserving the same

(jaKKov] Comp. Rev. vi. 12 /cat o construction as in Kpivan 6p(j)av^.

ijXioj iyevero peXas ws (tcikkos rpi- The LXX however has the accusative
X'-voi, Is. 1.
3 fvbvcroi TOV ovpavov (tko- XVPf^v ill the second clause though
TQ9 KoX <as aaKKov dijao) to irepi^o- with a various reading xWt-
Xaiov avTov. It was a black hair- 10. Xe'yei] sc. 6 Kvpios, which words
cloth. Thus Hilgenfeld's emenda- occur in the LXX of Isaiah in accord-
tion XaKKov is superfluous, besides ance with the Hebrew.
being out of place, for the comparison 16. Trai/ro/cparopt/cw] Apparently the
is between
garment and garment. earhest instance of this word comp.;

The (TKOTovs of the existing text of 60.

'
Clem. Alex, may at once be rejected. IX. Let us therefore obey His
4. fv eTfpco roTTOj] Is. i. 1 6 20. gracious summons. Let us contem-
The quotation is almost word for plate the bright examples of obedi-
42 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [IX

l3ou\t]<r6i auTOv, koI iKeTai yevofjievoi tov eXeou^ Kai Trj^

^pt]GTOTr]TO's avTOv TrpocTTrea-Mjuev kul eTna-Tpe^cojuev eTri

TOV<s OLKTipfjiOVi avTov, dTroXiTTOUTes Tr]v juaTaiOTTOuiav

Trjvre epiv Kai to eU Bavai-ov ayov ^r]\o^. dTeviacoiJiev
ek Tov^ Te\e'uo<i \eLTOvp'yt](ravTa<i Trj juieyaXoTrpeTreT ^ofrj 5

avTOv. \a(3(aiuev 'GvcD)(i o^ ^v VTraKofj d'lKaio^ evpedek

I yevS/xefoi] AC ;
but S seems to read yivdfievoi. A^oi/s] eXatoucr A,

3 OLKTip/Moiis] oiKTLpfj.ov(T A. ciwo\nr6vTi] AC ; but S apparently (XTroKeiwovTes.

5 reXetws] AC ; reXeiovi S. XeLTOvpyrjaavras] XiTOvpyrja-avTaa A. 7 Odi/a-

ence in past ages Enoch who was : and just above (comp. /xeyaXoTrpeVeta
translated and saw not death Noah ; 60). It is only found this once in
through whom a remnant was saved the N.T.
in the ark.' 6. 'Ej/a);^;] Clement is here copying
3. iiaraionoviau] The word occurs Heb. xi. 5 Evo)^ pLereTedr) roil fir)
i8eiv
in Classical writers, e.g. Plut. Mor. davarov Kai ov^ ijvpicrKfro (COmp.
119 E, Lucian Dml. Mot't. x. 8 (l. p. Gen. V. 24); though the words are
369) ; comp. Theoph. ad Autol. ii. 7, displaced, as often happens when the
12, iii. I. Polycarp, Phil. 2, appa- memory is trusted. In the sequence
rently remembering this passage has of his first three instances also,
aVoXiTrovres Ty]v Kevrjv fxaraioXoyiav Enoch, Noah, Abraham he follows
Twv TToiKXav TrXavrjv. But this
Koi TTjv the writer of that epistle. See also
does not justify a change of reading the language in Ecclus. xliv. 16, 17,
here for iiaraiOTvovlav, which is the
;
to which Clement's expressions bear
reading of all the authorities here, is some resemblance.
more appropriate, and a transcriber's dLKaios] The book of Enoch is

error is more likely in the MSS of quoted as 'Ei/w;^ 6 SUaiOi in TesL xii
Polycarp derived from one very
(all Pair. Levi 10, Juda 18, Dan. 5, Benj.
late source)than in all our copies of 9. Thus it seems
have been a re-
to
Clement nor is it impossible that
:
cognised epithet of this patriarch, and
Polycarp's memory deceived him. perhaps formed part of the title of
MaraioXoyla OCCurs I Tim. i. 6. the apocryphal book bearing his
arevlcra^ev K.r.X.]
4. Clement of name. It was probably the
epithet
Alexandria Strom, iv. 16 (p. 610), after applied to him also in the opening
giving an earlier passage from this of the extant book,i. 2, in the original ;

epistle (see j^^ i), adds elr i^iK^avea-re- see also xii. 4, xiv. i, xv. i, and else-
pov 'ArfvicTiafiev k.t.X. down to 'Paa/3 where.
;) nopvi] but contents himself
( 12), 7. aiJroii] i.e. Enoch himself. Forthis
with a brief abridgement, and does reflexive use oiavrov see A. Buttmann
not quote in full, so that he gives but p. 98 sq. Comp. also 12, 14, 30.
little aid in determining the text.
TS-aXiyyevea-iav] \.t.'' a second birth,
8.

T^ fifyaXoTrpene'L fio|?] The

5. same a renewal,' of the world after the
expression occurs in 2 Pet. i. 17. flood ;
as Orac. Sib. i.
195 (comp.
The word ixeyaXoTrpeTTrjs is frequent vii. Kai
bfVTepos ecraeTai
11) alcov,
in Clement, i, 19, 45, 58, 61, 64, words put into the mouth of Noah
 x] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 43

lu6TT6ri, Kal ov')(^ evpeOrj avTOv OavuTO'S. Nwe ttktto^

evpedek hia Trj^ XeiTOVpyia^ avTOu TraXiyyevecTLav Kocr/uKi)

EKripvpeVy Kal diea-cocrev

^i avTOv 6 ^ecTror^/? Ta elcreX-

lodovTa ev ofJLOuola ^toa ets rrjv Kif^coTov.

X, 'A^pactfji, 6 (plXo^ Trpoa-ayopevSek , ttlo-to^ ev-

Tos] A ;
6 ddvaroi C. 8 5ia rrjs Xtirovpyias] AS (but Xirovpyiaa A) ; ev ry
XeiTovpylq. C. 96 detTirorris] S translates the word here and in other passages

dominus universi (?3T KID). 1 1 ttio-tos] TnaTicr A.

himself. See Philo Vit. Moys. ii. 12 pronounced upon him for his faith.
(ii. p. 144) 7ra\iyyVf<rlas iyivovro rjye- He was promised a race countless as
fioi/fs Koi dfvrepas dpxT)yfTai Trepi68ov, the stars or the sand in multitude,
where also it is used of the world and in his old age a son was granted
renovated after the flood. Somewhat to him.'
similar is the use in Matt. xix. 28, II. o (l)ikos\ From Is. xli. 8 'Abra-
where it describes the 'new heaven ham my friend' (LXX ov ijyanria-a) :

and new earth.' The Stoics also comp. 2 Chron. xx. 7, and see the
employed this term to designate the passages of the LXX quoted by
renewed universe after their great Roensch Zcitschr. f. Wiss. Theol.

periodic conflagrations ; see Philo d XVI. p. 583 (1873). See also James
Mund. incorr. 14 (ll. p. 501) o'l ras ii. 23 K.ai (fiiXos Qeov eKXTjdrj, and below
KTTvpo!>(TLS KOi Tcis TToKiyyevecTias eicr- (piXos wpocrriyopeiidr] rov Qeov.
17
Tjyoviifvoi rod Koa-fiov, Marc. Anton. In the short paraphrase of the Alex-
xi. I
rr]v TrepiodLKrjv nakiyyevea-iav rOyv andrian Clement this chapter relating
okoiv (with Gataker's note). For to Abraham is abridged thus, 'A^paafx
Christian uses see Suicer s. v. Any OS 8ia TVLCTTiv Ka\ (piXo^evLav (jilXos Qeov
direct reference to the baptismal Trarfjp 8e rov 'icraaK irpocrrjyopivdrj ;

water (Xovrpw TraXiyyevecrias, Tit. iii. and has therefore been suggest-
it

S), as typified by the flood (comp. ed to read ey 4>iAoc for o 4>iAoc.

I Pet. iii.
21), seems out of place here; But no alteration is needed. Abra-
but iraXtyyevfcria appears to allude ham is here called the friend abso- ' '

indirectly to the renewal of the Corin- lutely, as among the Arabs at the
'
thian Church by repentance. See present day he is often styled El-
the next note. Khalil' simply: see d'Herbelot s.v.
10. eV o/iiowia] An indirect reference Abraham, and Stanley's Jewish
to the feuds at Corinth. Even the Church I.
p. 13. So too Cle7n. Horn.
dumb animals set an example of xviii. 13 oiirws 8vvarai...ov8e Ei'tu;^ o
concord see below 20 ra eXaxia-ra
; evapearria'as fJ.r] eldevai ovre Ncof 6 8l-
Tav (dxou ras crvveXfixreis avrcov iv Kaios p-Tj eTriaraddai ovre ^Ajipaap. 6

op.ovoia Koi elprfvrj iroLovvTai. The word (f)[Xos prj (Tvvuvai, which has other
6p.6voLa isof frequent occurrence in resemblances with this passage of the
Clement. genuine Clement; Clem. Recogn. i.
X. 'Abraham by obedience left 32 'Abraham pro amicitiis quibus
his home and kindred, that he might erat ei familiaritas cum Deo.' It is

inherit the promises of God. Not an indication how familiar this title
once or twice only was a blessing of Abraham had become in the Apo-
44 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT b

pe6f] ev TO) avi-ov vTrrJKOOv yevecrdat roh pY]fj.a(nv

tov
Qeov. ovTO's ^L vTraKofj^ e^rjXdei/ 6k rfji yfjs avTOu Kal
eK Trjs orvyyeveia^ auTOv Kat e'/c tov o'ikov tov iraTpo^
Kai olkov
avTOv, OTTWS yriv oXi'yrjv Kai crvyyeveiai' ctaSevfj
KaTaXiTTcov K\}]poyoiur](ni
ras STrayyeXia^ tov 5
fjLiKpov
Oeov. \6y6L yap uvtm' 'AneAOe eK thc thc coy kai Ik
THC cyrreNeiAC coy kai bk to? oi'Koy toy nAxpdc coy eic thn
THN HN AN CO! Aei'lco, KAI noiHcoo ce 610 e0NOc MefA KAI ey-
AorHCOO ce KAI Mer^AyNW TO o'nOMA coy, KAI 6CH eyAoTHMe-
Noc- eyAorHcoo Toyc eyAofoyNTAC ce kai katapacomai
KAI io

Toyc KATApco/weNoyc ce, kai eyAorHBHcoNTAi eN coi nACAi ai

(jjyAAi THC THC. Kai 7ra\u> ev tw dia^^copKrdfjvaL avTOV
diro AwT elirei/ avTw 6 Oeo'S' 'AnaBAch^ac toic o^OaA-
MoTc coy, lAe Ano Toy Tonoy, oy NyN cy ei, npdc BoppAN kai Ai'Ba

KAI ANATOAAC kai GaAaCCAN" OTI nACAN THN THN, HN Cy OpAC, 15

3 avyyefeias] avyyeviaa A. 5 eirayyeKiai] enayyeXeiaa A. 10 Kara-

pdao/J-ai] A; KaTapaa ffofxai C. 15 17V] AS ; oni. C. 16 at'wvos] A; tov

aiuivQS C. 19 '^^Trjyayevl A ; e^-r)yaye 5^ CS. 21 tol-s aaripas'] AC ;

add. TOV ovpavov S. 24 yrjpq] yrjpei. C see the note on ; 63. 25 r^J
Gey] AS; om. C. For a similar omission see Ign. Rom. 4. Trpbs] A; e^s C ;

super S (with the Hebr. and Pesh. of Gen. xxii. 2, where the
LXX has c^' or eTrt).

stolic age, that Philo once inadver- of the Lord.' Later Rabbinical illus-

tently quotes Gen. xviii. 17 'A/3paa/x trations of this title will be found in
TOV (ptXov fiov for TOV TraiSof fj.ov and Wetstein on James ii. 23, and espe-
argues from the expression, de Sobr. cially in Bqqv Leben Abraham'' s, notes
II (i. p. 401), though elsewhere he 427, 431, 950. Comp. TertuU. adv.
gives the same text coi'rectly de Leg. Jud. 2 'unde Abraham amicus Dei
All. iii. 8 (l. p. 93), Quaest. in Gen. iv. deputatus ?'
21 (p. 261 Aucher). At a much earlier 6. "AneXde k.t.X.] From lxx Gen.

date one Molon (Joseph, c. Ap. ii. 14, xii. i 3 with slight but unimportant
33) who wrote against the Jews and variations. In omitting /cat SeOpo
is quoted by Alexander Polyhistor after tov iraTpus a-ov Clement agrees

(Euseb. Pracp. Ev. ix 19, p. 420) in- with A and the Hebrew against the
terpreted the name Abraham as Trarpos common text which inserts the words.
(f)LKov, apparently reading Dn"13X as He also reads fvXoyTjdqa-ovTai with A
if it were DniQN. And in the Book of against the common text evevXoyrjdi]-

Jubilees c. 19 (Uillmann in Ewald's a-ovrai, but evXoyrjfiivos where A has

JaJu-b. III. p. 15) it is said of this ivXoyr]To%. See Ha.ich Biblical Greek
patriarch that 'he was written down p. 154 for the various readings in this
on the heavenly tablets as a friend passage in the MSS of the LXX, in Acts
 XI]
TO THE CORINTHIANS. 45

COI ACOCOO AYTHN KAI TO) CnepMATI COY e'^C AIOONOC- KAI
noiHcoo TO cnepMA coy d)C thn ammon thc fhc- ei Aynatai
TIC e2ApieMHCAI THN AMMON THC fHC, KAI TO cncpMA COY
6 Oedc ton
ISApieMHGHceTAi. Kai ttolXlv Xeyer 'E^Hr^reN
20'ABpAAM KAI einCN AYTCp- ANABAevfON eiC TON ofpANON KAI
ApiGlWHCON TOYC ACTCpAC, 61 AyNHCH e?Api9MHCAI AYTOfc*
oy'tooc ecTAi TO cnepMA coy" eniCTCYceN Ae 'ABpAAM to)

Oeo), KAI eAoricen aytTo eic Aikaiocynhn. Aia ttig-tiv kui

(piXo^eviap eloOt]
avrw v\6<i ev ynpo^y Kcci ^^' v7raKorj<s

25 7rpo(TY]ve<yKev avrov dvarlav tw Oeco Trpos ev twv opeiov

COP
kdei^ev auTtp.
XI. Aid (piXo^eviav kui evcre^eiai' Acot ea-wdt] e'/c

Co^OfJitov, Tt]^ Trepixf^pov Trda-r]^ KpiOeia-r]^

dia 7rvpo<5 Kai

de'iov 7roir](ra<i 6 dea-rroTt]^, otl tovs eXni^ov-

7rp6dr]\ov
30 ras eV avTOv ovk iyKaToXeiTreL, toi)s ^e erepoKXiveT^

op^wi']opaiwv A. 28 KpiOeiffTjs] A, as I read it. Tischendorf, with whom

Wright agrees, reads it KpiOrjcr-qcr and appeals to the photograph. The photo-
graph seems to me more Uke KpLdeKTrjcr, and another inspection of the MS itself
confirms me. I can see no traces of the left-hand stroke of an h. 29 delov]
diov A. TTOL-rjaas] AC ;
S translates as if eTroi-rjcrev. 30 iw' avTov] A,
and so too apparently S ;
eh avrbi' C.

vii. 3, and in Philo Mtg-r. Abrah. i (l. 25. jrpoy %v K.r.X,] Gen. xxii. 2 (^'

p. 436). Clement agrees with Philo in If tS>v opeav cSv av aoi e'lnw.
Lot's faith and good deeds
'

quoting airiXBe for i'^eXde. XI.

12. eV ra 8iaxa)pt.(T0fjvai] The ex- saved him from the destruction of
pression is taken from Gen. xiii. 14 Sodom and Gomorrah; while his own
fiera to 8iaxa>pi(T6rivai tov Aoor oTr' wife perished and remains a monu-
avTQX). ment to all ages of the punishment
13.
'

Ava(3\e\l/ai K.r.X.] From LXX with which God visits the disobedient
Gen. xiii. 14 16, almost word for and wavering.'
word. 28. Kpidfia-rjs 8ia Trvpor] Comp. Is.

19. 'E^Tj-yayef] From LXX Gen. xv. Ixvi. 16 eV rw rrvpl Kvpiov Kpidija-erai

5, 6,with unimportant variations. naa-a 7) yfj.

The emendation Kav^fi(r>;s
i.e. his entertaining
24. ({)iKo^fviav] for Kpidflcrrj'i is unnecessary as well
the angels comp. Heb. xiii. 2. Simi-
;
as weak.

larly of Lot just below, 11, and of 29. noi^aai:] A nominative abso-
Rahab, 5^12. The stress laid on this lute; Winersee xxviii. p. 194,
virtue seems to point to a failing in A. Ruttmann p. 251 sq.
the Corinthian Church. See also the 30. irfpoKKivels] ^swerving aside,'
note on a(f>i\o^fviav below, 35. especially in a bad sense Epictet.
;
46 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XI

vTrap-^ovTa^ eU KoXaciu Kai aiKL(Tfj.ov TiOricriv' (ruve^eX-

Sovcrr]^ yap uvtm
yvvaiKO^, eTepo'yvwfxovo's vTrap^ov-
Ttj^

0"js Kai ovK ev oiuovoia, eh tovto a~t]iue7oi' ereOri uxTTe

<yevea6aL avTrjV (TtyiXyiv dXo^ ews TJ79 t^/uepas Tavrr]^, et?

TO 'yvuiijTOv elvat Tracriv oti ol Zl'^v^ol kui ol cicrTa^ov- 5

I KoXocrjj'] AC ;but S translates as if Kplffiv. 2 frepoyvdjfiovos] C A ; is

read erepoyvw/jLocr by Tischendorf and Jacobson, erepoyvui/iov by Vansittart. The

last letter appears to me lilce c with possibly y superposed. Wright is probably
correct in his explanation that the y is seen through from eypeQH on the oppo-
site side of the page. The reading therefore is erepoyvw/jLoa: 3 tovto] AS ;

om. C. 6 Kpl/jLo] Kplfia C. <ry)iJ.eiw<nv] arj/juwatv A. 8 (piXo^eviav]

Diss. iii. 12. 7 cTepoKXivas e'xco Trpos too Irenseus {Haer. iv. 31. 3) speaks
ijdovTjv. See below, ^47 tovs erepoKXi- of it as 'statua salis semper manens,'
i/flf vTTopxovTas acf)' rjjiSiv.
So fTepo- which he makes a type of the Church.
KkiviaClcm. Ho7n. Ep. ad Jac. 15, said Cyril of Jerusalem also, Catech. xix.
of the ship of the Church heeling 8 (p. 309), describes Lot's wife as cVt?;-

over, when not properly trimmed. \iTevp,vr] 81 aliovos. The region a-

2. eVfpoyj/wVoi'os'] The word has bounds in such pillars of salt (see
two senses, either (i) 'dissentient, Robinson's Biblical Researches, etc.
otherwise-minded,' Cyril. Alex, in Es. II.
p. 108 sq). Mediaeval and even
xlviii (II. p. 642), Iii (ll.
p. 736) okorpd- modern travellers have delighted to
TTCof eTepoyva>ixovas Trap" eKfivovs or (2)
; identify one or other of these with
'wavering, double-minded', Cyril. Lot's wife.
Alex. Cord. Cat.itiPs. i. p. 225 hi^vxov 5. 01 St\//'uxot] The word occurs only
Tf Kai fTfpoyvapovos. As it seems to twice, James i. 8, iv. 8, in the New
be defined here by ovk ev ofxovola, the Testament. Both the word and the
first meaning must be adopted ; warning are very frequent in Cle-
though Lot's wife was also eTepoyva- ment's younger contemporary Her-
liav in the other sense, and as such mas, Vis. ii. 2, 3, 4, 7, 10, II,
is classed among ol di\lrvxoi koI Sicrra- iv. I, 2, Sim. viii. 7, etc., but especi-

(ovres below. In ev ofiovola there is ally Maud, ix, x. Comp. also Didache
again an allusion to the feuds at 4 ov hv^v\r](Teis noTepov earai ov, r]

Corinth ;
see above 9. with the corresponding passage in
3. ei's ToiiTO K.r.X.] Here aare is Barnab. 19. See below 23 with
dependent not on els tovto, but on the note (comp. C/em. Rom. ii. 11).
(rrjp.e'iov eredi] ;
and els tovto 'to this XIL'Rahab also was saved by
end' stands independently, being her faith and her hospitality. She
afterwards explained by els to yvco- believed in the might of the Lord
(TTov elvai K.r.X. God, and she rescued the spies ;

4. 0)9 Tf]s T]fi. TavTTjs] A pillar of salt therefore she and her family were
identified with Lot's wife is mention- spared. She was gifted too with a
ed as standing in Wisdom x. 7, aVi-
prophetic spirit, for the scarlet thread
aTovcfi]s yl/vxfis fxvr)p,e'ir>v ecrrrjKvla a-TijXr] typified the saving power of Christ's
a\6s, and in Joseph. A7it i. 1 1.
4 who blood.'
says that he himself had seen it. So 8. 'Paa/3] This account is taken
 XIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 47
Te? Trepi Tfj<s rod Oeov ^uvajueco^ ek Kpijua Kai eU a-t]-

jueicoo'iv TraoraL's tol^ yeveah yivovTcti.

'
XII, Alcl TTLO'Tiv Kai (piXo^eviav icrwdr] Paa^ ij
'

TTopvt]' K7reiuL(p66VTcov yap VTTO lr](rov tov tov Navri

10 KaTacTKOTTCdv 49 Tr]v 'lepi^co, eyvco 6 (^acriXev^ Trj's yrj^
on fjKucriv KaracrKOTrevcraL Tr]v yjapav avTcoVy Kai epe-

A, but CS repeat the preposition, see 5tot (piKo^evlav. For C see Bryennios Didache

p. p7'. y] TTopvT]] A ; t] e-mXeyofx^vT} -Kopv-q CS ; see the lower note. 9 e*--

irefj.cpdivTuii'] eKwe<pdevT(j}v A. rod tov^ A ;

tov (omitting the second rod) C.
10 tV] a ;
om. C. 11 i^iweix\j/ev'\ A ; 'iireix\pev C; dub. S. For C see
Bryennios Didache p. py' .

from the book of Joshua but Cle- ; dopted by several Jewish and some
ment gives it in his own words, even Christian interpreters see Gesenius ;

when recording the conversational Thes. s. v. njIT, p. 422. Others again

parts. The instance of Rahab was have interpreted the word as meaning
doubtless suggested by Heb. xi. 31, 'Gentile'. The earliest Christian
James ii. 25 for both these epistles
;
fathers took a truer view, when they
were known to S. Clement and are regarded this incident as an antici-
quoted elsewhere. His expression pation of the announcement in Matt.
8ia nicTTiv Koi cftiXo^eviav connects the xxi. 31; e.g. Justin Dial, iii, Iren.
two aspects, to which the two Apo- iv. 20. 12.

stolic writers severally direct atten- In Heb. xi. 31 also 77 eniKeyop.vri

tion, the iri<TTis of the one, the epya nopvr] is read for
by K (first ?) Tropvrj
of the other; comp. 31, 33, 34, 49 hand) and likewise by the Harclean
(notes). See also the note on the (piko- Syriac, this part being preserved
$evia of Abraham 10. only in the Cambridge MS (see above,
7/ TTopvr]] For the insertion ^ em- I.
p. 130 sq). Bensly also calls my
XeyofievT]see above, i. pp. 125, 139. attention to a passage in Ephraem
The object of this interpolation is to Syrus O^. Graec. i. p. 310 ofioios 8e
suggest a figurative sense of the Koi Paa^ 7/ iTtiKeyop.vq nopvq 8ia rrjs
word ; comp. Orig. zn les. Nave (f>LKo^fvias ov crvvancoXero to7s oTret-
Horn. iii.
3 (11. p. 403) 'Raab in- drjcracri, de^apivr] roiis Karaa-KOTTOvs iv
terpretatur latitudo. Quae est ergo elprjVT]. Immediately before, this
latitudo nisi ecclesia haec Christi, father has mentioned Abraham and
quae ex peccatoribus velut ex mere- Lot as examples of persons rewarded
tricatione collecta est?. ..talis ergo et for their (juXo^evla, so that he seems
haec meretrix esse dicitur, quae ex- to have had the passage of S. Clement
ploratores suscepit lesu'; comp. ib. in view.
vi. 3 (p. 411). From a like motive 9. TOV TOV Navfj] In the LXX Num.
the Targum interprets the word in xxxii. 12, Deut. xxxii. 44, Josh. vi. 6,

Josh. ii. I by Xn''pn31D = 7rai'SoKevTpia etc., he is called 'irjaovs 6 tov Navij,

'an innkeeper,' and so Joseph. Ant. and the same expression is adopted
V. I. 2 vnoxoapovaiv e'ls Ti Karaymyiov... here, though in the genitive it sounds
ovres iv rc5 ttjs 'Pa;^a/3r/s Karayco-yt'o), somewhat awkwardly.
etc. This explanation has been a- 1,1
nvrcoi/] Not ai5rc5i', as most edi-
48 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xii

Tre/i-v/^ei^ avdpa^ tov^ crvW-t^fjL-^OjjLevovi avTOvs, ottws

(rvWr]fi(b6evTe^ davaTtodcoG-LV. ri ouv (piXo^evo^ Paaf^

eicr^epaiuLeyr] avTov^ etcpv^ev ets to vTrepwov vtto Trjv
\ivoKa\afjLr]v, eTTLCTTadevTitiv Be twv Trapa rod (3a<ri-
Xew'S KUi XeyovTwv TTpdc ce eicfiAGoN oi KAXACKonoi thc 5

rflc HMooN" eSAfAre AYToyc, 6 r^p BAciAeyc oy'tooc KeAeyer

t] he ctTreKpWri'
EichA9on mcn oi ANApec, oyc zHxeire,

npdc M, aAAa eyGeooc AnHA6oN ka'i nopeyoNTAi th oAco'

VTToheiKUuovcra avToX^ ei/aWaf. Kai elwev 7rpo<s

tov^

I avWyj/xxpofxivovs] crvWti-'pofj.evova- A, though just below it has avWrj/j-cpdevTea:

For the omission of /x compare eKire<pdevTU)v above. C has (tvW7i\j/o/j,^vovs, (tvX-
\'q<f>divTes. For the orthography see i dTrpoffUTroXrj/jnrrws. 5 XeyovTWv] AC ;
add. z//i S. 6 oiircjs] . .rwcr A; ovtu C. 8 dTrrjXdov] A; e^rfKOov C.

9 ffaXXdl] CS. For A, Tischendorf prints ew... as though the 2nd letter were
legible; but nothing more than ei can be discerned,
and the might as well be 1

the upright stroke of n as of K. 10 eyw] AS; om. C. 11 vfiQiv] A;

tors print it ; comp. 9 and see the is its more frequent sense ; (2) ''cross-
note on Philippians iii. 21. wise,^ or ''inversely'' ; e.g. Aristot.
I. Tov^ (jvKkr]\i.-<\ro\iivov%\
i.e. ot ctuX- Aniiii. Hist. iii. 4 (p. 515, Bekker)

\r]\).-^ovra[..
For this construction see erepai (0Xe/3es)...0e'poucrii' evakXa^, ?)

Winer xviii. p. 121, and the notes fiev K T^v

apiarepcoi' els ra Se^ia, 1] 8e
Galatians i. 7. els Ta apiarepa eK twv 8e^ia>v. So too
4. \ivoKaka.]ir]v\ 'flax-stalks'' laid on the attitude of Jacob crossing his
the flat roof of the house to dry; see hands, when he blesses the sons of
Josh. ii. 6. So Joseph. {Ant. v. i. 2) Joseph, is described in Barnab. 13
explains it, \ivov yap ayKoXiSas eVt tov (professing to quote the words of
Tfyovs e'yl/^vxf-
The word vnepMov does Genesis) koI iiroirjaev ^laKajS evaXKa^
not occur in the original narrative, Tas x^'pos '-'"-^- Again in mathe-
which describes the men's lurking matical language speaking of propor-
place as on the house-top (eVl tov tion, evaXXa^ is permutando, i.e. the
hdfiaros). But Clement would not inversion of the antecedents and
necessarily be familiar with Eastern consequents, as defined by Euclid v.

customs and might easily substitute def. 13 evaWa^ \6yos eVri Xfjyjns tov
a wrong expression. Tjyovp.evov irpos to rjyovfxevov Ka\ tov eiro-
9. VTrobeiKuvovcra avTols] Clement npos to inonevov comp. Aristot.
p,evov :

must have made a slip of memory, Anal. Post. i. 5 (l. p. 74), ii. 17 (p. 99),
as he has done already in vnepaov ;
Eth. Nic. v. 6 (p. 1 131), who is rather
for in the original narrative Rahab fond of the word. The attempts to
shows the opposite route not to the supply the lacuna in A were signal
king's messengers but to the spies. failures before the discovery of the

fvaXXd^] 'in the reverse^ or ''oppo- second MS.

site direction.^ The word ivdKka^ has II. 6 (f)6^os K.r.X.] The expression
two meanings ; {i)' alternately ,^ wh.ich. does not occur in the LXX here, but
 XIl]
TO THE CORINTHIANS. 49

ai/dpa'i'
eroL> OTi
fiNoocKOYCA Kypioc d Oedc riNcocKoo

YMoaN nApAAiAoociN ym?n thn thn taythn, d r^p (jidBoc kai

d rpoMoc YMooN eneneceN toTc katoikoycin aythn. ojc can

OYN reNHTAI AaB6?N A^THN Y^^^C, AlACobcATe M6 Ka'i TON

oTkon toy nATpdc moy- Kai elwau avrfj' "Ectai oy'tcoc wc
[5 cAa'AHCAC HMIN. (X>C eAN OYN rNt;)C nAp Afl N OMCN OYC HMAC,

CYNA^eiC nANTAC TOYC COYC i-no Td TerOC COY, KAI AiaccoGh-

CGNTAi- dcoi TAp eAN eYpeBoociN ef03 thc oiki'ac, AnoAOYNTAI.
Kai Trpoa-edevTO avrrj hovvaL Kpe^aari e'/c
(Tt]fJ.eLOv,
'otto)^

TOU o'lKOU aVTt]'S KOKKLVOV, 7rp6h]\0V TTOlOUVTe^ OTI dia

om. CS. ^6/3os, rpo/xos] C; (po^ocr, .../j.o(t A. The two words are trans-

posed in S. 12 avTTjv] AC; ttjv 'yrjv S. ia.v'\ A; dii' C. 15 eXd-

X7;(ras] A ; XeXdXrjKas C. cbs] AC ;
not translated in S. eav] A ;
w C.

Trapayivo/jLevovs] AS (by the pointing); irapayevoixivovs C. 16 to reyos crov]

TOToeyoaa-ov A; to ar^yos (om, (tov) C; tectum domtis ttiae S. See below. A

reads aov, not ov as sometimes stated. 17 otrot yap'] AC; et omnes illi qui
(koX oaoi) S. eai'] A; a;/ C. 18 KpepAa-^] A; eKKpeixdar) CS.

is common elsewhere ; e.g. Gen. ix. 2, word is perhaps not intended to bear
Deut. ii.
25, xi. 25. These passages the meaning here.
illustrate not only the combination 18. npoaedevro k.t.X.] ''they went
of (/)c)/3o?
and rpouos, but the repeti- on to give he}- a sign\ The word is
tion of the article before the latter. used in imitation of the LXX diction,
Cotelier observes that Clement seems where it very frequently renders FiD''
to have had in hiscopy of the LXX and thus reproduces the Hebraism
(Josh. ii.
9) the words koI KaTinrrja-- 'to add to do,' as e.g. Luke xix. 11
crov TvavTfS 01 KaToiKOVvres rrjv yr]v a(p TTpoade'icra ehep, Acts xii. 3 irpoa-iBero
vfiav,which are wanting in all the o-uXXajSe ti/ /cat Uirpov, and so commonly
best MSS, though supplied in the in the In this sense both the
LXX.
active and middle are used. Har-
Complutensian edition and repre-
sented in the original Hebrew. The nack strongly objects to the transla-
existing text of the LXX has only eVi- tion 'praeterea ei signum dederunt'
TTtTTTaKev yap 6 <ji6j3os vixwv e0' Tjjtxas. and renders 'praeterea mandaverunt
16.
Teyos] The text of our au- signum daret,' appa rently taking
ei ut
thorities makes it difficult to decide npoa-Tidea-Bai 'to enjoin'
or 'impose.'
whether we should read areyos or This seems an impossible rendering,
Ttyos. The former occurs in the LXX and moreover in the narrative (Josh,
only once, Epist. Jer. 8; the latter ii. 19) the spies are represented
as
not at all in the LXX, but in Aquila giving the sign of the scarlet thread
Num. xxv. 8. In these passages to Rahab in the first instance.
they are used for 'lupanar'; and ig. 7rp68r]Xov K.r.X.]
So Justin Dm/.
Tfyo<i especially has frequently this Ill (p. 338) TO avpLJioXov TOV kokkLvuv
bad sense elsewhere (e.g. Orac. a-vp-finXov tov iiifxaTOS
(TnapTiov...rri
But the Toi) 81 ov OL naXat,
Sibyll. iii. 186, v. 387). XpiUTOv fdrjXov,

CLEM. II.
50 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xii

Tov aifjiaTO^ Tou Kvplov Xvrpcoo'i^ 'ecrTai iracnv tol^

TricTTevovcrLv kui eXiri^ovcrLV ctti tov Oeou. 'Opare,

dyaTrrjroif ov fJLOVOV ttlo'tl's dWa 7rpo(pr]Teia
ev Trj

yvvaiKi yeyoveu.
XIII. Ta7reivod)povri(T(i}iuev ovv, dhe\(pOL, dwoGefxe- 5

Kai Kai
VOL Trdorav dXa^oveiav Kat Tv(po^ d(ppocrvvr]V

I TOV Kvplov] AC; TOV xptfToO S (see the passage of Justin in the lower note).
6'rt oi' CS. d\Xa] A; add. Kat
2 Kol eKirl^ovcxLv'] AC; om. S. 3 oi] A;

tropvoi Koi aBtKoi fK Travrav Tav idvav 3. dXka So Origen in

7rpo4)r)TeLa}
'

a-oj^ovrai k.tX, perhaps getting the yes. Horn. 4 (ll. p. 403) Sed et
iii.

idea from this passage. Irenaeus (iv. ista meretrix quae eos suscepit ex
20. 12) copies Justin, 'Raab for- meretrice efficitur jam propheta etc'
nicaria conservata est cum universa 4. ykyovev\ The perfect tense ye'yo-
domo sua, fide isfound^ must unquestionably be
'
coccini etc. vev,
See also In yes. Horn.
Origen the right reading here comp. i Tim. ;

iii. 405), vi
5 (II. p. 4 (II. p. 411), ii. 14 r\
8e yvvTj e^aTTaTr)6ii(Ta iv rrapa-
In Matth. Comm. Ser. 125 (iil. p. ^aa-fc yiyovev, where, as here, the
919). From this time forward it tense denotes the permanence of the
becomes a common type with the record and the example. See also
fathers. Barnabas ( 7) similarly ex- Gal. iii. 18 rtS 8e 'A/Spact/n. bC enayye-
plains the scarlet wool of the scape- \ias Ke)(api(TTai 6 Qeos, iv. 23 o Ik tjJs
goat (see the note there). Compare 7rai8i.aKT]s Kara aapKa yeyfvprjTai, where
also Heb. ix. 19, which may have the explanation of the perfect is the
suggested this application to Cle- same. So too frequently in the
ment. Epistle to the Hebrews, e.g. vii. 6

The word jrpoSrjXos occurs twice be- 8e8eKaTa>KV, xi.28 TreTTOirjKev.

sides in Clement 1 1
7rp68r]\ov Troirja-as XIII. 'Let us therefore be hum-
6 8e(T7r6Tr]s oti (the same construction ble, and lay aside anger and pride.
which we have in Heb. xii. 14 npodrj- The Holy Spirit condemns all self-
\op oTi e^ 'lov8a k.t.X.), 40 Trpo8i]\a>v exaltation. Let us call to mind the
ovv rjplv ovrcL>v tovtcov. It may be a words in which the Lord Jesus com-
question in many passages whether mends a gentle and forgiving spirit.
the preposition denotes priority in The promise of grace is held out to
time or distinctness. In Demosth. patient forbearance.'
de Cor. 293 et p.h) yap rjv aoi 7rp68r]\a 5. dnodepevoi K.r.X.] So 57
ra /ieXXoi'Ta...TOT eBei TrpoXiyeiv, el fie fidOeTe inroTaaa-etrdai diroOepevoL ttjv
lb.
p-rj npo-^8fi5 K.T.X., 199 ft yap ^1/ dXd^ova Koi vireprji^avov Tfjs yXcocrcTTjs
aiiatji. 'np6hr]Ka ra peXkopra yej/T^cre- vpav av6d8eiav. Comp. Heb. xii. X

adat KOL Trporjdeaav aTvavres koi av oyKov dnodepevoL ndvTa, James i. 21, I

npovXeyes. On the other hand irpobr)- Pet. ii. I.

Aor frequently signifies 'plain,' 'mani- 6. Tvcf^os] A neuter form like eXeos,
'famous,' 'illustrious,' and it is
fest,' Cv^os, ttXovtos, etc., for which see
explained by Trpo4>avi]s in the Greek Winer ix. p. 78 and Jacobson's
lexicographers. note on C^Xos above 4. For an ex-
XIIl]
TO THE CORINTHIANS. 51

opyccs,
Kal TTOLYia'ijoiJ.ev to yeypa/uLjuevoi/' Xiyei yap to
TTvevfJia TO ayiov Mh kayx<^c6oo 6 cocfjoc hu th co(t)iA aytoy,
MHAe d icxYpdc eN th icxyV aytoy mhAc 6 nAoYCioc eN to)

nAoYTw AYTOY, aAA' h d kayx<^m6noc eN

KYpiw kayx^'^cGoo, toy
6KZHTe?N AYTON KAI nOielN KpiMA KAI AlKAIOCYNHN' /XaAfCTTa

/jLCjULvrjiuevoi
tcov \oyo)v tov Kupiov lr](rov, ov^ eXdXrjcrep

CS. 4 y^yovev} A; iyev-qd-rj C; dub. S. See the lower note and comp. i.

p. 126. 6 dXa^oveiaf'] C; aXa^oviav A. ti^^os] A; rvcpov C.

10 dXV 7) 6] A; dW 6 C, and so perhaps S.

ample of rixpos Jacobson here quotes original text or (2) ;

A
recension of
Cone. Ephes. Can. 8 (Routh Script. the text of Jeremiah (or Samuel) was
Eccl. Opusc. p. 395). As the v is long in circulation in the first century
in the older writers but short in the which contained the exact words 6
more recent (e.g. Greg. Naz. ii. pp. Kuvxc^P^evos iv Kvpico Kavxacrdo). The
490 V. 44, 880 V. 45, ed. Caillau), I have former is the more probable hypo-
accentuated it according to this later thesis. Iren. iv. 17. 3 quotes Jer. ix.
usage; see L. Dindorfin Steph. Thes. 24 as it stands in our texts. In
s.v. and compare the analogy of (ttv- neither passage does the Hebrew
Xoj, (TTvko^^ Galatians ii. 9. aid in solving the difficulty. In i Sam.
8. This pas-
M77 Kavxaa-doa K.r.X.] ii. 10 it is much shorter than and quite
sage is Sam. ii. 10, or from
taken from I different from the LXX.
Lucifer pro
Jen ix. 23, 24, or from both combined. Athan. ii. 2 (Hartel, p. 148) quotes
The editors have overlooked the first it 'non glorietur sapiens in sua sa-

of these passages, quoting only the pientia nee glorietur dives in divitiis
second, though in several points Cle- suis, sed in hoc glorietur qui gloriatur,
ment's language more closely resem- inquirere me et scire in Dominum
bles the first. The latter part in gloriari, quia ego sum Dominus
qui
I Sam. ii. 10 runs aXX' ^ iv tovtco facio misericordiam et judicium et

Kavxa(T6a> 6 /cav;(cojLiei'o? avvielv Kal justitiam super terram.' As Cotelier

yivuiUKeiv tov Kvpiov Koi Troielv Kpifia
Koi 8iKaio(rvvT]v iv fieaa Trjs y^s; while
the corresponding passage in Jere-
miah diverges still more from Cle-
ment's quotation. On the
S. Paul quotes twice (i
Kadws ytypaTTTai, 2 Cor. x.
fievos ev Kvpio) Kavxacrdo).
blance of Clement's language to S.
Paul may be explained in two ways
either (i) S. Paul does not quote lite-
remarks, he seems to have read ck^?;-
rfiv with Clement, for he has 'in-
quirere' three times in this context,
but the coincidence may be acci-
other hand dental. On the other hand Antioch.
Cor. i.
31 Patest. Horn, xliii {Bibl Vet. Patr.
17)0 Kavx^^- p. 1097, Paris 1624) quotes directly
The resem- from I Sam. ii. 10, and betrays no
connexion with Clement's language.
;
12. p.ep.vr]p.evoi k.t.X.] Comp. ActS
XX. 35 p.VT]p.ovfViv TU)v \oy<x>v TOV Kvpiov

rally but gives the sense of one or oTi finev k.t.X.

'ir/o-ov, See above 2
other passage (i Sam. ii. 10 or Jer. ^8iov XapjicivovTes k.t.X. (with the note),
ix. 23
sq) and Clement, writing after-
;
where Clement's language reflects
wards, unconsciously combines and the context of this quotation.
confuses S. Paul's quotation with the

42
52 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xiii

diddo-Kcov eTrieiKeiav Kai iuLaKpo6v^iav' ovtws yap eiTrev

'EAGATe i'na eAeneflTe, A(j)ieTe i'na AcjieGH ymin" <x>c noieiTe,

oy'too nomeHceTAi ymin- cbc AiAoxe, oy'twc AoGHceTAi ymin*

cbc KpiNere, oy'tooc KpieHcecGe-

(he xpucTeYecOe, oy'twc xRh-
w Merpco MexpeiTe cn aytco MeTpHGHce- 5
creYSHceTAi ym?n-
TAi YMIN.

TOVTOis (TTtjpi^coiuev
lit
Tavrr] tw evToXtj Kal Toh TrapayyeX^aa-iv
6avT0u^ 619 TO TTOpeveordai vTrtiKOOv^
ovra^ To7s ctyLOTrpeTrecFL \6yoL9 avrov, TUTreLVOCppo-
I ivuiKeiav] e-jriUKiav A. ouVws] C ;
. . rwa A. 2 'EXeare] A ;

Aeetre C. a^ere C.
a^tere] A ; 3 oi-Vws] C, and in all the other

so too A, except in the where has

places in this sentence where it occurs first, it
;

ovTu. 4 Kplvere] Kpiverac A. XRV^'^^'^^'^^^I XPV<^Tve(rdai A. 5 w

lx4Tpu}...iJi,eTpri6'/j(TeTai v/juv] here, AS
Clem; before cos Kplvere k.t.X., C. ev

avTi^] S; evavTT] A; ovrcosC; om. Clem. 7 arrjpi^u/xev] A; a-rripL^ufiev C.

iropijea-0ai] iropeijea-de C. 10 irpaiiv] A; Trpdov C. raXoyiojA;

'EXfare k.t.X.] The same saying where quoted almost exactly as

2. it is

which is recorded in Matt. vii. i, 2, here, except that ev avra is omitted.

Luke vi. 36 38, to which should be He betrays no misgiving that he is
added Matt. v. 7 fiaKapioi oi eXerjiioves not quoting directly from the Gospel,
oTi avToi fKfrjdijcrovTai, vi. 14 eav yap when evidently he has taken the
dcf)fiT Tols avdpconois K.r.X., Luke vi. words from his namesake the Roman
31 Kodais Bekere Iva ttoloxtiv k.t.\. Clement. Comp. Apos/. Const, ii.
21,

(comp. Mark xi. 25). As Clement's Ps-Ign. Tral/. 8.

quotations are often very loose, we On the form iXeav (for iXee'ip) see
need not go beyond the Canonical Winer xv p. 97 sq, A. Buttmann
Gospels for the source of this pas- p. 50; comp. Clein. Ho7n. xviii. 6.
sage. The resemblance to the original Previous editors needlessly read eXe-
is much closer here, than it is for elre here.
instance in his account of Rahab 4. coy xPl'^'>'^'^^^^^ "^he corre-

above, 12. The hypothesis there- sponding words in S. Luke (vi. 36)
Clement derived the saying
fore, that are yivfade olKTippoves. In Justin Dial.
from oral tradition or from some 96 and Apol. i. 15 they are quoted
needed. Polycarp
lost Gospel, is not ylvecrde Se xPW'^'- '^"'' olKTippLOves, and
indeed {Phil. 2) in much the same in Clem. Horn. iii. 57 yivea-de dyado\
words quotes our Lord as saying Ka\ oLKTippovfs. The verb ;^p7;(7rei;6(r^ai
dtpUre Kal aCpfdrjaeraL vp.1v, eXeelre tva occurs I Cor. xiii. 4.

fXfTj^fjre, but it can hardly be doubted 5. perpco K.T.X.] Quoted also in-
from his manner of introducing the directly Clem. Horn, xviii. 16 a p-erpa
quotation (pvrjpovevovres a>v fi-TTev 6 ep-erprjaav, p.(Tpr]6fj avTois T(5 icrca. See
Kvpios SiSaV/ccoi'), that he had this Mark iv. 24, besides the passages
passage of Clement in his mind already quoted from the other Evan-
and does not quote independently. gelists.
See also Clem. Alex. Strom, ii. 18 8. dyioTrpeTrea-i] Compare Polyc.
(p. 476) tX^aTi., (fyrjalu 6 Kvptor k.t.X., P/iil. I. This is apparently the earli-
 xiv] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 53

vouvre^. (brjcriv yap 6 ayio? \oyo<s' 'Eni tina eniBAevfoo,

o aAA' h eni ton npAyN kai hcyX'on kai jpeMONXA Moy ta AdfiA;
XIV. Alkulov ovv Kai bcnov, avhpe<i d^e\(pol, virr]-

Koovs fjidWov yeveadai tw Oew t] to?9 ev dXa^ovela

rifjid^

Kai aKaTacTTacTLa juvcrepou ^t]\ov^ dp-^tTyoT^ e^aKoXou-

deiv. fi\dl3ijv yap ov Trjv TV^ovcrau, judWov he klv-

5 Zvvov VTrOKTOfJLev ideyav, eav pi\jyOKivdvv(jo^ eTrthcofjiev eav-

Tov^ Toh 6e\)]fj.ao'LV twv dvdpcoTrcou, oWiue's i^aKOVTi-

toviTiv ek tpLV Kai aTacrei's ek to dTraWorpiwcrai tjjuds

TO!)s \6yovs C (with LXx) dub. S.;

1 1 oaiov] AC ;
deiov S. See also 2,

21. 12 T//xas] AS; V/J.5.S C. yeviadai ti^ Oey] A; tQ dec^ yeviadat.

CS. dXafoi'etoi] aXafowa A. 13 ffJXous] A fjjXoi; C. 17 ^ptv'l ;

A; S (where the plural depends merely on ribid, and would be suggested by

^peis
the plural of the following word); alpeaeis C Nicon. See above, i. p. 125. cfto,-

creis] (TTaaiu A. et's toI AC ; rod Nicon.

estpassage in which the word occurs. Second. See the several references.
Suicer gives it a place 'quia a lexi- K.T.\.'\ For the stress laid
vnrjKOQvs
cographis omissa,' but does not quote by Clement on the duty of vnuKoij,
either of these passages in the Apo- see 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 19, 58, 60, 63.
stolic fathers. 13. fivaepov] The form fivaepbs
9. 'EttI riW K.r.A.] A quotation from occurs again below 30 and in both ;

theLXX of Is. Ixvi. 2 with slight and places the editors have altered it to
unimportant variations. For a dis- jxvaapos. This is not necessary see :

tinctionbetween irpaxis and rfcrvxi'Oi Lobeck Pathol, p. 276. In Lev. .xviii.

see Bengel on i Pet. iii. 4 (where 23 it is so written in A ;
and simi-
both words occur). Comp. also larly in Mark i. 42 fKadepladrj is read
Hatch Biblical Greek p. 73 sq. in the best MSS see Tischendorf on
:

XIV. 'We ought to obey God Acts X. 15 and proleg. p. I (ed. 7),
rather than man. If we follow men, Winer v. p. 56. See also the form
we shall plunge ourselves into strife piepav (for /xiapav) in Boeckh C. I. G.
and peril; if we follow God, we no. 3588. So likewise the play on
shall be gentle and loving. The lepfv?, pifpevs, inApost. Const, ii. 28.
Scriptures teach us, that the guileless (C writes p-vcrapav for pva-epau in 30,
and meek shall inherit the earth ;
but not so here).
but that the proud and insolent shall dpx^yoli^ Comp. 5^ "PX^y"' '''1^

be blotted out.' araafcus.

II. AiKotoi/ K.r.X.] This passage as 15. pi^j/oKtv^vucjoi] 'in a foolhardy
far as xaXcof exovros is quoted in spirit^; Appian Civ. i. 103. It does
Nicon the Monk, in an extract given not occur in the LXX or New Testa-
by Cotelier from the Paris MSS Reg. ment.
2418, 2423, 2424. He strings together 16. i^uKovT'i(ov(Tiv\ The word here
'
with this passage quotations from >^ appears to mean, launch out.' Gene-
15, 46, of this epistle, and 3 of the rally, when it occurs metaphorically,
54 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xiv

Tou /caXws exoi^TOs. ')(^pt](rTevcr(joiuLe6a

avToT<s Kara Triv

eva'irXa'yyyiav kuI yXvKvrrjra tou iroiria-avTO'i t]^a.

yiypaTTTaL yccp' XpHCTOi Icontai oiKHTopec thc, akakoi

Ae YTToAei^BHCONTAi en' aythc* oi Ae nApANOMoyNTec eio-

AeepeyOHCONTAi ah aythc Kai iraXiv Xeyer ETaon acsBhs

YnepYS^OYMENON kai enAipdweNON wc tac KeApoYC toy AiBa-
NOY, KAI nApflAGON KAI lAOY OYK HN, KAI eSeZHTHCA TON TClnON
I airdis] A; iavrois CS. i iXvKiT-qTo] y\vKriT7]ra C. 4 oi dL..
air' avrris'] AC; om. S (by homoeoteleuton). evoked pevO-qaovTai] A; e^oko-

0pev6rj(rovTai. C. See the lower note. 5 W5ov] idov A. d<xe^v]

aa-e^Tjv A; rbv aae^jj C ;

there is the same v. 1. in the Lxx. 6 eiraLp6iJ.evov]

ai.irepoiJ.evov A. 7 rov Tbwov...eZ'pov'\ AC; avrov Kai ovx evpedrj 6 tottos

avToO (with the lxx) S. 9 ivKardXeifjL/jia] evKardXififia A ; eyKaTd\\ei/xfji.a

C. 10 KoWtjdQfJLev] AC; aKoXovdija-wfxev Nicon. 12 OSros 6 \abs]

\6yovs or yXcoa-aas would be under- TO avro, which occurs in the context

stood, if not expressed. of his next quotation.

^oXe6p(vd>]<rovTai] On the vary-
'
1. avTols] towm'ds them^ the 4.
leaders of the schism comp. 2 Thess. ; ing forms oXedpeveiv and okodpeveiv
iii. IS M '^^ ix^pov rjyelcrde K.r.X. This see Tischendorf Nov. Test. p. xlix.
must be done 'in imitation of the com- Our chief MS for the most part writes
passion of the Creator Himself {Kara the word with an e.

TTjv evcTTrKayxviajj k.t.X.) comp. Matt. ; 5. EiSoi/ aa-e^ri k.t.X.] From the
V. 44. Others substitute aurois^dXX?;'- LXX of Ps. xxxvii. 36 38 with unim-
Xois, but this is not so good. More- portant variations. The LXX has /cm
over, as the contracted form avrov e^ijrrjcra avrov Kai ovx ^p^^l o tottos
etc., for eavTov etc., seems never to avrov. In the Hebrew there is
occur in the New Testament, it is a nothing corresponding to 6 tottos

question whether Clement would have avrov. Without hinting that he is

used it see the note on avrav 12.
:
quoting from a previous writer, Cle-
2. 6i;(r7rXay;^i't'ai' K.r.X.]
The same ment of Alexandria, Strom, iv. 6 (p.
combination occurs in Theoph. ad 577), strings together these same six
Autol. ii. 14 '^^v y\vK.vTT]Ta Koi ev- quotations, beginning with Ps. xxxvii.
cnikayxvlav Kai biKaiocrvvqv k.t.X. quoted 36 sq and ending with Ps. xii. 4 sq
by Harnack. {TTapprj(rLa(Top,ai iv avrco). In compar-
3. xPW''- K.T.X.] From Prov. ii.
ing the two, we observe of the Alex-
21, 22. The first part of the quota- andrian Clement, that (i) In his first
tion xP'?o"Tot...e7r' avTTjs is found in A passage he restores the text of the
with a very slight variation (and par- LXX, and quotes Kai i^rjrrjaa avrov
tially in S),but B omits the words the ; K.T.\. (2) For the most part he follows
;

second runs in all the best MSS of the Clement of Rome, e.g. in the remark-
LXX, oSot [Se] acre^av en yrjs oXovvrai, oi able omission noted below (on aXaXa
8e TTapavofioL i^acrdrjcrovTai air avrris- In yevrjdijra k.t.X.); (3) He inserts be-
quoting the latter part Clement seems tween the quotations an explanatory
to be confusing it with Ps. xxxvii. 39 word or sentence of his own ; (4) He
oi be Trapdvofjioi e^o\odpev6t]a-oprai ejri ends this string of quotations with the
 xv] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 55

AYTOY KAI OYX eypON. (|)YAaCC6 dKAKIAN KAI TAG eyOVTHTA, OTI
ecTiN eNKATAAeiMMA AN9pconcp eipHNIKCO.
lo XV. ToLvvv KoWriQcojJLev Toh julet eva-e/Seia^ elprj-

vevovcLV, Kai jut]

to?? lueO' VTroKpio'ea)^ (SouXojmevoi^ elpri-
vr]V. Xeyei 'ycip
ttov Oytoc d Aaoc toTc x^'AeciN Me tima,
H KApAiA AYTOON noppco AnecTiN An' eMoy. Kai TraXiv
Ae

Tcp CTOMATI AYTOON eY'AOfOYCAN, TH Ae KApAlA AYTOON KATH-

15 poONTO. KaL TToXlV Xeyei' 'HfAnHCAN Ay'tON TO) CTOMATI

A and apparently S; 6 Xaos oi5ros C. rots xf^Aecrti'] AS; tw crTo^art C.

13 aw(XTti'] A Clem; dw^x^i C Nicon ;

dub. S. 14 eiiXoyovaau] A; ev\6-

yovv C; et/Xoyovcrt Clem. See I. p. 127. rrj 5e] AC Clem; Kai rfj S, with

the LXX. KaTTjpQvTo]C (with Lxx) KarapCivTai Clem ; Tischendorf says of the
;

reading of A
KarrjpovvTo certum est,' but Wright reads it KarripwvTo.
'
I looked

several times and could not feel certain. On such forms as KarripowTo see
Tischendorf iVoz'. Test. prol. p. Ivii (ed. 7).

very words of the Roman Clement, p,eTifia as here. Both Evangelists

yap... to Troifiviov
TaTreivo(jipovovi'T(ov
have ciTre^et with the LXX, where
avToi), without any indication that he Clement has ajrea-Tiv. Clem. Alex,
is citing from another. follows our Clement, modifying the
9. eVKaraXet/x/ia] 'a remnant^ i.e. form however to suit his context. In
a family or a memorial of some C/e/Ji. Rom. ii. 3 it is quoted exactly
kind, as in ver. 39 to. iyKaTdKiip.\i.aTa as here, except that 6 Xaos ovtos stands
rcovdae^cov e^oXoOpeva-erai comp. Ps. : for OVTOS o Xaos. Justin quotes the
xxxiv. 16 Tov e^oXodpeiia-ai sk yfjs to LXX, Dial. 78 (p. 305). For various
^vr]iJ,6(Tvvov avTau, quoted by Clement readings in the MSS of the LXX and
below, 22. quotations from it see Hatch Biblical
XV. '
Let us then attach ourselves Greek p. 177 sq.
to the guileless and peaceful; but 14. Tm oTo/iart k.t.X.] From LXX
avoid hypocrites who make a show Ps. Ixii. 4, with unimportant varia-
of peace. Against such the denun- tions.
ciations of Scripture are frequent and evXoyov(Tav\ for eiXoyovv. See
severe; against the idle profession of Sturz Dial. Mac. p. 58, and the refer-
God's service against the deceitful ences in Winer xiii. p. 89. In the
and proud lips.' LXX here SB have ivKoyovtrav . Clem.
12. OvTOi 6 Xaos] From Is. xxix. 13, Alex, (edd.) quotes ivXoyovdi.
which is quoted also Matt. xv. 8, 15. ^Yiyan-qa-av /c.r.A.] From Ps.
Mark vii. 6. Clement follows the Ixxviii. 36, 37 almost word for word.
Evangelists rather than the original 'ETrto-rai^r/a-ai' is here
a translation of
text. For the opening words of the 13DX3, 'were stedfast.' Though ryya-

Origmal, eyyifei fxoi o Xaos ovtos iv 7rr;crai/

read by the principal MSS
is

Tw (TTop.aTL avTOv KOI iv Tols ;(t\eo"tj/ (SB) of the LXX, the original reading
avTav Tifiaaiv /xe, they give the sen- was probably ^naTTjaav, as this corre-
tence in a compressed form ovtos o sponds with the Hebrew. See also
Xaos (o Xaos ovtos Matt.) toIs xf'AeaiV Hatch Biblical Greek p. 204 sq.
56 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xv

AYTWN KAI TH rAWCCH AYTCON eS^GYCANTO AYTON, H Ae KApAlA

AYTcoN OYK eYOeiA met' aytoy, oy'Ae enicTOieHCAN in th

AlAeHKH AYTOY- ^l-d TOVTO "AAaAA reNHeHTW TA )(e\KH TA

AOAlA TA AaAoYNTA KATA TOY AlKAlOY ANOMIAN' KUl TVaXiV

'EloAeGpeYCAi KyP'oc hanta ta x^'Ah ta AoAia, rA<J;>ccAN 5

HMOiN MefAAY"
werAAopHMONA, TOYC eiHONTAC, THN fAoicCAN
NOOMGN, TA X^'AH HMWN nAp' HMIN eCTIN' TIC HMa)N KYpiOC

ecTiN; And thc TAAAinoopiAC toon nTOOX^N kai Ano toy

I
e-^evaavTo] AS Clem ; ^e^av C. 3 5ta tovto] CS Clem ;
om. A.
Clem;
yev7)0y)TtjS\ A yevndeirj C. 4 to, \a\ovvTa...Ta. 86\ia] S; om. AC
Clem by homoeoteleuton. 5 yXQacrai' fxeyaXoprjfiova rovs etTroyras] AS; Kal

y\Coa<Tav /xeyaXop'rifiova roi/s dirbvras Clem; y\Qiaaa fxeya\opr}fx.wv Kal wdXiv Tods
eiwbvTas C. The scribe thus patches up by insertion and alteration the text which
the previous omission had dislocated, so that it may run grammatically and make
sense; see l. p. 143. 6 ^JLeya.\{lv(^3|xev'\ A; /j-eyaXwovfiev C Clem; dub. S.

3. 8ia tovto] This should not be xeiXrj TO. 86Xia. Wotton and others
treated as part of the quotation, since detected the omission but made the
it is not found in any of the passages insertion in the form koI 'E^. K. tt.
of the Psalms which are here strung r.
X- SoXta Kot.
''' This does not
together. The Alexandrian Clement explain the scribe's error. The kui
however (p. 578), quoting from his before yXaa-crav p,eya\oprjfJLOva, though
Roman namesake, may perhaps have found in AB, is marked as to be
regarded it as such. erased in S and is omitted in many
"AXaXa ventureto transcribe
K.r.X.] I
MSS in Holmes and Parsons and ;
in

(within brackets) the note in my first our Clement's text of the LXX it must
edition; from which it will be seen have been wanting. The Hebrew omits
how far I had divined the reading of the conjunction in the corresponding
the text, as since confirmed by the place. The existing omission in the
Syriac version. text of the Roman Clement seems to

[The words aXaXa yevt]di]Ta) Ta X^ 'At; be as old as the end of the second
TO.8oKia are taken from the LXX, Ps. century, for his Alexandrian name-
xxxi. 19. Those which follow are from sake (see the note on eidov da-e^rj
the LXX Ps. xii. 36
e^oXodpevcrai K.T.X. above) gives the passage, SXaXa
Kvpios navra ra x^'At; to. BoXia [kol] yevqdtjTco TvavTa Ta X^'-^l
'''^ doXia /cat

yXaxrcrav iMeyaXoprjfiova tovs eiTvovTas yXaacrav [xeyaXop^pova k.t.X,, msertmg

K.T.\. Since in the quotation of Cle- Kal before yXaxraav, though quoting
ment, as it stands in the MS, yXaxra-av itin the main as it is quoted here.

[ifyakoprifiova has no government, it Or we have the alternative of supposing

seems clear that the transcriber's eye that a transcriber of the Alexandrian
has passed from one to. x^i^V ^" 8oXia Clement has independently made a
to the other and omitted the intro- similar omission to the transcriber
ductory words of the second quota- of the Roman. For the form ixfyaXoprj-
I have therefore inserted the the note on
tion. fxova see i^epi^(i)a-ev 6.]
words f^oXedpfvaai Kvpws iravra to. 7. Trap' i^plv]
'
in our power, our
 xvi] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 57

cTeNAfMOY T(ON neNHTOoN NYN ANACTHCOMAi, Aefei Kypioc

lO OHCOMAI eN COJTHpi'cO, nAppHCIACOMAI 6N AyTO).

XVI. TaTreivocppovovvTOJV yap e(TTiv 6 XpicrTO^,

ovK eiraipofjievcov
eirl to ttoijuulov avrov. to orKfJTrrpov

[t^9 IULe'Ya\(joa-vi/t]'S~\
rod Oeov, 6 Kupio^ [^//xwj^] XpL<TTO<s

'lt](TOu^, OVK f]\6ev ev KOfiTTM dXa^ovela^ ov^e V7rpt](pa-

15 vias, KULTrep hvvaiJievo<i, dWa raTreivocppovcov, Ka6u3<i to
7 Trap' 7]/j.Tv] A Clem; Trap' tj/jluv CS. 8 dirb] A; om. CS Clem. 9 dva-
ffTTfia-ofiai] ava<jT-qffoiJ.ev A. 10 et-
(rwTijpt'y] Clem; ei'crwrrjpia A; XJp"l"l33 (ef'

aidTTjpla or ev auTripiip) S; om. C. The MSS of the LXX vary. 13 rrjs fxeya-

Aw(Twi?j] AC; om. S Hieron. r]fxi2v] A; om. C Hieron; dub. S, for pD is

used equally for 6 Kvpios and 6 Kvpio^ ^/xwf. Xpio-rds 'Irjaoi/s] A; i-qaovs

Xpi-a-Tds CS Hieron. 14 dXafovet'as] aXafoj/tao- A. 15 raireivoippovuiv]

AC [Hieron]; add. ri\9ev S.
It represents the Hebrew 13nX.
i77///.' our Lord. Fell refers to the applica-
The dative is correctly read also by tion of the same text made by Justin
Clem. Alex, and some MSS of the Dial. 63 (pp. 286 sq) to show otl koX
LXX ;
but SAB have Trap' i^ficiv. TrpoaKvvriTos eari koI Qeos nai. XpicrTos.
9. dva(rTT](ToiJ.ai^ The reading of Jerome in Isai, lii. 13 (iv. p. 612)
A avaa-TTjdonev has arisen from ava- quotesthis passage of Clement, 'Scep-
a-Tr](Toix, whence avaaTrjaofii conip. : trum Dei, Dominus Jesus Christus,
aixfJ-oXt^o-Lo. {alxp-aXcoa-Lav) for at;^/LiaAa)- non venit in jactantia superbiae, quum
(Tia {alxfJ-oXo^cia) in ii. 6. So too possit omnia, sed in humilitate.' This
41 (rvvei8r](TLV (crvveLdrjcrT) for crui'et- application of our Lord's example
8rjat= avvi8r](Ti. bears a resemblance to Phil. ii. 5 sq
10. drjCTOixai
K.7-.X.] / w/// //<:?'
and may be an echo of it.
/i/; z
safety, I will deal boldly by 13. p.iyak(xi(Tvvr]s\ The word is

hvn.' The Hebrew of the last clause doubtful here, but occurs several
is wholly different from the LXX. times in Clement elsewhere, 20,
XVI. '
Christ is the friend of the 27, 36, 58, 61, 64, 65 ;
and this fact is

lowly; He Himself is our great pat- in its favour.

tern of humility. This is the leading 14. eV KofXTra k.tX] Macar. Magn.
feature in the portrait which the evan- Apocr. iv. 2 (p. 159) iroKvs yap ovtos
gelic prophet has drawn of the lamb T^y aXa^oveias 6 KOfXTTOs.
led to the slaughter. This too is dXa^oveias K.r.X.] The adjectives dXa-
declared by the lips of the Psalmist. ^u>i> and iiT!-epi]<pavos occur together,
If then He our Lord was so lowly, Rom. i.
30, 2 Tim. iii. 2. The one
what ought we His servants to be ?' refers to the expression, the other to
12. OVK enaipofifvcov k.t.X.^Comp. the thought; see the distinction in
I Pet. V. 3, Acts XX. 29. The word Trench A^. T, Syn. xxix. ist sen
noipLviov occurs again ^>5 44, 54, 57. 15. Kcuirep bwafifvos] This passage
(TKrjTTTfwv K.T.X.] Thc cxpresslon
7-6
implies the pre-existence of Christ ;

isapparently suggested by Heb. i. 8, comp. Phil. ii. 6 sq os iv p-op(l>fi Qeov

where Ps. xlv. 6 pd^bos evdvTr]Tos 7) vTTnpx^^v K.tX. ;
see the introduction
pd/3Sos TTjs ^a<n\fias arov is applied to I.
p. 398 sq.
58 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xvi

TTvevfJia TO a<yLOV vrepi

aurou e\d\r}(r6v' (pr]<Tiv yap'
Kypie, TIC enicTeyceN th
akoh hmoon; kai d BpAXioiN Kypioy
TiNi AneKAAy^QH ; ANHrreiAAiueN Inantion aytoy, wc haiAion,
<x)C pizA EN TH AiyoiCH- OYK IcTiN gTaoc AyTco, oyAe AolA-
KAI AYTON, KAI oyK e?xeN elAoc oyAe kaAAoc, aAAa
ei'AoMeN 5

TO elAoc AYTOY ATIMON, eKAe?noN nApA to eiAoc twn ANGpoi-

noiN" ANepconoc eN nAHTH wn kai noNCO kai eiAcoc ct)epeiN

maAaki'an, oti AnecTpAnTAi to npdcoonoN AyToy, htimacGh

KAI oyK eAoricGH. oyTOC tac amapti'ac hmoon (})ep6i kai nepi

HMOON OAyNATAI, KAI HMsTc eAOriCAMSOA AyTON e?NAI GN nONCO 10

3 dvijyyeikafj.ev'l avriyyCKajxev A. iratSt'oi'] AS ; Trediov C. 4 etSos

avT(^] A (with Lxx); avrip eWos C; and so S, but the order cannot be pressed in
this case. AC; dd^av S, but Nn31t^ is probably a copyist's
5 KdXXos]
error for XIDIti', former word having occurred in the previous sentence.
the
6 eKXelTTOv'] K\nrov A. to eWos twv dvOpuTnav] AC; iravras avdpdnrov^ S.

2. Kv'pie K.r.X.] A Messianic appli- The LXX itself differs considerably

cation is made of this 53rd chapter from the Hebrew in many points.
of Isaiah by S. Matthew viii. 17 (ver. See also Hatch Biblical Greek p.
4), by S. Mark xv. 28 (ver. 12), 178 sq, p. 201 sq, on the form, of the
by S. Luke xxii. 37 (ver. 12), by early quotations from this passage
S. John i.
29 (ver. 4, 7), xii. 38 (ver. i), of the LXX.
by Philip Acts viii. 32 sq (ver. 7, 8), 3. dvrjyyeiXanev K.r.X.] The LXX
by S. Paul Rom. x. 16 (ver. i), and reading here is devoid of sense and
by S. Peter i Pet. ii.
23 sq (ver. 5, must be corrupt, though the MSS and
9). Barnabas also ( 5) applies ver. early quotations all present dvrjyyelXa-
5, 7, to our Lord; and Justin both in fj.ei/.
As this word corresponds to the
the Apology and in the Dialogue Hebrew Vyi (Aq. Theod. dva^r]c
interprets this chapter so frequently: Symm. dvej3r]), Is. Voss proposed
see esp. Apol. i. 50, 51 (p. 85 sq), duereiXafiev (see Grabe Diss, de Variis
Dial. 13 (p. 230 sq), in both which Vitiis LXX
p. 38) but even this;

passages it is quoted in full. For Jew- alteration is not enough, and we

ish Messianic interpretations of this should require dvknCKev. The follow-
chapter see Hengstenberg Christol. ing meaning however seems gene-
II. p. 310 sq (Eng. trans.), Schottgen rally to have been attached to the
Hor. Hebr. II. p. 138 sq, and espe- words ;
'
We
the preachers an-
cially Driver and Neubauer The fifty- nounced Him before the Lord ; as
third Chapter of Isaiah according to a child He, as a root etc' (see
is

the Jewish Interpreters., Oxf. and Eusebius and Jerome on the pas-
Lond. 1877, with Pusey's preface. sage); but Justin Dial. 42 (p. 261)
Clement's quotation for the most strangely explains my iraihiov of the
part follows the lxx tolerably closely. child-like submission of the Church
The more important divergences to Christ. The interpretation of Ori-
from the LXX are noticed below. gen ad Rom. viii. 6 (iv. p. 627)
 xvi] TO THE CORINTHTANS. 59

KA\ eN nAHTH KAI eN KAKOOCei. AYTOC Ae eTpAYMATIC0H AlA

TAC AMApTIAC HMCJON KAI MeMAAAKICTAI AlA TAC ANOMIAC HMOON.
nAiAeiA eipHNHc hmoc)N en' ayton* to) MooAooni aytoy HMeTc
lAOHMeN. nANTGC cbc npoBATA enAANHSHMeN, AN9pOOnOC TH
15 oAo) AYTOY enAANHBH- ka'i
KVpioc nApeAcoKGN AYTON Yirep
Tc2)N AMApTlCON HMOaN. KAI AYTOC AlA TO KeKAKOOCBAI OYK

ANOi'rei TO CTOMA" oic npoBATON eni c(|)ArHN h'xQh, KAI cbc

AMNOC eNANTIOISl TOY Kei'pANTOC a4)0ONOC, ofTOOC Oy'k ANOIfei

TO CTOMA AYTOY- GN TH TAneiNOOCei H Kpi'ciC AYTOY HpGH"

See the lower note for the lxx reading. 1 2 a/j-aprlas, dvofiiai] A ; transposed
'

in CS. See the lower note. 13 TraiSela] Trai8(.a A. 15 iir^p tuv

a/JLapriuv] AC; rah afxaprlais S with the LXX. See the lower note. 19 iv
rrj rairetvwaei] AC; add. ejus S, where the punctuation attaches it to the previous
sentence. Kpiais] Kpiaeio- A.

is not quite clear. The fathers of 13D0 D^:D'inDOD, 'as Mding the face
the fourth and fifth centuries gene- from him'' or 'fromus^ The LXXseem
rally interpret as plCa iv yfi di-^aia-r] to have adopted the latter sense,
as referring to the miraculous con- though they have omitted 1JD0 ''His ;

ception. In the order iv. avr. cos face is turned away, i. e. as one
TraiS. Clement agrees with SA Justin ashamed or loathed comp. Lev. xiii. ;

p. 230 (p. 85, 260 sq, ivainov avToi)); 45-

^ ^ ^ ^
and so the old Latin, e.g. TertuU. adv. 12. dfiapTLas, dvofiias^ So B, Justin p.
Marc. iii. 17 (and elsewhere) 'annun- 230; but SA, Barnab. 5, Justin p.
tiavimus coram ipso velut puerulus 85, transpose the words, reading dvo-
but B has ws iraid.
etc.'; iv. avT., the ixias in the first clause and d/xapTias
order of the Hebrew. in the second.
6. Trapa to ei8. r. dv6p.^ The LXX 14. avdpcoTTos] 'each man^ distribu-
S, Clem. Alex. p. 440, Trapa navTas (S tive; aHebraism not uncommon in
corr. from nav) roiis vlovs t<ov dvdpd- the LXX; and the use is somewhat
TTcav ; B, Justin p. 230, Tertull. adv. similar in John ii.
25, i Cor. xi. 28.
Marc. iii.
7, adv. Jiid. 14, irapa tovs 15. i^TTep Tcov a/^apncoj'] The LXX has
vlovs Ta>v dv6pu>TV(x>v ; A, Tertull. adv. Tols dpapTiais, and SO Justin pp. 86, 230,
Marc, iii. 17, Trapanavras dvdpcoTTovs ;
Clem. Alex. p. 138; but Tertull. adv.
'
Justin p. 85, Clem. Alex. p. 252, Trapa Prax. 30 pro delictis nostris.'
TOVS dvBpanovs. 19. eV T^ raTTCij'cucret K.r.X.] This pas-
7. Ka\ Tv6v(o\ Wanting in the LXX. sage is also quoted from the LXX in
The words must have crept in from Acts viii. 33 iv T^ TaTTeivaxrei [^avTov\
below, iv TTovco Ka\ iv TrXrjyf], either by Tj Kpiais avTov rjpdrj, where the first
a lapse of memory on Clement's part avTov should be omitted with the best
or by an error in his copy of the LXX MSS, so that S. Luke's quotation ac-
or in the transcription of Clement's cords exactly with the LXX. For the
own text. probable meaning- of the LXX here
8.
dTTia-TpaTTTaiJ The original is see the commentators on Acts I.e. ;
6o THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xvi

THN reNeAN aytoy tic ^iHTHceTAi; oTi Ai'pexAi And THC rflc

H ZOOM AYTOY' ATTO TCON ANOMIOON TOY AAOY MOY HK6I eiC 9ANA-
KAI
TON. KAI nONHpofc ANTI THC
AOOCOO TOYC TACt)HC AYTOY
TOYC nAOYCIOYC ANTI TOY OANATOY AYTOr OTI ANOMIAN OYK
AoAoc tco ctomati aytoy- kai 5
enoiHceN, ofAe eYpeOh sni
'

THC nAHrHC" CAN Awje nepi

Kypioc BoVActai KABApicAi AYTON
KAI KVpiOC
AMApTIAC, H YYX^^ YM<^N oVcTAI CnepMA MAKpoBlON.
And toy noNOY thc ay'toy, AciIai
BofAeTAi A(t>eA6iN ^>y)(HC

AYTtO Ct)OOC KAI nA_ACAI TH CYNCCCI, AlKAuicAl AlKAION CY AOY"

AlA 10
AefONTA nOAAOIC- kai TAC AMAPTIAC AYTWN AYTdc ANOICei.
AC; rJxSv S. See the
1 tV yevedv] AC; /cat rrjv yeuedv S. 2 iJKei]

lower note. 7 6\peTac] ei/'erat A. 8 rrjs V'l'X^s] AC; awb r!j$ xj^vxvs S.

if = ^eV.
The P which represents dirb before tov irovov is pointed as 12 roZs]

and for patristic interpretations of in Tertullian or Origen.

yevea, Suicer I.
p. 744 s. %i. The 5.
So A in the
ovbe evpidt) bokos]
Hebrew is different. LXX, but SB (corrected however in
2. r]Kei\ Tjxdrj LXX and Tertull. ad?', S by later hands) have simply ovbe
yud. 10; but r]KiL is read by Justin b6\ov, following the Hebrew more
pp. 86, 230, though elsewhere he has closely. In i Pet. ii. 22 are the
rix^f] P- 261 (mss i]x^n^')^ coinp. p. words OS djiapTiav ovk i-no'i-qcrev ovbf
317 ort OTTO tSv avofiiav tov XaoO evpedr] boXosivTw (TTOfiaTi avTov, though
dx^WfTai fls davarov. As rjx^l may this is not given as a direct quotation
easily have been introduced from and may have been intended merely
ver. 7, rJKei was perhaps the orig- as a paraphrase, like much of the
inal reading of the LXX and so it ; context. But it is quoted by Justin
stands in some MSS in Holmes and also Koi ovx evpidr] bokos p. 230, and
Parsons. ouSe evpedri boXos p. 86, though in a
3. Ka\ StBo-o) (c.r.X.] The LXX clearly third passage he has ovbe boXovp. 330.
means that the wicked and the And so likewise Tertull. adv. Jiid.
wealthy should die in requital for 10 'nee dolus in ore ejus inventus
His death as Justin Dz'al. 32 (p.
; est,'Origen L p. 91 C, IL pp. 250 D,
249) avTi TOV davarov avTov Toiis ttXou- 287 and Hippol. in Psalm. 7 (p.
C,
(TLOvi davaTcodi^aeadai. Thus the refer- 191 Lagarde). The passage of S.
ence to the crucifixion of the thieves Peter might have influenced the form
and the entombment in Joseph's of quotation and even the reading of
grave, which the original has sug- the MSS in some cases : but the pas-
gested to later Christian writers, is sages where ovbk evp^drj bokos appears
rendered impossible in the LXX. This are so numerous, that we must sup-
application however is not made in pose it to have been so read in some

the Gospels, where only ver. 12 ev copies of the LXX at least as early as
Tols avonois fKoyladr} is quoted in this the first century. This reading is
connexion, nor (I believe) in any fa- found in several MSS in Holmes and
ther of the second century nor even Parsons.
 xvi] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 6l

Toyjo AYTOc KAHpoNOMHcei noAAoyc KAi TOON icxYpcoN Mepiei

ckyAa" anB' wn nApeAoGH eic Oanaton h ^>X){H aytoy kai toTc

ANo'moIC eA0riC9H' kai Ay'tOC AMApriAC nOAAOON ANHNerKGN KAI

AlA TAC AMApTIAC Ay'toON nApeAoOH. Kui TTuXlV aVT0<5 <pt](nV'

iS'Erto Ae eiMi ckooAhz kai oyk ANGpoonoc, ONeiAoc ANepoincoN
KAI e2oY0eNHMA Aaoy- nANTec oi GeoopoYNTec Me eleMYKTHpi-
CAN Me, cAaAhcan eN yeiAeciN, eKiNHCAN Ke(})AAHN, "HAniceN
eni K-fpiON, pYCACGoo ayton, coocatoo ayton, oti GeAei ayton.

'Opdre, avdpe^ dyaTrtjToi, tl^ 6 vTrojpa^jULO^ 6 Se^o/xe-

20 vos rjfjuv' 61
yap 6 Kvpio<i ourco^ eraireLVOCppovy^a-ev, tl

A; ev Tots C, and so probably S, which has 3 not ?. 15 5e] AS ;

om. C.
17 eKlvy)<Tai>] A.
eKeivrjaav 18 otl] AC; et S.

6. TTjs TrXrjyrjti:] So SB Justin pp. 86, quently. TertuUian however reads

230 but A (LXX) has drTo rris TrXrjyfjs. eximere a morte animam
'
; rr\v ^vxi]v
For aadapi^eiv or KadaipeLV tlvos COmp. ejus,' ad7'. Jlid. 10. nXacrai (sc. avrov)
Herod, i. 44. So the intransitive stands in the present text of the LXX
verb Kadapeveiv (Plato Epist. viii. p. (SAB), and in Justin pp. 86, 230, nor
356 e) and the adjective Kadapos is there any indication of a different

(Herod, ii. 38) may take a genitive. reading but, as y^Ci''* stands in the
:

8(OT] So alsoLXX (SAB) and Jus- corresponding place in the Hebrew,

tin pp. 86, 230 (mss, but many edd. the original reading of the LXX was
Scorai). Eusebius comments on this probably TrXrja-ai, as Grabe suggested
as the LXX reading, and Jerome dis- {Diss, dc Vit. Var. LXX, p. 39). Com-
tinctly states it to be so. Accordingly pare the vv. 11.
paacrei and prjacrei in
ye make an Mark
'
it was interpreted, If ix. 18.

offering' (or, translated into its Chris- 12. Tois avop-ois] iv Tols dvoixois LXX
'
tian equivalent, If ye be truly con- (SAB), Justin pp. 86, 231, (though in
trite and pray for pardon'). With the immediate neighbourhood of the
dovvai Trept Comp. Heb. v. 3 rrepi fav first passage he has fiera twu av6p.a)V,

Toi) 7Tpo<T(ppeiv Trept a/jLapricop.

The p. 85) ; /xera dv6ix(x)v, Luke xxii. 37,
meaning of the original is doubtful, (fMark xv. 28t).
but 8aTe seems to be a rendering of 14. ai'Tos-] Christ Himself, in whose
D''"'n taken as a second person, //loii
'

person the Psalmist is speaking.

shalt give.'' The reading hOirai 'give Comp. 22, where avroi TrpoaKoXel-
himself^ which some editors here rai has a similar reference. The
would adopt, is quite late and can words are an exact quotation from
hardly stand. the LXX Ps. xxii. 6 8. The applica-
7. Ki^ptoj (BovXerai k.t.\.] The LXX tion to our Lord is favoured by
departs very widely from the Hebrew, Matt, xxvii. 43.
but its meaning is fairly clear. For 19. ()
vTr(>ypap.p.()i] See llic note
d^eXeiv OTTO, ''to diminish fr0711 comp. ',
above on i:; 5.

Rev. xxii. 19, Exod. v. 1, and so fre-1

62 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xvi

Troirjorco/uLev >)/xe?5 ol vtto tov ^vyou Trjs ^apiTO's avTov

^L avTOv eXdovTES ;

XVII. MijULriTai yevcojueda KaKelvcoVf o'lTive^ ev hep-

fiacTLV alyeiOL^ Kai fj.r]\wTaX^ 7repL67raTr](rau Krjpvcra'ov-

Ts TriP eXevcTLv tov Xpia-Tov' Xeyojuev de 'HXiav Kai 5

'GXia-aLe btl ^e Kai l6^Kit]X, roiys Trpocptjra^' 7rpo9 tov-

-

T0L9 Kai Tovs fj.e{JLapTvpriixevov<i. ijuaprvprjOr] weyaAw?

I jroiricTWfji.ev] A; iroL-qao/Jiev C; dub. S. i e\66vTes] S ;
eXOovroff A;
anre\96vrs C. 6 'EXto-at^] A; 'EXt^o-ate C. ?rt 5,^] AS; om. C.
Kai] AC; om. S. Trpos roi^TOts] AC; add. bk S. 7 i/xapTvpi^dr)'] AS;
add. 5^ C. 9 drepi^wp] A; drepicas C; drepicroi) S, apparently, for it
renders ei dicit cogitans humiliter, videbo gloriam Dei. raireipo^popwp] C;

I. TOV ^vyov Trjs ;^dpiTos] A verbal garment of hair' (where the LXX

paradox, explained by the 'easy yoke' omits the negative and destroys the
of Matt. xi. 29, 30. The following St' sense, koI epSvaovrai 8eppiv Tpi)(ivT]v) ;

avToii is 'through His humiliation and see also Bleek Hei^r. I.e., Stanley's
condescension.' Sinai and Palestifte p. 305. The
XVII. 'We should also copy the word fxrjkmTr) is used in the LXX to
humility of the prophets who went translate miN, palndamentum, 'a
about in sheepskins and goatskins ;
mantle' ; e.g. of Elijah and Elisha,
of Abraham the friend of God, who I Kings xix. 13, 19, 2 Kings ii.
8, 13,
confessed that he was mere dust and 14. Though not a strict equivalent,

ashes; of Job the blameless, who it was doubtless adopted as describing

condemned himself and
impure in the sight of
the trusty servant, who declared his
nothingness before the Lord.'
The whole of this chapter and part
of the next are quoted by Clem. Alex.
Strom, iv. 16 (p. 610) in continuation
of 9 sq (see the note there) but he
cites so freely, abridging and enlarging
and interspersing his own
at pleasure,
all men as the recognised dress of the prophet.
God ;
of Moses Ezekiel is fitly classed with the older
prophets, as representing a stern and
ascetic type. His dress is nowhere
mentioned in the O. T, but might
be taken for granted as the ordinary
garb of his office. Clem. Alex, after
:
fiT]\coTais adds Km rpi^wv KafJLTjXficoi'
TrXeynaaiv, as after 'le^eKifjX he adds
Koi 'lu)avpr]v, the former interpolation

commentary (e.g. rr^v ov^ viroivm- preparing the way for the latter.
Tovaav vofico alviTTOfiivos afiapTiav yvco- 6. 'EXio-me] A frequent form in the

(TTiKots fierpLOTradaiv), that he cannot best MSS of the LXX (with a single or
generally be taken as an authority a double o-), e.g. 2 Kings ii. i sq. The
on the text, and (except in special editors have quite needlessly changed
cases) I have not thought it worth it into 'EXicra-aiov, which is the form
while to record his variations. in Clem. Alex.
3. eV Sf'p/xao-ti/ fcT.X.] From Heb. xi. Toiis
npocfyriTas] Epiphanius has
;i'7.For the prophets' dress comp. been thought to refer to this passage
Zech. xiii. 4 The prophets shall be
'
in Haer. xxx. 15, avros (KXtj firjs) ejKa-
ashamed... neither shall they wear a fiia^ei 'aXiav koi Aa/31S /cat ^afixlrav koi
 XVIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 63

'A^paajUL Kal (pi\o<s ir

poorly opevBr] rod Oeov, Kal Xeyei
aTeviVoiv ek Tr]V Zopav tov Oeov, TaTreivoCppovwi/' 'Eroo
10 Ae eiMi rfi KAi cnoAoc. eTi ^e Kal irepi '/w/S ovtms ye-

ypaTTTai' MtbB Ae hn Aikaioc kai AMeMnroc, aAhSinoc, eeo-

ceBhic, AnexoMGNoc And nANToc kakoy' ciW avTO^ eavTOV

KaTYiyopei Xeyiav, GyAeic KA0Apdc And pynoY, oyA' an

T<nreLvo(j>p(i>vij}v A. 11 5e] CS Clem; om. A. /cai] AC [Clem]; om.

S with LXX. dX');^t^6s] aXTjdeivoa A; dXrjOLvbs Kai Clem 611. 12 /ca/coO]

AC Clem; n-ovrjpov Trpdyfiaros (with LXx) S. 13 Kariijyopet "K^yuv] C;

KaT-qy A; contra seipsum dicens loquitur (as if Kar-qyopdv \iyei.) S. 0^5'

hv'] C ; 0^5' et Clem ; def. A. See the lower note.

TTovras Toiis Tvpo^-qras k.t.\. ;

but the the LXX Gen. xviii. 27.

reference must be to the spurious 1 1. 'Icb/3 ^v K.r.X.] A loose quotation

Epistles 071 Virginity^ where Samson, from Job i. i, where SB have aXrjdi-
as well as the others, is mentioned by pos ajiejiTTTos 8i.Kaios Beocrefiiqs., and A
name (see above, i. p. 409). apLefiTTTos diKaios aXrjdfivos deoae^ijs.

7. Tovs fiepiapTvprifievovs]
'
bome 13. KUTTiyope'i Xeycov] I prefer this
witness approved,' whether by God
to,
to KaTTjyopav Xeyet or Karrjyopav elnev.
or by men see below, 17, 18, 19,
;
Wotton is certainly wrong in saying

38, 44, 47, Acts vi. 3, Heb. xi. 2, 4, 5, that he could read dnev in A. There

39, 3 Joh. I2,etc. Here the testimony

isno trace of the word and cannot
of God's voice in Scripture seems to have been any. He must have made
be intended, as appears from the some confusion with the elirev below,
examples following. which is blurred.
8. (pCkos irpocrrjyopfvdri] Comp. Ov'Seij K.T.X.] A loose quotation
James ii. 23, and see above, 10 with from the LXX Job xiv. 4, 5.

the note. ov8' av] All the best MSS of the

9. do^av] i.e. the outward ma-
rrjv
LXX agree in reading eav koI, which
nifestation, the visible light and glory many editors have preferred here.
which betokened His presence ;
as On the other hand Clem. Alex. Strom.
e.g. Exod. xvi. 7, 10, xxiv. 16, 17, iv.16 (p. 611) has 0O8' el, and as in
xxxiii. 19, 22, xl. 28, 29, Luke ii. 9, the rest of this quotation he follows
I Cor. XV. 40 sq, 2 Cor. iii. 7 sq, etc. his namesake pretty closely, where he
raneivocppovuv] A favourite word departs from the LXX, he may have
with Clement see 2, 13 (twice),
;
done so in this instance. Origen,
16 (three times), 19, 30, 38, 48. In who frequently quotes the text, gene-
like manner Tanftvocjipoa-vvrj and ra- rally has ov8' av (e.g. H. p. 829) or
n-dvaxris occur several times. The ov8' d (in. pp. 160, 685), but some-
scribe of A reads Ta7reivo({)p(i>v cov here, times omits the negative. In Apost.
as he reads Ta-rreivo^^pov ov 19. In Const, ii. 18 it is quoted as here.

both cases his reading must be cor- The passage is one of very few out-
rected. This verb occurs only once side of the pentateuch quoted by
in the LXX (Ps. cxxxi. 2), and not Philo, de Mtct. Norn. 6 (l p. 585),
once in the New Testament. who reads n's yap.../cai av...

'Eyu fie
K.T.\.'\ Quoted exactly from
 64 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xvii

MIAC HMepAC H H Z(OH AYTOy. McOVO'fjS niCTOC CN oAtO TO)

oiKO) AYTOY eK\r]6r], kul dia t^? vTrrjpeona^ auTOv eKpivev
6 Qeo'i AtyvTrTOv Zia tmv juaariycov Kai tcHv aiKLcrfjia-

Tcov avTwv. dWa KcxKeivo^

do^acrdei^ fj.eyaXcd'i ovk
..-'
ijueyaXoptj/uLovrjcrei/f dW eiTrev, erri Tr]^ f^arov xP^f^^~ 5

TiCfJiOV avTM ^idojuevov. Tic eiMi epoa, oti me neMneic;

-2 avToO pri] AS (with Heb. iii.

2); om. C. ^KpLPev] AC; Kpivei (appa-

rently) S. 5 iirl TTjt ^drou] e (iarov A; fwt tov ttjs ^drov C ;

iirl ttjs

(or ToO) jSaron S ; t^s ^oltov Clem. See the lower note. 9 e'iirwfJLev]

1. TTKTTos K.T.X.] Hc is SO Called Horn. xvi. 14, Apost. Const, v. 20).

Num. xii. 7; comp. Heb. iii. 2. The So we have im tov jSutov Mark xii.
avrou is tov Gfoi), for the LXX has 26 (though with an ill-supported v.l.),
fXOV- but eVi TTJS (3a.Tov Luke xx. ^7. In
2. i57r>;pea-tay] Comp. Wisd. xiii. Justin Dial. 60 (p. 283) we meet with
II, XV. 7. OTTO Ti]s /3drou, 6 ^oltos, 6 /Sotos, o /Saroy,

eKpLvev K.r.X.] Compare 11 Kpi- en Trjs ^uTov, in the same chapter.

deia-ijs 8ia nvpos. Moses was the See on double gender of the word
this
instrument in fulfilling the prophecy Fritzsche on Mark I.e.
uttered before, Gen. xv. 14 (comp. 6. Tis ei/x' ^7^] From Exod. iii. 11
Acts vii. 7) TO 8e edvos (o iav bovkev- Tis elfii eyco, oti 7ropevaop.(ii k.t.X.
craxTi Kpivw eya. 7. f'yto
Se K.T.X.] From Exod. iv.

5- epfyaXopr]p6vr](Tv] See the note 10 l(Txv6(^u>vos Koi /SpaSi'yXcocrcros' iya

on i^fpi^axreii, 6. elp-L.

eVi Trjs (BaTov]Cannot have so A 8. Eyco Se elpi aTpis k.t.X. j This

read the words as they stand in C, quotation is not found in the Old
unless this line was very much longer Testament or in any apocryphal book
than the preceding or following one. extant whole or in part. The nearest
Moreover eVi tov Trjs ^aTov xp'JMa^'f" parallel is James iv. 14, nola yap rj

/xov auVw 8i8op.evov is in itself a very ^afj vpcov ; aTfus [yap] eVre 1] npos 6X1-
awkward and unlikely expression. yov (jiaivofievrj k.t.X. Compare also
Probably A
read enl ttjs ^utov or eVl Hosea 'As smoke from the
xiii. 3
TOV ^ciTov, this being a common mode chimney' (or 'the window'), where
of referring to the incident Luke xx. ;
the LXX seems to have translated
^7 (comp. Mark xii. 26), Justin Dia/. originally dTp,\s dirb aKpidav (see Sim-
128 (p. 357), C/em. Horn. xvi. 14, son's Hosca p. 44), corrupted into

Apost. Const. V. 20. The reading of QTTo 8aKpvcov in B and corrected into
C must be attributed to the in- fK Kanvodo^rjs from Theodotion in A ;

decision of a scribe hesitating be- and Ps. cxix. 83 ' I become like am
tween the masculine and feminine a bottle in the smoke,' where again
genders the word being sometimes
; the LXX mistranslates wo-et da-Kos iv
masculine, o /3aros (e.g. Exod. iii. irdxvT). In none of these passages
2, 3, 4, Apost. Const, vii. 33), some- however are the words very close,
times feminine (Deut. xxxiii. 16, Acts nor are they spoken by Moses. Per-
vii. 35, Justin Dial. 127, 128, Clem. haps therefore this should be reckon-
 XVIIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 65

eroo Ae eiMi ic)(Nd(t)00NOc kai BpAAyrAooccoc. Kai 7ra\iv

Xe'yei, 'Ercio Ae eiMi atmic And KyOpAc.

XYIII. T'l ^6 eLTTuofJiev 67ri T(jp iJi6fjiapTvpf]fj.evoi

10 Aavelh '^
7rpo<i
bv i7rev 6 Geo?, EypoN anApa kata thn
KApAiAN Moy, AAyeiA ton roy leccAi, en eAeei aiooni'co expiCA
AYTON. dWa
Kai avTO^ Xeyei irpo'i tov Oeov 'Eaghcon

A; iiroi/xev C. lo, ii AaveiS] dad AC. See above, 4. 10 6 9e6s]

AS; om. C. 11 iXhi] C; eXatet A; eXat'oj S Clem (edd.). See below.

ed among S. Clement's quotations example of humility. He is declared

from apocryphal books, on which to be theman after God's own heart.
Photius {Bibl. 126 pjjra Twa to? airo Yet he speaks of himself as over-
rfjs 6eias ypa(f)fjs ^eul^opra TraptKrayfi) whelmed with sin, as steeped in im-
remarks : see also !^ 8, 13, 23, ^o, 46 and prays
purity, that he may be
(notes). Hilgenfeld supposes that the cleansed by God's Spirit'.
words were taken from the Assump- 10. Trposoj/] Comp. Rom. X.21, Heb.
tion of Moses. This is not impossible ; i.
7, and see Winer xlix. p. 424.
but the independent reason which he Evpov K.T.X.] A combination of Ps.
gives for the belief that Clement Ixxxix. 21 ivpov AaueiS tov hovkov
was acquainted with that apocryphal fjLOV, iv eXat'o) ayia p.ov i'xpicra avTov,
work is unsatisfactory; see the note with I Sam. 14 avdpanrou kuto.
xiii.

on the phoenix below, ,25. I have Tf]v Kapdiav avTov, or rather

with Acts
pointed out elsewhere ( 23) another xiii. 22 evpop Aave\8 tov tov 'leacrai,

apocryphal work, from which they livSpa KaTci ttjv Kapbiav jj-ov (itself
a
might well have been taken. The loose quotation from i Sam. xiii. 14).
metaphor is common with the Stoics : In the first passage e'Aat'w the reading
see Seneca Troad. 392 sq Ut cali- of SA is doubtless correct, the cor-
'

dis fumus ab ignibus Vanescit...Sic responding Hebrewbeing}?3t^; though

hie quo regimur spiritus effluit', M. is read by B.
e'Xe'et But Clement ap-
Anton. X. 31 kouvov kol to ^.-qbiv,
xii. pears to have read eXeet as our Greek
33 vKpa Kai Kanvos; so also Empedo- MSS testify. Similarly in 56, when
Op. Mor. 5, he reads
cles (in Plut. p. 360 c, quoted quoting Ps. cxli. eXotocr

by Gataker on 31) had said, <i>Kv-

x. (i.e. eXeos) dfMapToaXcov for eXaiov ap.ap-
ixopoi KciTTvoio blKrjv apdevres aTvenrav. TuAuv. On the interchange of ai

K\)6pai\ Another form of x.'^rpa's, and e in this word see above, I. p. 121.
just as KL6a>v and ;^itcoi'
are inter- On the other hand Clem. Alex.
changed. The proper Ionic genitive Strom, iv. 17 (p. 611), quoting this

would be Kvdprjs, which is used by passage of his namesake, restores

Herodes in Stob. Floril. Ixxviii. 6 the correct word iXala (if his editors

(quoted in Hase and Dindorf s Steph. can be trusted), as he would do

Thes.). Clem. Alex. Pat'd. ii. i
(p. 165) naturally, if accustomed to this read-
has KvdpLSioLs ;
and for instances of ing in the Psalms.
Kvdplvos (for x'^'^'P'-^o^) see Lobeck 12. 'EXe'jjo-oi'/c.T.X.]
The 5 1st Psalm
Pathol, p. 209. In the text of Clem. quoted from the LXX almost word for
Alex, here ;^i;Tpa? is read. word. The variations are very slight
XVIIL 'Again take David as an and unimportant.
CLEM. II. 5
66 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xviii

Me, 6 Oedc, kata to iwepA eAedc coy, kai kata to nAflOoc

TcoN oiKTipMooN coy elAAeiS'ON TO ano'mhma moy- eni nAeiON

nAYNON Me And thc anomiac moy, kai And thc amaptiac moy
KABApicdN Me' OTI THN ANOMIAN MOY CffJ^ r'NOOCKOd, KA H I

AMApTIA MOY CNcbnidN Mof eCTIN AlA nANTdc. COI MdNOO HMAp- 5

TON, KAi TO noNHpdN eNobniON COY enoiHCA' onooc an AIKAIO)-

0HC eN TOic Adfoic COY, kai nikhchc eN tco KpiNec6Ai ce.

lAOY r^p eN ANOMIAIC CYNeAHM(j)0HN, KAI CN AMApTIAlC IkIC-

CHCeN Me H MHTHp MOY- lAOY f^P AAhlGeiAN HfAnHCAC" TA
AAhAa kai TA KpYCl)IA THC CO(})IAC COY fe'Al-iAOiCAC MOI. pAN- 10

I ^Xeos] eXatoa A. 2 olktip/jlujp} oLKTeipjioiv A. iwl TrXeiov k.t. X.] C

omits the rest of the quotation from this point to e^ovOefuiaei (inclusive) at the end

2. em nXe'iov k.t.X.] i.e. 'wash me prosy or some other taint was purged
again and again'. The Hebrew is according to the law; see Lev. xiv.
'mukiply (and) wash me'. 4 sq, Num. xix. 6, 18, and Perowne
6. oTrwy K.T.A.] This verse is quoted On //le Psa/tns, ad \oc.
also Rom. iii. 4. The middle /cpiWo-- 12. aKourtets] For the word qkovt-i-

6ai, Ho have a cmise adjudged, to (eip see Sturz de Dial. Afac. p. 144.
plead^ is said of one of the parties to It was perhaps invented to translate
a suit. The 'pleading' of God is a the Hiphil oi'^t^i^.
common image in the Old Testament; 16.
eu^es] A common form of the
e.g. Is. i. In this passage
18, V. 3. neuter in the LXX, e.g. Judges xvii. 6,
however the natural rendering of the xxi. 25, 2 Sam. xix. 6, 18, etc. The
Hebrew would be Kpiveiv, not Kpivecr- masculine ev6r]i also occurs, e.g. Ps.
6aL. xcii. 14.

7. The future wKj^Vets is im-

viKrjo-rfs] 19. ryeiioviKO)] The word occurs
probable (see Winer xli. p. 304), frequently in the Greek philosophers,
especially with a preceding 8iKaio)6fjs ;
The Stoics more especially affected
A
and the MS is of no authority where the term, to ijyefioviKov, or ^yefioviKov
it a question between h and ei.
is without the article, using it to signify
The LXX text (SB) has viKijajjs. the principle of life, the centre of
eKicra-Tja-fv]' conceived', not found being, the seat of the personahty,
8.

elsewhere in the LXX. The sense the element which determines the
and construction which the word has character, etc. (see Menage on Diog.
here seem to be unique. Elsewhere Laert. vii. 86 159; Schweighauser
it denotes the fastidious on Epictet. Diss. with the
appetite of i. 20. 11
women at such a time and takes a index; Mayor on Nat. Dear.
Cic. de
genitive of the object desired ; comp. ii. 11 29). Considering the world
Arist. Pax 497. to be an animated being, they dis-
9. ra abrjKa K.r.X.] The LXX trans- cussed what and where was its
lators have missed the sense of the ^yey^oviKov. The Stoic definition of
original here. rjyeyioviKov in the human being, as
II.
va-a-ioTTof]
As one defiled by le- given by Chrysippus, appears in
 XVIIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 67
Tieic Me yccobnco, kai KAeApicOncoMAr nAyNeic
Me, kai ynep

XiONA AeyKAN9h'coMAi AKoyrieic Me apaAAiacin kai eycjjpocy-

NHN' AfAAAlACONTAI OCTA TCT AH e N OOMeN A. AnOCTpe^ON TO I

npdcconoN coy aho toon amaptkon Moy, kai hacac tac ano-
[5 MIAC MOy elAAeiyON. KApAlAN KAGApAN KTl'cON 6N eMOl, O

0e6c, KAI HNieyMA eyBec e'rKAiNicoN en to?c erKATOic Moy.

MH Anopi'yHC Me aho toy npocobnoy coy, kai to hncyma to
AflON coy MH ANTANeAHC a'h' GMOy. AnoAOC MO! THN AfAA-
AlACIN TOY COOTHpiOy COy, kai HNeyMATI HreMONIKOJ CTH-
of the chapter; see l.
p. 128. -rrXeTov] vXiov A. 7 piKrjarjs'] viKrjcreuT
A. 10 crov] A (with Lxx) ;
om. S (with Hebr.). 11 irXweis]
irXwieia A. 16 e7/cdrot?] evKaTOicr A,

Diog. Laert. I.e. to KvpidraTov ttjs 'spontaneous', and so 'liberal in

'^vx^js iv at tpavracTLni kul al opfial
CO
giving'. Hence itgets a secondary
yivovTai Koi odev 6 \6yos dvaireixireTai. meaning 'a prince' or 'a noble',
M. Antoninus divides the human 'generosity' or 'liberality' being con-
being (ii. 2) into three parts, aapKia, nected with persons of this high rank.
TTvevfiaTLov, riyefjiOVLKov, which corre- In this meaning, which is extremely
sponds to his triple division else- common, the LXX translators seem
where (iii. 16) (Tuma, -^vxT], vovs comp. ;
to have taken it here; and the ideas
tk V. 1 1. In Epictetus the use of the which heathen philosophy associated
word very frequent. A full defini-
is with the word r^yepoviKos suggested it
tion of it is given in Sext. Enipir. ix. as an equivalent. Thus nvevpa jjye-
102 (p. 414 Bekker) Traaai al eVl rot pioviKov would mean
'
a spirit which
(J'^prj Tov bXov e^aTToa-TeWofxevni ^vva- isa principle or source of Hfe.' The
peis cos ano Tivoi Tr/jy^y tov
Tjyep,ovi-
Hebrew phrase itself however seems
Kov i^airoaTtWovTai, with the context. to signify nothing more than 'an
It is identified by various writers open, hearty, free spirit.'
with the \6yos or with the soils' or But, inasmuch as the Holy Spirit
with the irvevpa or with the ^vxrj, is the fountain-head of all spiritual
according to their various philoso- life, the expressions nvevpa rjyepoviKov,
phical systems. In Latin it becomes 'spiritusprincipalis', came soon to
principatits in Cicero {de Nat. Deor. be used by Christian writers of the
I.e. 'prmcipatum id dico
quod Graeci Holy Spirit and the passage in the
;

j/yf/LtowKov vocant'j ?Lnd principale in Psalms was so explained, as e.g. by

Seneca {Ep. 92 i, 113 23, and Origen Co)mn. ad Rom. 1. vii. i {Op.
elsewhere).So Tertullian de Resurr. IV. p. 593 De la Rue)
'principalem
Ccirn. 1
5 'principalitas sensuum quod spiritum propterea arbitror nomi-
r\yip,oviKov appellatur,' de Attini. 15 natum, ut ostenderetur esse quidem
'summus in anima gradus vitalis multos spiritus, sedinhis principatum
quod riyep-oviKov appellant, id est et dominationem hunc Spiritum sanc-
principale.' tum, qui et principalis appellatur,
The Hebrew word ^''"IJ, here trans- tenere'. This connexion indeed
lated rjyepoviKov, signifies 'prompt', might appear to them to be suggested

52
68 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xviii

picoN Me. AiAaIoo ANOMoyc TAC oAoYc coy, ka'i AceBeic

enicTpevf'oyciN eni ce. pycAi mg il aimatoon, 6 Geo'c, o Oedc

THC COOTHplAC MOy. AfAAAlACeTAI H fAOOCCA MOy THN AlKAIO-
cyNHN coy. Kypie, to ctoma Moy ANoiIeic, kai ta xeiAH
Moy ANArreAei thn AiNeciN coy on ei hiOeAHCAC 6yciAN, 5

eAcoKA AN' oAoKAyTooMATA oyK eyAOKHceic. 6yciA Toj Oeo)

HNeyMA CyNTerpiMMeNOM KApAlAN CyNTerpiMMeNHN KAI Te-

TAneiNooMeNHN d Oedc oyK eloyOeNoocei.

XIX. Tcov TOcrovTwv ovv Kal toiovtcov ovtco^ fjie-

fjiapTvprifievoiv
to TUTreivocbpovovv Kal to viroZee'i oia 10

T^9 VTraKori'i ov fjiovov tijua^ ctWa kui toc? Trpo ijiucov

4 sq TO (jT6ixa...TCi xe'^'?] A; the words are transposed in S with the Lxx and
Hebrew. 9 Toaodrwv, rotoiyrw!'] A; transposed in CS. oCrws] A;
om. C; Kal ovTws S. 10 TaTrLvo4>povovv'\ Taweivocppovov A; Taireivlicppov C.
II dXXot] CS; aWaa- A. ras npo tj/jluv Ycj/eas] AS; toi>s irpb tj/jlcSv (omitting

7ei'eds) C. 12 re] AC; om. S. 13 avrov] AC; rod 6eov S.

by the words of the Psalm itself, and (TTrjpicrov here.

since to to ayiov crov occurs
-rvvevfia 2. The plural denotes es-
aipiaT(Dv]
in the preceding verse. So in the pecially 'bloodsked\ as in Plat. Legg.
Fragm. Mtirato?'. p. 18 (Tregelles), ix. p. 872 E, and the instances col-
where speaking of the four Gospels lected in Blomfield's Gloss, to ^Esch.
this very early writer says that they Choeph. 60 : see also Test, xii Pair.
are in perfect accord with one another Sym. 4 f's cup-aTa napo^vvn, Anon,
'cum uno ac principal! Spiritu de- in Hippol. Hacr. v. 16 alp-acri ya'^P^^ ^
clarata sint inomnibus omnia'; on rovSe Tov KO(Tp,ov SeoTTorjys', Tatian. ad
which passage see Hesse Das Mura- Graec. 8. The same is the force also
torische Fragment p. 109 sq. Thus of the Hebrew plural CfDl, of which
irvevpLa ^yefioviKov furnishes an ad- alp-ara here and elsewhere is a ren-
ditional instance of the alliance of dering: comp. Exod. xxii. i, where,
the phraseology of Greek philosophy as here, 'bloodshed' is equivalent to
with scriptural ideas, which is a 'blood-guiltiness'.
common phenomenon in early Chris- XIX. 'These bright examples of
tian literature. humility we have before our eyes.
a-n^pia-ov] So SB read in the LXX, But let us look to the fountain-head
but A and others a-Trjpi^ov. On of all truth let us contemplate the
;

these double forms see Buttmann mind of the universal Father and
Ans/. Gr. Spr. 92 (l. p. 372) and
; Creator, as manifested in His works,
on the use of a-Tijpiaov, etc., in the and see how patience and order and
New Testament, Winer xv. p. loi. beneficence prevail throughout crea-
The scribe of A in Clement is in- tion'.

consistent; for he has ea-vTjpi^fv ^ S, 9. Toil' ToaovTcov K.r.X.] An imita-

3, but iaTrjpKxev tion of Heb.
1 xii. i.
aT-qpl^aypLev 33,
 xix] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 69

yevea^ ^eAr/ofS eTroiricrev, tovs re KaTahe^afjcevov^ to.

Xoyia avTOv ev
<po(iia
Kal dXtjOeia. noWwu ovv Kal

fjLeydXwv Kai evho^iov iueTei\ti<pOTe^ irpd^ecov^ eiravaZpa.-

15 fAWjuev eirl tov e^ otjO;^>7? Trapa^e^ojuevou rjfjuv tZ/s eipt]i^r]<s

aKOTTOV, Kai drevLa-wfjiev eis tov Trarepa kui kticttt^v tov

cnjfji7ravT0<i Koa'/aoVj Kai Tah jueyaXoTrpeweo'i Kal virep-
jSaWovG'aL^ avTOu ^a}p6aT<s Trjs elpt]vr]<i evepyecriai^ Te
Ko\Xf]6wjJiev' 'Ihcojaeu avTov KaTa didi/oiai/ Kai ejulSXeyfyU)-

20 JUL6V
ToT^ ojujuao'iv Tt]<s ^v')(f]<i eU to fJiaKpodvjjLOv avTOv
(SovXrjjua' vot](T(jojjiev ttco^ dop<y}]TO^ vTrap^ei Trpo^ Trdcrav
Trjv KTioriv avTOV.
I4 jrpdifw)'] C ; TTpa^aiuu A; add. tovtup, ddeX^ol dyatrTjToi S. 17 K6fffiov']

AC; hicjus vnmdi S; see above, 5, and below, ii.

19. 19 koWt]-
6u/j.v] AC ;
coiisideremus (vorjaui/xep) et adhacrcamiis S, but this is probably one
of the periphrases which abound in S (see i.
p. 136).

10. roTreii'o^poj'oi}!'] See the note on connexion with 8(0fxai indigeo^ like

TaTretro^poi/oji/ above, 17 ;
and comp. aTToSeT/s, eVSeTfy, KaraSej^y, rather than
38 below. with Seos tiinor, like aSejfy, irepiberjs.
Davies proposes
''

TO vTroSees] sitbmissive7iess\ ''siib- 12. KaTabe^afiivovs]

ordinaiion\ This seems to be the The emendation would
KaTaSe^oixevovs.
meaning of the word, which is very have been more probable if the pre-
rare in the positive, though common position had been different, SiaSe^o-
in the comparative vTroSfea-repos see ; fifvovs and not KOTade^ofxevovs.
Epiphan. Haer. Ixxvii. 14 to vrroSees 14. fxfTeiXrjcfioTes^ ''participated in\
Kai ijXaTTcofj.evoi', a passage pointed i.e.
by as examples.
profited The
out to me by Bensly. Accordingly achievements of the saints of old are
in the Syriac it is rendered di7niniitio the heritage of the later Church.
et demissio. Laurent says 'Colo- 15. elprjvrjs ctkottov] ''the /nark, the
mesius male substantivo subjectio goal, ofpeace'. God Himself
is the

vertit; coUaudatur enim h. 1. volun- great exemplar of peaceful working,

taria sanctorum hominum egestas', and so the final goal of all imitation.
comparing Luke x. 4, and Harnack
''

21. aopyrjTOi] cahii^ ; Ign. Philad.

accepts this rendering 'egestas'. But I, Polyc. Phil. 12 (note). Aristotle

this sense is not well suited to the attaches a bad sense to the word, as
context, besides being unsupported ; implying a want of sensibility, Eth.
nor indeed is it easy to see how Nic. ii. 7. Others however distin-
wroSe?;'? could have this meaning, guished dopyr)(xia from avaiadrjaia (see
which belongs rather to evdeijs. It Aul. Gell. i. 27) and with the Stoics
;

might possibly mean 'fearfulness', a it was naturally a favourite word, e.g.

sense assigned to it by Photius, Epict. Diss. iii. 20. 9 to uv^ktikov, to
Suidas, and Hesychius, who explain dopytjTov, TO npaov, iii. 18. 6 evaruduis,
it
vTr6({)oj3os. But usage suggests its aldrjuovMs, ciopy^Tois, M. Anton. 1. i
70 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XX

XX. 01 ovpavoL Trj ^LOiKricrei avrov (raXevofxevoL

ev eipt]pr]
vTroTacrcovTai avrio' tjjULepa te Kai vv}^ tov

rerajfjievov vir avrov dpo/mov ^lavvovcTLV, fj.t]bev dWrjXoi^

ijULTTodi^oi/ra. f/A.iOs re kul a-e\r]vr] dcrrepcDU re X^P^^

Kara tyiv diaTayriu avTOv ev Ojuovoia 3f% Tracrr]^ 5

avTol<i
TrapeKJSdcrew^ e^eX'icrcrovcriv tov? eTTLTeraj jjievov^
dpia-fjiov?. yrj Kvo(popov(ra Kara to deXyiiua
avTOv toT^
I dioLK-fja-ei] AC; S apparently.
StKaiuxret 4 re Kai] AS; Kal (om. re) C
dcTTepwv T xopot] AC
but S translates as if darep^s re Kal x^poi-
;
6 Trctpe/c-

A; C. In S it is rendered in omni egressu cursus

/3d(rews] .apeKJBacTewa Trapaj3daeu}s

TO KaXorjdes kol aopyqrov. The word of avToi). But such passages in the
does not occur in the LXX or New New Testament as Matt. xxiv. 29,
Testament. Heb. xii. 26, 27, are not sufficient to
XX. 'All creation moves on in justify the alteration ; for some ex-
peace and harmony. Night and day pression of vwtioii is wanted. Not
'
succeed each other. The heavenly '
fixity, rest,' but
'

regulated change
bodies roll in their proper orbits. is the idea of this and the following

The earth brings forth in due sea- sentences. For this reason I have
son. The ocean keeps within its retained aaXevopievoi. In the passage
appointed bounds. The seasons, the of Chrysostom quoted by Young in
winds, the fountains, accomplish their defence of his reading, z'/z Psabn.
work peacefully and minister to our cxlviii. 2 (v. p. 491) ovhlv crvvcx^Qr]
wants. Even the dumb animals ob- Tcov ovrav' ov daKarra rrjv yfjv eiriKXv-
serve the same law. Thus God has af!/, ovx^ rjXios rode to opafxevov KaT-
by this universal reign of order mani- KavcTfv, ovK ovpavos irapecrakevdrj K.r.X.,
fested His beneficence to all, but would seem purposely to
this father

especially to us who have sought have chosen the compound Trapaua-

His mercy through Christ Jesus'. Xeveadai to denote disorderly motion.
I.
(Tokevoixevoi] If the reading be The same idea as here is expressed in
correct, this word must refer to the Theoph. adAutol. i. 6 aaTpcov xopeiav
motion of the heavenly bodies, ap- yivopivrjv iv r<a kvkXw tov ovpavoii ois r]
parently uneven but yet recurrent TToXvTToiKiXos ao<pia Toil Qeoi) naaw iSia
and orderly and this reference seems
; ovopara KeKXr^Kev, comp. ib. ii. 15.

to be justified by e^eXia-aova-iv below. 5. iv opovoia] Naturally a frequent

'EaXeveadni is indeed frequently used phrase in Clement; 9, 11, 34, 49,
in the Old Testament to express 50, comp. 21, 30, 60, 61, 63, where
terror and confusion, in speaking of likewise the word opovoia occurs.
the earth, the hills, etc. but never of ;
6. napeK^da-eois] The Other reading
the heavens. So too in the Sibylline TrapajSaaecos destroys the sense. For
Oracles, iii. 675, 714, 751. On the the whole passage comp. Apost.
other hand Young would read /x?)
Const, vii. 34 <p(x)a-Trjps...dTrapdl3aTOV
(TaXevoiJLevoi ;
and Davies, improving (jd^ovTiS TOV ho\i)(ov Ka\ KaT ov8ev

upon this correction, suggests ov rrapaXXaaa-ovTes ttjs o'tjs ivpocrTayrjs. In

(TaXevojjid'oi, repeating the last letters the immediate neighbourhood is the
 xx] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 71

l^ioi^ KaipoX'i TYiv TravwXtjdri avSpcoTTOi^ te kuI Orjpa-h kul

Trdoriv toT^ ovcriv ett avTrjv ^woi^ dvaTeWei Tpo(pr]v, fir]

10
^L')(^ocrTaTOVG'a jurjhe dWoLOvcrd tl tcov hehoyiiaricrfjie-
v(jdv VTT avTOv. dfSvcTCTwv T6 dve^L^VLa(TTa Kal vepri-

pcov duEKhitjyrjTa Kpi/maTa to?? avToh a'vve-)(eTaL irpoo'-

TayjuacTLv. to kvto^ Ttj-s dTveipov 6a\dcr(rt]^ kutu Tr]v

ipsorum, which probably represents TrapeK^dcrews, and where probably the reading
was 8ia for Six"- 8 TravTrXrjdT]] A ; TrapLTrXrjOyj C. 9 eTr' avTrjv']
A; ctt' auriis C; in ilia S.

same quotation from Job xxxviii. 1 1 as We may either adopt this, or (as I

here in Clement. would suggest in preference) strike

eleXtWouo-ti/] Comp. Plut. Mor. out the word altogether. In either
p. 36S A TocravTaii ijixepais tov avrrjs case we may fall back upon the con-
kvkXov (^e\L(T(Tei{of the moon), Heliod. jecture of Lipsius (p. 155, note) that
^th. V. 1404 5e Kepi TOV vofxia kvkKov^ Kp'ip.aTa was written down by some
ayepaxovi e^eXiTTovres (both passages thoughtless scribe from Rom. xi. 33
given in Hase and Dindorf s Steph. ave^epevvrjra r KpipaTa avToii Kai dv-
Thes.). Thus the word continues the e^i)^VLa(TToi al oSot avTov (he gives the
metaphor of xP'h describing the reference ix. 33, which is repeated

tangled mazes of the dance, as e.g. by Jacobson, and still further corrupt-
Eur. Troad. 3. The opiup,o\ therefore ed ix. 23 by Hilgenfeld). Indeed the
are their defined orbits. same word seems still to be running
9. eV avTr]v\ For the accusative in the head of the scribe of A when be-
so used see Winer xlix. p. 426. low he writes Kpvpara for Kvp.aTa. The
ai/are'XXet] Here transitive, as e.g. veprepa are the 'subterranean regions
'

Gen. iii.
18, Is. xlv. 8, Matt. v. 45 ; regarded physically. Yet KpipuTa is
comp. Epiphanes in Clem. Alex. the reading of all our authorities. It
Strom, iii. 2, p. 512, ffKio^ Koivas must have been read moreover by
rpocjias ^ciois ciiraaiv dvareXXd (mSS the writer of the later books of the
dvareXXfiv), which closely resembles Apostolic Constitutions, vii. 35 dv^^-
our Clement's language here. i\v'iauT(.)^ Kp'ip.a(Tiv. My attention has
10. Twv 8f8oyp,aTi(Tp,(va)v k. r.
A.] been called also to the connexion of
Comp. 27 ovdiv p.r)wapeXdj] tQ)v Se- words in Ps. xxxvi (xxxv). 5 to. Kpip-md
SoypaTi(Tp.eva)v vrr avTov. aov [ojcrei] dlSvcrcros TroXXij.
'
12. KpifiaTo] ''Statutes, ordinances,^ 1
3. TO KiJro?] t/ie JioUow, the basin,'

i.e. laws by which they are

the as Ps. Ixiv. 7 o (TvvTapdcrcruiv to kvtos
governed, as e.g. 2 Chron. xxx. 16 Tfjs daXdcrcrrjs. In Dan. iv. 8 to kvtos
eaTTjaav enl rrjv crraaiv avrcov Kara is opposed to to v-\j/^os. Comp. also
TO Kpipa avTMv ('
as they were ap- Theoph. ad Auto/, i. 7 o awTapdaaav
pointed Chron. iv. 7 ras Xv^^ias
'),
2 TO K.VT0S Trjs 6aXd(ra-r]i, and Apost.
Kara to /cpifia avT^v (comp. ver. 20). Const, viii. 12 o avaTrjadfjievos a-
But KpipaTa is very awkward, and fivcrcrov Ka\ /xe'ya kvtos o-VTrj ttc-

several emendations have been sug- pideis...7rr]yals aevaois p-eOvaas...

gested, of which KXlpuTu is the best. iviavTcav kvkXols . .
ve(jj(ov opjipoTOKiav
72 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xx

avTOv (Tva-raQev eic tac cYNAro^T'^c ov irap-

hrjjULiovpyiav

EK^cdveL ra TrepiredeiiuLeva avTrj KXeWpa, ciWd Kadu)^

o\JT(i)<i TTOLeX. elirev jdp' "Ewe wAe

liera^ev avr^,
1 brjiuovpyiav'] Brtmovpyeiav
K. 3 oyrws] A; ovtm C 4 Kifxara]

Kpvixara A. ffvvTpijSrjaeTai] A; ffwrpi^i^cTOVTai C. e, dvdp. dirip.] A; dwip.

StaSpo/xais- fls Kapiraiy yovas Kai though airepavTos is read here not only
^axov (Tvaraaiv, crTadpiov avijxmv inour MSS, but by Clem. Alex. p. 693
dianveovTcop k.t.X., in which passage and Dionys. Alex, in Euseb. H. E. vii.
the resemblances cannot be acci- 21, or their transcribers,
and may
dental. possibly be correct. Yet as I could
I. eh ray crvvaya>yas] From LXX not find any better instances of this
Gen. i.
9 kul avvi]x^^ v8cop to vtto- use than Eur. Med. 212, JEsch. Prom.
KOTU) roil ovpavov els ras avvayayas 1
59 (where Blomf. suggests airipaTos),
avTmv, wanting in the Hebrew. It and in both passages the meaning

refers to the great bodies of water, may be questioned, I have preferred

the Mediterranean, the Caspian, the reading anipuTos as quoted by Origen
Red Sea, etc. Select, in Ezech. viii. 3.

irapeK^aivet k. r. A.] From Job The proper meaning of aTrepavTos,

boundless,' appears from Clem. Horn.
'
xxxviii. 10, II edefirju Se avT opia
xvi. 17, xvii. 9, 10, where it is found in
KKeWpa kol nvXa^, eina Se avrfj
Trepi6e\s
Mexpi TovTov eXeva-jj Koi ovx VTrepjSricrr], close alliance with aireipos. See also
dXX' ev (Teavrr) avvTpij3T]a'eTai aov ra Clem. Alex. Fragm. p. 1020. On the
Kvfiara comp. also Ps. civ. 9, Jer. v. 22.
: other hand for dnepaTos comp. e.g.
4. (OKeavos K.T.X.] This passage is Macar. Mdign.Apocr. iv. 13 (p. I79)p6i
directly quoted by Clem. Alex. Strom. T(5 depei Koi rw )(eip,oi)Vi ttoXvs koi anepa-

V. 12 (p. 693), by Origen de Princ. Toi. The lines in A here are divided
ii. 6 (l. p. 82, 83), Select, in Ezcch. Anep^N|TOC ;
and this division would
viii. 3 by Jerome ad
(III. p. 422), assist the insertion of the n. An
Ephes. ii. 2 (vii. p. 571). It must earlier scribe would write <\nep&|TOC
also have suggested the words of for (^nepAlroc. See Didymus Expos.
Irenaeus Haer. ii. 28. 2 'Quid autem Psal. 138 (p. 1596 ed. Migne) el yap
possumus exponere de oceani accessu Kai aKeavus dnepavTos, aXX' ovv Kai ol
et recessu, quum constet esse certam p,eT^ avTov KocrpoL toIs
tov SecTTTorou
causam ?
quidve de his quae ultra bLaTayah huOvvovrni' TrdvTa yap Ta rrpos
eum sunt enuntiare, qualiasint?' On avTov yey evqp.va 07roi[o7roia?] ttot ecTTiv
the other hand the expression o noXi/s rayais Trjs eavTov irpovoias SioiKovfJieva
Koi arrepuvTos avdpoonois (OKeavos used WvveraL. This language may possibly
by Dionys. Alex, in Euseb. H. E. have been derived from Origen, and
vii. 21 may be
derived indirectly not directly from Clement. Anyhow
through Clement or Origen. On the recognition of both the various
Photius see below, p. 86. readings, Tayais, diuTayais, is worthy
'

5. impassable^ as the
dTreparos] of notice.
context shows, and as it is rendered avTov KoapoL k.t.X.] Clement
ol p.eT
in the translation of Origen de Princ. may possibly be referring to some
ii. 3
(' intransmeabilis '). The com- known but hardly accessible land,
mon form in this sense is aivepaTos ; lying without the pillars of Hercules
 xxj TO THE CORINTHIANS. 73

H2eiC, KAI TA Ky'mATA COy In COI CYNTpiBhlceTAI. C0K6aVO9

5 dv6pa)7roi9 drrepaTO'S Kai ol jueT avTou koo'/uloi Tah avra't's

TayoL'i Tou decTTTOTOV dievdwovTai. Kaipoi eapivoi Kal

avOp. C. airipaTo%\ Orig ;

intransmeabilis S ; dwipavros AC Clem, Dionys,
Didym. See the lower note. 6 rayaTs] AC; 5taTa7ars Origen. See below.

and in foreign seas as Ceylon (Plin. : amined in the ist volume of A. von
N. H. vi. 22 Taprobanen alterum
'
Humboldt's Exam. Crit.de la Gcogr.
orbem terrarum esse diu existima- die Nouveau Continent : see also other
tum estjAntichthonumappellatione'), works mentioned in Prescott's Ferdi-
or Britain (Joseph. B. J. ii. i6. 4 virkp
nand and Isabella ll. p. 102. This
(OK.favov erepav e^ijTrjaav ol<ovfJiivT]v Kai interpretation is quite consistent with
fi^xpi t5>v nvicrropi^Tcov rrporepov Bper- the fact that Clement below ( 33)
ravuiv hirjvfjKav to. onXa). But more speaks of the ocean as to nepiexov
probably he contemplated some un- rfji/ yfjv vdcop.
known land in the far west beyond Atall events this passage was

the ocean, like the fabled Atlantis of seemingly so taken by Ireneeus and
Plato or the real America of modern Clement of Alexandria, and it is dis-
discovery. From Aristotle onwards tinctly explained thus by Origen (Set.
(c/e Caelo ii. 14, p. 298, Meteor, ii.
5,
in Ezech. viii. 3 sq, de Priiic. ii. 6)
p. 362), and even earlier, theories had who discusses it at great length. All
from time to time been broached, these fathers acquiesce in the exist-
'
which contemplated the possibility ence of these other worlds.' At a
of reaching the Indies by crossing later date however this opinion came
the western ocean, or maintained the to be regarded with suspicion by
existence of islands or continents Christian theologians. TertuUian, de
towards the setting sun. The Cartha- Pall. 2, Hermog. 25, was the first

ginians had even brought back a to condemn it. The idea of the
report of such a desert island in the Antipodes is scouted by Lactantius
Atlantic, which they had visited, Div. Inst. iii. 24, with other fathers
[Aristot.] Mirab. Aitsc. 84 p. 836, of the fourth century and later (comp.
136 p. 844, Diod. V. 19, 20; see August, de Civ. Dei xvi. 9) and in the ;

Humboldt Exam. Crit. I.

p. 130. reign of Justinian(ir.A.D. 535) the spe-
In the generations before and after culations of Cosmas Indicopleustes
the time of Clement such specula- (Montlaucon Coll.Nov. Pair. II. p.
tions were not uncommon. Of these 113 sq), who describes the earth as
the prophecy in Seneca's Medea a plain surface and a parallelogram
in form (see Humboldt I.e. I. p. 41
'
ii- Venient annis saecula seris
375
Quibus oceanus vincula rerum Laxet sq), stereotyped for many centuries
et ingens pateat tellus etc.,' is the the belief of Christian writers on this
most famous, because so much stress subject. It was made a special charge
was laid on it
by Columbus and his against Virgilius, the Irish geome-
fellow discoverers : but the state- trician, bishop of Salzburg (f a.d.
ments in Strabo i. 4 (p. 65), Plut. 784); see Stokes Ireland and the
Mor. p. 941, are much more remark- Celtic CImrch p. 224 sq.
able. The
opinions of ancient writers 6. rayai^Y directions^ ?i.% Hermes
on this subject are collected and ex- in Stob. Eel. i. 52. 40 fTroTrrrjp roivvv
74 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xx

Bepivoi
Kal jueTOTTcopivoi kui y^eLfdepivol ev elptji/j^ juera-

Trapa^L^oaa-LV dWriXoi^. dvefjuiav (TTadfjLol Kara tov

idiov KaLpov Trjv XeiTOupyiau avTwv d.Trpoo'KOTrco'S eVtre-
\ov(rLv' devaoL re Trr^yal irpo^ diroXavcnv Kai vyeiav

dr] iuL0vpyr]6e'i(raL ^'ix*^ eWel^eto^ Trape^ovTaL tovs Trpo^ 5

tcorj^ dvdpcoTTOi^ ptatov^. ra Te eAa;^fO"Ta tmv ^cocdv

tocs

(TuveXevcreis avTivv ev ojuoi/oia. koi eipiqvf]

TroiovvTai.

Tavra TrdvTa 6 /ueya^ hr]fJLLOvp'yo<s

Kal decnroTrj^ tcov

diravTcov ev eiprjvt]
kul opiOvoLa irpocreTa^ev eivat, evepye-

I fj-eTOTUpivol] ixedoirwpivoi A. fierawapadLSoaacv] A, and so app. S fxera- ;

diSoaa-ip C. 2 dv^fxwv'] A; add. re CS. S translates ventique locorjim as if

it had read dvejxol re arad/j-Qv. 3 ttjj'] AS; Kal ttjv C. XeLTovpylav]
XeiTovpyetav A. 4 a.ivaoi\ A; aivvaoi C. dirokavcTLv] AC; add. re
S. vyeiav'] A; iyleiav C. 5 irphs t^rjs] A; 7rp6s fwTji' C. S translates

rayrjs earai tcov oXav o^vbtpK^s debs illustration of Clement's meaning is

'A8pd(TTeia, with Other passages quoted the noble passage in Lucretius v.

by Hase in Stcph. Thes. s. v. Origan 737 sq.

Sel. in Ezedi. 1. c, and apparently 3. aTrpoa-KOTTcos^ So again 61
SiXso dePrific. I.e. (for the Latin is c//j'- bieTreiv Tr]P vno
be^opivqv aurois
(tov

positionibiis), has Starayal?, which rjyepoviav aTrpocrKoTrcos. For the cor-

some editors adopt but he would ; responding adjective nnpuaKonos,
naturally substitute a common for which seems to have been a spe-
an unusual word, and his quotation cially Pauline word (Acts xxiv. 16,
throughoutis somewhat loose. as well as i Cor. x. 32, Phii. i.
10)
1.
/ieraTrapaSiSoacrii']
''

gwe ivay ill see Philippians I.e.

succession^; again a rare word, of 4. vydav\ A common foi'm in late

which a few instances are collected writers : see Lobeck Paral. p. 28
in Hase and Dindorf's Steph. Thes. (with the references), Phryn. p. 493,
2. avepicdv o-ra^jLioi] From Job Pathol, p. 234. It is so written in

xxviii. 25 iiTolrjijev Se dvepcov araOpiov several inscriptions, and so scanned

Ka\ v^arav pirpa, where it means in 07ph. Hy/nii. Ixxxiv. 8 (p. 350,
'

weight,' as the original shows. Herm.) iSKfiou eTnTrvelovcra Kal rjjrto-

Clement however may have mis- X^ipov vyelav (unnecessarily altered
understood the meaning for he ; by Porson, Eur. Orest. 229, into -qnio-
seems to use the word in a different Xfip' vyieLav), and elsewhere. Editors
' '

sense, the fixed order^ or the fixed therefore should not have substituted
stations^ as the context requires. vy'ieiav. Compare rapfia 50.
The common Greek expression in 5. Tovs npos (mrji p.a(ovi] The meta-
this sense is orao-ety, e.g. Polyb. i.
phor was perhaps suggested by Jer.
75> 8 Kara rtvos avepcoi' (rracrfis, ix. 5- xvni. 14 (lXX) ^17 KXL\lrov(Tiv dno
23 eVtx<^P'ot raj rav dvepMi' crracreis rrerpas paaToi, which however departs
KoWicTTa yivco(TKov(Ti : see Schweig- from the existing reading of the He-
hauser on Polyb. i.
48. 2. A good brew. For npos C<ofjs, on the side of '
 xxi] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 75

lo Twi/ Ta TravTa, vTrepeKTrepKTcrco^ he r]iuLa<i tov^ TrpocTTre-

(pevyoTU's oiKTipjuoT^ avTOv hia tov Kvpiov f]fj.coi/

toI^
'

Irjaou XpicTTOu, do rj hopa Kai t] fxeyaXcocrvvt] ek tov9

aiujva^ Twu amoviiov. djj.r]v.

XXL 'Opare^ dya7rr]T0L, /ur] al evepyea-iai avrov

15 ai TToWai yevwvTai els
Kpijua irdcTLv YijJiiv, edv /urj dp'uos
avTOv TroXiTevojuevoL Ta KuXa kul evapeaTa eviainov av-
Tov TTOLcojuev juied' OfJLOvoLas. Xeyei yap ttov rTNeyMA
ea quae ad viiam, omitting fia^o^is altogether. 7 crweXeiVets] AC ; anxilia (as
if (TiiXXTji/'ets) S. 10 7rpoo'7re0eii7(3Tas] AS ; 7r/)ocr(/)e!;70j'ras C. II oiKTip-
fj.ois] OLKTi.pij.oL<r A. 12 Kal Tj fj-eyaXoiavvri] AC ;
om. S. 15 eh Kpijua
waffiv f]/J.?v] A; els Kpl/xara avv ijixiv C (eiCKpiMATACyN for eiCKpiMAnACm) ;

in judicium tiobis S; see I.

p. 143. 16 aiiTov pri.] AC; om. S.

'
life,^ conducive to life^ comp. Acts our curse unless we seek peace and
xxvii. 34 ""pos T/^s vfifTepas (rcoTrjpiaSj strive to please Him. He sees ail
Clem. Mom. viii. 14 jrpos- Kocrfiov koX our most secret thoughts. Let us
Tep-<\rea>s, and see Winer xlvii. p. 391. therefore offend foolish and arrogant
This sense of npos is more common men rather than God. Let us honour
in classical Greek. Christ let us respect our rulers, and
;

7. (Tvve'Kevcrei':] Comp. Jer. viii. 7 revere old age let us instruct our
;

'The stork in the heaven knoweth wives in purity and gentleness, and
hisappointed times and the turtle ;
our children in humility and the fear
and the crane and the swallow ob- of God. His breath is in us, and His
serve the time of their coming ',
etc. pleasure can withdraw it in a mo-
Or it
may refer to their pairing at ment'.
the proper season of the year. Comp. The ex-
15- a^ioos TToktrevofxevoi]
Ptolem. Geogr. i.
9 (quoted in Steph. pression occurs in Phil. i. 27. Cle-
Thcs.). ment's language here is echoed by
8.
Sj^/itovpyo?] Only once in the Polycarp P/iit. 5.
New Testament, Heb. xi. 10: in the 16. evapeara evcoTnov\ Heb. xiii. 21 ;

Lxx again only in 2 Mace. iv. i

(and comp. Ps. cxiv. 9.
there not of the Creator). On the 17. Xeyet -yap K.r.X.] Clem. Alex.
Christian use of this Platonic phrase Strom, iv.17 (p. 611 sq) cites the re-
see Jahn's Methodius 11.
pp. 1
1, 39, 91. mainder of this section and the whole
10.
7rpoo-(/)ei;yeir] Altogether a late of the next, continuously after g 17, 18
and somewhat rare word see i Sam. :
(seethenote 17). For the most parthe
xxix. 3 (Sym.). It does not occur in
quotes in the same loose way, abridg-
the LXX or New Testament.
ing and interpolating as before but ;

p.ey.] So again here and there, as in the long passage

12. 8('j^a Kut
T] 64. 7; ^5

In the doxology Jude 25 also the two Tas ywa'iKas ovttjv, he

ij/mcov ...dveXei
words occur together; comp. Ecclus. keeps words of his
fairly close to the
xliv. 2.
original and may be used as an au-
XXI. '
His blessings will turn to thority for the readings.
7^ THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxi

'

Kypioy Ayxnoc epeyNooN li tamigTa thc rAcrpoc. Idiofiev

TTw? iyyv^ ea-Tiu, Kai on ov^ev XeXrjBeu axWov tcov

evvoLcdv ov^e t(jov dLaXoyiarjULwi' cuv TroLOVfxeva. ol-
rifjicdv

KULOv ovu ecTiv fjir]

XnTOTaKTeiv tjjULd<s
diro tov veXr]-

juaTO^ avTOV' judWov Kai dvorirois 5

dvOpcoTroL^ dcppoo'i
Kal 7raipoiu6VOi^ Kai eyKav^oo^ei/oi^ ev dXa^oveia tov
\6yov avToov TrpocTKO^cojULev rj tvo Qew. tov Kvpiov
'If^aovv \XpL(TT6v\, ov TO aljuu vTrep rjfjcov c^oOr], evTpa-
I Xi^x^'os] C Clem 6ii; 'Xvxvov A. Taiueta] AC; ra/iela Clem. 2 ia-riv]

AC; a.dd. nodis S. oti] AC; om. (?) S. 4 Xt7rora/cxe?i'] A; XeLiroraK-

retv C. 5 jxaXKov] AC; add. 5^ S. 6 eyKavx^tJ-^vois} ejKavxo}-

fievoi A. aXa^oveia] aXa^ovM A. 8 Xpiarov] A; om. CS. 10 ri/xwv]

A; om. CS. viovs] vaiova A. 11 Traideiav] TraiBiav A. tov (po^ov]

Uvevfia Kvpiov k.t.X.] From Prov. 2. e'yyws icTTiv] As below 27 ;

XX. 27, which runs in the LXX 4>cos comp. Ps. xxxiv. 18, cxix. 151, cxlv.
to.
Kvpiov TTVoTj ai'dpooTToyv o j epevi'a {fpavva) 18, Ign. Ephes. l^ KpvnTa rjp.a>v iy-
TUfiela {rafjufla) KoiXias. Aadds rj yiis avTco icrTiv (with the note), Herm.
Xvxvos after dvdpcinoov, but this must Vis. ii.
3. There is no allusion here
originally have been a gloss suggest- to the nearness of the advent, as in

ing an alternative reading for (pas, as Phil. iv. 5 (see the note there).

\vxvos is actually read by Aq. Sym. This passage

ovhiv XiXrjBev K.r.X.]
Theod. ;
see a similar instance of cor- is copied by Polycarp Phil. 4 koI
rection in this MS noted above on 17. XeXrjdev avTov ovbev oi/Te Xoyicrpav
Comp. also Prov. vi. 23 Xv^i^os evroXri ovT evpoLwv. On 8iaXoyi(Tp.oi, ''iyiivard
vo/jLov Koi (j)(os. from which passage qtiestionijigs^ see the note on Phil,

perhaps Xvxpos came to be interpo- ii. 14.

lated here. Hilgenfeld prints Xeyet yap 4. XvK0TaKTiiv\ So avTop.6Xklv be-
nov TTPfvfia Kvpiov Avxvos epevvSv k.t.X. low, Ignatius has the same
28.
and finds fault with Clem. Alex, for metaphor but uses the Latin word,
making the words nvevpa Kvpiov part Polyc. 6 p.r]Ti<i vpcov deaepTcop ivpidr] :

of the quotation (Xeyei yap irov rj ypafjii] see the note there.
nvevp-a Kvpiov k.t.X.) ;
but they seem to On the authority of our older MS I

be wanted to complete the sentence. have preferred the form XmoTUKTeiv.

Our Clement in fact quotes loosely, There is poetical authority for the
transposing words so as to give a simple vowel in XnroTa^iov; see
somewhat different sense. See below, Meineke FragDi. Com. il. p. 12 14,
Is. Ix. 17 quoted in 42. For the exact III. p. 71, with the notes. So too in
words Xeyet yap wov see 1
5, 26, and analogous words, wherever they occur
for other instances of in verse, the form in t is found e.g.
Xeyei (or 4>r](Ti) :

with no nominative expressed, 8, Xnrovavs, XmopavTrji, Xi-

.
Xmavyri's,
10, 16, 29, 30, 46. On the spelling of TTomvoos, XiTToaapKJjs, Xmo^vxelv. The
Tajxula (ra/Lieia) Clement (or his tran- grammarians differed on this point ;

scriber) is capricious : see 50 (note). see Choeroboscus in Cramer's y^;/i?67/.

 XX l] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 11

TTcojULev Tov^ '7rpor]yovfJievov'i rificov aldea-dcojaev, rovs

10 roi)? veov^ Traideuorcojuev
TrpecT^vrepov^ tjjULcop TLfXf'ia'UiiJ.ev,

rr]v Traideiau rod <p6^ov rod Qeov, ras yvvaiKWi rjixwv

67rc TO d<ya66v diopdcoa-coiueda- to d^iayaTrriTOV Tt]^
dyve'ia^ rj6o<s evheipdadMcrav ^ to aKepaiov Tijs TrpauTtjTO^
avTcov (^ovXt]fjLa aTTodei^aTcoa-au,
to eTTieiKe^ Tt]^ yXwa--
15 crt]^ avTMV ^m t^7? aiyt]^ (pavepoi^ noirja'aTcoa'ai'' Tt]v

dydirriv avTwu, jurj kutu 7rpocrK\i(reL<s,

dWa iracnu toIs

AC; om. S. 13 dYcei'as] ayviacr A. Clem 612 has the order ^6os rr,s

ayveias. evSei^aadwcrav'] AC Clem. Bryennios wrongly gives the reading of A

Clem as iv^ei^aTwaav (ad loc. and comp. p. p^S'). 14 /3otiXr;^a] AC; NJ"'2V'l

(xat ^ov\y)ixa) S. 15 (ri7^s] CS Clem; (pwvria A. 16 Trpocr/cXtVetj]

AS ; Trpo(TK\7]<Tei% C. This same itacism occurs several times in C, 47, 50.

Graec. Bibl. Oxon. II. p. 239 Xeyei cers of the Church ;

see the note on
6 'Qpos oTi navTa trapa rn Xeinco oia Tois rjyovp.ivois I. The following
rfji ei 8i(f)6oyyov ypa(^erai, oiov XeiTTo- tovs npeafSvTfpovs must therefore refer

vecos, XetTTora^ta, XfinoTa^iov, Xeino- to age, not to office.

crrpaTeiov' 6 8e 'Qpiyivrjs 8ia rod i Xeyei

10. TOVS veovs K.T.X.] Copied by Po-

ypa4>ea-dai. There seems to be no lycarp Phil. 4 to. reKva 7rai8evfLu rrjv

poetical and therefore indisputable TraiSelav tov (pofiov rov Qeov. Comp.
authority for the ei. Prov. xvi. 4 (xv. 33) (f)6^os Kvpiov
5. a4)p. Kol Jer. X. 8
dvoi]T.] LXX naiBeia, and Ecclus. i. 27 where the
afia licppoves Koi dporjroi flat, found in
same words are repeated.
some copies, but not in the principal 15. (Tiyrjs] They must be eloquent
MSS. The former word points to by their silence, for ywai^l Koa-fxov 7)

defective reason, the latter to defec- aiyr) (pepei. This meaning is so obvi-
tive perception. Comp. 39. ously required, that I had restored
in my first edition on the au-
6. eyKavxoip.evois K.r.X.] See James a-iyfis
iv. 16 Kavxo.(Tde iv rais aXa^oveiais thority of the Alexandrian Clement
v/xav.
alone in place of the senseless (})o)vfjs
7. Tov Kvpiov K.T.X.] Clem. Alex, of A. It is now confirmed by our

(p. 61 1 sq), as commonly punctuated, two new authorities. Hilgenfeld re-

fers to Cor. xiv. 34 sq, i Tim. ii. 11.
quotes the passage t6v Kvpiov 'irja-ovv I

\eyu)...ov TO aifia vtrep r}p.(i)v riyiaadr^' T7]v dydnrju k.t.X.] So too Polyc.
evTpancofifv ovv rovs Trporjyovfiepovs rj- Pliil. 4 dyanfiXTas ncivTas $ laov ev
fiwv, Koi alBecrdaifjLev tovs TTpea^vTipovs
'

Traa-T] eyKpareia. The numerous close

Tip.^craipei' rovs veovs, Traidevcrcofiev ttjv coincidences with this chapter in

naibdav tov Qeov. A
different punctua- Polycarp show plainly that he had
tion, KoX aldeadSfxev' rovs Trpecr^vrepovs our epistle before him.
Tifxri(ra>p.ev' tovs veovsTratSevcrcofiev k.t.X., 16. Kara npnaKXiaeis] From I Tim.
would bring the quotation somewhat v. 21 p-rj^ev noiwv KaTO. npofTKXicnv.

nearer to the original. The word Trpoa-KXia-is occurs again

9. TOVS TTporjyovfifvovs^ i.e. the offi- 47, 50-
78 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxi

(pofiovfjievoL's
Tov Qeov oorioi^ 'la^v Trapex^Twcrav' tu
TEKva eV Xpiarru} Traidela^ fjieraXafji^aveTtocrav'
t]jjiu)v t;7?

juadeTCOcrav, ti raTreivocppoo-uur] vrapa Oew i(r^vei^ tl

dyciTrri dyur)vrapd tco Oeu) hvvaraiy ttco^ 6 (pof3o<i avToO

KaXo^ Kai fj.e<ya<i Kal aroo^wv TravTa^ tov ev avTco ocrico^ 5

aVaa'Tped)o//eVoL's ev Kadapa ^lavoia' epevvyjTrj^ yap icTTiv

evvoLuiv Kal evdv{jL>]ore(ov' ov y] ttvoy] avrov ev rifMv icTTLV,

Kal brav 6e\r] dveXel auTr]V.

XXII. TauTa de iravTa (^e^aiol t] ev XpicTTw ttlot-

TL^' Kal yap ocl/tos ^la tov TrvevjULaTO^ tov dyiov ovT(i)<i lo

TTpocrKaXeLTai i]iud<s' Aeyxe tekna, AKoycATe moy, (t)6BoN

Kypioy AiAaIco ywAC. tic Ictin ANGpoonoc zooh'n, d BeAooN

ATAno^N HMepAC iAe?N ataSac; nAycoN thn rAwccAN coy Ano

KAKoy, KAI xeiAH Toy MH AaAhcai AoAon" IkkAinon And

2 Tjfiwv] S Clem; v/j.Qi' AC. ixeraXafx^aviTwcrav] AC; fieToXa^eTueav

Clem. 3 I'crxtyet] icrxw- A. 4 t(^] A ;
om. C Clem. avrov'] ACS ;

TOV Kvpiov Clem. 5 Koi au'^uv] AC ;

et liberans et salvans S ; (tJi^wv (om. Kai)
Clem. oaiias] AC; deiws S. See above, 2, 14. 6 diapoiq.] AC;
Kap5ig. Clem. eaTiv} AC ;
om. Clem. 7 ivOvfi-qaeuv] C ; evdvixi-jaanov

A; ivOv/jLTj/jLaruv Clem. 8 dveXet] A; dvaipd CS. 9 5e] AC; om. S.

10 ovTuis] AC; but Bryennios reads ovtw without indicating that he is departing
from his MS. 12 tls iariv avOpuwos] C omits from here to ptjcrerai airbv 6

Kijpios, and begins again elra TroXXat at ixduTiyes rod a/xaprwAoO k.t.X. (1. 21).

I. oaicos] This word is best taken ful and God-loving, but threatening
with irapfx^'''^(^^v,
for it would be an utter destruction to the sinful and
unmeaning addition to rol? (po^ovfxe- disobedient'.
vois TOV Sew. 9. TaiiTa 8e navra k.t.X.] i.e. Faith
6. epevvrjTrjs k.t.X.]
As Heb. iv. 12 in Christ secures all these good re-

KpiTiKos iv6vyi,r}cre(ov
/cat ivvoiwv Kop- suits ;
for it is He Himself who thus
Stay. appeals to us, not indeed in the flesh,
7. oii...avTov] A Hebraism, for but through the Spirit, where David
which see Winer xxii. p. 161. says 'Come etc' For avTos irpoa-Ka-
8. ai/eXet] On
the rare future eXw Xetrai see above, 16 aiVoy^T^o-ii', with
of alpeo) see Winer xv. p. 94 with the note.
his references: comp. Exod. xv. g, 11. AeSreK.r.A.] FromLXXPs.xxxiv,
2 Thess. ii. 6. sq almost word for word.
1 1 The
XXn. 'AH these things are as- differences are unimportant,
sured by faith in Christ. He himself 18. to iJLvrip.6(Tvvov] See the note on

speaks to us by the lips of David, evKUToXeip.pa above 14.

promising all blessings to the peace- eKeKpa^ev] In the existing text of

 xxiii] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 79

15 KAKOy KAI nOIHCON ArAeON' ZHTHCON eipHNHN KAI AlOO^ON

AYTHN. d(t)0AAMOi Kypioy eni AiKAioyc, kai wta aytoy npoc
AeHCiN AYTa)N- npocoonoN Ae KypiOY eni noioyNTAc kaka
TOY ezoAeOpeycAi sk thc to mnhmocynon aytojn. eKeKpAleN
6 AiKAioc KAI Kypioc eiCHKOyceN aytoy kai eK nAcc2)N
zoTWN GAiVeooN AYTOY epycATO AYTON. noAAAi Ai BAiVeic Toy
AiKAioy KAi eK nAcouN pyceTAi ayton d Kypioc* eiTa'
rToAAAi aI MACTirec Toy AMApTooAoy, Toyc Ae eAni'zoNTAC
eni KypioN eAeoc KyKAoocei.
XXIII, 'O OLKTipfjiiov
Kara TravTa Kai evepyeTiKO'i

!5 7raTt]p e~x^eL (T7r\ay)(^va eV/ tous (po^ovfjievov^ avrou,

f]TTL(jd^ Te Kai Trpocnji^w^ Tas '^(^apLTa^ avTOu (XTro^ido'L toT^

irpocrep-^oiJ.evoi'i avTco aTrXrj ^lavoia. hio /ULt) ^lylyv^w-

ixeuy iu>]^6 iv^aWe(r6(a t] ^v^U tjnicov eni rah virepfiaX-

14 /cat] A Clem (with Lxx); om. S. X^'^^?] A; add. aov S Clem with the
LXX (v. 1.). 16 ocpdaXiioLl A
Clem (with A
of lxx and Hebr) ; on 6(p9a\/uiol
S (with BS of LXX), Trpos] A; els Clem with the lxx. 18 eKiKpa^ev k.t.X.]
See below. 20 dXltJ/ewv] dXixpaiwv A. aiirov] om. Clem. noWal at

6\l\l/is...6 Kiyptos] S; om. A; def. C. 21 eiral C ;

et iteruni S, frequently a
translation of /cat irdXiv, which possibly we should read here; but see below, 23,
fiera Tavra. 22 at] ACS; fikv yap C\&\n.. toO d,tiaprwXoO] AC ; tGjv

d/iapTuXQiv Clem lxx. rot/s de iXirl^ovTas] A Clem ; top Se iXwi^ovTa CS with the LXX
and Hebr. 23 Aeos] C Clem; eXaiocr A. 24 ocKTip/j.wi'] oiKreLp/j.ui' A.

Clem. Alex, this is read eKeKpa^ev Se o stituted for t6v iXirlCovra.

Kvpioi /cat etVr;(coi/o-e,
obviously a cor- XXIII. 'God is merciful to all

ruption. that fear Him.

Let us not spurn
20. TToXXai at dXiylreis
k.t.X.] This is His gracious gifts. Far be from us
from Ps, xxxiv (xxxiii). 20, the verse the threats which the Scriptures hurl
but one following the preceding quo- against the double-minded, the im-
tation. The LXX however has the patient, the sceptical. The Lord will
plural rav 8iKaia>v, avrovs, and SO it is certainly come, and come quickly',
quoted 4 Mace, xviii. 15.
in The 28. ii/SuXXeo-i^a)] 'indulge in ca-
Hebrew has the singular, and so the prices and hi(!noHrs\ The word is

Peshito. The words have obviously generally passive, be formed as '

been omitted in A owing to the re-
currence of IloXXat at, and should be
restored accordingly.
IloXXat ai p.a(Triyfs k.t.X.]
quotation from Ps, xxxii. 10 (lxx),
except that roiis eXTrifoiray is sub-
to
an image', 'to appear', and with a
dative 'to resemble'; see Ruhnken
Timaetts s.v. Here however it is a
An exact middle signifying 'to form images, to
conjure up spectres', and so 'to in-
dulge in idle fancies', like the later
8o THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxiii

XovG-cti^ Kai
ii/do^ois S(i)pea7^
auTOv. Troppu) yevecrda) ci<p'

ottov Xeyei' TAAAincopoi eiciN oi

rifjiMV r]
<ypa(pri aurr],
Ai'yyXOI, 01 AicTAZONTec THN yYX'HN, 01 AfcTONTec, Tayta hkoy-
CAiweN KAI eni toon nAjepooN hmoon, kai iAoy rernpAKAiweN
I
Tr6ppw yev^ado}] AS ; ir6ppw ye yeviadw C. See below, 33. 1 aurij]

AS; aiiTov C. 3 r7]v \pvxriv'\ A; ry \j/vxv C dub. S.

; 5 avv^i^riKev]

use of <f)avTa^e(T6ai. The lexicons do rived directly or solely from the First
not recognize this use, but see Dion Epistle. Moreover it is there con-
Chrys. OraL xii. 53 (p. 209 m) npore- tinued, ovTcos Ka\ o Xaos pov aKaTaaTa-
(jias Kai dX[yj/eis ecrx^v, eWetra ottoA?^-
pov yap are ov8ev (Ta(f)es etSorey
fiev

(iWrjv aXXos aveTrXarrofXfv I8fav, irav yJAeToi TO dyada. As this passage does
TO dvTjTov Kara ttjv eavrov 8vvap.Lv Kai not occur in the Old Testament, it

(f)V(riv lv8aWopevoi Ka\ oveipcoTTovres,

must have been taken from some lost
Sext. Emp. adv. Math. vii. 249 eVmt apocryphal writing. Some writers
{(pavTaa-lai) rraXiv cltto vnapxovTos pev
indeed have supposed that Clement
fldiv, ovK aiiTo 8e to inrdpxov lv8a\- here, as he certainly does elsewhere
XovToi K.r.A., xi. 122 o TOP ttXovtov (e.g. 18, 26, 29, 32, 35, 39, 46, 50,

peyiaTov ayadov IvhaKkopevos, Clem. 52, 53, and

just below raxv fj^ei
Alex. P?vtr. 10 (p. 81) xP^^^ V K.r.A.), is fusing several
passages of
\i6ov T] 8v8pov TJ npa^iv tj nados the Canonical Scriptures, such as

r)
voaov rj (f)6(3ov
lu8aXXea6ai cos 6env, James i.
8, 2 Pet. iii. 4, Mark iv. 26,

Method. Sy/iip. viii. 2 eVt evSrjpovaai Matt. xxiv. 32 sq (Mark xiii. 28 sq,
Tois acopaaiv lv8akXovTai ra deiu. (1 he Luke xxi. 29 sq); but the resem-
lasttwo passages I owe to Jahn's blances though striking are not suffi-
Method. II. p. 51 the others I had ; cient, and this explanation does not
collected before I saw his note.) So account for the facts already men-
'iv8aKpamost frequently suggests the tioned. The description 6 7rpo(f)riTLKos
idea of an unreal, spectral, appear- Xoyos and the form of the quotation
ance, as Wisd. xvii. 3 lv8a\paa-iv e/c- o Xaos pov K.r.A., as given in the 2nd

Tapaaa-opfvoi, Clem. Hoin. iv. 4 ^a.v- Epistle, show that it must have been
TaapaTa re yap Ka\ lv8a\paTa ev pfcrrj taken from some spurious prophetic
TTj dyopa (paiveadai ttoimv 81 rjpepas book formed on the model of the
Tvacrav iKTrKrjTTei rrjv rroXiv, Athenag. Canonical prophecies. I would con-
Stlppl. 27 oX ovv aXoyoi avrai Ka\ Iv- jecture that it was Eldad and Modad,
8aXpaTm8eLS ttjs yjyvxvs Kivqaeis {18(C- which was certainly known in the
Xopavels dnoTiKTovcn (pavraaias, where early Roman Church; see Herm. Vis,
he is speaking of false objects of wor- ii. 3 eyyiis Kvpios rols eTricTTpecpopevois,
ship. o5s yeypaTrrai ev rw EA8aS Ka\ Mco8a8

TaXairrapoi K.r.A.] The same pas-

2. Tols 7rpo(j)rjTev(Ta(rLV ev tjj eprjpat rco

sage is quoted also in the 2nd Epistle Xaa, a passage alleged by Hernias
ascribed to Clement ( 11), being there for the same purpose as our quota-
introduced by the words Aeyet yap Ka\ tion, to refute one who is sceptical
6 7rpo(f)i]TiK6s Aoyos. Though the quo- about the approaching afflictions of
tation there is essentially the same, the last times. On this apocryphal
yet the variations which it presents book see Fabricius Cod. Pseud. V.T.
show that it cannot have been de- I. p. 801. It may have been forged by
 XXIIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 8l

5 KAi oyAeN hmTn toytoon cyNBeBHKeN. ih anohtoi, cyMBAAere

eAyroyc SyAw- AaBctg AMneAoN"
npooTON men cj^yAAopoei,
eiTA BAactoc riNeTAi, eljA (j)yAAon, e?TA anGoc, kai mcta
TAYTA om(|)a5, elxA cta(})yAh nApecTHKY?A. Opdre, otl ev
A ; <rvfj,^ipr]Ky C. 6 TpCirov fiiv (pvWopoei'] AS ; om. C. 7 kcu fiera

ravra] translated in S as if eira, the koI being omitted.

some Christian to sustain the courage will be remembered that this

apo-
of the brethren under persecution cryphal prophecy is supposed to be
by the promise of the Lord's advent ; delivered to the Israelites in the
and, if so, the resemblances to the wilderness. At all events we cannot
New Testament writings in this quo- arbitrarily change ejrl into otto with
tation are explained. Hilgenfeld sug- Young and most subsequent editors
gests the AssumptioH of Moses (see (Jacobson and Hilgenfeld are excep-
the notes 17, 25) as the source of tions), for eVi is read in both our
this quotation, but does not assign MSS, both here and in ii. 11.

any reason for this view except his 6. Xa^tre apneXov k.t.X.] The
own theory that Clement was ac- words strongly resemble Mark 26 iv.

quainted with that work. sq (comp. Matt. xxiv. 32 sq, Mark xiii.
o( Siyj/vxoi K.T.X.] Comp. James i. 8 28 sq, Luke xxi. 29 sq). See also
avT]p dl'^v^oi duarddTaTos (v jracrats Epict. Diss. iii. 24. 86 o5? o-vkov, <os
raij Qhoi% avTov. For the parallels in a'ra(pvXT], rfj rtrayp^ivrj apq roii i'rovs,
Hermas see the note on 11. The iii. 24. 91 ro (pvXXoppoelv Kal ro la-xd8a
conjecture in the last note is con- yivfadai airt crvKOv Ka).
a(TTa(f)i8ns: 6K
firmed by the fact that Hermas gives M. Anton. xi.
rrji (TTacpvXfjs k.t.X., 35
repeated warnings against hi^vyia op(f)a^, (Tra(f>vXi], aracf^is, irdvra pera-
and even speaks thereupon in the jSoXai OVK els to pfi ov dXX' els to vvi>
context of the passage referring to prj ov.
'Eldad and Modad.' For close re- cjivXXopoel] For the orthography
semblances to this quotation see Vis. see the note on e^epl((oaev 6.

iii. 4 ^"^ Tovi hv^v-)(ovi Tovs 8ia\oyi- 8. TrapecTTrjKv'ia] 'ripe'; Exod. ix.
(ofjievovs fv Toii Kap8iais avrmv el apa 41 yap Kpidrj Tj-apeaTrjKvui.
j) So Theo-
ea-Tai ravra fj
ovk ea-rai,Matld. ix. 01 phrastus Caus. Plant, vi. 7. 5 Trapia-rd-

yap 8i(rTa(oi>rs eli rov Qeov ovroi flcriv pevos Kal e^io-rdpevos, of wine ripening
01
Bi'^v^oi K.r.X. and going off (see Schneider's note).

3. oi Xfyovres K.r.X.] 2 Pet. iii. 4 Similarly napaylvea-dai is used, e.g.

Ka\ Keyovrfs Uoii ((rrtv
fnayyeXla rrjs 7;
Herod, i. 193 irapaylverai o a'lTos-
rrapov(rias avroii; yap oi Trarepes
a.(f)' fji
The words op(f>a^, ora^vXr;, a-Ta(f>U
eKoip^drjaav, navra ovras 8iap.evei an denote the sour, ripe, and
(da-Tacfyis),
dried grape respectively see the ;

4. Kal (TTi] 'also in (he time of\ passages in the previous note, and add
Either the speakers use the first Ant/ioL III. p. 3, IV. p. 131 (ed. Jacobs).
person r\Kov(Tap.tv as identifying them- 'Opdre K.T.X.] This sentence is
selves with the Israelite people of generally treated by the editors as
past generations, or (as seems more part of the quotation, but I think this
probable) eVi rOtv Tvarfpoiv must mean wrong for two reasons; (i) In the
'when our fathers were still alive', 2nd Epistle, where also the passage
i.e. 'in our childhood and youth.' It is cited, after aracjivXrj napeaTrjKvia fol-

CLEM. II. 6
82 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxiii

Kaipu oXiycp eh TreTreipov KaTavra 6 KapTro^

rod ^vXov.
CLTT dXriQeia^ "T^^X^ ^^'-
^^oi'i-^vr]'5
TeXeicodyjorerai ro (3ou-

XrijuLa avTOu, orvveinfJiapTVpovcrr]^ Kai Trj^ ypaCpf]^ otl

TAXY H2ei KAI OY XP'^'^'^'^' '^'^' elAi'^NHC Hiei 6 Kypioc eic

TON NAON AYTOY, KAI 6 AflOC ON f'^eic npOCAOKATe. 5

XXIV. Karavoi^o'iiofjiev , dyaTryjroi, ttws 6 dea-TroTrj^

ewiheLKVVTaL ZirjveKco^ rijjuv Ttjv fjieXXovcrav dvao'Tao'iv

'

'iorecrdai, r]<s tyiv dTTap-)(Y]v eTTOLrjcraTO tov KvpLOv lr]crovi/

XpLG-TOv e/c
veKpwv dvacrrria'a^. 'i^cofjev, dya7rr]T0i, Tt]v
Kara Kaipov yLVOfJievr}v dvaoTTaa-iv. tj/nepa
Kai vu^ lo

I Triireipov] irtwipov A. 2 e^a^^vrys] e^etpv-qa A. 4 e^ai<pvri%\

e^aixvvc A. 7 iTriSelKwrai dLTjveKuis tj/uv] A (but eTndiKPVrai); SirjveKUi

ijfjuv iiridelKvvffi, C; monstrat nobis perpetuo S. 8 T7;^ dTrapxV] AC ;
add.

^Sr; S. 9 ^pi<TTov\ AS; om. C. 10 ko-to. Ka.ipov\Q,\ KuraKai...

A; in omni tempore 'i. '^wotJ.hy\v'\ AC; add. y]ixw S. 11 Koinarai...

Tlfi^pa] AC S renders
;
as if it had read KOL/j-arai [rts] vvkt6s, avlararai rifiipas.

lows immediately the sentence ovrwi (e.g. 42 Karaa-rijaco tovs enicrKoTrovs

Ka\ 6 \a6i fiov K.T.X.the words opare ; K.T.X., where he cites Is. Ix. 17). This
K.T.X. not only not being quoted but portion of Malachi's prophecy is

being hardly compatible with the form quoted much less frequently in early
of the context as there given ; (2) opare Christian writers than we should have
is an expression by which Clement expected. On the other hand the
himself elsewhere, after adducing a first part of the same verse l8ov aTro-
quotation or an example, enforces its crrf'XXco rov ayyeXov p,ov is quoted
lesson; as 4, 12, 16, 41, 50. Matth. xi. 10, Mark 2, Luke vii. 27,
i.

I. els !Ti7ripov\''to maiurity\ The and not seldom by the early fathers,
construction Karavrav els is common by whom, following the evangelists, it
in the LXX and N.T.; see also above is explained of John the Baptist.

5.

4. Taxv
_ rjei K.r.X.] A combina-
XXIV. 'All the works of the
Creator bear witness to the resur-
tion of Is. xiii. 32 Ta^v ep^erai kcii ov rection. The day arises from the
(comp. Hab.
Xpovie'i ii.
3, Heb. x. 37), grave of the night. The young and
and Mal. iii. I koI e^alcfivrjs ij^ei els fruitful plant springs up from the
TOV vaov avTov Kuptos ov vp,e'is ^rjTe'iTe decayed seed'.
Kai 6 ayyeXos rfjs SiadrjKrjs ov vfieis The eloquent passage in TertuUian
BeKere. The substitution of 6 ayios (ie Resurr. Carn. 12, 13, where the
for 6 ayyeXos k.t.X. may have been same analogies are adduced, is pro-
intentional, but is much more pro- bably founded on this passage of
bably an inadvertence of Clement, Clement (see above, I. p. 160). Com-
who quotes from memory largely but pare also Theoph. ad Aut. i. 13,
loosely and isinfluenced by the in- Tertull. Apol. 34, Minuc. Fel. 48,
terpretation which he has in view especially the passage of Theophilus,
 xxv] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 83

dva(TTa(TLV tjjuiv hr]\ov(riv' KOiiuaTai t]

vv^, dvicTTaTai
tljuepa' t]
rifxepa aTreLcnv^ vv^ eTrepx^Tai. XafBcojuev
TOi)s Kapirous' 6 cnropo^ ttws kul Tiva TpoTrov yiveTai ;

elHAOeN d cneipooN e^aXev eU Tt]v yfjv eKucrov tcov

Kai

5 (nrepficLTiov,
ciTiva ireorovTa ek Tr]V yfju ^r}pa Kai yu/uiva

diaXveTaL. eiT 6k Tt]^ dia\v(re(jt)^ rj /ueyaXeioTris; tyj^

irpovoia^ tov decnroTOv dvia'Tr]<Tiv avraj kui e'/c tou eVos

TrXeiova av^ei kul 6K(p6p6i Kapirov.
XXV. TO Trapdho^ov crrifjLeioVy to yLvo-
'IZwfjLev
5
fxevov ev toIs dvuToXiKoh tottol^, TOvrearTLv T0i5 nepi

aviaTaraL rjfj.ipa\ dviffTaraL rj rjfiipa C ; aviaTarairi... A. After the H Tisch. thinks

he sees part of a second h and would therefore read tj T]/j.pa. Having more than
once inspected this MS, I could only discern a stroke which might as well belong to
a M as to an H ;
and the parallelism of the clauses suggests the omission of the
article. 15 ^VP^ i^^^ 7U/a^a] AC ; ^7]pav S.

which has many points in common quoted by Wetstein on i Cor. I. c,

with Clement. and Methodius in Epiphan. Haer.
8. rrjv dirapxri''] I Cor. XV. 20 Ixiv. 44 (p. 570) Karapadf yap to. a-rrep-

XpiCTTOS iy-qyeprai k vKpu>v airapxr] p.aTa Trd)? yvfxva Koi aaapKa ^aXXerai
Tav KfKoifMrjfjievav; comp. ver. 23. It ii Trjv yrjv K.r.X.

is evident from what follows that 16. 8iaXverai]^rot'. Comp. Theoph.

Clement has this 1
5th chapter in his ad Aut. i.
npaTOv dno6vi]aK(c
13
mind. Koi Xverai. This analogy is derived
10. Kara Kaipov] ''at its proper from I Cor. xv. 36; comp. John xii.

season'. In my first edition I adopted 24.

'
the reading Kara Kaipovs, at each 18. av^ei] Intransitive, as in Ephes.

recurring season as in the parallel

'

;
ii.
21, Col. ii.
19. It is treated how-
passage Theoph. ad Aut. i. 13 Kma ever as a transitive in the Syriac,
Kaipovs irpocjifpovcriv tovs KopTTovs, but where av^ei and eK(f)epei have the
in deference to the recently dis- same subject as avlarr-qcnv.
covered I now adopt XXV. 'The is a still more
authorities, phoenix
Kara Kaipov. marvellous symbol of the resurrec-
12. XajSw/ifi/] So again ;i7 Xa- tion. After living five hundred years
Qatfifv TO (Ta>p,a ^jiav.
he dies. From his corpse the young
14. i^Tikdev K.r.X.] The expression bird arises. When he is fledged and
is borrowed from the Gospel narra- strong, he carries his father's bones
tive ; Matt. xiii. 3, Mark iv. 3, Luke and lays them on the altar of the sun
xiii. 5. at Heliopolis. This is done in broad
15. yvpiv(i\ See
Cor. xv. 36 sq,I
daylight before the eyes of all and :

rom which this epithet is derived. the priests, keeping count of the
t denotes the absence of germina- time, find that just five hundred
ion : see the rabbinical passages years have gone by'.
6 2
84 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxv

TVjV yap ea-riv o Trpoa-ovo^d^erai

'ApajSlav. opveov
I 6pveov^ opvaiov A.

I. opveov K.r.X.] The earliest men-

not unfrequent. Claudian devotes a
tion of the phoenix is in Hesiod whole poem to it. Another ascribed
to Lactantius {Corp. Poet. Lat. p. 1416
{Fragm. 50 ed. Gaisf.), vvho however
ed. Weber) also takes this same sub-
speaks merely of its lon.^evity. It is
from Herodotus (ii. 11) that we first ject. The references to the phoenix
hear the marvellous story of the burial in classical and other writers are
of the parent bird by the offspring, collected by Henrichsen de Phoenicis
as it was told him by the Egyptian fabtila Havn. 1825.
priests, but he adds cautiously l^ioX
The main features of the account
fifu ov TTKTTa 'Keyovres. It is men- seem to have been very generally
tioned again by Antiphanes (Athen. believed by the Romans. Thus Mela
xiv. p. 655 b) ev 'HXiov fiiv (paa-i yly- (iii. 8), who seems to have flourished

vfo-dai noXei (j)oiviKas. From the in the reign of Claudius, repeats the
Greeks the story passed to the Ro- marvellous story without any expres-
mans. In B.C. 97 a learned senator sion of misgiving. Pliny indeed de-
Manilius (Plin.A''. N. x. 2) discoursed clines pronounce whether it is
to
at lengthon the phoenix, stating that an fabulose');
true or not ('baud scio
the year in which he wrote was the but Tacitus says no doubt is enter-
215th since its last appearance. He tained of the existence of such a bird,
was the first Roman who took up the though the account is in some points
subject. At the close of the reign of uncertain or exaggerated. Again
Tiberius a.d. 36 according to Pliny yElian {Hist. An. vi. 58), who lived

(following Cornelius Valerianus) and in Hadrian's reign, alleges the phoenix

Dion Cassius (Iviii. 27), but A.D. 34
as Tacitus reports the date the
marvellous bird was said to have
reappeared in Egypt. The truth of
the statement however was ques-
as an instance of the superiority of
brute instinct over human reason,
when a bird can thus reckon the time
and discover the place without any
guidance and somewhere about the
;

tioned by some, as less than 250 same time or later Celsus (Origen c.
years had elapsed since the reign of Cels. iv. 98, I. p. 576), arguing against
the third Ptolemy when it was seen the Christians, brings it forward to
last (Tac. Ann. vi. 28). But the show the greater piety of the lower
report called forth many learned dis- animals as compared with man.
quisitions from savants in Egypt Still Philostratus {Vit. Apoll
later
both native and Greek. A few years iii. 49) mentions the account without A
later (a.d. 47) the bird was actually recording any protest. I do not lay

exhibited in Rome ('in comitio pro- any stress on such passing allusions
positus, gt/od actis testatum est,' are as Seneca's {Ep. Mor. 42 'lUe alter
Pliny's words) and may have been fortassetamquam phoenix semel anno
seen by Clement, but no one doubted quingentesimo nascitur'), or on de-
that this was an imposture. The scriptions in romance writers like
story of the phoenix of course has a Achilles Tatius (iii. 25), because no
place in Ovid's MetamorpJioscs (xv. argument can be founded on them.
392 Una est quae reparet seque ipsa
'
It thus appears that Clement is
reseminet ales' etc.), and allusions not more credulous than the most
to it in Latin poets are naturally learned and intelligent heathen wri-
xxv] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 8^

ters of the preceding and following Rec. I.

p. 99), the 'profcctio phocnicis'
generations. Indeed he may have is mentioned in connexion with the
thought that he had higher sanction exodus, and it seems probable that
than the testimony of profane authors. the writer borrowed the incident from
TertuUian {de Restirr. Cam. lo) took Ezekiel's poem and used it in a simi-
Ps. xcii. 12 SUaios (OS (f)o2vi^ dvd^a- fi lar way. The appearance of the
to refer to this prodigy of nature, and phoenix would serve a double pur-
Clement may possibly have done the pose; (i) It would mark the epoch;
same. Even Job xxix. i8 is trans- (2) It would betoken the homage paid
lated by several recent critics, 'With by heathen religion to the true God
my nest shall I die and like the and to the chosen people : for Alex-

phoenix lengthen my days' (comp. andrian Jews sought to give expres-

Lucian Hcrmot. 53 r\v firj (f)OLvi.Kos
sion to this last idea in diverse ways,
errj j3ico(t/;), therein following some through Sibylline oracles, Orphic
rabbinical authorities : but even if poems, and the like and the atten-
;

this be the correct rendering, the LXX dance of the sacred phoenix on the
version, through which alone it would departing host would not be the least
be known to Clement, gives a different eloquent form of symbohzing this
sense to the words, rj qXiKta fiov yrjpd- homage in the case of Egypt. But
(Tfl aXTTTep aT\f)(OS (f)OlVlK09, TToXvv this Ezekiel, though he coloured the

xpwof 010)0-0). The passage of Job incident and applied it to his own
xxix. 18, in relation to the phcenix, is purpose, appears not to have invent-
the subject of a paper by Merx in ed it. According to Egyptian chro-
his Archiv. f. Wiss. Forsch. d. Alt. nology the departure of the Israelites
Test. II.
104 sq (1871).
p. was coincident or nearly coincident
At all events, even before the Chris- with an appearance of a phcenix (i.e.
tian era the story had been adopted by with the beginning of a phoenix-
Jewish writers. In a poem on the period). Tacitus {Ann. vi. 28) says
Exodus written by one Ezekiel, pro- that a phoenix had appeared in the
bably an Alexandrian Jew in the 2nd reign of Amasis. If this were the
or 3rd century B.C. (see Ewald Gesch. earlier Amosis of the 17th or i8th
IV. p. 297), the phoenix, the sacred dynasty and not the later Amosis of
bird of Egypt, is represented as ap- the 26th dynasty (the Amasis of
pearing to the Israelite host (see the Herod, ii. 172), the time would coin-
passage quoted by Alexander Poly- cide; for the Israelites were consi-
histor in Euseb. Praep. Evang. ix. dered by some authorities (whether
29, p. 446). Though the name is not rightly or wrongly, it is unnecessary
mentioned, there can be no doubt here to enquire) to have left Egypt
that the phoenix is intended for the ;
in the reign of this sovereign; e.g.

description accords with those of by Ptolemy the priest of Mendes

Herodotus, Manilius (in Pliny), and (Apion in Tatian ad Graec. 38 and
Mela, and was doubtless taken from Clem. Alex. Strom, i. 21, p. 378) and
some Egyptian painting such as He- byjulius Africanus(Routh's Rel. Sacr.
rodotus saw and such as may be seen II. p. 256). For rabbinical references
on the monuments to the present day to the phoenix, which seem to be
(see Wilkinson's Anc. Egypt. 2nd numerous, see Buxtorf Lex. Rab. s. v.
sen I.
p. 304, RawHnson's Herod. 11. ?"in, Lewysohn Zoologie des Talmiids

p. 122). In the AssHDiption of Moses p. 352 sq ; comp. Henrichsen 1. c.

too, if the reading be correct (see II.

p. 19. The reference in a later

Hilgenfeld Nov. Test, extra Can. Sibylline too {Orac. Sid. viii. 139
86 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxv

oTav (jioiviKos iire\6r} Trevraxpovoio) was acfuKTai noWav in<JTa>v re kch anidTav.
probably derived from an earlier On the other hand Euseb. ( Vit. Const.

Jewish poem. iv. 72) gives it merely as a report,

Thus mere fact that the phoenix
the Greg. Naz. {Orat. xxxi. 10, I. p.
is mentioned in the Assumption of 562 d) says cautiously ei' rw ttio-tos
Moses affords no presumption (as 6 \6yos, and Augustine de Anim. iv.

Hilgenfeld supposes) that Clement
was acquainted with that work for
the story was well known to Jewish
writers. In the manner and purpose
of its mention (as I interpret it) the
Assumption presents no coincidence
with Clement's Epistle.
33 (20) (x. p. 404) uses similar lan-
; guage, 'Si tamen ut creditur'; while
Photius {Bibl. 126) places side by
side the resurrection of the phoenix
and the existence of lands beyond
the Atlantic ( 20) as statements in
The pas- Clement to which exception may be

sage in the Assumption of Moses is taken. Other less important patris-

discussed by Ronsch in Hilgen- tic references will be found in Suicer's
feld's Zeitschr. f. Wissensch. Theol. Thes. s.v. (po'ivi^.

XVII. p. 553 sq, 1874. Ronsch takes It is now known

that the story
the reading profectio Phoenices, and owes origin to the symbolic and
its

explains it of the 'migration from pictorial representations of astrono-

Phoenicia', i.e. Canaan, into Egypt my. The appearance of the phcenix
under Jacob. And others also take isthe recurrence of some prominent
fynicis to mean Phoenicia, explaining astronomical phenomenon which
it however in different ways. See marked the close of a period. Even
Hilgenfeld's note to Mas. Assumpt. Manihus (Plin. N. H. x. 2) had half
p. 130. In this way the phcenix en- seen the truth; for he stated 'cum
tirely disappears from the passage. hujus alitis vita magni conversionem
Of subsequent Christian fathers, anni fieri
iterumque significationes
TertuUian, as we saw, accepted the tempestatum et siderum easdem re-
story without misgiving. As Theo- verti'. For the speculations of
philus of Antioch {ad Aut. 13) fol- i.
Egyptologers and others on the
lows Clement's analogies for the re- phoenix period see Larcher Mem. de
surrection up to a certain point, but I' Acad, des
Inscriptions etc. I. p. 166
omits all mention of the phcenix, sq (
1 81 5 ), Lepsius Chronol. d. Aegypt.
I infer that his knowledge of Egyp- p. 180 sq, Uhlemann Handb. d. Ae-
tian antiquities (see ii. 6, iii. 20 sq) gypt. Alterthumsk. iii. p. 39 sq, 79

saved him from the error. For the sq, 226 sq, Poole Horae Ae-
IV. p.
same reason, as we may conjecture, gyptiacae p. 39 sq, Ideler Haridb. der
Origen also considers the fact to be Chfon. I. p. 183 sq, Creuzer Symb. u.
very questionable {c. Cels. iv. 98, i.
Mythol. II. p. 163 sq, Br ugsch A egyp-
p. 576). But for the most part it tische Studien in Zeitschr. d. Deutsch.
was believed by Christian writers. Morgenl. Gesellsch. x. p. 250 sq (i 856),
S. Cyril of Jerusalem {Cat. xviii. 8), S .
Geograph. Inschrift. der Altaegypt.
Ambrose (see the quotations, I.
167, Denkmdler I. p. 258 (1857), Wiede-
172),Rufinus {Symb.Apost. 11, p. 73), mann Die Phoenix- Sage in Zeitschr.
and others, argue from the story of f.Acgyptische Sprache etc. xvi. p. 89
the phoenix without a shadow of mis- sq (1878), Lauth Die Phoenix-Periode
giving. In Apost. Const, v. 7 it is 1880 (a separate issue of a paper in
urged against the heathen, as a fact Abhandl. d. Bayer. Akad. der IViss.).
which they themselves attest; and The actual bird, around which this
Epiphanius {Ancor. 84) says etr olkovjv mass of symbolism and of fiction has
xxv] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 87

I /j-ovoyep^sl fiovoyevria A.

gathered, bears the name bennu in
the Egyptian language and appears
to be the ardca ctnerea (or purpurea),
a bird of passage ;
see
I.e. p. 104.
Thus the phoenix was a symbol
from the very beginning. Horapollo
says that in the hieroglyphics this
found on coins and medals of the
Roman emperors (for instances see
Piper p. 449) to denote immortality
Wiedemann or renovation, with the legend SAEC.
AVR., or AETERNITAS, or AICON. It is
significant that this use begins in the
time of Hadrian, the great patron
and imitator of Egyptian art.

bird represented a soul, or an inun- I.

/^towyei/es] ''alone of its kind,
dation, or a stranger paying a visit U7iique\ This epithet is applied to
after long absence, or a restoration the phoenix also in Origen, Cyril, and
after a long period {airoKaTa^TTauw Apost. Const. V. 7, and doubtless as-
7To\vxp6vLov), Hierogl. i. 34, 35, ii. 57. sisted the symbolism mentioned in
The way was thus prepared for the the last note. The statement about
application of Clement. This Apo- the phoenix in Apost. Const, (f^aal yap
stolic father however confines the bpveov Ti novoyeves VTrap)(fiv k.t.X. is
symbolism to the resurrection of evidently founded on this passage of
man. But later patristic writers di- Clement; comp. e.g. el toivvv...8i

versified the application and took dkoyov opviov SeiKwrai r/ dvacrraais

the phcEnix also as a type of the Per- K.T.X. with Clement's language in
son of our Lord. The marvellous 26. So also in Latin it is 'unica',
birth and the unique existence of 'semper unica', Mela iii. 9, Ovid Ajh.
this bird, asrepresented in the myth, ii. 6. 54, Lactant. Phoen. 31, Claudian
were admirably adapted to such a Laud. Stil. ii. 417. Thus Milton
symbolism and accordingly it is so
: Samson Ag07iistes 1699 speaks of
taken in Epiphan. (I.e.), Rufinus (I.e.), 'that self-begotten bird... That no
and others see especially an un-
;
second knows nor third,' and again
known but apparently very ancient Paradise Lost v. 272 'A phoenix gaz'd
author in Spicil. Solesm. ill. p. 345. by all, as that sole bird. When to
Some of these writers press the par- enshrine his reliques in the Sun's
allel so far as to state that the phoenix Bright temple to Egyptian Thebes
arises after three days. The fact he flies'. Why does Milton despatch
that a reputed appearance of the his bird to Thebes rather than Heli-

phoenix was nearly coincident with opolis?

the year of the Passion and Resur- 'irr] KivraKo(Tia\ The longevity of
rection (see above, p. 84) may have the phoenix is differently stated.
assisted this application. At a later Hesiod gives it (9x4x3x9 = ) 972
date the Monophysites alleged the generations of men ;
Manilius (Plin.
phoenix as an argument in favour of A'^. H. X. 2) 509 years ;
Solinus {PolyJi.
their peculiar doctrines(see Piper 36) 540 years ; authorities mentioned
Mythol. u. Sy7nbol. der Christl. Ku7ist. in Tacitus 146 1 years, which is the
I. I, p. 454). length of the Sothic period; Martial
For representations of the
the (v. 7), Claudian, Lactantius, and
phoenix in early Christian art see others, 1000 years; Chaeremon (in
Piper I.e. p. 456 sq. Before it ap- Tzetzes Chil. v. 6. 395) 7006 years.
pears as a Christian symbol, it is But, says Tacitus, 'maxime vulgatum
88 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxv

yevojuevov re ijdr] 7rp6<i

clttoXvo'iv tov aTrodaveiv avTO,
(rt]K6v eavTM ttolcT k Xifidvov Kai (T/ULvpvr]^
Kai twv
XoLTTwv dpwfjiaTcov.,
ek ov TrXrjpcoOevTOs tov )(^povou

elcrepx^Tai Kai TeXevra. (Tr]7rofj.evr]^ he Trjs capKo^

(TKioXr]p Tis yevvaTai^ 69 e/c ry]^ iKfJiaho^ rod rere- 5

XevT)] KOTOS ^coov di/aTpecpojuei/os iTTepo(pveL' eiTu <yev-

vaTo's yevofjievos a'lpei

tov crr]KOU eKeivov ottov tu
oa-TO. TOV TrpoyeyovoTOS eCTiv, Kai TavTU (iacTTa^uiv
^Lavvei diro 'Apa^iKrjs -^wpas tcd'i Trjs AiyvvrTOV
Trjs
'

6f9 Triu XeyofJievnv HXlovttoXiv' Kai t^juepas, (SXewov- 10

TO)!/ wduTcoVi eTTtTrra? eTTi tov tov fjXiov jSwiuov Ti6r](riv

I re] A ;
5^ CS. 3 tov xpoi'oO] AC ;
add. vitae suae S. 4 reXei/r^
AC ;
add. in illo S. 5^] AS ; re C. 5 7ej'mTat] A ; kfiivarai. CS,
the latter translating nascitur in ea illic. 5s] AC ; So-xts (apparently) S. reTf.-

Xei;T?7/c6Tos] reXeurTjKOTocr A; TeXeuTTjffacros C; see I.

p. 126. 7 ar]Kbv

eKeivov] AC; S adds H^inn |0 {

= KVK\6dev avroO). 8 ^aardi^wv] ^aara^ov

quingentorum spatium'; and this is found in the smouldering ashes e.g. ;

adopted by almost all the Christian Artemid. Oneirocr. iv. 47 avroy favrw
fathers together with most heathen TVOiTjadfievos eK Kuaias re Kai afivpvrjs
writers ;
of the latter see a list in nvpdv aTTodvijcTKer Kavdeiarjs 8e r^r ttv-
Lepsius Chron. p. 180. pds fxerd \p6vot> eK ttjs (nro8ov (TKcoXrjKa
TOV dnodavflv avro] 'so that it
I. yevvdcrBai Xeyovcriv k.t.X. (comp. Mar-
should die ^ explaining the preceding tial V. 7). It is interesting to observe

yevo\i.evov npos dnoXva-iv 'at the eve of the different stages in the growth of
its dissolution'; comp. 46 ep^o^eda the story, as follows- (i) The lon-
acTTe fTTi\a6e(Tdai rj/xay. This con- gevity alone (Hesiod); (2) The en-
struction seems to me preferable to tombment and burial of the parent
connecting avro with what follows, by the offspring (Herodotus) ; (3) The
as in the Syriac version for in this ; miraculous birth of the offspring from
case I should expect that avro eavTa the remains of the parent (Mani-
would stand in juxtaposition, as e.g. lius) ; (4) The three days' interval
Rom. viii. 23, 2 Cor. i.
g. between the death of the parent and
5. yewdTai] This mode
(tk(oXt]^ Tis resuscitation of the offspring (Epi-
of reproduction not mentioned byis
phanius).
Herodotus (ii. 73) but it formed part ; 6.
yevvdlos] ''strong, lusty ^ as e.g.
of the story as related by Manilius to Dion Chrys. vii. p. 228 R \<Txvpo\ en
the Romans and is frequently men- veoi Kai yevvaioi Ta crap-nra. It corre-
tioned by subsequent writers. To sponds to Ovid's 'Quum dedit huic
this account is sometimes added the aetas vires'.
incident that the parent bird lights biavvei] 'makes its fre-
9. way\
its own pyre and that the worm is quently used absolutely, e.g. Polyb.
 xxvi] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 89

auTa, Kal outco^ eU TOVTriaio dcpop^a. 01 ovv

lepei^
eTrKTKeTTTOi/Tai tu^ dvaypacpa^ twv 'x^povMV kul evpicr-
Koucriv avrov TrevruKOO'LOG'TOv eroiy? 7r67r\ripa)juevov eXrj-

5 Xvdevai.
XXVI. Meya kul davixaarov ovv vofJLi^Ofxev elvaL,

el 6 ^rifXLOVp'yo'i
twv cLTravTuiv dvaaTacrLv TroitjaeTai
T(t)v dcr/ws avTco dovXeuaavToyv ev TreTroidrjcrei TricTTeu)^

dyadf]^, OTTOV Kai ^i

opveov ^eiKwaiv i^iuiv to jueya-
i
20 \elou eTrayyeXias avrov', Xeyei yap ttov Kai
rf]^

elANACTHCeiC Me KAI elOMOAorHCOMAI cor KAI eKOIMHeHN

KAI fnNoocA, elHrepOHN, OTi cy mgt eMoy eT. Kai TraXtv
A. 9 diaviet] C; diavevei A; niigrat volans S. 11 Ka,vrij3v\ A;

a.vavT(j}v C. ^TTtTrrds] AS; om. C, doubtless owing to the following eTrt.

12 lepels] AC; add. ol t^s Myvirrov S. 14 ireTrXTjpu/xivov] AS irX-qpovfjiivov ;

C. 19 opviov Se'iKvvaLv'] opvaiov diKWcnv A. /aeyaXelov] fieyaXiop A.

20 e7ra77eX^as] e-rrayyeXeiaa- A. 22 i^rjy^pdrjv] A; /cat e^rjy^pdrjv CS.

iii.
56. I
{airo), iv. 70. 5 (), ii. 54. 6 same combination of epithets see
(Trpoy). The word
occurs above, 20. 50, 53-
The reading of A, biavevei, is out of 17. 6 8r]p.i.ovpyos k.t.X.] See above

place, for it could only mean 'turns 20. On

this Platonic phrase com-

aside', purpose of avoiding.

i.e. for the pare Jahn Afethodius li. pp. 39, 91.
Several instances of the confusion of 1 8. v TTfTroiGrjcrei /c.t.X.] 'z' the con-
'
biavvdv and biavfvau by transcribers fidence which cotnes of honest faith :

are given by Jahn Methodius ll. p. comp. Ephes. iii. 12 e'v

nfTroidijaei 8id
no. Trjs TTtVrews avrov, and below 35
13. amypa^as] the public re-
ray
^
ttIcttis iv nfiroidrjo-ei. The phrase tt/o--

cords'' comp. Tatian ad Grace. 38

;
Tis dyadrj occurs Tit. ii.
10, where
AtyuTTTt'coi' Se i\<jw
aX eV aKpL^es XP^' however nia-ns seems to mean 'fi-

vav dvaypa4>ai. For the Egyptian delity.'

'

dvaypa(f)aL see also Diod. Sic. i. 44, 69, 19. TO ixtyaXelop] the greatness' ;

xvi. Joseph, e. Ap.

51, 6 sq. The i.
comp. 32, 49. occurs Acts ii. 1 1,
It

recently discovered register of the Luke i,

49 (v.l.), and several times in
epiphanies of the bulls Apis is a par- the Lxx.
allel instance of such chronological 20. Xeyfi yap nov] Taken apparently
records; see Bunsen's Egypt I. p. 62 from Ps. xxviii. 7 kuI dvedaXtv r; (rdp^

(2nd ed.). pLOv Ka\ K 6f\i]p^aTos fxov (^opLoXoyrjO'o-

XXVI. 'Is it then strange that p.ai avra (comp. Ps. Ixxxvii. II).
God should raise the faithful, when 21. fKoifj,7]dr]i/ K.r.X.] A confusion of
He has given this marvellous sign? Ps. iii. 5 ^y^Kai virvuxra,
(KOLfijjdrju
To such a resurrection we have the (^TjyepdfjV ort Kvpios dvTi\i^\j/fTai pov,
testimony of the Scriptures'. and Ps. xxiii. 4 ov (j)o^r]6rja-opt.ai kuku
16. Me-ya Km 6av\i.a<jr(}v\ For the OTl (TV flfT tflOU 61.
90 THE EPISTLE OF S. "CLEMENT [xxvi

Icop Xeyer Kai ANACTHceic thn capka moy taythn thn

anantAh'cacan tayta hanta.
XXVII. TavTf] ovv TYj i\7ri.^L
Trpocrdedeo'dcoG'a!^
al yp-v^ai rudiav tw TricTTia eV tol^ e7ra<yy6\iai<s Kai tm
^LKaiip iv
raj's
Kpljuacriv. 6 TrapayyeiXa^ jur} yfyevdeaSai 5

TToWw luctWoi^ auTO'S ov \jy6ucreTai' ovhev yap dhuva-

Tov irapa tu) Gew, el fir] to xfrevcracrOai. dva^coTrvpr]-
craTU) ovv h ttio'tl's aurov ev rifJuv^ Kai votjcrco/uiev otl
TravTa eyyu^ avrw ecTTLV. ev \oya) Trj^ jueyaXcoo'vvri^

avTOv (Tvve<TTt](raTO ra iravra, Kai ev Xoyoj Cvvarai 10

avTCi KaTaa'TpeyjyaL. Tic epe? ay'tco' ti enomcAc; h tic

ANTICTHCCTAI TO) KpATCI THC ICXfoC AYTOYi 6x6 6e\ei Kai

I crdpKa] crapKap A. 2 avavrX-fjaaaav] A; avrk-fjcraaav C; toleravit

(d,vaT\rjaa(xav7) S. 3 TrpoadedecrOwffai'] AS ; irpoffoexiaOuiaav C. 4 eV]

A; om. C; dub. S. t^ StKat<f)] A; diKaiip (om. rf) C, and so apparently S.
7 Tip] A; om. C; see above, 21. t6] A, and so apparently S; om. C.
10 TCI Trdcra] A, and so probably S ;
wavra C. 13 TrotT^crft] AS ; Troi-qcrai C.
15 oi] A; om. C. 16 iroirj<T lv] Troi-qaeiv A. x^'P'^"] ACS; Bryennios
accidentally omits xetpw;' in recording the reading of C (p. 51). 17 rb trre-
piw^ia K. T.X.I C runs to aTepiw^ia' Kai aKovovTai ai <po}vou iravTijiv ^Xeirofiiviav Kai
aKovo/jLevuv (pojSrjdwfxev k.t.X., omitting many words. The omissions here are not

I. 'Iw/3 Xeyei] From LXX Job xix. XXVII. 'Let us therefore cling
26 dvaaTTjaet 8f jxav to aajxa to dvav- fast to God. He has promised, and
rXoOi' raOra as read in A, but i<B have He Whatsoever He wills,
cannot lie.
dvaa-Tfiaat to depua fiov to dvavrXovv (or He is able to perform. To His power
avT^ovv) ravTa. The Hebrew original no bounds are set. To His eye and
is different from either. For the con- His mind all things are open. The
fusion of dvaTXrj(Tai and duavrXfjcrai heavens declare His glorious works',
in this passage of Job and in Prov. 4. rw tvkttw k.t.A.] Comp. Heb. x.
ix. 12 see Schleusner Lex. Vet. Test. 23 nicrTOi yap 6 fTrayyeiXdnevos, and
s.v. dvaprXeo), Orz: Hexapl. Ii.
Field xi. 11.

p. 36. It may be a question what 6. ovhkv yap dBvvaTov k.t.X.] Corn-

reading the Syriac translator had pare Heb. vi. 18 eV oh ddvvaTov
yj/fv-

here, but the same word 72D is used cracrdai [top] Qeov, with Matt. xix. 26
elsewhere (e.g. Eus. //. E. viii. 14) to (Mark x. 27); see also Tit. i. 2.

render di/arAavrey; see Payne Smith 7. ai'a^w7rupr;crarco] Intransitive; see

Thes. Syr. s. v. the note on Ign. Ephes. i. Thecon-
Harnack refers to the discussion text seems to suggest that ?;
ttlo-tls

of this passage of Clement in Caspari avrov should be rendered 'His faith-

(2uellen z. Gesch. d. Taufsyinbols ill. fulness', as in Rom. iii. 3; see Gala-
p. 158. tians p. 155.
 XXVIIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 91

0)9 6e\ei TTOi/jaei iravra, Kal ovZev fjn] TrapeXOrj Tcav

ZehoyfJLaTKTfjievMv vtt avTOv, iravTa tvoiTTiov avTov

15 elcLVf Kal ov^ev \e\t]6ev tyiv ^ovXr]v avTOv^ el Oi oy-

pANo'i AmrOYNTAi AoIan Ogoy, noiHCiN Ae yeipooN aytoy

ANArreAAei TO crepeooMA' h HiwepA th HMepA epeyreTAi pflMA,
KAI NY? NYKTI ANArreAAei rN<>^CIN" KAI OYK 6ICIN AOfOI OYAe
AaAIAI, (Ln OYX' AKOYONTAI AI (})00NAI aytoon.
20 XXVIIl. riavTwv ovv iSXeTTOjueucov Kai cLKOvofjie-

vwv, (bo^r]6cJofjiev avTOV Kal diroXeLTrMfJiev (pavXwv epycov

fxiapca eTTiOviuia^f 'iva tw iXeei avTOv (TKeTracrdodfJiev

OtTTO TWJ/ fJieXXoVTMV KpifJiaTCdV

. TTOU yap Tl rjiJ.wv

altogether explained by the practice of abridging quotations (see i. p. 128).

18 avayylWeL] A; d;'a77eX S (with Hebr. and LXX A); def. C. In the previous
line S has the present {avayyeWeCj. 18, 19 \6yoL, XaXtat] S transposes these
words, as in the LXX. 19 ai ^wvat] The text of S is perhaps corrupt here.
As it stands, the translator would appear to have had toIs (puvais ii?p2, instead of

N?p, unless it is a very loose paraphrase. 20 oSv] A; re (IT'D) S ;

om. C
(see the note on t6 crrep^w^a /c.T.X.). 21 diroXeliru/uLei'] A; dvoXlTrufjiev C.
21 /xiapai] AS ; /3Xa/3fpds C (see Bryennios )/'</.
p. py'). 23 Twf /xeWdv-
Tojv Kpi/JLaTwv] AC
tou i-UWovTOi Kplfxaros (TTiyi NJH) S.
;
The variation cannot
be explained by rtdui here, and must have been deliberate see also 21. ;

9. iyyiis avrw] So
Ign. Ephes. 5 1 that The heavens etc' The ft is no
ovhiv Xavdavfi rov Kvpiov, dWa /cot ra part of the quotation. So treated
KpvTTTa rjpiwv eyyvs avra iariv, which is the passage presents no difficulty;
perhaps a reminiscence of this pas- and the corrections proposed (e.g.
sage compare
: 2 1 above. the omission of ei, or the reading Ka\
fi>
\6ya) K.r.X.] See Heb. i. 3 (jiep- 01 ovpavoi) are unnecessary. Perhaps
(ov Ta iravra rai pTjp,aTi r^s Swajxecos also the /cat before ovk elaiv should be
avTov :
comp. Wisd. ix. i. See the excluded from the quotation in the
introduction, I. p. 398, on the relation same way. The quotation is then
of Clement to the Logos doctrine. word for word (except the interchange
1 1. Ti's e'pf'i avTcp k.t.X.] From Wisd. of Xoyot and Xakiai) from the LXX
xii. 12 ris yap tpel Ti enolrja-as rj rii Ps. xix. I 3.

afrtcrrjjcrerat r<a Kplfiari (rov; Comp. 19. u)v...aiiTa)v\ See above the note
Wisd. 22 KpciTd j3pn)(iov6s (Tov Tis
xi. on 20.

dvTC(TTi](TfTai TJie expression to Kpa-

;
XXVIIl. 'Therefore, since He
roj r?7j l(Txvos avTov occurs in Ephes. sees and hears all things, let us for-
i.
19, vi. 10. The Kparos is the la-xys sake our vile deeds and take refuge in
exerted on some object. His mercy. We cannot escape His
13. ovidiv p.Tj napeXdrj k.t.X.] Comp. powerful arm neither in the height
;

Matt. V. 18. of heaven nor in the abyss of ocean

15. ft Ol ovpavol K.r.X.] ^seeing nor in the farthest parts of the earth'.
92 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxviii

^vi/aTUL (bvyelv cltto Trjs KpaTaia^ ^eipo^ avTOU ; ttoTos

he Koa-juo^ de^eTat nva tmv avTOjuoXovvToov cItt uvtov ;

Xeyei yap ttov to ypacpeTov FToy a(}>h'2oc> ka'i noy Kpy-

Bh'comai And toy npoccanoy coy san anaBoo eic ton oypA-

NON, cy el eK6?' can AneAOco eic ta Icxata thc thc, eKe? h 5

Ae2iA coy can KATACTpoocoo eic tac AByccoyc, eKel to nNeyMA

5 el eKei] A (with LXX ABS); eKei tl CS. exet 5e^id crov] AS

ij ; ffi e/cet eT C.

7 ovv] AC; om. S. aTroSpixcrr;] A; dirodpacrr] (or ajroSpdcret) S; ris drrodpa-

2. aOro/xoXowr<av] See above, Xi- with the Prophets ;

see Fiirst Der
TToraKT-eii' 21, and the note on Secrep- Kanon des Alten Tesiatnents p. 10
Twp Ign. Polyc. 6. ^^.1 P- 55 sq. Elsewhere he uses
ypa(pe1a more widely, Haer. xxvi. 12
'

3. TO ypa^etoi'] //z^ writing.^ S.

Clement here seems to adopt the (p. 94) atCka pvpia Trap' avroii TreTrXacr-
threefold division of the Old Testa- comp. Deut. x. 4 (Aq.).
fifva ypa(f>ela ;

ment books which appears in Ecclus. John Damascene likewise (de Fid.
(prol.)) in S. Luke (xxiv. 44), in Philo
Orthod. iv. 17, I. p. 284), following
{de Vit. cont. 3, ll. p. 475), in Jose- Epiphanius, describes the historical
phus {c. Ap. i.
8), and generally. The books from Joshua to 2 Chronicles,
third division is called ra aWa ^t/3Xta as Ta Kokovpeva ypac^eia napa riai 8e
and ra Xoiwa rav ^iSXiav in Ecclus., ayioypa<^a. In the Classical language
\lraKfjio\
in S. Luke, Philo and
vfivot in (as also LXX Job xix. 24, Hex. Jer.
Josephus. Its more general name in xvii. i) ypa(pe2ov is not 'a writing' but
'
Hebrew was D^3inD, 'the writings', a pen.'
translated sometimes
by ypa(p{ia, IIoC d^jf^oj] A
very loose quota-
sometimes by ayi6ypa(pa comp. Epi- : tion from Ps. cxxxix. 7 10, where
phan. Haer. xxix. 7 (l. p. 122) ov yap the slight variations of the principal
aTTTjyopfvTai nap" avrdis vofiodecria nai MSS of the LXX do not affect the wide
npocprjTai Koi ypacpeia ra trapa. 'louSai'ots' divergences in Clement's quotation.
(caXov/xfi/a, and again Trap' avrois yap Compare also the parallel passage in
was 6 vofios Kal oi 7rpo(prjrai. /cat to. Amos ix. 2, 3, to which Clement's
ypacjifla Xe-yop.ei'a k.t.X., Mens, et Pond. quotation presents some faint resem-
4 (11. p. 162) TO. KoKovp-iva ypn(pf'ia blances. It is important to observe

Trapa. Ticri de ayi6ypa(f)a Xeyopeva. In that in using /caraorpwo-o), '

make my
the of these passages however
first couch,' Clement conforms to the ori-
Epiphanius includes the historical ginal ny*VX, where the LXX has Ka-
books among the ypaipela, and in the ra^M. This is the more remarkable,
second he confines the term to them, as he elsewhere shows no knowledge
placing the Psalms, Job, Proverbs, of the Hebrew, and in the Psalms
etc., in a separate section which he generally quotes pretty accurately
calls ol (TTixrjpe'ii. This does not from the LXX. Whence then did he
truly represent the Jewish tradition, get this word.? We
may conjecture
in which i, 2 Chronicles alone be- that he was acquainted with one of
longed to the D''2inD, while the his- the versions afterwards included by
torical books generally were ranged Origen in his Hexapla. The 5th
 xxix] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 93

COY. TTcl oiiv T19 aTTeXdr] h ttov aTroZpacrr] diro tov to.

Travra efjiirepie^ovTO'i ; .^.,

XXIX.
ripoa-eXdiofjiev
ovv auTw ev 6<TioTt]TL x/^u-
lo xr}^, dyva^ Kal diuLiavrovs ^elpa^ alpovTe^ Trpo^ avTOV,

dyaTTcovTe^ tov eTrieiKtj kui eva'TrXay^i/oi/ jrarepa Yifjicov

09 K\oyf]9 fJi6po<i 67roit](Ti/ iauTW. OvTO) yap ye-
ypawTai' "Ore AieMepizeN 6 fyicToc cOnh, cLc AiecneipeN
aei C Tot] A ;
om. C, and so probably S. g oSv] AC ; om. S.

II eirieLKrj] eTneiKrjv A. 12 fiepos] A; add. ri/xas CS. ovru] ovtcos C.

version {e in Origen) has o-rpwo-o) or len, de Antid. ii. 7 (xiv. p. 145, ed.
Karaorptoo-o) (see Field's Hexapl. ad Kiihn) dXA ocrias p,iv ;^ftpas is ^ipa
loc), and as this seems to have been Xafinpov deipas (quoted by Wetstein
the one found in an old cask either on I Tim. ii. 8). The expression de-
at Jericho or Nicopolis (Euseb. H.E. scribes the attitude of the ancients
vi. i6, Epiphan. Mens, et Pond. i8, (as of Orientals at the present day)
p. 174 see Hody^i? Bibl. Text. Orig.
;
when engaged in prayer, with ex-
etc. p. 587 sq), it may very well have tended arms and uplifted palms.
'
been an ancient Jewish tradition prior 12. eKXoyfjs fispos k.t.X.] /las made
to the age of Clement. Clem. Alex. us His special portion^ or rather 'has
Strom, iv. 22 (p. 625) quotes the set apart for Himself a special por-

passage nearly in the form which it tion\ In either case the e <Xoy^y \iipos
has here (though substituting the Lxx is the Christian people, the spiritual
Kara^a for KaTacrrpfoaco), and doubt- Israel, who under the new covenant
less derived it through the medium have taken the place of the chosen
of the Roman Clement, so that he is people under the old; as i Pet. ii. 9
not an independent authority. Vfieis 8e ye'vos eKXeKTOv, (SaaiXdov ifpd-
a07;|co] The verb d(f)i]K(Lv is not Tfvp.a, edvoi dyiov, Xaos els irepiTroLrjaiu
found in the LXX or N.T., and is K.T.\. See the notes on napniKova-a
altogether a rare word ; comp. Plato and riyiaap.ivois ( l). Thus fiepos eK-
Resp. vii.
530 E, p. Antiphon in Xoyfjs here is coextensive with ol e'KXe-
Bekker Anecd. p. 470 s. v. acft^Kovros. Xeyfievoc vwo tov Qeov Hia Irjaov Xpia-
XXIX. Therefore let us approach
'
Tov 50 (comp. 64). The words
Him prayer with pure hearts and
in fxepos eKXoyrjs are not to be translated
undefiled hands. We
are God's spe- 'a portion of his elect' but 'a portion
cial portion and inheritance, of which set apart by election,' eKXoyijs being a
the Scriptures speak once and again '. genitive of the same kind as in Acts
See on the liturgical character of ix. 15 CTKevos eKXoyfjs, Iren. i. 6. 4 (mep-
this portion of Clement's Epistle fiara eKXoyfjs. The expression therefore
which follows, the introduction, i. has no bearing on the question whe-
p. 386 sq. ther Clement was a Jewish or Gentile
10. ayvas K.r.X.] I Tim. ii, 8 fTrai- Christian. See the note on Xaos below.
povTas oaiovs ;^etpas, Athenag. Suppl. 13. "Ore diep-epi^ev k.t.X.} From the
1
3 (Traipcofifv oalovi- ;^e7paf avrw see ;
LXX Deut. xxxii. 8, 9, almost word
also Heliodorus the tragedian in Ga- for word.
94 THE EPISTLE OF S. CEEMENT [xxix

yioyc 'Aaam, ecTHceN opiA eSNoaN kata ApiSMON ArreAcoN

eeoY- ereNHBH Mepic Kypioy Aaoc aytoy 'IakooB, cxoi'nicma
'

KAHpONOMIAC AYTOY C p A H A. KUl Iv eTEpo) TOTTW Xeyei' I

Maoy Kypioc AamBani eAyTto Ionoc Ik Mecoy e9N<ji^N cbcnep

I
dpidixov] apidov A. 1 iyevrjdi]] AC; Kal iyev/jdr) S with LXX.

I. Kara apidfiov k.t.X.] The idea and the error can be easily explained.

conveyed by the LXX which Clement The ends of the lines have got out of
quotes is that, while the Gentile na- gear ; 7N1K''', which in the present text
tions were committed to His inferior
occupies the end of ver. 8, has been
ministers, God retained the people displaced from its proper position at
of Israel under His own special the end of ver. 9, and thrust out the
guardianship comp. Dan. x. 13 sq,
:
original word DTI^Xn, which has thus
xii. I, but esp. Ecclus. xvii. 17 eKacrTco
disappeared. The 'sons of God' are
edvfi KarecTTrjcrev rjyovjxevov Koi fiepis mentioned Job i. 6, ii. i, xxxviii. 7,
Kvpiov 'l(rpai]X iariv, and Jnbilees 15 and in all places are translated (as it
'

(Ewald Jahrb. iii. p. 10) Many are appears, correctly) by ayyeXoi [rov
the nations and numerous the people, Qeov] in the LXX ;
see Gesen. T/ies.
and all are His, and over all hath p. This conjecture is confirmed
215.
He set spirits as lords... but over by the Samar. Pent, reads
fact that the
Israel did He set no one to be Lord, 'Israel' at the end of both verses,
neither angel nor spirit, but He alone thus presenting an intermediate read-
is their ruler etc.', with the context. ing between the LXX and the present
See also Clem. Honi. xviii. 4, Clem. Hebrew text. Justin Martyr Dial.
Recogn. ii. 42 (references which I 131 (p. 360 b) refers to the difference
should have overlooked but for Hil- between the Hebrew and LXX texts;
genfeld Apost. Viit. p. 65). Clem. see also Origen /?i Num. Horn, xxviii.
Alex. Strom, vii. 2 (p. 832) uses the 4 (II. p. 385), In Ezech. Horn, xiii
text to support his favourite idea that (ill. p. 401). The reading of the He-
heathen philosophy is the handmaid brew text is naturally adopted in
of revelation ;
ovtos ianv 6 bibovs kui Clem. Hom. xviii. 4, as it is by
Tots "EXXt^o"! TTjv (f)LXo(ro(f)i,av 8ia tcov v- Justin'sjewish opponents. The writer
nobf fcrripaip dyytXav' fla). yap (Tvv8iavf- lived lateenough to have got it from
Trpoara^ei deia re Kol ap^aiq
vefirjfiivoi one of the Judaizing versions. On
ayyeXoi Kara edprj, dXX' i] fi(p\s Kvpiov rj the other hand the LXX is quoted by
86^a Twv ntaTfvouTwv. On the Other Philo de Post. Ca. 25 (l. p. 241), de
hand the present text of the Hebrew Plant. 14 (i. p. 338).
runs
'
He set the boundaries of the na- 2. Xaos\ We
have here the com-
tions according to the number of the mon antithesis of Xao^ 'the chosen
sons of Israel (^Nlt^''' 'n ISDO*?) ; for people', and %Qvr] 'the Gentiles'; as
(or 'while', the portion of Jehovah
""3) e.g. Luke ii. 32, Acts iv. 27, xxvi.
is His people, Jacob is the rod of His 17, 23, Rom. XV. 10, II, etc. By
inheritance'. So too the Peshito and becoming the Xaos however the Is-
Targum But it is diffi-
of Onkelos. raelites do not cease to be called an
cult to get any good sense out of this 'IQvo^ (see esp. Joh. xi. 50), but are
reading, and the parallelism of the rather 'iBvo^ ayiov (as Exod. xix. 6,
verses is thus shattered. I can hardly I Pet. ii.
9) or i'dvos K fieaov edvav

doubt therefore that the LXX is right. (as below) : so Justin Dial. 24 (p. 242)
 xxx] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 95

5 AamBaN6I AN0pOOnOC THN AHApXHN AYTOY THC A A 00, KAI e2e-

AeyceTAi eK toy eONoyc eKeiNoy Af''^ AriooN."^

XXX. 'Ayiou ovv juepi's v7rap^ovTe<i Troujo'coiuev Ta
OY
7 'Aylov ow] AfioyN (the oy above the hne being written prima manu) A;
ajyio. ovv /xtpU S ; dyia ovv /n4pT] C. See I.
p. 143.

Iva yevrjTai fdvos diKaiov, Xaos (pvXacr- 14 tovvai rds aTrap-)(as Kvpiov Ka\ rd
(Tcov nia-Tiv xxvi. 2). All such
(from Is. dyia Ta>v dyicov, Ezek. xlviii. 12 (o-rai
titles, referring primarily to the Israel avTols rj anapxh 8e8opevr] tK rcoi/ arrap-
after the flesh, are transferred by dyiov ay'iav ano tuiv opicov
)(U)v rrji yrjs,

Clement, following the Apostolic wri- K.T.X.with the context but in all these ;

ters, tothe Israel after the spirit see ; passages the reference of the 'first-
above the notes on i and comp. below ,
fruits' is different. As Clement's quo-

64 Xaov Tvepiovaiov, and especially

fls tations elsewhere are so free (e.g.

Justin Dial. 119 (p. 347). I call at- 18, 26, 32, 35, 39, etc.), he may only
tention to this, because Hilgenfeld have combined these passages and
{Zeitschr. f. Wissensch. Thcol. 1S58, applied them from memory but ;

p. 585, and here) distinguishes

the the alternative remains that he is
\aoi of the first passage and the Wvo% quoting from some apocryphal wri-
of the second, as though they referred ting, such as the spurious or interpo-
to the Jewish and Gentile Christians lated Ezekiel quoted above (see the

respectively. Of such a distinction notes 8, 13, 17, 23, 46). The dyia
the context gives no indication and ; dyiav are the specially consecrated
the interpretation moreover supposes things, the offerings or first-fruits, as
that Clement departs from the ob- in the passages just quoted see also ;

vious meaning of the passages in- Lev. xxi. 22, Ezek. xlii. 13. The ex-

corporated in the second quotation, pression is applied here either to the

where the original reference of Wvo^ people of God themselves, or to their
is plainly to the Israelites. See the spiritual oblations (see below, 40,
note on e/cAo-y?]? fiepos above. 44)-

axoiPicTfia] 'a portion measured out XXX. '

Therefore, as the portion of

the let us be holy our-
by a line' (see the note on kovuv, Holy One,
7). a common word in the Lxx selves ;
let us lay aside all sins which

exactly representing the Hebrew ^3n. defile us shun pride and ensue
;
let

4. 'iSot)
Kvpios K.r.X.] A combina- peace us be on our guard against
;
let

tion of several passages Deut. iv. 34

;
slander and backbiting let us seek ;

(I {ireipaaev 6 Qeos elaeXdcov Aa/Seii/ not our ownpraise, but the praise of
favTM edvos eK jxicrov i'dvovs eV God. Self-will is accursed in His
neipaa-
/iw K.r.A., Deut. xiv. 2 koi o-e
i^iki^aro sight ;
but His blessing rests on the
Kvpios 6 Geof aov yeveadai ae Xaov gentle and lowly-minded'.
avT(o TTfpiovcriov ano navruiv tu>v e'Ofcov 7. 'Ayiou ovv pepls] i.e. 'As the
K.T.X. (comp. vii. 6). special portion of a Holy God' :

axrnep Xap^dvei k.t.X.] The pas- comp. I Pet. 15 sq Kara top KaX4-
i.

sages most nearly resembling this cravra vpns dyiov /cat avTol ayioi ev
are, Num. xviii. 27 Xoyiard^aerm vp.1v Trd(TT] dvatrrpocfiTJ ytvi^drjTe, ^uWi ye-
rn n(f)aipfpara vp,cov a)s a'trni; ano ctXco ypiiTTTai (Lev.
\i. 44) 'Ayioi eaecrBe on
Ktii
difinipfpa dnn Xrjvov, 2 Chron. xxxi. (yM tt'yi
ij. On the liturgical charac-
96 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxx

Tov dyiaciuLOv TravTa^ (pevyovre^ KaraXaXid^, /ULiapd^ re

Kai dvayvov^ orujUTrXoKas, jueOa^ re kui vewTepicriuLOvf
Kui fiheXvKTa^ e7n6vfjLLa<iy fjivcepdv fj-OL-x^^iav, (S^eXvKTtjv

V7repr](paviai>.
Oedc r^p, (priG-iUj fnepH(|)<\Noic ANTiiAcce-

TAi, TAneiNoic Ae AiAcocin x<^P'n. KoWtjOwjuev ovv 6Ki- 5

voi^ oh t] xajOf? avro tov Qeov hehoTai. ev^vaiufjieda

Ttjv ofjiovoiavy Ta7reivo(ppovovvTe<i, eyKparevofJievoi^ dno
TravTO'i yp^idupio'iuiov
Kai KaraXaXid^ Troppw eavTOVi
TTOiovvTe^, epyoi's BiKaiov/uLevoi Kai /mt) \6yois, Xeyei
yap' '0 TA noAAA AerwN kai ANTAKoycexAr h d efAAAoc lo

oTeTAI elNAI AlKAIOC; efAOTHMeNOC reNNHTOC TYNAIKOC OAl-

roBioc MH noAyc n phmacin riNoy. eTraipo^ rjfJLcov

1 av&yvovs] C ; ayvova A. (jvixirKoKi-s] AC ;

Kai ffvfiirXoKas S, rendering
the word however by contentiones (Jurgia), and connecting fuapas re /cat dj'd7J'ci;s
with KaraXaXids. re] AS ;
om. C. 3 /xucrecac] A ; nvaepdv (/xvaapdu
C) re CS. /jLoixflcLv] fj.oix'^av A. ^SeXi/KT-Jji'] A; koL ^de\vKT7]v CS.

4 Geos] AC. Bryennios reads 6 9e6s, as if it had some manuscript authority.

6 dirt)] AS; om. C. 8 KaTa\a\iS,s...iavTovs] AC; S translates as if /caraXa-
\ids... iavTU!!', connecting dwd iravThs xpt.9vpia/j,ov with eyKparevbixevoL. 9 Kai]
AS; om. C. lo fi] r} A dC ; ; -g (apparently) S, for it translates Hie qui

ter of the language here used, see curs in the LXX or New Testament.
above, i.
p. 387. 3. p.v(Tipa.v\ For this form see the
1.
(})fvy. KaraX."] I Pet. ii. I anode fie- note on 14.
voi...TTa(ras KaraXaXids- 4. 0fos yap K.T.X.] From Prov. iii.

2.
dpayvovs] Something may still 34 Kvptos inreprjcfydvois k.t.X. In I Pet.
be said for Xdyvovs which I read in V. 5, James iv. 6, it is quoted 6 Qeos
my first edition after Colomi^s ; comp. vnpr](f)dvois k.t.X. The Hebrew has
Athenag. Suppl. 19 Tois aKoXdoroty simply Nin 'he'.
Kcu Xayvois, 21 Xayveias t] ^Las rj
nXeo- 8. ^16. Kai KaTaX.] See below, 35.
vf^ia^, Clem. Recogn. ix. 17 (the Greek The words occur together also 2 Cor.
is preserved in Csesarius) fiedvcrovf, xii. 20 comp. Rom.
; 30 "^iBvpuxTds, i.

Xdyvovs, baifiovavras, Petri in Ada KaToXaXovi.

Isid. Pelus. Ep. ii. 99 (see Hilgenfeld's 9- fpyoii diKaiovixevoi] See the note
Nov. Test. extr. Can. Rec. iv. p. 70) at the beginning of i^ 33, and the in-
o yap <^CKoxpr\\iaTos ovk fx<opr](re tov troduction, I. pp. 96, 397.
TTJs aKTTjiJLoa-vvrjs Xoyov ov8e 6 Xdyvos 10. 'OTairoXXd K.T.X.] FromtheLXX
TOV ntpl a-a>(f)po(Tvvr)s k.t.X., Clem. Alex. of Job xi. 2, 3, almost word for word.
Faed. ii. 10 (p. 222 225). The com- Itdiverges widely from the Hebrew,
mon form was Xayvos, the Attic and the sentiment fvXoyrjfxevos k.t.X.
Xdyvrji; Lobeck Phryn. p. 184.
see has no connexion with the context.
Neither word {avayvo^ or Xnyvo^) oc- It may be conjectured that the words
 xxxi] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 97

ecTTOi ev Qew Kal jULt] e^ avTcou, ouTeiraLveTOv^ yap

juioreT 6 Oeos. tj /uapTvpia tyj^ dyadf]^ Trpa^eio^ fjjucoi/

5 Bi^ocrdo) VTT aAAo)!/, Kado)^ edodt] TOT'S

Trarpacnv rjjucoi/

ToT^ ^LKaiOL^. 6paG'09 Kal avOadeia kui ToX/ua rols

KaTt]pajuievoi^ vtto tov Oeou' e7ri6iK6ia Kai TaTreivo-

(ppocrvi^r]
Kai Trpaiirt]^ irapa to?? rjuXoyrjiuevoL^ vtto tov

Oeou.
'o XXXI. Ko\\t]6u)iuLep ovv TY] evXoyia avTov, Kai
L^Mjuev TLve^ al odoi Ttj^ euXoyia's. dvaTuXL^Mfjcev Ta
(XTT
dp^tJ9 yevojueva. tlvo^ X^P'-^ f]vXo'yr]6r] 6 7raTt]p
'

rjfjiiiov Aj^padfj. ; ov-^l diKaioa'vvt]v

Kai dXtjOeiav ^la ttlct-
T6W9 TTOu'iaa^ ; IcraaK jmeTa TreTTOiOtjcrea)^ yivoocTKcou to

mulhim dicit et audit in hac {hoc) quod qui bene loquitur, etc. 1 1 evXoyrjfj.^-

fos] A; om. C; S substitutes Yej/j/i^ros, thus repeating the same word, Hv"' X'7v\
12 Tjfxwv] AS; vfiSiv C. 13 OetfS] A; ri3 de(^ C 7ap] AC; om. S.
14 ayaOrji'] AS; om. C. r)|J.Qlv^^ A; vixQiv CS. 15 e^odrj] eSe-qdrj A.
17 VTTO TOV GeoO] AS; om. C. See l. p. 125. eVietKeta] eTrtet/cia A.
18 7rpaiiT7;s] A; irpaorrjs C. S transposes TaTrLvo4>po(Tvv'rj and irpavr-qs, probably
for convenience of translation; see I. p. 137. 23 5ta Trt'crTews] AS; om. C.

yewT]Tos yvvuLKos oXiyo/3to? crept in 18. npavrrjs] This word is distin-

from xiv. I
fSporos yap yevvrjToi yvvai- guished from raneivoclypoavvr], Trench
Kos oXiyo^ios, which may have stood A^. T. Syn. ist ser. xliv, and from
next to this passage in a parallel iirifLKfia ib. % xliii.

column, and the euXo-yr;/iei/os will have XXXI. '

Let us therefore cling to
come from the first word of the next His blessing : let us study the re-

verse, "i''12 misread jinn. cords of the past, and see how it was
1 1.
y(:vvr]To%\ See the note on Ign.
won by our fathers, by Abraham and
Ephes. 7. Isaac and Jacob'.
12. 'O enaivos k.t.X.] See Rom. ii. 21. dvarvkL^anev] unroll \ and so '

pore over'; comp. Lucian Nigr. 7

^

29 nv 6 enaivos ovk i^ dvdpwnMv dXX'

(K TOV Geou, 2 Cor. x. 18 ov yap 6 rovs Xoyovs ovs Tore rjKovaa avvayd-
iavTov (Twia-Tavcov k.t.X. ; Comp. I Cor. pcov kuI dvarvXiTTcov.
iv. 5. 22. o TraTrjp rj/xwi/] See the note on
13. avTav] So read for aOrcoj/. On 4.

the forms avruv, avTa, etc, as inad- 23. ovxi- SiKaioa-vvTjv k.t.X.] Com-
missible here, see 9, 12, 14, 32 bining the statement of S. Paul (Rom.
iv. i sq, Gal. iii. 6 sq) with that of
(notes).
avTfnaiveTovs] No Other instance of S. James (ii. 21 sq). See the note at
the word is given in the lexicons. the beginning of 33, and the intro-

15. i57r'
liXXav] See Prov. xxvii. 2. duction, i.
p. 96.

CLEM. IL 7
98 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxxi

jixeWou I7^ew9 Trpoa-^yeTO dvoria. 'laKco^ fdera Tairei-

vo(ppO(Tvvm e^')(^wpr]cr6v Trj^ yfj^ avTov hi

dheXcpov Kai
eTTopevdn Aafiav kul ehovXevaev, kui
TTjOO? edoSrj avTw
TO dwdeKacrKrjTTTpov tov 'IcparjX.
XXXII. 'Edv Ti^ Kad' ev eKaarov elXiKpivM^ Kara- 5

vorjo'rij eTTiyvMcreTai /ueyaXeTa twv vtt' avrov hedojuevMv

hwpewv. eT avTOv yap lepeh Kai XevTrai Travre^ ol

XeLTOVpyovvre^ tw 6va-iacrTr]pi(i) tov

Oeov' e^ avrov
I ^S^ws] AC; KoX ijdiccs S. 5 'Ew] conj.; def. A; 5 &v C ; qjtae si (as if
a,
iav) S, which is perhaps correct. See the lower note. elXiKpivws] iXiKpiv...
A. 7 ocopedv] 8wpaLU3v A. avrov] S; avrwv AC. lepets] A; ot

lepeh C. ot] AC; om. (apparently) S. 8 'Keirovpyovvres'] "KiTOVpy...

I. jJSe'tBs K.T.X.] There is nothing in Pair. Nepht. 5 to ScodfKa (TKrJTrTpa tov

the original narrative which suggests 'lapa^X.
that Isaac was a willing sacrifice ;
XXXII. '
If any one will consider,
Gen. xxii. According
7, 8. to Jose- he may see what blessings God show-
phus however, An^. 14. 4, on hear- i. ers on the faithful. What great ho-
ing his father's purpose he de'xfrai noursdid He
confer on this patriarch
TTpos rjbovTjv Toiis Xoyovs and oopfirjcrev Jacob ! From him was
derived the
eVt TOV jScofiov Koi ttjv a<payi]v. See also priestly tribe of Levi from him came :

Beer's Abrahanis p. 65 sq
Lebeji the great High-priest, the Lord Jesus ;

with the notes p. 709 sq, where ample from him are descended kings and
rabbinical authorities are collected rulers through Judah. And by the
for this addition to the narrative. The other tribes also he was the father of
idea is brought out strongly by Melito countless multitudes. It was God's
(Routh's Rel. Sacr. I.
p. 123) o hi will, not their own righteous doing,
'icraaK. criya TTenedrjfiivos a>s Kpios, ovk whereby they were glorified. And
afoiycov to aropa ovde (f)dfyy6p.evos by His will also, not by our own
(f)covfj' TO yap ^i<^os ov (fio^rfdels ovhe piety or wisdom, are we and all
TO TTvp TTTorjdels ou'Se TO TvaOelv Xvnr)- men justified through faith by His
0e\s f^aaracrev tov tvttov tov Kvpiov
Almighty will to whom be glory for
K.T.X., where there is an obvious ever'.
reference to Is. liii. 7 in ovbe (pdey- Previous editors read et;
5. 'Eai/]
yofifvos Philo de Abr. 32 (ll. with the conjunc-
cfxcvfj. but, though ft

p. 26) is seemingly ignorant of this tive is possible (see Philippians iii.

turn given to the incident. 11), it is rare and ought not to be

4. TO hahiKacTKrjTTTpov]
Equivalent introduced unnecessarily.
to TO ScoSeKa'^vXoi/, which occurs below '

eiXtKpti'wy] distinctly, severally^.

55 and Acts xxvi. 7 for aK^nTpov ; It seems to be a military metaphor
(D2C0) 'a branch or rod', is a syn- from i'CKr] ' turma '
see the note, ;

onym for 'a tribe'; e.g. i Kings xi. 10.

Philippimis i.

31, 32 Kai 8coo-&) aoi BeKU (TKrJTrTpa kol 6. vii avTov\

i.e. tov Geov. There
dvo (TKriTrTpa ?(TTai avTm, and again is a awkwardness in the sudden
little
ver. 35, 36 (see 32) ; comp. Test, xii transition to e'^ avVoi), which must re-
 XXXIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 99
6 TO KaTci crapKa' i^ avTOv fiacriXeh
Kvpio<5 'lt}(rov^
lo Kai ap-^oi'T6<5 Kai t]<yoviaei/oi, kuto. tov lovhai/- to. 5e
XoiTva (TKtiTrrpa auTOU ovk eV
luiKpa ho^t] VTrdp^ovcriv,
w? eTrayyeLXafxevov tov Oeov otl "Ectai to cnepwA coy
(he 01 ACTe'pec toy oypANOY. /7aWes ovv eZo^d(T6t](Tav
Kai efJLe'yaXvv6t)(Tav ov di avTwv r] twu ep<yoiv avTwv r]

15 t//9 diKaiOTTpayia^ //s KaTeipyd(TavTO, dXXd Zid tov

Tca A. 10 Kara] AC; ot Kara S, this being a repetition of the last syllable of

TjyOlJfJ.VOl. 5^] A; re CS. 11 avrov] AS om. C. ;

dd^rj] AS ;

TCL^ei C. 12 TOV Qeov] A; 9eov C. 14 airui''] avruv C.

fer to Jacob ; but rav viv avrov 8e8. which Clement quotes so repeatedly,
Bapeoiv can only be said of God (as and from which his ideas of Christ's
ri
'9i 23, 35), nor can vtt' avrov high-priesthood are taken, would dis-
be translated ^per eum', as in the tinctly teach him otherwise (vii. 14).
Latin version of Young. Lipsius (de A double descent (from both Judah
Clem. Rom. Ep. p. 55) explains De '
and Levi) is maintained in the Test.
beneficiis a Jacobo in nobis collo- xii Patr. (see Galatians p. 308), but
catis' and Harnack adds 'haec dona this writing travels in a different
sunt sacerdotes, ipse Dominus se- cycle of ideas. And even in this
cundum carnem, reges.' Judaic work the Virgin herself is
7. e^ avrov\ i.e. from Jacob. The represented as belonging to Judah.
following clauses render it necessary In Iren. Fragm. 17 (p. 856, Stieren)
to read avrov for ai5rc5i', which might likewise a double descent is ascribed
otherwise stand. For the whole pas- to our Lord
e'/c fie rov Aeui Kai rov
sage comp. Rom. ix. 4, 5 S>v...r] Xa- loi'Sa ro Kara aapKa as fSaaiXfiis Ka\
rpfia KOI al eirayyeXiai, mv ol narepes lepevi iyevvrjOrj. On the descent from
Ka\ e^ d)v Xpiarbs ro Kara adpKa. Levi see Sinker Test, of Ttuclvc Pat?'.
9. o Kvpios 'irjo-oiis} He is men- p. 105 sq.
^
tioned in connexion with the Leviti- 10.Kara rov \ov8av\ after fudali^
cal tribe, as being the great High- i.e. as descended from him and
priest, a favourite title in Clement :
thereby inheriting the attribute of
see the note 36. Comp. Ign. F/ulad. royalty, Gen. xlix. 10. This idea of
9 KoXot (cat 01 if pels, Kpelcraou 8e 6 dp- the royalty of the patriarch Judah
Xifpevs. With Levi He is connected runs through the Test, xii Pair.., e.g.
as a priest ; from Judah He is de- Jud. I o TTarr]p p.ov 'laKmjS Tjv^aro p.01
scended as a king. Hence His name Xeywv, Baa-ikevs ecrrj KarevoSovixtvos eV
is placed between the two, as the Tracrt.

from the one to the

link of transition 12. "Ea-rai K.r.X.] Comp. Gen. xv. 5,
other. But there is no ground for xxii. 17, xxvi. 4. It is not an exact

assuming that by this collocation Cle- quotation from any of these passages,
ment implies our Lord to have de- but most closely resembles the first.
scended from Levi, as Hilgenfeld (A- 14. 81' auVwi/] Not avTciv. See
post. Vat. p. 103, and here p. 98, ed. 2) above the notes on 9, 12, 14, 30.
thinks. The Epistle to the Hebrews, 15. rfji SiKaioTTpayias K.r.X.] Comp.
72
lOO THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxxii

BeXrifj.aTO'i auTOv. Kai rifjieis ovv, dia SeXrifjiaTO^ avrov

'

ev XpiCTw lt](TOv K\7]6evre^y ov hi eavTWv oiKaiov^eOa

ovde ^id Ttj^ ijjuerepa^ (rocpias rj o-ui/ecrew^ y} eva-6(3eia^ tj

epyoiv (hv
KaTeipyacrafieSa ev oaioTtjTi Kapdia<Sy dWd
did tP]9 TTLO-Teit)^, di ^? 7ravTa<i rov^ aTr aiMVO^ 6 irav- 5

TOKpartop 0609 ediKaicoG'ev' o) ecTTio r]

do^a eU tov^
al(Joi/a<i T(Jov aicdvuiv. dfit^v.

XXXIII. Tl ovv TTOiricrcoiuev, ddeXcpoi ; dpyyiG-wfjiev

diro Tt]^ dyadoTTOuas kui eyKaraXeLTroofjiev Tt]v d<ya-
1 avTov] AC; rod deoO S. Kal r]ixeh...de\i}iia.To^ avrov] AS; om. C, by
homcEoteleuton. 3 ij/xeT^pas'] rj/xepacr A. 5 iravras] A ;
dvavTas C.

Toi)s] Tov A. 6 Toiis aiu>vas rCiv aliLvuiv] AS ;

aiCiva^ C. See also
below, 45. 8 Tt odv irotrjauixev, dSeXtpoi] AS ;
ri odp ipovfxev, dyaTnjToi C.

This variation is obviously suggested by Rom. vi. i, where the argument is the

same; see I. p. 125. For ddeXcpoi translated as if dyaTrrjToi see above, i, 4.

dpyT^awixev] A; dpy-qaofiev C. 9 Kat] AS; om. C. iyKaTaXelTrw/jiei']

A; KardXiironev C; dub. S. 10 iaaai 6 de<Tir6T7)i1 A; 6 becnrbT-qs edaai C.

Tit. iii. 5 ovK i^ epyav twv iv hiKai- seen before that the righteous have
oavvT) a ijfieli aWa Kara
7Toii]aafifv ever been adorned with good works,
TO avToi) eXfos ac.t.X. so now we see that even the Creator
2. St' iavTcov] i.e. ijfxaiv avrwv, aS thus arrayed Himself. Having such
e.g. Rom. viii. 23, 2 Cor. i.
9, iii. i, 5, an example, let us do good with all
and commonly. our might'.
3. (Tocpias fj avpe<T(ci>s] The words In 31 we have seen Clement com-
occur together i Cor. i.
19 (from Is.
bining the teaching of S. Paul and
xxix. 14), Col. i.
9 ;
so too (ro0oi icai S. James in the expression ov^i Bikoio-

o-vveTOL, Matt. xi. 25 (Luke x. 21). (Tvvrjv Knl aXrjdeiav 8ui TrlaTeas Troiijans;
They are explained in Arist. t/i. So here, after declaring emphatically
Nic. vi. 7, 10. The first is a creative, that men are not justified by their
the second a discerning faculty. own works but by faith ( 32 ov 81

6. T] So|a] See the notes on Gala- avrav t)

raiv epycov avrav k.t.X., and
tians i. 5. again ov 8ia...epya>v (of KaTeipya.crdiJ,eda
XXXIII. 'What then? If we are iv 6(Ti6Tr]TL Kaphias ak\a 8ia ti]s niarecos

justified by faith, shall we leave off K.r.X.), he hastens to balance this

doing good ? God forbid. We must statement by urging the importance
needs work. The Almighty Himself of good works. The same anxiety
rejoices in His own beneficent works. reveals itself elsewhere. Thus, where
The heaven, the earth, the ocean, the he deals with the examples adduced
living things that move on the land in the Apostolic writings, he is care-
and in the sea, are His creation. ful to show that neither faith alone

Lastly and chiefly He made man nor works alone were present : 10
afterHis own image. All these He of Abraham fita tt'kttip koI <f)i\o^viav
created and blessed. As we have f8udr] avra vlos k.t.X., 12 of Rahab
 XXXIIIJ TO THE CORINTHIANS. lOl

io7rt]v; jULr]6afj.(jo^
tovto iacrai 6 hecTTrorrjs e(J) rifjLLv ye
yevrjdfji'aL, dWa orTrevo'MiJiev {leTci eKTeveia^ kul irpo-

dujuia^ TTciv
epyov dyadov eTTLTeXeiv. avTOS y^P o

hjiuioupyo^ Kcil dea-TTOTt]^ tcov diravTcov eiri toI<s

epyoi^
avTOv dyaWiuTai. tw yap TrajUjueyeOecTTaTa) avTOv
15 Kpdrei ovpavou^ e(TTf]pi(Tev, kul Trj dKaraXtjiTTip
avrou
(Tweaei hieKoa-fj.^G'ev aJroi/'s* yr]V re hLe^wpKrev diro
Tov 7repi6^ovTO<s avrrjv v^aTO<i kcu t]^paarev etti top
ye yV7]67JvaL]A; jevridrivaL (oni. 7e) CS. Above, 23, we have the same pheno-
menon, though there the relations of A and C are reversed, A omitting and C re-
taining 76. It is wanted here for the sense. ir eKrece/as] eKrevia... A.

14 aYaXXtarat] A; d7cXXeTat C Leont Damasc. Tra/xfjieyeOeaTarq}] AC ; Trafi-

fxcyeffTOLTip Leont Damasc. 15 ea-rripia-ep] AC; ecxT-qpi^ev Leont Damasc.

T^] A Leont Damasc; iv rrj C; dub. S. 16 yrjv re diexupicrev] C; yqv
re pLcrevA; yrji/ de Stexciptirej' Leont ; y7Ji> 5e ix'^pi-o'ev Damasc. 17 17-

dpaaev] AC Damasc ; ^dpaaev Leont.

Sta nicTTiv koI (piKo^eviav ecradrj. See 10. fdcrai 6 becnroTTjs K.r.X.] True
Westcott Cation p. 23. Nor is it to his dictum that everything is Sta
only where doctrine is directly con- 6f\j]pi.aTos avTOv and nothing St' iav-
cerned that Clement places the teach- ratv, he ascribes the prevention of

ing of the Apostles of the Circum- this consequence solely to God's pro-
cision and the Uncircumcision in hibition. On o dfcnroTTjs see the note
juxtaposition, as e.g. 49 ayaixr] ku- above, 7. For the preposition in
'
XvTTTfi TrKfjOos afxapTicov, dyairr] iravra e'(^' J/Mi", i'n our case,' comp. John xii.
avex^Tai K.r.X. (see the note there). 16, Acts v. 35, xxi. 24, 2 Cor. ix. 14.
This studied effort to keep the balance avrof yap K.r.X.] This passage
12.

produces a certain incongruous effect as far as av^aveade Ka\ TrXrjdiii'eade is

in the rapid transition from the one quoted (with some omissions and va-
aspect of the antithesis to the other; riations) by John of Damascus Sacr.
but it is important when viewed in Parall. (ll. p. 310).
connexion with Clement's position as 13. Srjuiovpyos k.t.X.] So Clein.Honi.
ruler ofa community in which the xvii. 8 TvdvTaiv 8T]fxiovpyov koi SecrTTorjjj/.

two sections of the Church, Jewish 15. fo-rripia-eu] See the note on
and Gentile, had been in direct an- cTTijpiaoi'
18.

tagonism and probably still regarded 17. TreptexoiTos] This has been
each other with suspicion. On this thought to imply an acceptance of
position of Clement, as a reconciler, the theory of the (OKeavos TroTapios
see Galatians p. 323, and the intro- supposed to encircle the earth comp. ;

duction here, i.
p. 96. A part of this e.g. Herod, ii. 21 t6 S' wKeavov yfjp
TvepX iraa-av peeiv, M.
chapter is quoted by Leontius and Ann. Seneca Suas.
John Res Sacr. ii (see above, I. p. 188) i. I de Oceano dubitant utrumne
'

with considerable variations. terras velut vinculum circumfluat.'

8. Tt ovv 7rot?)o-co/xfz/] Evidently But, as Clement does not use the
modelled on Rom. vi. i
sq. word cineapos, and as it is not un-
I02 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxxin

d(r(pa\f]
Tou i^'iov /3ou\r]iuaTO^ defxeXiov Ta re ev

avTrj tcoa (pOLTcovTa Trj eavTOu diaTa^ei eKeXevcreu

elvaf 6d\a(T(Tav kul Ta ev avTrj ^wa TrpodtJiuioupyr]-
(ra^ eve.K\eL(Tev Ttj eavTOv dvvajuiei' Itti TrdcL to e^o-

^coTaTOv Koi TrajUjueyeSe^ kutu diavoiav, dvQpiairov tol^ 5

lepals Kal dfj.cdfj.OL'i ^epaiv eTrXaaev Tt]^ eavTOv eiKOuo^

o'vTUi^ T^/' (p^lO'LU 6 Qeo^' TToiHcooMeN an-
)(^apaKTripa.
9poanoN kat' gikona kai ka9' omoioocin HMTepAN. KAi enoi-
HceN d Gedc ton ANBpoonoN, ApceN kai GhAy InomceN Ay-

I j3oi'Xi7/ia70s] AC; deXrjfiaTOS Leont Damasc. rd re ev avTr!...dvvdfjLeC\

om. Leont Damasc. i iavTov] AS ;

eavrOip C. 3 !rpo^7)ixLovpyr]aas]

irpoSrjixi aaa A ; irpoeroi-fidaas CS. 4 ev^KXeicrevI eviK\iirev A. iwl

]ra(Ti...dv6puirov'\ AC; iirl rot/rois rbv i^oxi^rarov {e^braTov Leont) Kal iran/xeyedq
dvOpuvov Leont Damasc S. 5 wafx/xiyedes] A; irafx,uyeOe(TTaTov C. For
the other authorities see the last note. . 6 iepais] AC ;
ioiais avrov Leont

'
natural to speak of the water gird- the lips of Clement, and such a strong
ling' the land independently of this expression as TrapLfieyedes kotci 8ta-
theory, the inference is questionable. voiav jars with his language elsewhere
See the note on 20. about human intellect, e.g. 13, 32,
3. 7Tpo8riiiiovpyi]aas^ i.e. before to. 36. The TranfjLeyedei kuto, didvoiav
ev Trj yrj {"wa (poiToivTa, which have therefore seems to have the same
been already mentioned out of their bearing as ttj a.KaTa\7]TrTa> avTov (Tvveaei
proper place. above. John of Damascus indeed
'
4. eveKKeiaev] tnc/osed within takes the sentence otherwise, but he
their proper bounds' see above 20 : omits KaTci hiavoiav.
ra TTepiKelfxeva avTjj KkeWpa. 5. waixjieyedei] The word does
TO e^o^coTaTov k.t.X.^ Is this an not occur either in the LXX or in the
accusative after eVXao-ei', avOpaiTov G.T., but is found in Symmachus Ps.
being in apposition ? Or is it a Ixvii (Ixviii). 31 a-woba irafineyedav
nominative absolute, referring to the (Field's Orig-. Hexapl. ll. p. 204).
whole sentence which follows, avOpa- 6. d/LiwjLiois] 'faultless'. See the
Tvov. .
.xapaKTTjpa ? On the construction note on pLcopLoaKOTTr]dev, 4i'
adopted depends the sense assigned 7. A broken quo-
Ylonja-cofiev k.t.X.]
to Karo hiavoiav which will mean tation from the LXX Gen. i. 26, 27,
respectively either (i) 'in intellectual clauses being left out.
referring to man; or (2) 'as
caj>acit_y', 8. elKova, opLOLcoiTiv] These words
an exercise of His creative intelli- are distinguished in reference to this
gence\ referring to God. The former text by Trench N. T. Syn. ist ser.

appears to be generally adopted; but xv,

the latter seems to me preferable ;
for Dorner {^Person Christi I.
p. 100,
a sentiment like Hamlet's '
How Engl, trans.) considers it probable
noble in reason ! how infinite in
'
that under the expression ei/cwj/ Geov,
faculty !' is somewhat out of place on whose xapaKTripa man bears, we are
 xxxiv] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 103

10 Toyc. TauTa ovv iravTa TeXeiwa'a^ eiry^vecrev

cwtcc Kai

ijuXoytjcreu Kal eiTrew AyHANecee kai nAneVNecee. G'l^o-

jdev on epyoi^ ayaOoh iravTe^ eK0(Tfj.r]6r](rav ol hi-

ev

KaiOL' Kcii auTO's ovv 6 KvpiO<i

epyoi^ eavTOv KOcrjULrjora'i
e.)(^apy). e)(^ovTe^ ovv tovtov tov vTroypa/uiuov ao/cj/wv
15 TrpocreXOwjuev too deXrjjULaTi avTov, e^ bXri's 'kt^vo^ f]jj.wv

epyacrutfJieBa epyov diKaio(rvv)}<i.

XXXIV. 'O dya6o9 epyaTtj^ /xera Trapprio'ias XajUL-

Damasc. 8 eUdva] Damasc adds ijfj,Tipav and omits it after ofj-oiucriv.

10 iirrjvecrev] AC; iiraiveaev Leont ; ewoliqcrev Damasc. 11 Av^aveaOe]

avk,aveadai A. TrX-rjOvveade] wX-ajduveadaL A. Et5o;U6>'] Young (marg.); ibwixev
ACS. 12 OTi\ CS ;
add rb A. 'ipyoi.s\ eyyoLcr A. e/coffjUTj^T/crac]

AC; eKot/j.-r]d7](Tai' S. 13 oSv] A; 5^ CS. epyois] A; add dyadois CS.

See above, 30, and comp. i.
pp. 126, 141. 15 e'^] A; Kai i^ CS. tVxi^os]
A ; TTJs iaxvos C.

to understand the Son'. Though the credited by the fact that the scribe's
text in Genesis is so interpreted by attention was flagging here, for he
later fathers (e.g. Clement of Alex- writes eyyoty for epyoty and (as we
andria and Origen), I see no indi- have seen) iSa/j-ev for eihofiev. On
cation in the context that this idea these grounds I proposed the omis-
was present to the mind of the Roman sion in my first edition, and it has
Clement. See the remarks on the since been confirmed by our new
logos-doctrine above, i.
p. 398. authorities.
11. Av^avio-de /c.r.X.] From the 14. vnoyjjaynj.ov'l See the note on
LXX Gen. i. 28. 5.

El'So/xei/]
The sense seems to re- 15. TTpoo-eX^cu/xei'] The verb npoa--
quire this substitution for 'ibu>iiev ; see epxecrdai occurs several times of
the introduction I. p. 120 for similar approaching God in the Epistle to
errors of transcription.
'
We saw be- the Hebrews, and in the imperative

fore,' Clement,
says all the 'that npo(Tepx(ofJifda more especially twice,
righteous were adorned with good iv. 16, X. 22. See also above ^ 29
works ( 32), and now I have shown TrpoaeX6a>p,V ovv avra k.tX. comp. ;

that the Lord God Himself etc' By 23, 63.

6 Kvpios is meant 6 SrjjjLiovpyos koI XXXIV. '
The good workman re-

Secnrorris tSv
appears airavTOiVf as ceives his wages
boldly but the :

from ovv and from ix^P^ taken in slothful dares not face his employer.
connexion with what has gone before The Lord will come quickly with
(compare ayaWiarai above). His reward in His hand. He will
12. oTi K.T.\.^ If the readings to be come attended by myriads of angels,
retained, we must understand a cog- hymning His pi'aises. Let us there-
nate accusative such as K6a-fj.t][j.a
:
e.g. fore with one voice and one soul cry
Soph. if/. 1075 TOV del irarpos (sc. to Him, we may be partakers of
that
(TTovov) SeiKaia (TTevaxovda. This is His glorious promises, which surpass
possible ;
but the reading of A is dis- all that man can conceive'.
 I04 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxxiv
^->7
(idvei Tov apTOv tov epyov avTOv, 6 vwdpos Kai irap-
eLjuevo^ ouK cii/TO(p6a\iu6T rw epyoTrapeKTr} avrou. deov
ovv ecFTiv TrpoOujuovs ij/ias elvai eU dyadoTrouav e^
avTOv yap icTiv Ta iravra' irpoKeyei yap Y\\Xiv' Maoy
6 Kypioc, KAI 6Micedc AYTOY npd Trpocoanoy aytoy, AnoAoY- 5

NAI eKACTCp KATA TO epfON AYTOY-

FlpOTpeTTeTaL OVV t^jULCl^
TTiG'TevovTa^ e^ oX^s Tt]^ Kapdia^ eir' avTM /ut] dpyou9

jurjde TrapeifJLevovi eivaL eiri wdv epyov dyaSoV to Kav-

X^lM-(^ ^)/xwi/ Kai ri
7rappt](ria ecTa) ev avTO)' ivTroracr-

I 6 vuOpbs] AC ;
6 d^ vuidpb^ S. 3 ^/aSs] AC ; vj^as S. et, avrov]
AC S translates as if it referred to irpodv/jLovs iifids k.t.X. 5 6 KvpLos] A;
K^pios (om. 6) C. 6 UpoTp^Trerat] irpoTpeireTe A. 7 inaTevovTa{\ CS ;

1. o v(o6pos K.T.X.] Both these <ra>Trjp TrapayivcTai SA) excou tov eav-
words occur in the epistle to the He- Tov picrOov, Koi TO epyov avTov (om.
brews, and nowhere else in the N.T. A) irpo TrpocrcoTrov avToii but the
avToii :

For voidpos see Heb. v. 11, vi. 12; ending comes from Prov. xxiv. 12 os
for irapeifievos, ib. xii. 12. The com- a7ro8i8a)criv eKacTTm koto to.
e'pya avToii,
bination appears in Ecclus. iv. 29 unless (as seems more probable from
vadpos rat Trapfip.evos if toIs i'pyois
the connexion) it is taken from Rev.
avTov, which passage perhaps Cle- XXII. 12 I80V epxofiat
Ta^v Kai 6 fiia-ffos
ment had in his mind. pov peT epov anoSovvai eKaarco (os to
2. dvTo(l)6a\pfl] '/aa's\ as Wisd. epyov e'a-Tai avTov. Clem. Alex. Strom.
xii. Acts xxvii. 15, Barnab. iv. 22 (p. 625) has the same
14, 5. quo-
The word occurs frequently in Poly- tation, but is copying the Roman
bius. Comp. avTccTre'iv Theoph. ad Clement.
Atitol. i.
5, ovTop-paTiiv Apost. Const. 7. V
auVw] i.e. Tw piadM, la/t/t
'

vi. 2. For dvTo(f)da\fjL'Lv itself see our reward in view\ The position
Lit. D. Jacob, p. 25 (ed. Hammond). of e^ oXrjs Trjs Kapdias is Opposed to

epyoTrapeKTj]]
''

]iis
employcr\ I have such corrections as eV avTo to or eVl
not found any other instance of TO for the MS reading eV avTm nor ;

this word, which is equivalent to does any alteration seem needed.

epyo8oTr]s. Compare also fpyoXdjBos, 8. prj8e TTapeipevovs k.t.X.] Comp.
{pyodiwKTrjs (Exod. iii. 7, v. 6, etc.). 2 Tim. il. 21 els Trav epyov dyaOov
3. e^ avTov] i.e. TOV epyoirapeKTOv ijToipaapevov, ib. iii. 1 7, Tit. iii. i, and
l]flWV. see above, 2. The pr]Te after px] in
4. 'idov 6 Kvpios K.T.X.] The be- A was so suspicious (see Winer ^ Iv.
ginning is a confusion of Is. xl. 10 p. 513, A. Buttmann p. 315) as to call
t8ov Kvpios (o 6e6s vp.u>v S) Kvpios (om. forth the suggestion in my first edition
Kvpios sec. A) /Liera Icrxvos epx^Tai Koi that should probably be read pr]U
it
;
'
6 ^paxioiv add. avTov A) p,eTa Kvpias see the vv.11. in Luke vii.
^^i, Eph. iv.
idoii o piadbs avTov fieT avTov Kai to
27. Our new authorities have con-
e'pyov ivavTiov avToii, and Is. Ixii. II firmed the justice of this suspicion.
iSoD o (TaTrjp (TOi irapayiyovfv 6 12. Dan. vii. 10 (Theo-
{croi Muptat K.r.X.]
 xxxiv] TO THE CORINTHIANS. i05

I
lo or CO /ued a tm OeXtjjuaTi avTOV' KaTavor](T(afxev to irav

7r\f]6o9 Twv dyyeXwv avTOV, ttoj? t deKfjjULaTi avTOv

\eiTOupyou(nv TrapecTTcoTe^' Xeyei yap t]
ypacprj' MypiAi
MYpiAAec HApeicTHKf icAN ay'to), kai )(iAiai xiAiAAec eAeiToyp-
roYN AYTO)" Kai eKeKpAfON" Afioc, Afioc, a'tioc KVpioc CA-
15 BaooO, nAhipHc haca h kticic thc Aozhc ay'toy. Kai tjjueT^

ovv, ev Sjuovoia ettIto avTo orvva'^devTe^ Trj crvvidri(reij

ws e^ eVos cTTOjJiaTO^ (ioy)(nofj.ev 7rpo<s avTOv eKrevw^ eh
TO fXETOXOvs tjjULas yevecdai twv jueydXwi^ kul evho^iav

om. A. See i. p. 124. 8 /xiyS^] C, and so probably S; iJ.-qTe A. 12 Xet-

Tovpyo\j(nv'[\i.rovp-yov(yiv A. 13 eXetToyp70w] C ; XiTovpyovv A. S translates

both this word and TrapeiarriKeicTav as presents. 15 Kricns] AS ; yrj C with
LXX and Hebr. 16 ry crwetS'^crei] AC; in una conscientia S.

dot.) )(iKiai ;(tXtaSe? l\nrov()yovv avrOi sis for such conjectures. Probst more
{idepaTTevov avrov LXX) Koi fivpiai pv- especially {Litiirg. d. drci crsien
ptdSes Trapei(rTT]KLcrav avrm, the clauses Jahrh. 41 sq) emphasizes this con-

being transposed by Clement. The nexion. The phenomena which ex-

order of the clauses in the Hebrew is pressly point to it are (i) the 'ter
the same as in the Greek versions. sanctus', and more especially the
Yet Iran. Haer. ii. 7, 4, Euseb. Pracp. connexion of 3 with Dan. vii.
Is. vi.

Ev. vii. 15 (p. 326), Greg. Nyss. Hoiii. 10 ; (2) The expressions eVi to avrh
via in Ecdcs. (l. p. 463), Cyril. Hier. avvaxdevres (comp. Ign. Ephcs. 13,
Catcch. XV. 24 (p. 237), and others, Philad. 4, Sniyrn. 7, 8), e'^ eVoy aro-
give the quotation with the inverted fxaTos (comp. Rom. xv. 6), tKrevas (see
clauses as here but, as it is quoted
; I.
p. 385), etc. ; (3) The quotation
with every shade of variation in dif- 64>0a\p6s K.T.X. For more on this
ferent fathers and even these same subject see the introduction, i.
p.
fathers insome cases give the right 386 sq.
order elsewhere, no stress can be 16. Trj a-%!veL8r](Ti] Hii heart, ill con-
laid on this coincidence which seems sciousness'' ; comp. Eccles. x. 20 Kai ye
to be purely accidental. iv crvvei^rjaeL crov (BaaiXea p,rj KaTapacrrj,
14, Kai e/ceKpayoi'] A loosequotation 'in your secret heart'.
i.e. The pre-
from LXX Is. vi. 3. 'EKeKpayoi- is an sence of their hearts, and not of their
imperfect new verb Kf/cpayw
of a bodies only, is required. The com-
formed from KfKpaya see Buttmann ;
mentators however either translate
A us/. Griech. Sprachl. iii (ll. p. as though it were ev ayaBf] a-wftdrja-fi,

37)- or give tt/ crtn/etSrycret the unsupported

Kat J/xeiy ovv k.t.X.] The con-
15. sense 'harmony, unanimity'. This
nexion of this passage with the li- last is apparently the sense assigned

turgical services had struck careful to it by the Syriac translator see ;

observers, even before the discovery the upper note. Others have pro-
of the liturgical ending of the epistle posed to read arvvBrja-d or avvabia.
(,^ 60, 61) had furnished a solid ba-
io6 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxxiv

avTOv. '0(\)QaKm6c oyk el^eN

eTrayyeXiMU Xeyei yap'
KAi oyc OYK HKoyceN, KAi eni KApAiAN ANepconoy oyK aneBh,
OCA HT0l'\AAC6N TOIC fnOMeNOYCIN AYTON.
I '04>da\ix6s] A; a 64>6a\f^bs CS (with i Cor. ii.
9). 3 offa AC ; orn. S.

^Toi/Maaev] A; add. KvpLos CS. rots virofievovaiv] A; Tois dyaTTuxxiv CS (see

the lower note).

I. 'O0^aXjLio? K.T.X.] This quotation

The passage, if we may trust S. Je-

occurs also in S. Paul i Cor. ii. 9 rome, occurred as given by S. Paul,

(where it is introduced by Ka^wy ye-
both in the Ascension of Isaiah and
a o(f)6aXfibs ovk in the Apocalypse of Elias (Hieron.
ypawTai), in the form
elBef KoX ovs ovk. fjKovcrev Koi eVt Kap8iav in 761 Prol. in Gen.
Is. Ixiv. 4, IV. p. ;

dvdpcoTTOv OVK avefirj baa TjTOifiaa-ev

o IX. p. 3). And
Origen, in Matth.
Qeos Tols dyanacriv avrov. It is cited xxvii. 9 (ill. p. 916), says that S. Paul

again in ii. n (comp. 14), AfarL *

quotes from the latter, In nullo re-
Polyc. 2, Clem. Ep. ad Virg. i. 9 see ; gulari libro hoc positum invenitur,
also Lagarde's Gesamm. Abhandl. p. nisi (et pr]., 'but only') in Secretis
142. It is apparently taken from Eliae prophetae'. This assertion is
Isaiah Ixiv. 4, which runs in the repeated also by later writers (see
LXX OTTO Tov almvos ovk rjKovaanev Fabricius Cod. Ps. V. T. i. p. 1073)
ov8e ol 6cf)6aX[io\ rip-mv eibov deov jrXrjv doubtless from Origen, but combated
(TOV Koi Ta epya crov a Troirjcrets toIs by Jerome (11. cc. and Epist. Ivii. 9,

imopivova-Lv eXeov, but more nearly in I.

p. 314), who refers the quotation to
the From eternity they
'
Is. Ixiv. 4. If it could be shown that
Hebrew,
have not heard, they have not heark- these apocryphal books were prior to
ened, neither hath eye seen a god S. Paul, this solution would be the

[or 'O God'] save thee (who) worketh

most probable but they would ap- ;

[or '(what) He shall do'] to him pear to have been produced by some
that awaiteth Him' (see Delitzsch Christian sectarians of the second
ad loc)\ combined with Is. Ixv. 16, century, for Jerome terms them 'Ibe-
17 OVK dva^ijafTai avrav eVt rrjv Kap- rae naeniae' and connects them with
Biav...ov prj eTreXdrj avrav ini ttjvKap- the Basilideans and other Gnostics
biav. Clement mixes up S. Paul's who abounded in Spain (11. cc. ;
see
free translation or paraphrase from also c.
Vigil. 11.
p. 393, and comp.
the Hebrew (the latter words ocra Fabricius p. 1093 sq). If so they

rjToipaaev k.t.\. being apparently the incorporated the quotation of S.

Apostle's own explanatory addition) Paul in their forgeries. For a simi-
with the passage as it stands in the lar instance of incorporation see the
LXX ; just as above, quoting 13, in notes on Galatians vi. 15. At all

Jer. ix. 23, 24 (or i Sam. ii. 10) he con- events both these works appear from
denses it after S. Paul. For a similar the extant remains to have been
instance see above 34 l^ov 6 Kvpios Christian. For the Apocalypse of
K.T.X. The
passages, which Hilgen- Elias see Epiphan. Haer. xlii (p. 372),
feld suggests as the sources of the who says that the quotation in Eph.
quotation (4 Esdr. x. 35 sq, 55 sq), V. 14 (which is obviously Christian)

diverge more from the language of was found there and for the Asceti- ;

S. Paul and Clement, than these sion of Isaiah, this same father Haer.
words of Isaiah. Ixvii. 3 (p. 712), where he quotes a
 xxxv] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 107
XXXV. 'CaJ^
^aKapia Kai Oav/uLaa-rd to.
^copa tou
5 Oeou, dya7rt]T0i. ^wrj ev ddava(TLa, XajjcTT pern's ev di-

passage referring to the Trinity. In- modern critics have made of this re-
deed there is every reason to beHeve ference to Hegesippus in Stephanus
that thework known to Epiphanius Gobarus, see Galatians p. 320.
and several other fathers under this For the connexion of this quotation
name, is the same with the Ascension ocpdaXfjLos ovK eiSev k.t.X. with the
and Vision of Isaiah published first earlier liturgies, see the introduction,
by Laurence in an yEthiopic Version I.
p.389 sq.
and subsequently by Gieseler in a Fabricius (p. 1073) quotes a par-
Latin. The two versions represent allel from Empedocles {Fragm. Phi-
different recensions and the passage ;
los. I.
p. 2, ed. Mullach) ouV eTriSepKra
'
Eye hath not seen, etc' appears in Ta8 dv8pctcriv ovt enaKovcrrd, ovre vooa
the Latin (xi. 34) but not in the Tre piXrjTrTa..

yEthiopic (see Jolowicz Hiinmelfahrt 3. vTrop.vov(nv] It is clear that

tc. Vision dcs Propheten Icsaia p. 90, Clement wrote vrropevovaiu from the
Leipzig 1854). The Latin recension words which follow at the beginning of
therefore must have been in the hands the next chapter riva ovv apa ia-rlv tci
of Jerome ; though this very quotation iT0ip.a^6p,eva tols where viropevovcnv;
seems show clearly that the ^thi-
to he picks up the expression according
to his wont
opic more nearly represents the ori- see the note on
; 46
ginal form of the work (see Liicke TO)!/ eKkenTuiv fiov diacrTpeij/aL. On the
Offcnbarung d. Johannes p. 179 sq). other hand S, having broken the
Both recensions alike are distinctly connexion by substituting dyanuxriu
Christian. for v7rop.evov(rip, re-establishes it
by
It was events a favourite
at all the expedient of adding koI dyancovTcov
text with certain early Gnostic sects, to inroixevovTwv in 35. On this
who introduced it into their formula reading {inrop.epov(Tiv) see also i.
p.
of initiation and applied it to their 390, note.
esoteric teaching ; see Hippol. Hacr. XXXV. '
Great and marvellous
V. 24, 26, 27, vi. 24. This perverted are God's gifts even in the present !

use of the text was condemned by How then can we conceive the glory
their contemporary Hegesippus that hereafter awaits His patient ser-
(as
reported by Stephanus Gobarus in vants Let us strive to attain this
.''

Photius Bibl. 232), as contradicting reward. And to this end let us do

our Lord's own words fiaKapioi ol what is well-pleasing to Him : let us
o(f)daXfjio\ vfiav K.r.X. In Other words shun and vainglory let us
strife ;

he complained that they would re- lay aside all selfish and unbrotherly
strict to the initiated few the know- sins. Remember how in the Psalms
ledge which Christ declared to be God denounces those who hearken
laid open to all. But Stephanus Go- not to His warning voice, who persist
barus himself, writing some centuries in wronging their neighbours, count-
later and knowing the text only as it ing on His forbearance. He tells us
occurs in S. Paul, is not unnaturally that the sacrifice of praise is the path
at a loss to know what of salvation'.
Hegesippus '
means by this condemnation {ovk ol8' 5. XaiJLTrpoTrjs] cheer/u/ness, ala-
Ti Koi TvaBwv fiUTrjv /xiu eiprja-dai raiira crity, strcnuousness\ as e.g. Plut.
Xe'yei k.t.X.). On the use which some Vit. Cim. 17, Polyb. xxxii. 23. i (see
io8 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxxv

Kaio(ruvr], dXriBeia ev Trapprjcria, ttlo'ti's iv 7r67roi6t](reiy

eyKpuTeia iv dyiacrfjico' kui ravTa vTreTTLTrrev iravra vtto

Tr]V hidvoiav tjjutoi/. Tiva ovv apa icrriu Ta eTOijua^o-

jueva Toh vTrojuevovcriv 6 hrifxiovp'yo^ kul Trarrjp twv

;

alwviov 6 Travayics auTO^ yLviacTKei Trjv TrocroT^TCt Kai 5

Tf]u KaWovrjU avTcov. t^jueT^ ovv dycoi/icrcoiueda evpedfjvai

eV Tw dpidjUM TWV vTTOfxevovTUiv avTov, OTro)^ jULeTaXa-

fiwjuev Tvov eir^yyeXfJievcdv hcopewv. Tray's he ecTTaL tov-

TO, dyaTTtjToi', eav ecTTtipiyfJievr) rj t] Ziavoia 7]p.oiv Zia

TrlarTew^ Trpos tov Oeov

eav eK^^TWfjLev Ta evapecTa lo

Kal evTrpoG'heKTa avTco' eav e7rLTe\e(r(i)fj.ev Ta dvrjKOVTU

1 iyKpareia] eyKparia A. vireiri.irTev ttAvto] A ;

vvoir'nrTeL iravTa C ;
vtvo-

iriTTTovTa S, some letters having dropped out,

YTTOniTTTe[lTTA]NT&. 4 Kai
TraTTjp tQv aiihvwv 6 7ra;'d7tos] AS; tQv althvwv /cat irarrjp vavdyios C. 7 vwo-
fievovTWv] AC; add. Kai dyairdvTuv S. For the reason of this addition see the note
on 34 6<pda\fibs k.t.X. auTov] A; om. CS. 8 ti2v evqyyekfiivwv SwpecDf]

TuveirriyyeXfieviiivdwpaiiov A; Ttov dwpeCov twv eirrjyyekixivwv C, and so probably S.

9 dyairrjToi] AC; om. S. 3 '^l '?'? A ; ^ (om. ij)

C. Sid Tricrrews] Young; per
fidcni S; iria-Teus (om. dia) ;
A
iria-ruis C. 10 iKlyjTQfiev] A; iK^rrjawfiev C.
ra eiidpeara Kal einrpocrdeKTa ai}ry] ; to. AS dyadd Kai eiidpeffra avT($ Kai evwpoa-

Schweigh. Lex. s.v. Xa/nTrpds). Com- less indeed the occurrences in4 Mace,
pare the similar word 0atSporjj?. The vii. 4, xiv. 7, are earlier.
position of Xafinporrjs here seems to 9. 8ia TTio-rews] The reading of the
require this sense, for all the words Syriac version
unquestionably is

in the parallel clauses ^cot/', dXrjdfia, right see i. p. 143. The omission of
;

nicTTis, eyKpciTfia, refer to the moral 8ia in A may perhaps be explained by

consciousness, not to any external the neighbourhood of 8iapoia. Hil-

advantages. genfeld and Gebhardt read Tria-Toos.
1. irl(TTis iv 7re7rot^r;crei] See the Lipsius (p. 15) defends TrtWemr, trans-
note above,
''

26. lating cogitatiojtcs fideV, but this

2. 'These,' Cle-
Kui raiira /c.r.A.] would require a\ 8iavoiai rijs Tr/o-rewr.
ment argues, 'are already within our II. evTrpoa-dfKTo] See the notes on
cognisance. What then are the joys 7, 40.
in store for those who remain sted- 13. naaav ddiKiav k.t.X.] The whole
fast to the end?' Comp. i Joh. iii. 2 passage which follows is a reminis-
viip TiKva Qeov iafJiev Ka\ ovtto) f(j)av- cence of Rom. i. 29 sq Troielv ra p,rj
padrj Ti iaofj-eda. Kadr]KOVTa...Tra(rr] d8iKLa TTovrjpiq irXeo-
5. Apparently the first in-
TTuvayios] ve^Lq...epi.8os 8oXov KaKorjdfias, ^idvpia-
stance of the word, which afterwards ras KaToXaXovs dfO(TTvyeis...vnepr](jia-
takes a
prominent place in the povs aXa^opas ...eTTiypopTei: oti 01 ra

language of Greek Christendom ;

un- ToiavTa TTpdcrcropTes d^ioi dcipdrov elaip,
 xxxv] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 109

rfj dfJitdfJLM l3ou\t](r6L avTOv kul ciKoXovOtjcrwiaei/ tyj oZw

TfJ9 d\r]6eia^, ciTroppi^avTe^ d(p'
eavTwu Trdcrav dhiKLav

Kal dvofjiiaVf irXeove^iav , 'epei9, KaKorjdeia^ re Kai hoXov^,

15 ^i6vpL(Tiiiov<i
TE Kal KUTaXaXid^, OeocTTvyiav, vTrept]-
(baviav re kul dXa^oveiav, Kevoho^iav re Kal dcpiXo-
peviav. Tavra 'yap ol rrpao'O'OVTe^ crrvyriTOi
tw Oew
vTrdp-^ovariv ov juovou he ol
TrpacrcovTe^ avTa, dXXa Kai
ol (TvvevhoKovvTe^ avToh. Xeyei yap ypacpr]' To) Ae
ri

20 AMApTCoAo) eineN d Oedc "Ina ti cy Aihth ta Aikaioomata

MOY, KAI anaAaiuBancic thn AiaGhkhn moy eni ctomatoc coy;
CY Ae Imichcac nAiAeiAN, kai eleBAAAec toyc AdroYc moy ^ic
8eKTa C. 14 dvo/xiav] A; Troi/rjpiav CS (comp. Rom. i.
29). irXeove^iai']

AS; om. C. 15 /caraXaXtds] KaToXiKtacr A. virepr)(paviav re] AC; koI

virepr](paviav S. 16 dXa^oveiav] aka^ovid A. d(pi\o^viav] CS; (piXo^ei/iav

A. 18 /xovov] [lov A. 20 515777?] A; eKdn^yfj C; dub. S. This is a
v.l. in the Lxx also. 21 iirl] A (as the Hebr. bj?) ; 5ta CS with the LXX.
(Tov] fxov A. So the MS seems clearly to read (as even the photograph shows),
though Tisch. gives it aov. 22 av d^ k.t.X.] C omits all to 6 pvofievos (p. 1
11,
1. i) inclusive. After the omission comes /cat iv t<^ reXet dvaia atVecrews k.t.X.

iraideiav] iraidLav A. e^ejSaXXes] e|a/3aXXeo- A ; efe/SaXes S ;

def. C.

ov pLovov aira TTOiovaiv {v. I. Tvuiovvres) liness of their contributions towards

aXXfi Kai (TvvevhoKovcnv {v. I. arvvevdo- the needs of poor Christians abroad,
Kovvres) toIs irpaa-aova-iv. On the though they may have failed in this

reading iroiovvm, avvfvboKnvvm, sup- respect also (see the note 38). The
ported by Clement's language here, duty of entertaining the brethren
see Tischendorf 's note. from foreign churches was a re-
16. a(^i\o^evLav] This was the sim- cognized obligation among the early
plest emendation of the reading of A Christians. In former times the
(see the note on ^j) dr/;/xeXetVw 38), Corinthians had obtained a good re-
and it is now confirmed by our new port for the practice of this virtue
authorities. The word occurs Orac. (
i to pLfyaXoTrpe-n-es rrjs (fnXo^evias
Sibyll. viii. 304 rr]s a^iKo^ivir)^ ravTr^v vp>.u>v ^6os), but now all was changed.
Tia-ova-L irpane^av. Other proposed Hence the stress laid on the hos-
readings were (^yikoTm'iav, (fiiXodo^lnv, pitality of Abraham ( 10), of Lot
^ikoviiKMv. The
suggestion of Lip- ( 11), of Rahab ( 12); for this
sius (p. 115), that the Corinthians
virtue cannot have been singled out
had failed in the duty of providing in all three cases without some special
for others, appears to be correct. reference.
But the word seems to point rather ig. Tw Se a^apruikw k.t.X.] From
to their churlishness in not enter- the LXX Ps. 1. 16 23, with slight va-
taining foreign Christians at Corinth, riations, of which the more important
than (as he maintains) to the niggard- are noted below.
 no THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxxv

TA oTTicoi. ei
eOecbpeic KAentHN, cyNexpexec aytco, kai meta
Moi'xcaN THN MepiAA COY eriGeic- to ctoma coy enAeoNAceN

KAKIAN, KAI H fAoOCCA COy nepienAeKGN AOAIOTHTA" kaOhmenoc

KATA Toy AAeAcj)OY coy katcAaAcic, kai kata toy yioy thc

MHTpo'c coy eTi6eic ckanAaAon" tayta enomcAC kai ecirHCA'5

yneAABec, anomc, oti ccomai coi omoioc eAe'r^oo ce kai

nApACTHCoi ce KATA npdcooncJN coy. cynctc Ah tayta, oi

eniAANSANOMeNOi toy Oeoy, mhttotc ApnACH <x>c AeooN, kai

A
ewXedva^ev S.
2 itrkedvacrev^ ; 4 dde\(poxj] a8e\<f)ov(r A. 6 dvofie]
avofiai A; See the lower note.
avofilav S. 7 ere /card irpbaoj-rrbv aov\ A;
/card irpbffWKbv aov ra? a/jLaprias aov S. .See the lower note. ro y] LXX (BS)
see below; rjv ACS (with some MSS of the Lxx). aOry] AC; adroTs S.
ToOGeoO] AS; /xov C. 13 dcrOeveias] affOeviaa A. 14 rovrov] C; TOyxoy

3. Kudijfievos] Implying deliberate bring thee face to face with thyself,

conspiracy ;
see Perowne on Ps. i. i. show thee to thyself in thy true light.'
6. avofjLe] LXX avo^iav (B) ;
but S The uf. is omitted in BS of the LXX
has avojxe, though it is afterwards cor- and doubtless had no place in the
rected into avofjLfiav {avopiiav). 'Avo- original text of this version which
'
fxiav is read by Justin Dial. 22 (p. agreed with the Hebrew, I will lay
240), Clem. Alex. Stroin. vi. 14 (p. in order (the matter) before thee'.

798) but avo\x.i Clem. Alex. Strom.

; Justin Dial. 22 (I.e.) and other wri-
iv. 24 (p. 634). The Syriac does not ters supply an accusative ras dfiapTias
favour avo\x,i (as Wotton states), ex- aov, which is found also in a large

cept that the existing pointing in- number of MSS (see Holmes and
terprets it thus. The reading of Parsons).
our MS A here shows how easy was
'
8. cos i.e.
Xe'taj/]lest he seize you
the transition from the one to the as a lio?i\ The words coy Xecoj/
it we7'e

other, and avofxia ( = dvo-

ai/o/xat (avofie) are absent from the LXX (and Justin
fiiav). See the notes on dvaa-Trjanixai Dial. 22 p. 402), as also from the
5, and ^ Se/|co just below. Though Hebrew. They must have come
aj/o/xe makes better sense, the original from Ps. vii. 3, either as a gloss in
reading of the LXX here must have Clement's text of the LXX or as
been dvopiiav (not avop.e Wottonas inadvertently inserted by him in a
thinks) ; for the translators must quotation made from memory.
have misread n\ni< nVH TT'OT 'Thou 10. fi Set'^coj As fi is read in the LXX

thoughtest, I shall surely be', as if (BS) and in Justin 1. c, and as the

n-'nx niin rr^an 'Thou thoughtest parallelism in the opening of the
destruction (or iniquity), I shall be', next chapter (tJ 6hos ev evpofiev to
since niin is elsewhere translated by a-coTi^ptov K.T.X.) seems to require it,

dvo^ia, Ps. Ivii. 2, xciv. 20 ;

and Theo- I have restored it for rjv. For similar
dotion,whose version agreed with the corruptions in the MS A see 15 ava-
LXX Field's Hexapl. ad loc),
(see arrja-ofiev (note), 36 o(ra)V, 41 o-wei-
must have read it in the same way, b-qcriv, ii. 6 aLXfJ^oKaxriav. If rjv be
'

7. 77apa(TT}]crw ere k.t.X-I I will retained, a-mrijpiov must be taken as a

 xxxvi] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 1 1 1

MM H d pyoMeNOc. eyciA AiNeceooc AolAcei Me, kai eKei

lo f5Adc H Aei'loo AYTO) to cooTi-ipioN toy Oeoy.
XXXVI. AvTY] Tr] o^o'i, dyaTTriTOi, ev t)
e'vpofj.ev to
crwTtjpiov >7/:xa)i/ lt]crovv XpicTTOV tov dp^iepea tmv irpocr-

(popwv t]^o)Uj TOV 'rrpoa-To.Tnv Kai f^ot]66v t^9 d(r6eveias

ij^MV. ^la TOVTOu dTevL(TU)jj.ev ek to. v^t] tcuv
ovpavwv
15 ^la TOVTOV evoTTTpi^ojueOa tyiv afjLMjjiov Kai vTrepTaTrju
b^lnv avTOV' Zia tovtov ^veto-^driorav rifjicov oi ocpdaXjuoi
Ttj^ Kap^ia^' ^la tovtov ri dcrvveTO^ Kai ea-KOTM/uLevr] did-

(the superscribed y being prima manu) A; toCto S, and so 11.

15, 16, but not 1.
17,
or p. 1 12 1. 2. areviaijiiiivl Acofitemplcmur (or contemplabimur) S
; ; drevl^o/ji.ei' C.
15 evoTrTpi^6^9a] AC; videa?mis (or videbimus) tajupiam in
specula S. 16 ^J'tci-

xOvo-av] A; dved)x6v<^av C; et apcrti stmt ^. T]ix.(hv\ AC; vixGiv S. 17 kcjKO-

TUfiivrf] AC; iaKOTia/x^vrj Clem 613.

nominative in apposition with 686s. tin Dial. 116 (p. 344).

XXXVI. 'On this path let us tra- 13. Trpoo-raT-j;!']
''

guardian, patron,
vel. This salvation is Jesus Christ who protects our interests and pleads
our High-priest. Through Him our our cause'. To a Rornan it would
darkness is made light, and we see convey all the ideas of the Latin 'pa-
the Father for He is the reflexion of
:
tronus,' of which it was the recognized
God's person. He has a place far rendering, Plut. Vit.Rom. 13, Vit.Ma-
above all angels, being seated on rii 5. Comp. Trpoa-TaTis Rom. xvi. 2.
God's right hand and endowed with Trji ncrdevdas^ In connexion with
universal dominionand made tri- the work of the great High-priest, as
umphant over His enemies. These in Heb. iv. 15.
enemies are they that resist God's will.' ivonTpi^opedal Christ is the mir-
15.
12. TOV apxiepeci] This is founded ror in whom is reflected the faultless
on the teaching of the Epistle to the countenance of God the Father (av-
Hebrews (ii. 17, iii.
i, iv. 14, 15, etc.), Tov) ; comp. 2 Cor.
18 Trjv bo^av iii.

of which Clement's language through-

Kvpiov KaTOTTTpi^opevoi, Philo Leg. All.
out this section is an echo. See 33 (l. p. 107) pr]bk KaT07rTpicraipr)v
iii.

again 61, 64. Photius {B/dl. 126) ev oXXo) Tivl TTjv (TT)V I8eav rj iv <to\ t
alludes to these two passages in his 060) ; comp. John i.
14.
criticism of Clement, dpxiepea Kai '
be-
a/xw/xo!'] ''fmdtless\ fleckless'' ,
TrpocTTaTTjv TOV Kvpiov rjpav ^ly^aovv e^o- cause the mirror is perfect. For the
vofjLa^iov ovbe Tas Beonpenfis Kai yyj/rjXo- meaning of lipaipos, sec the note on
Tfpai a(f)riKe nepl avTOv (fxovds (see the fi(OHoq;KOTrT]6ev, ^ 4^-
note, ^5 2). The term dpxiepevs is 17. 8ia tovtov K.T.X.] Quoted in Clem.
very frequently applied to our Lord Alex. Strom, iv. 16 (p. 613) o iv ttj
by the earliest Christian writers of irpos Kopivdiovs iTVKTToXrj yiypaTrrai,
all schools ; Ign. Philad. 9, Polyc. Aia 'irjaov XpitrroG rj d(rvv(Tos...rjpas
Phil. 12, Test, xii Pair. Rub. 6, yevcacrOai.
Sym. 7, etc., Clem. Rccogn. i.
48, Jus- ij
drrvveTos k.t.X.] Roni. i. 21 Kcii
 112 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxxvi

i^oia i^fjiiou dvaSaWei ek to [Oaviuaa-Tov avTOv] (pco?'

dia
TOUTOv tjOeArjcev 6 decTroTtj^ Trjs dOavarov yviacreoy^

rifjid's yevo'acrvaL' oc con AnAYr<^cMA thc MerAAoocyNHc ay-

toy TOCOYTOi MeiZOON eCTIN AfreAoON, OC(ii AlACJJOpOiTepON
ONOMA KeKAHpoNOMHKeN. yeypaTTTai yap ovtw^' '0 noiaJN 5

TOYC AVreAoYC aytoy nNeYMATA kai toyc AeixOYproYC aytoy

nYpdc (t)AorA. 'Stti de tm vIuj avTOv outws eiirev 6
oeo'TTOTrj^' Yidc moy el cf, er<i> CH/wepoN rereNNHKA ce* aT-

THCAI HAp' ImOY, kai AcbcCO COI GONH THN KAHpONOMl'AN COY,
I TO Oaufxaarbv avrov 0tSs] A (with i Pet. ii.
9) ; to <pSis S with Clem; rd
davfiaaTOf (pds C. 2 Trjs ddavdrov yfdiiieus] AC ; mortis scicntiae S (Q<xva.Tov
where r^s has been absorbed in the preceding syllable of deairdTris and
Yi't^irews),
OavaTov is written for dOavaTov. For an instance of ddvaTO'; for d^dvaros see ii.

19, and conversely of dddvaTo% for Odvaros Ign. Ephes. 7. 5 &o/xa kckXtj-
pov6ixr)Kev^ A ; KeK\ripov6ix7]Kev Svo/xa C (with Heb. i.
4). 7 Tupos 0Xo7a]
A (with Heb. i.
7); (pXbya -rrvpos C (as Rev. ii. 18). 13 ry deXrifiaTi avTov]

CS; Twde\7}iJ.a.TLTU3d\-q[ji.a A, as correctly read by Tisch. The lacuna has space

for seven letters and should probably be filled up (with Tisch.) TiavTov, the words
T(f> deXrifiaTi being written twice over. 18 eiicTiKuis] eKTiKus C; Ic7nter

icTKOTicrOrj rf
dcrvveros avrav (capSta, Epistle to the Hebrews, from which
Ephes. iv. 18 ea-Korcofievoi [v. I. (tko- expressions, arguments, and quota-
Tianevoi] Tji biavolq. These passages tions alike are taken see esp. i. 3, 4, :

are sufficient to explain how Clem. 5, 7,For the meaning see the
13.
Alex, in quoting our Clement writes commentators on that epistle. On
'

eo-KOTto-jLte'i'?;, but not sufficient to justify ovoiia, title, dignity', see Philippiatis
the substitution of this form for eV/co- ii.
9.

rm/xei/77 in our text. See A. Jahn's 5. 'O TvoiQiv (C.T.X.] From LXX Ps.
Methodius II. p. jj, note 453. civ. 4. quoted exactly as in Heb.
It is
avaOaXkit K.r.X.] i.e. Our mind,
I.
'
i.
7j TTvpoy (j)X6ya being substituted
likea plant shut up in a dark closet, for TTvp cpXeyov of the LXX (BS, but A
had withered in its growth. Removed has TTvpoa 0Xeya which shows the
thence by His loving care, it revives reading in a transition state).
and shoots up towards the light of 8. Yios/iouK.r.X.J FromLXXPs. ii.7
heaven.' Comp. i Pet. ii.
9 tov ck word for word, after Heb. i. 5 comp. :

(TKOTOvs Vjias KaXeaavTos els to dav- Acts 33 (in S. Paul's speech at

xiii.

fiaa-Top avToii (j)oas. See also Clem. the Pisidian Antioch), where it is
Alex. Faed. i. 6 (p. 117) npbs to dtdtov again quoted. In both these passages
dvaTpex^ofievov (pas and the note on the 7th verse only is given ;
Clement
59 below eKoKea-ev ^^^J,as k.t.X. It is adds the 8th, aXTjja-ai k.t.X.
Strange that editors should have 1 1. Kadov K.T.X.] From LXX Ps. ex. i

wished to alter dvadaXXei, which con- word for word, after Heb. i.
13.
tains so striking an image. XXXVII. 'We are fighting as
3. av K.T.X.] The whole passage
OS soldiersunder our heavenly captain.
is borrowed from the opening of the Subordination of rank and obedience
 xxxvii] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 113

10 KAI THN KATAC)(eCIN COy TA nepATA THC fHC. KUl TTCtXlV

Xe'yei Trpo^ avTOV KaBoy eK Ae^ioJN woy, eooc an eoo

Toyc exQpoyc coy ynonoAiON tcIon noAcoN coy. T'lv6^ ovv

OL
e-)(6poL ; ol
(pavXoL Kal dvTLraa-crojULevoL tw 6eX>]{j.aTL
avTOV.
15 XXXVII, CTpaTev(TU)fie6a ovv, avdpes dheXcpoi,
fjiBTa Traorv]^ eKreveia^ ev toI^ djuw/uoi^ irpoo'Ta'yfj.aa'iv
avrov' KaTai/or](r(joiuL6v TOv<i aTpaTevojuevov^ Toh r\<yov-

IULVOl rifJiMV, TTW? 6VTaKT03<S, TToJs eLKTLKtO'i, TTWS VTTOTe-

{placide) n''N3''3"1 S; eyeKTil... A, as I read it. The first part has originally
been written eieKT, but the is
prolonged and altered into an y, and an
i is I

superscribed between e and K, so that it becomes eveiKT-. So far I agree with

Tischendorf prol. p. xix. After this he reads oo ('non Integra'); it seems to me
more like an with a stroke of another letter which might be K, so that I read the
i

part before the lacuna eveiKTiK- But the MS

is so worn, that it is
impossible to
speak confidently. The lacuna seems
too great for a single letter, and this again
is an objection to ei;i/crw[(r], the reading of Tisch. But the uneven length of the
lines diminishes the force of this objection. See the lower note.

to orders are necessary conditions in i.42 Tols fv avTj] 'Po}p.aioi.s .Kripv^v. .. . .

an army. There must be harmonious arparevaeLv eavrco (where (rrparevadv

working of high and low. So it is is transitive).
'
with the human body. The head 18. elKTiKcos;^ concessive /f\ In
must work with the feet and the feet my former edition I had proposed,
with the head, for the health and with the evidence then before me, to
safety of the whole.' read evecKxiKcos. The adverb eveiV-
15. ^TparevcTcofJieda] 2 Cor. X. 3, I Tim. rcos is recognized in the Etym. Magn.,
i.
18, 2 Tim. ii. 3, 4, Ign. Polyc. 6. and of the adjective fCeiKTos the Lexi-
17. Karavoijorconev K.r.X.] So Seneca cons give several instances, e.g. Dion
de Traiiq. An. 4 'Quid si militare Cass. Ixix. 20. On the other hand
nolis nisi imperator aut tribunus ? of fveiKTiKos, -KMs, though legitimate
etiamsi alii primam frontem tene- forms, no examples are given in the
bunt, te sors inter triarios posuerit, lexicons. But in the light of the
inde voce, adhortatione, exempio, recently discovered authorities, etV
animo, milita'. TiKois seems to me more probable.
Tois rjyovfievoLs iqfiu>v\
'
under our The alternative would be to read

temporal j-itlcrs.' For this sense of eKTiKws with C. The word cKn/ccos
ot riyovfKvni see the note 5. On the means 'habitually', and so 'fami-
otherhand ol Tjyovfifvoi is used else- 'easily', 'readily' (i.e. 'as a
liarly',
where of the officers of the Church : matter of habit'); comp. Epict. Diss.
see I
(note). For the dative after iii. 24. 7S (TvWoyiap.ovs iv ava\vcrT]s
(TTpaTfvea-dai see Ign. Polyc. 6 apku- fKTlKOOTfpOV, Plut. A/or. 802 F KTLK(OS
Kere m (TTpaTfveadf, Appian Be//. CiT. h '"fX""'''"'* 1 8iuip(TiKa)i, Porph. (fe

CLEM. II. 8
114 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxxvii

ray/ULeva)^ eiTLTeXovorLV Ta diaTacrcrojueva. ov TravTe's

elaiv eTrap-^OL ovhe '^(^LXiapxoi

ov^e eKarovTap^oi ovhe
TrevTYiKOVTap-x^OL
oiiZe to KaOe^rj-s'
dW eKao'TO^ ev rw
ihiui TOLyfjiaTL to. iTTLTacrcroiueva vtto tov f^acriXea)^ Kai

TCdv ewiTeXeT. oi MerAAoi Ai'xa to^n MiKpo^NS

riyovfjievcdv
ov huvavTUL elvai, ovte oi MiKpoi Ai'x^ toon MerAAcoN- cfr-

KpAci'c TIC ecTiN EV 7rd(nv,

Kal ev tovtois xP^^^^' Aa/Sw-
I eTTLTeXovcni'} A ;
reKoucn. C ;
dub. S. to, 8iaTacr(x6iJ.eva] AC ;
TrdfTa ri

biaraaaofieva S. 2 ^Trapx^O AC
S adopts the Greek word virapxoi., but it
;

does not necessarily imply any variation in the Greek text. 4 itriTacrcoiJ.eva.']

Abst. iv. 20 TO alriov tov crvufJ-eveiv tion to get a word with an adequate
e'lirois av koI tov eKTiKcos diajieveiv, Diod. sense ;
but on the whole it seems
Sic. iii. 4 iieXeTT] TroXvxpov'ioi /cat fivrifJ-f]
more probable that he had eiKTiKcoc
yvfiva^ovTis Tas "^v^as eKTiKcos eKacrTa in his copy, and not eKTiKcac as read
T(ov yeypafxfxevaip dvayivaaKovai, 1. e. in C. If so, fLKTiKas has the higher

'fluently' (where he is speaking of claim to be regarded as the word

reading the hieroglyphics). So here, used by Clement. It is difficult to
ifthe reading be correct, it will mean say whether the rendering in S repre-
'as a matter of course', 'promptly', sents elKTiKms or iKTLKcis. In the Pe-
'readily'. The adjective is used in shito Luke vii. 25 NDi31 stands for
the same sense, e.g. Epict. Diss. ii.
jiaXaKos, and in the Harclean Mark
18. 4 *' >"' TTOtelv fOeXeis cktikov. The xiii. 28 for arraXos. Thus it seems
reading of C confirms my account of nearer to el<TiK(os than to exTiKcis.
A as against Tischendorf's, though The word (Iktikos occurs Orig. de
he still adhered to his first opinion Priiic. iii.
15 (l. p. 124), and occa-
after my remarks. There can be little sionally elsewhere. On these ad-
doubt now, I think, that the account jectives in -iKos see Lobeck Phryn.
in my upper note is correct; for the p. 228.
reading of Tischendorf has no re- 1. ov Traj/Tc? K.r.X.] Comp. I Cor.
lation to the eKTinas of C. The ey xii. 29, 30.
(altered from ei, as it was first written) 2. enapxoi K.r.X.] See Exod. xviii.
must be explained by the preceding 21 Karaarijaeis [avTOvs] en avrmv ;(iXi-
ey of evTaKTcos catching the scribe's dpxovs KOI eKaTovTapxovs Koi nfvrrjKov-
eye as he was forming the initial rdpxovs Koi deKaSap^ovs (comp. ver. 25).
letters of either eKTiKcoc or eiKTiKooc. The reference here however is to
He had ei, and at
written as far as Roman military organization as the
this pointhe was misled by the same context shows comp. Clem. Horn. x.
;

conjunction of letters noocey just 14 ovnep yap Tpowov eis icrriv o Kaiaap,
before. Whether this ei was the be- ex^i Se vtt' avTov tovs dioiKiJTas (viraTi-
ginning of eiKTiKooc, or an incom- Kovs, fTrapxovs, eKaTovrap-
;Y'Aia/);(;ov?,
plete eK as the beginning of eKTiKtoc, Xovs, teKa^dpxovi), tov avTov Tponov
may be doubtful. In the latter case K.T.X. The enapxot, therefore are
we must suppose that the second 1, 'prefects', e-rvapxos being used especi-
written above the was a de-
line, ally of the 'praefectus praetorio', e.g.
liberate (and perhaps later) emenda- Plut. Galb. 13, Oiho 7; comp. Dion
 xxxviii] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 1
15

juev TO (TwfjLa rjfjiiav' ri

K(pa\t] ^/^ twv ttoBcov ovdev

eCTTLV, OVTCd^ 01/^6 ol TToSes ^^X T7? Ke(pa\f]<S'

TO. de

lo e\a^^lG^Ta jueXf] rov o'cojuaTO^ rifxwv dvayKoia kul ev-

^.,^3
^prjCTTa eicriv bXw tw (rcdfjiaTL
'
dWa iravTa (rvvTrvei
Kal vTTOTayt] juiia )(^priTai
eU to (rco^eadai bXou to
(TCOjULa.

XXXVIII, Cco^ecrdu)
ovv rifiMV bXov to (rcoiaa ev

A; vTroTaaao/iieva C. The converse error appears in the MS of Ign. Ephes. 2 cTri-

raaaofievoc for vwoTacraofMevot. 8 oi/Siv iariv] A

and so prob. S icxTiv ovB^p C. ;

II (rvvTTPel] A; av/j.irvei C. 12 xp^rat] A; xpSrat C: see the note on ii. 6.

Cass. Fragm. (v. p. 203 ed. L. Dind.) quotation, and indeed Clement's text
alcTXpov KaTcrap, eKarovrapxa ae
icTTi, seems to embody some anapcestic
diaXeyecrdai rcov eirapxatv e'^a eoTUiTuiv. fragments.
The x'-^^opx^h eKOTouTapxoi, again are 6. axjyKpacris k.t.X.] This seems to
the common equivalents for 'tribu- be a reference to Eurip. Fragm. Ailol.
ni', 'centuriones', respectively. But 2 oXX (TTi rts (TvyKpacris coctt e'x^i-v

for TTfPTTjKovTapxos I do not know any KoXcuy, for Euripides is there speaking
corresponding term in the Roman of the mutual cooperation of rich and
army. If it represents the 'optio' the poor see the passage quoted from
:

lieutenant or the signifer 'the ensign' the context of Euripides on 6 ttXov-

(see Lohr Taktik u. Kriegsweseji p. aios K.T.X. just below 38. Cotterill

41), the numerical relation of 50 to {Pcregri)ius Proteus p. 25) points out

100 has become meaningless. that this extract appears in close
3. eKacTTos K.T.X.J I Cor. XV. 23 proximity to the passage from So-
eKacrros 8e ev tco tSto) Tayp-OTi. ; comp. phocles quoted in the last note in
below 41. Stob^eus Floril. xliii. 18, 20 (p. 82 sq,
4. /SacrtXe'tur] Comp. I Pet. ii. 13 sq Meineke). Comp. i Cor. xii. 24 aXXo
eire /3a(7tXfi...eiVe T^ye^ocrtf ; COmp. o 0eos (TvufKepaaev to crafia.

Joh. xix. 15, Acts xvii. 7. The offi- 7. AalUcofiev to cra>p.a k.tX.^ Sug-
cial title of the emperor in Greek gested by I Cor. xii. 12 sq (comp.
was avTonparap, but ^aaiXevs is found Rom. xii. 4) ;
see esp. ver. 22 to. 80-
in common parlance, though the cor- KovvTa p-eXr] rod (rcofj,aTOS aadiViCTTepa
responding 'rex' would not be used vnapxeiv avayKola iaTiv. For XajScDjifv
except in gross flattery. see above, 5.

5. ol jxeyakoL K.r.X.] See Soph. AJ. XXXVIII. 'So therefore let the
158 (quoted by Jacobson) kultoi ap,i- health of the whole body be our aim.
Kpoi fieyaXaiv X'^P'-^ a(f)a\pov nvpyov Let weak and strong, rich and poor,
ftiifia neXovTai k.t.X. (with Lobeck's work together in harmony. Let each
note), Plato Leg. x. p. 902 E ov8e yap man exercise his special gift in humi-
avev (Tp.iKpS>v rovs p.eyaXovs (j)a(r\v ol lity of heart and without vainglory,

Xi^oXdyoi Xidovs fv Kelcrdai, with the remembering that he owes everything

remarks of Donaldson, New Ci-at. to God and giving thanks to Him
455, on this proverb. I have there- for His goodness.'
fore ventured to print the words as a

82
Il6 THE EPISTLE OF S.CLEMENT [xxxviii

XpiCTTW 'lt]a'ov, Kai vTroTao'area'da} eKaarTO^ tw TrX^aiov

avTOu, Kudoj's Kul eTedt] ev tm x.^pLG'/uLarL
aurov. 6

ia-)(ypo<5 fJif] dTrijuieXeiTco top dadevrif 6 de dcrdevt]^ ev-

TpeTreadio tov [(T'xypov 6 ttXovo'io's 67rL')(^opr]'y6iT(t)

tw
TTTw^^w, 6 de 7rTa);^os ev)(^apiG'TeiTa) rw 0ew, oti e^coKev 5

avTw Si' ou dva7rXt]pw6r} avTOv to v(TTeprjfj.a. 6 oro(p09

ivZeiKvucrdu} Tt]v (ro(piav

avrou (jly]
ev Xoyoi'S dXX ev

epyoi'S dyadol^' 6 TUTreivocppovcov fxr} eavTop /ULapTvpeiTa),

dXX' eaTio v(p' eTepov eavTOV juapTvpela'dai, 6 dyvo^
ev TYi aapKi yitw kul jur] dXa^ovevecda) , yivwcTKoyv otl 10

I 'ItjctoG] a ; om. CS. 2 /cat] A ;

om. CS. 3 firj dTTjfxeXeiTca]

fjL7p-/xfJi.e\eLTU} A; T-rjixeXeiTU (omitting /xr]) CS. Obviously the a of aTTj/ieKeiTu had

already disappeared from their prototype as it has from A, and the transcribers are
obliged to erase the counterbalancing negative fii] in order to restore the sense;
see above, I. p. 143. evrpe-Kiadw] C ^vrpeir^Tw A, retained by Gebhardt ; ;

but it is a soloecism. 7 evSeiKviadui] evdiKwadu A.

iv \6yois] Xoyois AC ;

(jibvov Clem 613. ev ipyoLs] A ; C, thus omitting iv here, while conversely

'ipyois
Clem has omitted it in iv Xoyois. S has it in both, but no stress can be laid on the
fact,as the translator repeats the preposition where it does not occur in the Greek ;

see I. p. 137. 8 TaTrivo<ppovu>v} A, and so prob. S; Taweivorppwu C Clem;

see above, 19. /U.7j eayry fj-aprvpelro}] AC ; fMapTvpeirw fx-q eavri^ Clem.

1. vTTOTaa-aea-dco eKaa-ros k.t.X.] here confirms the conjecture that in

Ephes. V. 21 ; comp. i Pet. v. 5. the earlier passage Clement has the
2. Ka6a>s Kal fredr]] sc. o irkrjdiov, words of Euripides in his mind.
^
according as he was appointed with 6. dvanXrjpadfj k.t.X.] For the ex-
his special gifV ; comp. i Pet. iv. 10 pression see i Cor. xvi. 17, Phil. ii.

tAcao-ros Ka^coyeXa^ei^X'^P'O'M") I Cor.vii. 30: comp. Col. i. 24.

7 e/cao-roy Ihiov i'xei x'^pi-crf^a sk Qeov, 6 (TO(f}os k.t.X.} This passage down
Rom. xii. 6 exovres x^P^^I^'^^^ Kara to rffv eyKpareiav is quoted in Clem.

Tr)v x"-p<-v rffv ^oBelcrav rjpiv bLa(l)opa. Alex. Strom, iv. 16 (p. 613) between
3. \i.r]
This reading
aTTjfifXeiTco] extracts from 40, 41 (see the notes
makes better sense than TrXrjpLfieXfiTco there).
(for Clement is condemning the rt'i?/?'^- him
^
10. tjto)] let de it\ For this
ciation of others) and accounts more emphatic use compare Ign. Ephes.
easily for the corruption ;
see the 15 a\i.iwov lanv a-ionTvav koI elvat rj
Xa-
omission of a in dcfuXo^evlav 35. Xowtu fif) ehai, Iren. 30. 2 ovk
ii.

4. o TrXovaios k.t.X.] See Eurip. fVTcSXeyfivdXX' evrS elvai. 6 Kpelrrav

Fragm. jEoI. 2 (of which the context I have

dfUwa-dai, oc^eiXet. preferred
is cited above, ^y) a nfj ydp ia-n tco Laurent's happy emendation rjra to
'

TTivrjTi, TrXovo-tos b'lbaxr a S' 01 ttXov- otyaro) which has also been suggested,
ToiivTfs ov KKTT]p,fda, Tolo-iv TTevijai both because it better suits the vacant
Xpmp.fvot 6ripa>p.i6a. The resemblance space in A, and because it is the
 XXXVIIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 117

eTepo^ ecTTLV 6 eTTLxoptiyMV avTw tyiv iyKpareiap. ^Ava-

XoyicrcojueOa ovv, d^e\<poi, e'/c Troia^ vXr]^ eyei^t^drjjULev'

TToioL Kai Tii/es eicrjAdajuiei/ ek tou koctijlov ck ttoiov

TaCpov Kai CTKOTOV^ 6 TrXacra^ rifxa^ Kal Zf]jJiiovp<yri(Ta<i

15 CKTiryayeu et? tov koct/uou avTOv, 7rpo6TOiiuia(ras ra?

evepyecria^ avTOu rrpiv rjjJLa<i yevmjOiji^ai. TavTa ovv
iravTa ep avTOv 'e')(OVTe^ dcpeiXofJiev
kutu Travra ^v-^a-
piCTTelv avTM' (p ri
ho^a eU tov<s alcovas tcov alwucop.

djUt]!/.

9 idria] ACS ; eu rw Clem. v((>' eripov eavTov'^ A; airbv v<p' eripov Clem;
iavrhv v<f>' eripov C; S translates the lenience sed ab aliis testimonium detur {/J-ap-

TvpeiaQu) stiper ipso. ka.VTov\ AC ;

avrov Clem. lo ev\ AC ; om.
Clem; dub S. -^tw] Laurent (his earlier suggestion had been ^<jru:, Zeitschr.
f. Luther. Theol.xyilY. p. 423). CS Clem omit the words -^tw koI: see above, I.
p. 142. In A
the margin of the parchment is cut off, so that nothing is visible.

There seems however to have been room for lyrw, as the size of the letters is often
diminished at the end of the lines ; eyKparuav'] eyKpanav A.
see below. i r

13 Kai rives] C ;
/catrt... A; om. S. da-qXdafiev] ...aifKdaiJiev A; eia7}\do/j.v C.
15 Tov k6(t/j.ov] AC; S has /lunc mundum, but it probably does not represent a
various reading ; see the critical note on ii.
19. 17 o^etXo/tec] o(pL\ofj.iv A.
KOLTo. Trdcra] AC ;
om. S. evxo-pi-0'Tetv~\ evxapi-O'Tl A.

form found elsewhere in Clement, the allusions of Epiphanius and Je-

48. Hort suggests o-rz/ro), com- rome (quoted above, I. pp. 170, 173),
paring I Cor. vii. ;i7. At the end of which doubtless refer to the spurious
a line it is not safe to speak positively Epistles on Virginity; see above, I.
about the number of letters to be sup- p. 408 sq.
plied, as there the letters aresome- 13. Tvoioi Ka\. Tivis\ I Pet. i. II 6ts
times much smaller and extend be- TlVa T)
TTOIOV KaLpOV.

yond the line but o-iyaro) seems

; flcn]\dafxv] For the form see Winer
under any circumstances too long 86.
xiii. p.

to be at all probable. Hilgenfeld's eK TTo'iov Td(j)ov K.r.X.] Harnack re-

reading, 6 ayrus iv rfj crapKi Koi \avTos\ fers to Ps. CXXxix (Cxl). 15 TO OCTTOVV

^LTj aka^ovevia-dw, supplies the lacuna p.ov...eTioiriaas iv Kpv(f)rj KoL rj vnocrTaais

in the wrong place. For the senti- fXOV iv Tols KaTCOTaTOLS TTji yrjs.
ment see Ign. Polyc. 5 el' nr Swarat 15. TrpoeToifMacras k.t.X.] See the
iv ayvfia jxevftv els crapKus
Ti^rjv ttjs fragment from 'the 9th Epistle' of
TOV Kvpiov, ev aKavxricria fxevfTQi' iav Kav- Clement of Rome in Leontius and
XWT)Tai, dncoXfTo (see above, I.
p. 149), John Sacr. Rer. ii (Mai Script. Vet.
TertuU. de Virg. Vel. 13 Et si a Deo '
Nov. Coll. VII. p. 84) given above, i.
confertur continentiae virtus, quid p. 189. Though it has some points
quasi non acceperis', pas-
gloriaris, of resemblance with this passage in
sages quoted by Wotton. Clement's our epistle, it cannot have been taken
language is not sufficient to explain from it.
ii8 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxxix

XXXIX. '

Acppove^ kui davveTOi Kai jutopoi Kal

ciTral^evTOi ^\eva^ou(rLU rifj.a^ Kai jjiVKTvipL^ovcrLv, iavrov^

(^ouXojuevOL eTraipecrdaL tol^ ^lavoiai^ avTwv. tl yap

dvvaTai SprjTO's ; rj ti<s

la'^y^ yr]<yevovs ; yeypaTTTai yap'
Oyk hn Mop(})H npo 6(})eAAMooN Moy aAA' h ay'P'^'N kai S

((JOONHN HKOyON. f^p MH KAGApOC eCTAI BpOTOC eNANTI

Tl i

Kypi'oY; H And twn eprooN aytoy AMeMnxoc ANHp; ei kata

nAiAojN AYTOY OY niCTefei, kata Ae ArreAcoN aytoy ckoAion

i"K(f>pove%...aTral^VToi\ AS; dcppoves Kal airalSevToi Kal fxoipol C. 2 /xvKTTjpl-

^ovcxLv'] fivKTtprj^ovaiv A. 6 Ka6apbs\ AC; 5<73n corruptor S, perhaps connecting

it with KaOaipeiv, as if KaOaip^rrjs: see above, I.
p. 140. The translator however may
have had (pdopos in his text. ^cTTaL] AC ;
ia-nv S. IvavTi.] A (withLxx SA);
evavrlov C (with LXX B). 7 el\ AC; ^ S. 8 iral5<j}v'\ AC; operiim S, but
this is due to the false pointing; see above, i.
p. 138. ayroC] A; eai/ToO C.

XXXIX. 'WhatfoUy is the arro- Clem. Alex. Paed.'x. 12 (p. 156), Strom.
gance and self-assumption of those iv. 6 (p. 577). In classical writers
who would make a mockery of us ! the yTjyei/ets
are the fabled giants, the
Have we not been taught in the sons of Uranus and Gsea, and rebels
Scriptures the nothingness of man ? against the Olympians (e.g. Soph,
In God's sight not even the angels Tracll. 1058 o yrjyevTjs arpaTos yi-
are pure : how much less we frail yavTOiv, Aristoph. Av. 824 ot 6eo\
creatures of earth ! A lump of clay, rovs yrjyerels KadvTreprjKOfTtaav, see
a breath of air, the sinner is consumed Pape IVortcrb. d. Griech. Eigenftam.
in a moment by God's wrath and : s. v.). Connected with this idea is
the righteous shall inherit his for- the translation of D''^sD"l, where it

feited blessings.' means 'the shades of the dead', by

1.
"A(j)povfs K.T.X.] Comp. Hermas yr^yevels in the
LXX of Prov. ii. 1 8,
Sim. ix. 14 cKppav el Koi dcrvveros. ix. 18 ;
while in these and other pas-
2. ;^Xevdfou(rii' K.r.X.] Ps. xliv. 14 sages the other Greek translators
(v. 1.), Ixxix. 4, flVKTTJpKTIXOS Kai X^V- (Theodotion, Symmachus) render the
aa-fios ; comp. Apost. Const, iii.
5 /uuk- same word by yiyai/rec or Beofiaxoi'.
TTjplcravTes x^evaaovai. In C iavroiis see Gesenius Thesaur. s. v. XQl on
'
is connected with the preceding words the connexion of Rephaim and the
'

by punctuation. giants. Altogether we may say that

4. As a LXX word, yr^yev^s
yrj-yevovs] the word (i) signifies originally 'hu-
is a translation of DHX in Jer. xxxii. mility and meanness of origin', and
20. In Ps. xlix (xlviii). 2 o'l re yrjyevels (2) connotes 'separation from and
Koi 01 viol Tcov avdpcoTTcov is a rendering hostility to God'.
of K^'-N* ija m
DIN "-n DJ where the yiypamai yap] A long passage
next clause of the verse has nXova-ios from the LXX Job iv. 16 v. 5, the
Kal TTfvrjs. In Wisd. vii. i Adam is words oi3pai'ofS...ai)roi) being inserted
called yijyevrjs TrpwroTrXacrros-. The from Job xv. 15 (see below). The
word occurs Test, xii Pair. Jos. 2, variations from the LXX are for the
 xxxix] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 1
19

Ti eneNOHceN- oyp<^noc Ae oy KA6Apdc eNooniON aytoy' ga

10 Ae, 01 KATOIKOYNTeC OIKIAC HHAINAC el d)N KAI AYTOI eK TOY

AYTOY nHAoY ecMeN' enAiceN aytoyc chtoc rpdnoN, kai And

npcol'SeN ecnepAc oy'k g'ti eiciN" nApA to mh Ay'nacOai

ecac

AYToyc eAYToic BohGhcai AnoiAoNTO' eNecfJYCHceN ay'toTc kai

eTeAefTHCAN, nApA to mh e'xem aytoyc cocj^ian. eniKAAecAi
15 Ae, ei' TIC COI YTTAKOYCCTAI, H ei' TINA AflOON ArrcAOON OyH"
KAI TAp A(})pONA ANAipC? dpfH, nenAANHMENON Ae GANATO?

01;] AC; om. S. Triffre^ei] AC; TTLjie^a-et S. ii iirai<Tiv avTovs\ AC (but

A eireaev) ;
i-rreaov avrov S ;
see above, I.
p. 140. cnjros] ayjrov stands in A
(as I read it), by a transposition with the termination of the next word. Tischendorf

gave (X7]To(T, but afterwards acquiesced in my reading of the MS. Tpowovl CS;
TpoTToa A; see the last note. 12 ^rt] AC; om. S. 15 ei.'
pri] AC; ^ S.

aoi] A, and so prob. S (with Lxx BS) ;

ffov C (with LXX A). oVs] A; 6\f/i C,

most part slight. more, ye that dweW. In the LXX BS

5. OvK rfv nop4>fi K.T.X.] The words read tovs Se KoroiKovvTas, but A ea hk
of Eliphaz reproving Job. He relates
'
Tovs KaroiKovvras let alone those that
how a voice spoke to him in the dead dwell'. The latter is a better render-
of night, telling him that no man is ing of the Hebrew and must have
pure in God's sight. The LXX differs been the original LXX text. Sym-
materially from the Hebrew, but the machus has ttoo-g) /jloXXov, to which

general sense is the same in both. ea with this construction is an equiva-

The OVK is not represented in the lent. Job XV. 16, xxv. 6.

Hebrew, and it may have been in- 10. oIklus Ti:T]XLvas] The houses of
serted by the LXX to avoid an anthro- clay in the original probably signify
pomorphic expression but the trans- ;
men's bodies comp. 2 Cor. v. i t)
:

lators must also have read the pre- eVt'-yetos r\p.av olKia tov an^vovs, called

ceding words somewhat differently. before (iv. 7) oo-rpaKiva a-Kevrj. But

7. el Kara iraibuiv /c.r.X.] 'seeing the LXX by the turn which they give
that against His servants He is dis- to the next clause, e| a>p Ka\ avrol

trustful, and against (to the discredit K.T.X,, seem to have understood it

of) His angels He noteth some de- literally, 'We are made of the same
pravity.^ clay as our houses' e^ a>v being ex- ;

oupai/oy Se K.r.X.] From Job xv.

9. plained by eK Tov avTov Trr]Xov.
Ka\ ano TTpoiWev k.t.X.] Kai is
15 (likewise in a speech of Eliphaz)
11.

61 KaTa ayicov ov Tncrrevei, ovpavos Se ov found in BS but omitted in A. By

ano irpatdev k.t.X. is meant in the
'

KaOapos ivavriov avrov. The fact that

nearly the same words occur as the course of a single day' comp. Is. ;

first which are found

clause of xv. 15,
xxxviii. 12, 13.
likewise in iv. 18, has led Clement 14. ereXevTrjaav] In the LXX A so
to insert the second clause also of reads with all authorities here ; but
this same verse in the other passage BS have e^r]pav6r]a-av.
to which it does not belong. 16. f^Xoy] i.e. indignation
opyrj,
eu 6f, ol KaTOKovvTii] 'how much against God, such as Job had shown.
120 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xxxix

zhAoc. erw Ae ea>pAKA AcfjpoNAC pi'zAC BaAontac, AAA ey-

eeooc eBpoiOH aytoon h Aiaita. ndppoo rcNOiNTO o'i y'oi

AYTCON And COOTHpiAC KO A ABpicGei HCAN eni GypAIC HCCONOiN,

KAI OYK eCTAI d elAipOYMGNOC A f^P CKeiNOIC HTOIMACTAI,
AlKAIOI eAONTAI" AYTOI Ae eK KAKOON OYK e^AipeTOI eCONTAI. 5

I 5^] AC ;
om. S. A; ^dWovras C
PaXdvras] (with Lxx), and S also has
a present. eWiios] A (with lxx BS) evdi/s C (with LXX
; A). 4 eKehois
riToifj-atXTai] AC ;
eKehoi. -^Toi/xaa-av S for the LXX see below.
: 5 i^alperoi.]

' '
2. 8latTa]
'
//letr abode^ ;
as e. g. brew, where
'
at the gate means in
LXX Job 22, xi. 14, xxxix. 6.
viii. 6, court, in judgment'.
a yap sKeivois Ac.r.X.] In the LXX
'

3. KoXa^pia-6eiT]aav] mocked, in- 4.

sulted\ as Athen. viii. p. 364 A KoKa- (BS) a yap iKeivoi crvvtjyayov {idepicrav
^pi^ovcTL Tovs olKeras, aTreiXovai toIs A), h'lKaioi edovrai k.t.X. For i^aipeToi
TToWols. Suidas after others says io-opTai A has ^fp(dt](TOVTai (i. e. e^ai-

KoXa^piadeir]' xkevaa-deir], eKTivaxdfirj, pe6r]crovTai). The LXXin this verse

CLTiyLaadeir)-KoXaftpos yap koI (cnXa/3poj, diverges considerably from the He-

o [iiKpbs xolpos' uvt\ Toi) ov8evos Xoyov brew, i^aiperoi here has the some-
a^ios vofxiadeiT], And SO Bochart what rare sense '
resetted, exempt,' as
Hieroz. ii.
57, I.
p. 707,
'

KoXa^pi^eiv e.g. Dion. Hal. A. R. vi. 50.

Hellenistis conUmnere, quia porcello XL. This being plain, we must
'

do all things decently and in order, as

apud Judaeos nihil fuit contemptius'.
But this derivation cannot be correct ;
our Heavenly Master wills us. The
for (to say nothing else) the word was appointed times, the fixed places, the
not confined to Hellenist Jews. The proper ministers, must be respected
same Athenteus, who furnishes the in making our offerings. So only
only other instance of the verb KoXa- will they be acceptable to God. In
^pi^co, has also two substantives, KoXa- the law of Moses the high-priest, the
^pos or KaXajBpos (iv. p. 164 E, xv. p. priests, the Levites, the laity, all have
697 c) a licentious song', and aaXa-
'
their distinct functions'.

^picTfios (xiv. p. 629 d) 'a certain The offence of the Corinthians

Thracian dance'. The latter is de- was contempt of ecclesiastical order.
fined by Pollux (iv. 100) QpaKiKov They had resisted and ejected their
opxrip-o- KoL KapiKov. Here therefore lawfully appointed presbyters and ;

the derivation must be sought. The as a necessary consequence they

jeering sallies and mocking gestures held their agape and celebrated their
of these unrestrained songs and dan- eucharistic feast when and where
ces would be expressed by KoXajBpi- they chose, dispensing with the in-
((IV. The reading of A in the LXX tervention of these their proper offi-
aKoXa^pia-dfiTja-av, compared with (tko- cers. There is no ground for sup-
paKi^eiv, might seem to favour the posing (with Rothe Anfdnge p. 404
other derivation, if there were suffi- sq), that they had taken advantage
cient evidence that KoXa^pos ever of a vacancy in the episcopate by
meant ;^otptSioi'. death to mutiny against the presby-
eVi dvpoLs T]aa6vcov] ' a/ ^ke doors Of bishops,
ters. properly so called,
of their inferiors'. There is nothing no mention is made in this epistle (see
corresponding to tJo-ctoi/wj/ in the He- the notes on 42, 44) and, if the ;
 xlJ TO THE CORINTHIANS. 121

XL. ripo^riXcdv ovv }]fMV bvTCdv TOVTcoi/, Kai iy-

KeKvcpoTe^ ek to. (3adr] Ttj^ Oeias yvcoo'eco's, iravTa
rapei TTOLeli/ ocheiXofjiev bcra 6 hecnroTtj^ eTrireXeTu eVe-
Xevcreu Kara Kaipov^ TTa<yfjievov<i' ra^ re 7rpo<T(popa^

e^eperoL A. 6 ijfuv 6i'Twy] AC ;

ovtuv tjjjuv Clem 613. To&roiv] AC ; add.

a5e\<poi S. i'yKeKV(j)6Te%] AC ; eKKCKVcpoTe^ Clem. 8 d(pei\o/j.ep] ocpCkoiiev

A. Saa] AC ;
sicia (ws?) S.

government of the Corinthian Church which afterwards became the watch-

was in any sense episcopal at this words of the Gnostic sects and were
time, the functions of the bishop were doubtless frequently heard on the
not yet so distinct from those of the lips of their forerunners his contem-
presbyters, but that he could still be poraries. To belongs ra
this class

regarded as one of them, and that no ^ddr] Trjs (comp. I Cor. ii.
yvcoa-fccs

special designation of his office was 10) see S. John's language in Rev. ii.
:

necessary or natural. On the late 24 OLTLves ovK eyvuxrav to. (iaOia

development of the episcopate in Co- Tov "SiOTava, oj? Xeyovcriv, which is
rinth, compared with the Churches of illustrated by Iren. Haer. ii. 22. 3
'

Syria and Asia Minor, see the disser- profunda Dei adinvenisse se dicen-
tation in Fhilippians p. 213 sq, and tes',ii. 28.
9 'aliquis eorum qui alti-
Igtiat. and Polyc. I. p. 562 sq, ed. i tudines Dei exquisisse se dicunt',
(p. 579, ed. 2). Hippol. Haer. v. 6 iTTiKokidav iavrovs
6. npo6;fAwv K.r.X.] This passage yvaxTTiKovs, (fidaKovrei fiovoi to. jBddr)
as far as Kaipovs Teraynivuvs is quoted yivdaaeiv; compare the description
'
in Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 16 (p. 613). in TertuUian adv. Valent. i Si

eyKeKuc^ores] ''peered into, pored bona fide quaeras, concrete vultu,

over\ See below 45, 53, Polyc. suspenso supercilio, Altum est aiunt',
Phil. 3, Clem. Ham. iii. v- In all and see Galatians p. 298. It is sig-
these passages it is used of searching nificant too that yvSidis is a favourite
the Scriptures. Similarly TrapaKinr- word with Clement: see i, 36, 41,

Teiv, James i.
25, i Pet. i. 12. The and especially 48 ^'rm fiui-aro? yvaaiv
word eKKKv({)6Tei in Clem. Alex, must e^emelv (with the note). Again in
be regarded as an error of transcrip- 34 he repeats the favourite Gnostic
tion. text 'Eye hath not seen etc.', which
7. Ta (dadr] ttjs deias yioJaecos] The they misapplied to support their prin-
large and comprehensive spirit of ciple of an esoteric doctrine. See
Clement, as exhibited in the use the note there.
of the Apostolic writers, has been 9. ras T 7rpo(r(f)opas K.r.A.] Editors
already pointed out (notes on 12, have failed to explain the reading of
31, 33, 49). Here it is seen from a the MS satisfactorily. Two modes of
somewhat different point of view. punctuation are offered. The main
While he draws his arguments from stop is placed (i) after fKeXevaev, so
the law of Moses and his illustrations that we read Kara Kuip. rer. rds re
from the Old Testament, thus show- npoacp. K.T.X. but in this case we get
;

ing his sympathy with the Judaic side an unmeaning repetition, Kara Kaipnvs
of Christianity, he at the same time TfTayp.ivovs and copiaixevois KaipolsK.r.X.
uses freely those forms of expression belonging to the same sentence: or

I
122 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XL

KUL \eiTOvp<yia<s eTTf/xeAw? e7riT6\T(r6ai kui ovk eiKfj t]

dTaKTia eKeXeva-ev yivecrdai, dW copicTjuei'OL^ KaipoT^ kui

CD
apai^' TTOv T6 Kai ta t'lvmv eTTiTeAe^adaL OeXei, avTO's

ft)
opKTev TTj vTrepTciTU) avTOv (iov\ri(T6L' \v ocrico^ iravTa

yuojuLei/a ev evdoKtjcrei ev7rp6(rdeKTa elr] tm 66\r]fiaTL 5

auTOv. 01 ovv TOiS TTpoo'TeTa'y fjLevoL^ Kaipol^ ttoiovvte^

I XeLTovpyla'i] XeLTovpyeiaa- A. om. ACS. The reasons

eTTi/xeXtSs] conj. ;

for the insertion are given below. AC ; om. S see below.

eir it ^Xeicr 6 ai /cat] :

2 aKK''\ A; dXXa C. 3 co'pais ttoG re] AC. S translates as if it had read oJpats re
TTou. 4 virepTciTip] A; virepTdrri C; see the lower note, -nd above, I. p. 127.
TrdvTa] TravTara A ; wavTa rot C. For S see below. 5 ev evdoK-qaei] AC S :

translates the sentence, iia ut, quum omnia piefiant, velit tit acceptabilia sint volun-
tati suae, thus apparently taking ivevdoKriaei. (one word) as a verb and reading

(2) after eTriTeXeto-dai, in which case readings in our authorities, see I.

imrfXela-dai must be governed by p. 143. I should have
preferred ras
o06iXo^6i/. But, with this construc- 8 e TTpo(T^opas, as Tischendorf de-
tion (not to urge other obvious objec- ciphers A, but (unless I misread it)
tions) there is an awkwardness in it certainly has re, as also have CS.

using the middle fmreXela-dai. in the On the Christian sense of Trpoa-cpopai

same sense in which the active eVt- see the note on Trpoa-eveyKovras to.

TfXflv has occurred just before ; dcopa 44-

though the middle in itself might 2. KULpols Koi wpais] pleonasm, A
stand. James
(In iv. 3 however
2, as in Dionys. de Isocr. 14 (p. 561) /lit)
we have alrelv and alreladai side by iv Kaipa yiveadai p.rjS' iv (opa, Plut.

side.) I have therefore inserted eVi- Ages. 36 TOX) kclKov Kaipov olKflov

/xeXws, supposing that the omission flvai Koi (Spav. The words differ only
was due to the similar beginnings of so far, that Kaipos refers to the^i/iess,
the two words (as e.g. aia>viov for aivov Spa to the appointedness, of the time.
aiaviov ii. 9 see also the note on
;
Demosth. Olyiith. ii.
p. 24 iirjdeva
ii. 10 evpelv) comp. i (3) Esdr. viii.
; Kaipov jUJyS' apav TrapaXeiTrav showS
'
21 Travra Kara tov tov Qeov vofiov that Spa does not refer to the /lour

eTriTeXecrdi]T(i) eTTi/xeXw? ra Gem of the day', as this use of the word

rw vy\r'i(TT(o,
Herm. Maud. xii. 3 rrjv was only introduced long after the
biaKoviav . . Thus the
.Tikei eTTi/xeXcos. age of Demosthenes.
passage reads smoothly and intel- 4. vTrepraro)] I have not ventured
ligibly. An alternative would be to to alter the reading to inrepraTrj, since
omit eniTeXeladaL (and this is done even in classical writers compara-

by the Syriac translator), as having tivesand superlatives are sometimes

been inserted from below (Sta tlvmv of two terminations; e.g. Thucyd. iii.
enireXf^crdai), and to take rds re 89, loi, V. 71, no. See Buttmann
npoacfiopas koX XetTovpyias in appo- Griech. Sprachl. 60 anm. 5.
sition with oaa, but this does not TvavTa ywop.iva\ I have Struck out
seem so good for more than one ra before yivop.(:va as a mere repe-
reason. For the growth of the various tition of the last syllable of Trdj/ra.
 xl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 123

Ta9 7rpo(T(popa<s
avTwv evTrpoa-heKTOi re kui ^aKapioi,
ToTs tov ecTTOTOV d-KoXovdovvTe^ ov
yap vofJUjuoL^

^Lafiapravovoriv. tw yap dp^iepei l^iaL XeLTOvpyiai

10 dedojuei^ai elcriv, Kal toTs lepevcTLV
l^io 6 totto?

Kal Xevtrai^ idiai ZiaKOVLai eTriKeiv-

irpocTTeTaKTaL,
ehaL for eirj. eir]] A; add. Travra C (thus repeating it a second time in the

sentence) ; for S see the last note. 6 TrpoaTerayfi^voi.^] A ; Trpoaraye'ia-L C.

9 dpxi-epel] ; AC
apxtepevaiv S. This is probably due to a misapprehension of
the translator or of a scribe who supposed that the Christian bishops were meant,
10 6 rdwos] A ; tottos (om. 6) C. S translates as if it had read l8iois towols.
11 XevtraLS . .
.iwiKeLVTaL] AC (but emKivraL A); levitae in ministeriis propriis po-
niintur S.

and as interfering with the sense. by some (e.g. Lipsius p. 25) that, this
The omission of to is confirmed by being so, the analogy notwithstand-
the Syriac. ing extends to the number three,
5. iv evSoKTjVft] SC. TOV Geov. See Christ being represented by the high-
the note on 2. But possibly we priest (see the note 36), the presby-
should here for eYAOKHCeiGY- and the deacons
ters by the priests,
nPOCAGRTA read eYAOKHCeieY- by the Levites. But to this it is a
nPOCAGKTA ;
as in Epiphan. Haer. sufficient answer that the High-
Ixx. 10 (p. 822) evhoK.r](m Geov. priesthood of Christ is wholly differ-
9. TM yap dpxiepe^ K.r.X.] This is ent in kind and exempt from those
evidently an instance from the old very limitations on which the passage
dispensation adduced to show that dwells. And again why should the
God will have His ministrations per- analogy be so pressed.'' It would be
formed through definite persons, just considered ingenious trifling to seek
as below ( 41) ov navTaxpv k.t.X. out the Christian equivalents to eVSe-
Clement draws an illustration from V i^X^^ ^ rrepi apaprias Koi
X^X'-'^H-'^^
the same source that He will have TrXrjppeXeiai below (41), or to enapxoi,
them performed in the proper //-tx xCKiapxoi, eKarovTapxoi, TrevrrjKovrapxoi,
There is therefore no direct reference K.T.X.above ( 37) nor is there any
;

to the Christian ministry in a/3;^iepei;'y,

reason why a closer correspondence
lepeiy, Aetiirat, but it is an argument should be exacted from this passage
by analogy. Does
the analogy then than from the others. Later writers
extend to the three orders ? The an- indeed did dwell on the analogy of
swer to this seems to be that, though the threefold ministry but we cannot ;

the episcopate appears to have been argue back from them to Clement, in
widely established in Asia Minor at whose epistle the very element of
this time (see Philippians p. 209 sq threefoldness, which gives force to
with the references given above, p. such a comparison, is wanting.
121), this epistle throughout only 10. I'Sto? 6 roTTOf /C.T.X.]
'
The office

recognizes two
presbyters orders, assigned to the priests is spcciaV.
and deacons, as existing at Corinth On this sense of roTrof comp. below
(see esp. the notes on eVto-KOTrcoi/ 42, J544 TOV Idpvpevov avTois tottov, and
and on lav Koiprjduiaiv, diabe^cavrai see the notes on Ign. Polyc. i iKhUfi
K.r.X. 44). It has been held indeed aov TOV tottov.
124 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xli

Tai' 6 XdiKO^ av6p(j07TO9

toTs Aai/co?? TrpocTTayfjiaarLV

XLI. '',Ka(TTO<i vfJLcov, aheX(poi, ev rw l^ua ray-

2 S^Serat] A; S^Sorat CS. 3 vfiuvl A.; tj/uluv CS. 4 vxapi-(yTelTu]

A; ei'iapea-retrw CS. See the lower note. (rwet5T?(ret] auveLdTjaiv A. 5 /xt;

I. XaiiKos] Comp. C/etn. Hovi. E- though not solely, to the principal act
pist. CI. 5 ovTdts ^Kcicrra XaiKco afxap- of Christian thanksgiving, the celebra-
Tia forrh K.T.X., Clem. Alex. Strom. tion of the Lord's Supper, which at a
iii. 12 (p. 552) Kav TrpeajBiirepos rj Kav later date was almost exclusively term-
8iaKovos Kav XatKoj, z^. v. 6 (p. 665) ed evxapc(TTia. The usage of Clement
Kcokvua XdiKrjs aTricrrias. In Tertul- isprobably midway between that of
lian 'laicus' is not uncommon, e.g. 5. Paul where no such appropriation
de Pracscr. 41 '
nam et laicis sa- of the term appears (e.g. i Cor. xiv.
cerdotalia munera injungunt'. In 16, 2 Cor. ix. II, 12, Phil. iv. 6, i Tim.
the Lxx \ao% is used not only in ii. I, etc.), and that of the Ignatian
' '
contradistinction to the Gentiles Epistles {Philad. 4, Sviyrn. 7) and of
(see the note on 29 above), but Justin {Apol. i.
^ 66, p. 97 sq. Dial.
also as opposed to (i) 'The rulers', 41, p. 260) where it is especially so
e.g. 2 Chron. xxiv. 10, xxx. 24, (2) applied. For the the Ihiov raypLa of
'
The priests ', e.g. Exod. xix. 24, people at the eucharistic feast see
Neh. vii. ']'}, (viii. i), Is. xxiv. 2 ; Justin Apol. i. 65 (p. 97 d) ov (i.e.
comp. Jer. xxxiv (xli). 19 rous apxovras TOV TrpoearaiTos twv ddeXtpdv) avvTeXe-
lov8a Kol Tovs dwaaras /cat rovs lepe'is aavTos ras (vxas Koi. rrjv evxapiCTTiav
Kui Tov \aov. From this last contrast iras 6 Xaus errevcfirjp.e'i Xiyav 'Afiijv...
comes the use of XaiKos here. The fvxo-picTTTjaavTos Se tov TrpoecrrcoToy koX
adjective however is not found in the tov Xaoii k.t.X.,
iiVv(^rjp.rj(ravTos iravTos
LXX, though in the other Greek ver- and again zd. 67 (p. 98 E). See
sions we meet with XaiKos laic or Harnack De?^ Christliche Gottesdienst
' '

'profane' and XaiKovv 'to profane', etc.(Erlangen, 1854).

Deut. XX, 6, xxviii. 30, Ruth i. 12, Thoughthe reading evapea-TeiTO)
I Sam. xxi. 4, Ezek. vii. 22, xlviii. 15. is simpler,
evxapia-TfiTa is doubtless
XLI. 'Let each man therefore correct comp. ; 38 with Rom. xiv.
take his proper place in the thanks- 6, I Cor. xiv. 17. For another
giving of the Church. Then again, instance of confusion between evapea-
in the law of Moses the several sacri- Teiv and evxapiaTelv in our authorities,
fices are not offered anywhere, but see 62.

only in the temple at Jerusalem and iv ayadji (TvvLbrj(Tii\ ActS xxiii.

after careful scrutiny. If then trans- I, I Tim. i.

5, 19, I Pet. iii.
16, 21 :

gression was visited on the Israelites
of old with death, how much greater
shall be our punishment, seeing that
our knowledge also is
comp. Kakfj avvfidrjais, Heb. xiii. 18.
For an explanation of the reading
avvfi8r]cnv in A see above 15.
greater'. Kavova] Compare the metaphor
6.

4. evxapia-TeLTO)] The allusion here 2 Cor. X. 13, 14, Kara to p.iTpov tov
is plainly to the public services of the Kavovos and inrepeKTiivopiev. see also
Church, where order had been violat- the ROtc on 7.

ed. Thus evxapia-TLa Will refer chiefly, Trpocr0epoi/rai] The present tense
 XLl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 125

/iiaTL v^api(rT6iT(t) Oem eV dyaOfj (Tvveihv](reL vwdp^cov,

5 jUf] TrapeK^aivuov tov wpKTjuei'Ou Ttj^ XeiTOvpylas avTOv

Kavova, ev crejULVOTrjri. Ou TravTa^ov , ctdeXcboij 7rpo(r(pe-

povrai ducriai ivhe\6)(^L(riuiOv rj

ev^cou rj irepi djuapria^ Kai
wapeKpalvuv] AC (but irapaiK^aivuf A); et perficiens S. XetToi'p7tas] \novp-
7iacr A. 6 irpoacpepovTai] AC; om. S. 7 e^X'*'''] A; irpoa-evxuiv C.

has been thought to imply that the p. 480 sq. See also Grimm in Zeitsch.
sacrifices were still offered and the f Wiss. Theol. xili. p. 28 sq (1870)
temple yet standing, and therefore to with reference to the bearing of this
fix the date of the epistle before the phenomenon on the date of the
destruction of Jerusalem, i.e. about Epistle to the Hebrews. Comp.
the close of Nero's reign. To this Apost. Const, ii. 25 atto rav dvaiav
very early date however there are Koi ano Traa-qs TrKrjfipieKeLas kql nepl

insuperable objections (see the intro- dpLapriav, where parts of the context
duction, I. p. 346 sq, and notes on i, seem to be suggested by this passage
5, 44, 47). Clement
therefore must use of Clement, though the analogies in
Kpoa-^epovrai as implying rather the the O. T. are interpreted after the
permanoice of the record and of the fashion of a later age.
'
lesson contained therein than the con- 7 evSeXexicp-ov] of continta'ty,
tinuance of the i7istittitio7i and prac- perpetuity, the expression used in
tice itself. Indeed it will be seen the LXX for the ordinary daily sacri-
that his argument gains considerably, fices, as a rendering of "fOn (e.g.
if we suppose the practice discon- Exod. xxix. 42, Neh. x. 33) ;
and thus
tinued because then and then only
; opposed to the special offerings, of
is the sanction transferred from the which the two types are the freewill
Jewish sacrifices to the Christian offerings (evx^av) and expiatory offer-
ministrations, as the true fulfilment ings (ntpl dfiapTias fj 7rXr;/x/LieXfiay).
of the Divine command. If any one Of the last two words anapria denotes
doubts whether such usage is natural, the sin-offering (ni^ton) and ivXrip.p.6-
let him read the account of the Mosaic \eia the trespass-offering (D^'S). A
sacrifices in Josephus Ant. iii. cc. 9, similar threefold division of sacrifices
10 (where the parallels to Clement's is given by Philo de Vict. 4 (ll. p. 240)
present tense Trpoa(f)epovTai are far too TO oKoKaVTOV TO aOiTTJpiOV, TO
, TTfpl UpLUp-
numerous to be counted), remember- Tias, and by Josephus Ant. iii. 9. I sq
ing that the Antiquities were pub- q oKoKavTcoaii, dvaia,
rf )(ctpiaTrjpios
lished A.D. 93, i.e. within two or three 7/ vnep dfiapTdbcov (passages
referred to

years of our epistle. Comp. Barnab. in Jacobson's notes) see also Ewald ;

7 sq, Epist. ad Diogti. 3, where also Alterth. des Volkes Isr. p. 52 sq.
the present is used. This mode of Here the Qvfrla eVSeXe^'o"/^"'^ stands
speaking is also very common in the for the oKoKavTa>\iaTa generally, as
Talmud ; comp. Friedmann and being the most prominent type ;
and
Graetz Die angebliche Fortdauer des in the same way the Qvfrla fu^wi', as

jildischen Opfercultus etc. in the a part for the whole, represents the
Theolog. Jahrb. xvil. p. 338 sq (1848), peace-offerings (o-wrrypta in the LXX
and the references in Derenbourg and Philo) which comprised two spe-
LHist. lit la Geogr. de la Palestine cies (Lev. vii. 11 17), the vow or
126 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XLI

TrXiT^/ueXeia^, dW t] eV
'

lepov(Ta\f]fjL juovr]' KaKel e ovk

ev iravTL tottm
7rpo(T(pepeTai, dW ejHTrpoaOei' tov vaov
TTjOO?
TO dvcnaa-TYipioVy jJLWfjLocrKOTrridev to 7rpo(r(pep6-
fjLevov hia TOV dp^iepeco'i kui tcov Trpoeiprifjievcov XeiTOvp-
ywv. 01 ovv Trapa to KaOfjKOv Trj^ f3ov\t](re(i)^ avTOv 5

7roiovvT TL duvuTOv TO 7rpo(rTifj.ov e^ovcriv. 'OpaTE,

1 ir\7]ix/j.e\das] Tr\r]fjt.iJ.e\iaa A; irXrj/jLfj.eX'q/j.dTuiv C. S has a singular. /J'l'vri]

AS ;
om. C (as a pleonasm after dXX' ij). i Trpoff^epeTai] AC ; offeru7ttur
sacrijicia S. 4 twj'] AC; ceterorum S. XetToi'/57wj'] \LTovpyuji> A.
5 /SoDXijo-ewj] A; ^ovXrjs C; dub. S. 7 Sacp] AC; add. 7010 S. /cott?-

free-will offering (which Clement has occurs in one instance. In Ps. ixi
selected) and the thanksgiving-offer- (Ix). 6, where the word is "113, the lxx

ing (which Josephus takes as the (with Symmachus) have npoa-evx^v,

type). On the other hand, when but Aquila more correctly evx^v, thus
speaking of expiatory offerings, Cle- preserving the fundamental meaning
ment gives both types. of the Hebrew word, though the con-
vx(of^ The V. 1.
npoaevx<iv has
'
noted idea of prayer is so prominent
'

parallels in James v. 15, 16, Ign. in the context as to explain the LXX

Ephes. 10, Rom. 9. It is explained rendering.

by the tendency to substitute a 2. ep.Trpo(r6ev /c.r.X.] The vaos is

common word for a less common. here the shrine, the holy-place the ;

Here ^vx^iv is unquestionably right ; 6v(Tia(TTrjpLov, the court of the altar :

for more especially in the later lan- see the note on Ign. Ephes. 5. The
'
comprises both. This distinc-
'

guage, while Trpoo-evx'? is a prayer [epov

in more comprehensive sense,
the tion of vao^ and iepov is carefully
iixh is 'a vow' specially. In the observed in the N.T. see Trench :

Lxx TTpofrevxh is commonly a render- N.T. Syjion. ist ser. iii.

^

ing of nbsn, but ^vyj] of iij or in. 3. p.Qi>p.o(yKo-ay]6lv\ after i7ispection^ ,

For ew'xv '^ vow' see Acts xviii. 18, with a view to detecting blemishes.
xxi. 23. In the only other passage A flaw or blemish, which vitiates a
in the N. T. in which it occurs, James person or thing for holy purposes, is
V. 15, the idea of a vow may possibly in the LXX fiwfxos. Doubtless the
be present, though it is certainly not choice of this rendering was partly
prominent, and in the context (ver. 14, determined by its similarity in sound
and prob. ver. 16) Trpoa-fvx^adai is to the Hebrew Q)D, for otherwise it
used of the same act. But, though is not a very obvious or natural
equi-
evxrj might undoubtedly be said of a valent. [A parallel instance is the
'prayer, supplication', it is not so evi- word a-Krjvri, chosen for the same rea-
dent conversely that '^poafvx^^ could sons, as a rendering of Shechinah,
be used of a vow specifically. In and carrying with it all the signifi-
Numb, 4 sq, where a vow is
vi. cance of the latter.] Hence aficopLos
distinctly meant, the word occurs in the LXX signifies 'without blemish',
many times in the same context and being applied to victims and the like,
the form is evxfjs throughout, though and diverges from mean-
its classical
an ill-supported reading Trpoa-evxfjs ing. Hence also are derived the words
 XLIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 12'

d^eXcpoi, ocrw ttXcioi/o^ KaTri^icodrjiuLev yvMo-eco^, toctovtw

judWov vTroKei/uieda Kivduvto.

XLIL
01 dTTOCTToXoi ^iMV euriyyeXlo'drja'av diro tou
'
lo
Kvpiou 'Iricrou XpiCTOVj Irjcrov^ 6 XpicrTO^ dvro tov
Oeov e^e7refx(p6t], 6 Xpio'TO's ovv aVo tov Qeou, kui oi

^iiiOrjfji.ev'] Kara^io}9rj/jLev A, as Tisch. (praef. p. xix) reads it, but I could not see dis-
tinctly. 9 vr]yye\[a-d7]<Tai>] AC ; evangelizaverunt (active) S. Hilgenfeld
wrongly gives the reading of C evayyeXlcrdT^crav. lo 6 Xpiarbs] A; xP"'"''os
(om. 6) C. II ^eirefj.(j>dri...dTvb tov 6eoO] AS om. C (by homceoteleuton). ;

fianoa-KOTTos, ^oifiofTKoivelv, which seem among many instances of the excep-

to be confined to Jewish and Christian tional character of the Attic dialect,
writers: Philo de Agric. 29 (l. p. 320) for Tvpoa-TLpiov occurs as early as
ovj eVtot ixcofJioaKOTrovs ovoiia^ovaiv, Iva Hippocrates see for other examples
;

afxiofia Koi daivrj TrpocrdyrjTai tS /3w/xa) Galatians vi. 6 and p. 92 (p. 89, ed. l),
rd lepela k.t.X., Polyc. Phil. 4 ndvTa Pliilippians i.
28, ii. 14. In the
Clem. Alex. Strom, iv.
ficoixoaKorrelrai, inscriptions it is a very common
18 (p. 617) y\(Tav 8e icdv rals rav 6v(na>v word for a fine.

irpoaaycoyais Trapa tm vopa 01 Upeicov 'Oparek.t.X.] This sentence is

pwpoaKtmoi, Apost. Const, ii. 3 7^'" quoted by Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 16
ypaTTTai ydp, Manoa-Kone^ade tov peX- (p. 613).
^
XovTa els Ifpaavvrjv TTpoxftpiC^cySai (a 7. yvaxTfafi] See the note on to
paraphrase of Lev. xxi. 17). ^adrj TTJs deias -yi/cocreto? 40.
4. dpxiepeas] Wotton suggests XLII. 'The Apostles were sent
quum sacerdotum inferioris
'

lepecos, by Christ, as Christ was sent by the

ordinis potius quam summi sacerdotis Father. Having this commission
sit Tas 6v(Tias papoaKOTrelv' ;
but 8id they preached thekingdomof Godand
Toildpxtfpfcos K.T.X. belongs rather to appointed presbyters and deacons in
7rpo(r(f)peTai than to pcofjLOCTKojrrjdev, as every place. This was no new insti-
the order seems to show. The three tution, but had been foretold ages
conditions are (i) that it must be ago by the prophet.'
offered at the proper place, (2) that 9. fvrjyyeXladrjarai/] ''were taught
it must be examined and found with- the GospeP, as Matt. xi.
5 (Luke vii.
out blemish, (3) that it must be 22), Heb. iv. 2, 6 ;
for the first aorist
sacrificedby the proper persons, the apparently is always passive, being
high priests or other priests. The used with a nominative either of the
8id Toil dpxifpecios k.t.X. is comprehen- person instructed or the lesson con-
sive, so as to include all sacrifices. veyed and rjplv will be ^for our
;

5. TO KadfJKou K.r.X.]
'
t/ie seemly or- sakes\ 1 1 m ight be a question however
dinance of His will.'' For the geni- whether we should not read r\p5)v, as
tive comp. Plut. Mor. p. 617 E ex rtoj/ in the opening of 44.
Oprjpov TO deooprjpa tovto Xap^avcov ir. is attached
e^eTrep(j)6r]] This
by
KadrjKovTcov. the editors generally to the following
6. TO Trpoarripov] 2 Macc. vii. 36. sentence. Yet I can hardly doubt
F,TnTipiov 'ArrtKcoy, TtpoaTipov 'EXX^;- that it belongs to the preceding
MKws Moeris s. v. iiriTipiov. This is one words; for (i) The position of ovv
 128 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XLII

aTTOCTToXoi ctTTO Tov XpiCTOv' eyevovTO OVV djUKpOTEpa

VTaKT(t)<i e/c deXrj/uaTO^ Oeov.
TTapayyeXia'i ovv \a(^ov-
Tes KaL 7r\r]po(popri6evT^ ^la Ttj^ dpao'Tao'ews tov Kv-

piov fj/ULOJV 'lr](rov XpicTTOv kul TricTTcoQevTe^ ev tw \6yw

TOV Oeov jucTa TrXtjpocpoplas 7rvevjj.aT0^ dyiov e^rXdov, 5

eva'yyeXL^^oiJLevoi Tr]v (^aa-iXeiav tov Oeov /uLeWeii/ ep-

^ecrBai. KaTa ^(opa^ ovv Kai 7ro\ei Kr]pv(r(rovTe^ Ka6-

LCTTavov Ta^ oLTrap-^a^ avTcoVy hoKifJiacravre^ tw irvev-

/uLUTi, eU e7ri(TK07rov<s Kai diaKovovs tcov jaeWoi/TMi/

2 \a^6vTs] AC; add. ol dtrbo'ToKoi S. 4 rinuv'\ A; om. C; dub. S
(pD being the common rendering of 6 KipMs as well as of 6 Kipios rjixQv).

seems to require this ; (2) The awk- 4. TTtcrraj^ei'res'] 2 Tim. iii. 1 4 yiteW
'
ward expression that Christ was eV oty efiades xai eVtcrrw^T^r.

taught the Gospel by the Father' 5. fiera 7TXripo(f>op[as /c.r.X.] ''with

thus disappears; (3) get in its We Jirtn coiivictioti inspired by the
place a forcible epigrammatic paral- Holy Ghosf :
comp. i Thess. i. 5 iv
lelism 6 Xpia-Tos ovv K.r.X. For the 'TTvetifjiaTi ayico Koi [e>] 7rXi]po(j)opia
omission of the verb to gain terse- IToXXfj.

ness, and for the form of the sentence 7. Kcidia-Tavov] The same word is

generally, see Rom. x. 17 apa rj

used in Tit. i.
5 KaTaaTijarjs Kara ttoXiv
TTicTTis e'l aKofjs, )
fie aKofj 8ia prfp,aTOS npecr^vTepovs. Both forms of the im-
XpicTToi/, I Cor. iii. 23 v^els 8e XpicTTOv, perfect Kadlaravov (from laTavco) and
XpLo-Tos 8e Qfoii ; comp. also Rom. v. Kadia-Tcov (from lo-row) are admissible,
18, I Cor. vi. 13, Gal. ii.
9. My at least in the laterlanguage see ;

punctuation has been accepted by Veitch Greek Verbs p. 299. But I

Gebhardt and Harnack and by cannot find any place for either of
Hilgenfeld (ed. 2), and is now con- the readings of our MSS, Kadea-rnvov
firmed by the Syriac version. For and Kadiardv.
the thought see J oh. xvii. 18 Kadas Xfopas] ''country districts', as op-
efie aTTeareikas fls tov Koerp-ov, Kayui posed to tov/ns comp. Luke xxi. 21,
;

aTTfaTfiXa avTovs fls tov KoajjLov, xx. 2 1 Joh. iv. 35, Acts viii. i, James v. 4.
Ka6a>s aTTearaXKev jxe 6 TVOT-qp, (cayw Hence the ancient title ^wpfTt'cr/coTroy ;

nifXTTU) vfias. See also the notes on see Philippians p. 230.

Ign. Ephes. 6 and comp. Tertull. de
'
; 8. TCLs
aTTapxas avrSv] the first-
'
Praescr. yj in ea regula incedimus, fruits of their preaching' \ or perhaps
quam ecclesia ab apostolis, apostoli avTOiv refers not to the Apostles but
a Christo, Christus a Deo tradidit' to the ;^c5pai kq\ TroXeir, and is like the
(quoted by Harnack). genitives in Rom. xvi. 5 os eVrtf
'
2.
TrapayyeXt'a?] ivord of com- aTvapxTj rfjs 'Aa-ias, I Cor. xvi, 15 ort
mand'', received as from a superior earlv dnapxrj rfjs 'A;^aras, which pas-
officer that it may be passed on to sages Clement may have had in his
others as e.g. Xen. Cyr. ii. 4. 2, iv.
; mind.
2. 27.
doKiixcwavTfs] I Tim. iii. 10 doKi-
 XLIIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 129

10 TTiG'TeveLV. Kal tovto ov Kaivw<Sj 6k yap hr) TroWiav

^povcov iyeypaTTTO Trepi eirKTKOiTCdv kul ^laKoviav

0VT(a<5 ttov Katacth'coo toyc eni-
yap Xeyei rj
ypa(pr]'
cKorroyc aytoon 6n Aikaiocynh kai toyc Aiakonoyc aytoon
eN ni'cxei.

^5 XLIII. Kal TL 6avfj.a(TTOv el ol ev Xpia-Tw

TTLCTTevOevTe^ irapa Oeov epyov toiovto KaTeaTi^arav
Tom Trpoeiptjuievovs',
brrov Kai 6 juaKapio^ nicroc eepA-
nooN eN d'Acp tco oi'K<ip Mcovcfj^ Ta ^laTeTayfjieva avTw
7 KaOta-Tavov] Kadearapop A; Ka9i(TTa.p C. 8 rc^ irpetjfiaTi] AC; spiritu
sancto (or rather sanctos, for the word has ribui) S. lo /caii'ajs] AC; /ce^'ws S.
12 oJJrws] AC, but Bryennios tacitly writes ourw; see the note on 56.

fia^ecrdaxrav TTparov, eira SiaKOPetTaxrav

:
ness'; i.e. 'there shall be no tyranny
see below 44 Siade^avrai erepoi or oppression'. For eniaKOTros, 'a
behoKniaa\i,ivoi avbpes. task-master', see Philippians p. 93.
TO) TTvevnaTi] ''by the Spirit', which XLIII. 'And no marvel, if the
is the great searcher, i Cor. ii. 10. Apostles of Christ thus ordained mi-
9. eVto-KOTrous] i. e. irpea^vTepovs ; nisters, seeing that there was the
for Clement thrice mentions iivia-Konot precedent of Moses. When the au-
Koi bioKoi'oi in conjunction (as in Phil. thority of the priests was assailed, he
i. I (Tvv fTTia-KOTTOLs Kol StoKWoiy), and took the rods of the twelve tribes
it impossible that he could have
is and placed them within the taber-
omitted the presbyters, more especi- nacle, saying that God had chosen
ally as his one object is to defend
the tribe whose rod should bud. On
their authority which had been as- the morrow when the doors were
sailed ( 44, 47) 54)- The words opened, Aaron's rod alone had bud-
eVio-KOTToj and irpea-^vTepos therefore ded, and the office of the priesthood
are synonymes in Clement, as they was vindicated.'
are in the Apostolic writers. In Igna- 16. TTto-rev^ei/res]
^
entrusted with\
tius they first appear as distinct titles. The construction mcrTevea-dal n is

See Philippians p. 93 sq, p. 191 sq. common in S. Paul : Rom. iii.

2,

12. KaTao-TTJo-coJLoosely quoted from I Cor. ix. 17, Gal. ii. 7, i Thess. ii.
4,
LXX Is. Ix. 17 Swo-o) roivi apxovras crov I Tim. i.
II, Tit. i. 3.

iv elpijpr]
Koi tovs (iriaKOTTOvs crov iv 17. ma-Tos depdnav k.t.X.] From
biKaioa-vvp. Thus the introduction of Heb. iii. 5 Mcoucr^s fxev tticttos eV oXo)
the biaKovm is due to misquotation. Tw oiKo) avTov (OS depciTTcov, where there
Irenaeus also {Haer. iv. 26. 5) applies is a reference to Num. xii. 7 ovx
the passage to the Christian ministry, ovToiS 6 depancop pov Mcoijafji iv dXo)
but quotes the LXX correctly. The TM otKO) pov nicTTos ecrriv. depdnav On
force of the original is rightly given see above 4. For the combination
I will also make thy of epithets here comp. Justin Dint. 56
'
in the A. V.,
officers [magistrates] peace and thine (p. 274) McoiJo-^f ovv
n piixcipios kul

exactors [task-masters] rightcous- TTta-Toi dfpdnoiv Qtoi) k.t.A.

CLEM. II.
I30 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [xliii

iravra ecrYiiieiwararo ev tols lepaT'i ^i(3\oi^, ta Kai

e7rr]KoXov6r]crai> ol Xoittoi TrpoCprJTai cvveTTifJiapTvpovvTe^

ToT^ VTT avTOv vevofjLoQeTnfJLevoL^. eKelvo^ 7|0j ^t]\ov
efJLireo'ovTO'i irepl Trjs [epMcrvvr]'^
kuI crrao'ia^ova'cov twv
(pvXcov OTTOia
avTwv ett] tw ivho^w ovojULaTi KEKoa-^rifxe- 5

vf], eKeXevaev tovs ^coheKa (puXap-^ov^ TrpocreveyKeTv

avTM pdjSdov^ eTTL^yeypafjifieva^ (pvXfj-i eKaa-Tr]^ kut
ovofjia' Kal XafBtov avrds e^rjcrev Kai ecrcppajKrev roh
daKTvXioL^ Tcav (pvXdp^cov, Kal (XTredero avra^ eis Trjv
Tov eTTi tov Oeou' i^
(TKt]vriv /iiapTvpiou Tt]V Tpaire^av
Kai K:\etVas Tt]U (TKt]vr]v ecr(ppa'yicrev Ta^ KXelZa<s cocrav-

Tft)s Kai Ttt? 6vpa9' Kai eiwev avToT'S' "ANApec AAeA4)oi,

HC AN ({)YAHC H pABAOC BAACTHCH, TAyTHN GKAeAeKTAI 6

Oeoc eic to lepATeyeiN kai AeiToyprelN aytoj. Trpw'ias

I icrrj/ieiuKraToi] earjfiLWcraTO A. 2 iir'y]Ko\oi'id'i](rai''\ A; -rfKoKovdyfcrav C.

5 (fivKGvl AC ;
add. iraawi' [roO] ^Icrpa-qX S. KeKoaixruj.ivri'] KeKoafx-rjfjievu} A.
8 avras] AS ;
avrbs C. rots] A ;
ev rots C, a repetition of the last syllable of
(T(ppd.yLcrev. 11 K\el<Tai\ KXiaaa A. 12 dvpas]S; pd^oovs AC.
See I.
p. 140. 15 rbv] A; cm. C. 16 eTredel^aro] ...det^aro A;
'
1.
fOTjfieidxraTo] recorded as a see above 36.
sign'': comp. 11 ty Kp'^ia kcli els 7. <^vX^s] For the geni-
eKaarrjs
rats yeveais y'lvovTai,
ar]fieico(Tiv Traa-ais tive of the thing inscribed after eni-
So in the narrative to which Clement ypa(jieip comp. Plut. Mor. 400
E tov
here refers, Num. xvii. 10 drroOes ttjp evravOa tovtovl dtjaavpov eTnypayj/airris
pajBSov 'Aapa>p...crr]p.e'iov toIs viols rcov TroXecos. Here however (})vXrjs might
dvrjKocop. be governed by kut opop-a.
lepals] On this epithet see below, 8. eBrjaep k.t.X.] This incident,
53- with the following e(T(f)pdyLa-ep ras
2. 01 XoiTTot 7rpo<l>fJTai] Moses ap- KXe'i8as aaavras, is not given in the
pears as the leader of the prophetic biblical narrative (Num. xvii). It

band, who prophesied of the Messiah, seems however to be intended by

in Deut. xviii. 15, as emphasized in Josephus (I.e.) rmv rare (re?) ai/Spwi/
Acts iii. 21 sq, vu. 13. KaTaa-rjprjpapevcop avrds, olrrep eKopi^oP,
3. eKelvos yap k.t.X.'} The lesson Ka\ tov TrXr/dovs, though his language
of this narrative is drawn out also by is obscure. Comp. Xen. //e//. iii. i.

Joseph. Afit iv. 4, 2, and by Philo 27 KaTSKXeiaep aCrd koL KaTecrrjprjpaTO

Vit. Moys. iii. 21 (ll. p. 162). Kai (pvXaKas Karea-Trjaev.

5. 6v6p.aTi\ i.e. ''dignity., office\ sc. 11. wo-avro)? xat] So also ofioias
Tfjs lepaxTVPTjs; as 44 enl tov opopaTos Ka\ Ign. Ephes. 16, 19, Trail. 13.
TVS ein(TKonrjs. On this sense of ow^a 18. TrpoelXep}
^
took oitt\ For this
 XLIV] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 131
'

15 ^6 yevofjLevri^ (TweKaXetTev ttuvtu tov la-pat'jX, Tec's

epuKoo'La'i ^iXiada^ twv dv^pcov, Kai enehei^aTO tols

(pvXdpy^OL'5
Tci^
(r(ppa'y'i^as
Kal ijvoL^ev Tr]v o-Kt]vt]v tov

fxapTvp'iOv Kal TrpoeiXev Ta<i pa^^ov^' Kal evpeOt] t]

pd/Sho^ 'Aapcop ov fJLOVOv ^efiXaa-TtjKvTa dXXd Kal

20
Kapirov e^ovG'a. tl hoKeiTe, d'yaTnjToi', 01)
Trpotj^ei

McoiJcrrj^ tovto jueXXeiif ea-eaOai ; fdaXia-Ta ri^ei

'
dXX
'

\va fjLt]
dKaTa<TTa<Tia yeut]TaL eV tw Icrpar'jX, outco^
eU to ^o^a(r6fivai to ouojua tov dXtiBivov Kal
e7roU](Tev

fiovov Oeov' to 77 do^a els tovs a[(ava<s twv aluivcdv.

25 dfjtriv.

XLIV. Kal OL dTTOcTToXoL YjfJLiJdv eyvwcav ^la tov

Kvpiov ijpLwv 'Iriarov XpicTTOv, otl epis ecTTai eirl tov

iwidei^e C. 17 ras acppayiSas] AC ;

om. S. 18 xpoeiXev] irpoe .... A
TTpoetXe C ; susttilit S. 20 hoK^lreX SoKSirai A. 23 eis t6] A
uKxre C and so apparently S. The variation is to be explained by the uncial letters
eiCTO, were. 24 GeoO] S; def. A; Kvpiov C. S translates as if it had
read tov /xocov a\7]9ivov Qeov. 27 Kvpiov] Ky CS ; XY -^' ^P'^] epeicr A.

?arai] AC; but S seems to have read iariv. iwi] A; rrepl C, and so app. S.

sense of the active irpoaipelv see Judith sin of which you are guilty in ejecting
xiii, 15 npoeXovaa ttjv KefpaXrji/ eK rrjs men so appointed, when they have
nripas. Though it occurs compara- discharged their duties faithfully.
tively seldom, it is a strictly classical Happy those presbyters who have
use, e penu promere ;
see the com- departed hence, and are in no fear of
mentators on Thucyd. viii. 90. The removal from their proper office.'

much commoner form is the middle 26. r]pQ,v\ Comp. 2 Pet. iii. 2 r^s
voice with a different sense, npoaipela- Tav aTTocTToKwv vpcjv evToXfjs, where
Bai praeferre^ eligere. vixwu (not :jp.oov) is the correct reading,
20. ov Trpo^8(i K.T.X.] This passage as quoted by Hilgenfeld so that it is
;

is loosely
quoted or rather abridged an exact parallel to Clement's expres-
and paraphrased by one Joannes. sion. See the note on tovs dyadovs
The quotation is given in Spicil. drrocrToXovs 5-
Solesm. I. p. 293 (see above, I. p. 187). 27. See Tert. de
epii eVrat K.r.X.]
23. TOV akr]6ivov /c.r.X.] Comp. Joh. Bapt. 17 'episcopatus aemulatio scis-
xvii. 3. matum mater est', quoted by Har-
XLIV. '
So likewise the Apostles nack.
foresaw these feuds. They therefore TOV ov6p.aTos K.r. X.] On uvop.a see
provided for a succession of tried above ^S^ 36, 43. The eVto-KOTT)) here
persons, who should fulfil the office is of course the 'office of presbyter',
of the ministry. Thus it is no light as in I Tim. iii. i.
132 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XLIV

6v6iJLaTO<s Tr] 67ri(rK07rfJ. Aid TavTf]V ovv Tf]v alriav

TTOOyVOXTLV 6l\ri(pOT6S TsXeiaV KaT6(TTri<TaV TOVS TrpocL-

I odu]AC; om. S. 3 nera^ij] fiero^v A. eirifiovriv] eTrivofxriv] A;
iTridojj.7]v C. in medio [ijiterim) super probatione {kirl doKifiriv or iirl
S translates e(

doKififi) dederiint etiam hoc ita ut si homines ex iis etc. See the lower note.

2. rov^ 7rpoipr]fievovs] SC. eVtCKo- Alex. 35) or poison (v^lian H.A.xli.

TTOvs Koi ^laKovovs, 42. 32), (2) 'a bandage' Galen xviir. i.

3. p.Ta^v] 'afterwards''; comp. p. 791 (Kuhn) and frequently (see Hase

Acts xiii. 42 fis TO /jLera^v crd^^arov, in Stepli. Thes.). It might also consis-
Barnab. 13 ei8ev 8e 'laKm/3 tvttov tm tently with its derivation have the

n-vevfxari tov \aov tov fiera^v, Theoph. sense 'distribution, assignment', like
ad Aiitol. i. 8, iii. 21, 23. See also iirivifxr)(Tii.
If it is to be retained, we
the references in Meyer's note to have the choice (i) of assuming a
Acts I.e. secondary meaning 'injunction', de-
'

eTrinovfjv SeSwKacrii/] have given rived from the possible (though un-
permanence to the office' comp.:
supported) sense 'assignment' (so
Athenag. de Resurr. 18 SeTrat Se Sta- Lipsius p. 19 sq) or (2) of giving to
;

iiTivofxr) the known meaning of em-

boxris Bia Trjv tov yevovs
8iafiovqp.
For inLfiovrj (which occurs occasion- vofiU, 'an after enactment', 'a codicil'
ally also in classical writers of this (so Rothe Anfdnge p. 374 sq see ;

age) see Epist. Gall. 6 in Euseb. the note on KOLjirjOwa-iv). Of these

V. I, Tatian ad Graec. 32. This read- alternatives the former is preferable,

ing was adopted by Bunsen, but he but both are unwarranted. I have

wrongly interpreted it 'life-tenure' the less hesitation in making so

(see Ignat. von Antioch. etc. p. 96 slight a change in the reading of the

sq, Hippolyhis I. p. 45 2nd ed) and ;

chief MS, because jnero^u before and
it has consequently found no favour. e8a)Ka(Tiv after show that the scribe
The original author of this emenda- of A wrote carelessly at this point.
tion eninov^v is mentioned by Ussher Hilgenfeld (ed. 2), not knowing the

(Ignat. Epist. proleg. p. cxxxvii) who reading of S, conjectured eVl So/ci/n.7,

quoting the passage adds this note which he

explains koI fieTa^v
in his margin; 'eTrifiovrjv D. Petrus ('jam conditis ecclesiis') eVi SoKinji
Turnerus [Savilian Professor at Ox- eScuKav (to ovofia Trjs em.(TK07Trjs) oncos

ford, t 165 1] hie legit, ut continnatio ('hac ratione inducta') k.t.X., adding
episcopatus ab apostolis stabilita 'jam ecclesiarum al airapxai spiritu
significetur ; quod Athanasiano illi, probati episcoporum et diaconorum
/cat ^e^aia fievei, bene respondet'. munera susceperunt, post eos sola
Other suggestions, enikoyi^v, eVtrpo- probationis ratione episcopi con-
Tn]v, iivKTKO'KrfV, eTTiiTToXrjv, anovofxrjv, 4ti stituti sunt'. But notwithstanding
are either inappropriate or di-
voiJLov,
the coincidence of this conjecture
verge too widely from the authorities. with S, I do not think that a reading
It seems impossible to assign any fit so harsh can possibly stand. The
sense to the reading fnivo^^v con- word (TTivofifjv is retained by Laurent,
formably with usage or derivation. who explains it
'
adsignatio muneris
The word elsewhere has two mean- episcopalis' (a meaning of eirivojir}
ings only; (i) 'encroachment or rav- which though possible is unsup-
age', e.g. of the spread of fire (Plut. ported, and which even if allowable
XLIV] TO THE CORINTHIANS. ^33
^
5^
prjfieuov^f Kai /ueTa^u eiTLfJiOviqv hehu)Ka(Tiv OTTto^, eav

KOijurjdwG'iu, ^Lade^covTaL eTepoi ^ehoKLfxacfJievoL avhpe<s

deSiiiKacni'] eduKaaiv A; ^duKav C.

and similarly S inserts Aomines ex Us. 0.V
""Spes] AS; om. C.

in would be very awkward

itself For ehaiKao-iv it is a question whe-
here) and in their first edition by
; ther we should read SeScoKao-ii/ or
Gebhardt and Harnack, where it is edcoKav. The former involves a less
interpreted 'dispositio, praeceptum' change, and the transition from the
(a meaning which would be adequate aorist {Karea-Triaav) to the perfect
indeed, but which the word could (SeSwKao-tv) may be explained by the
not, I think, possibly have). In ed. fact that the consequences of this
2 however Harnack expresses a be- second act are permanent.
lief that the word is corrupt and 4. KOLfjLTjdaxTiv] SC. ol TTpoeiprjfievoi,

suggests eVt^oXr/v. Hagemann {R'6- i.e. the generation of presbyters

first

mische Kirche p. 684) conjectures appointed by the Apostles themselves;

d. h. wenn diese Form des
'

inivoixLv, and avTwv too will refer to these

Accusativs von enivofiis nachgewiesen same persons. Rothe (I.e.) refers
werden konnte'; and Hort quite both to themselves.
the Apostles
independently suggested to me eVt-
'
He assumes Clement to be here de-
voixida, or conceivably but improbably scribing the establishment of episco-
inivofiiv, as we have both ^apira and pacy properly so called, and supposes
and and inivop.rj, which he translates
;^a/3ii', vria-Tida vrjariv, /cAetSa
'after-

KXfLv\ and refers to Philo de Creat. enactment', to refer to a second

Ptinc. 4 (11. p. 363 M.) where Deu- Apostolic Council convened for this
teronomy is so called (comp. Quis purpose. I have discussed this theory
rer. div. 33, 51, I.
pp. 495, 509). at length elsewhere {Philippians p.
Donaldson conjectures enlSona '
an 199 sq). Of
his interpretation of this
addition' {Theol. Rev. Jan. 1877, P- particular passage it is enough to say
45), and Lipsius liriTay-qv {Jen. Lit. that it interrupts the context with
13 Jan. 1877). irrelevant matter. Apostles, says The
The Latin quotation of Joannes Clement, first appointed approved
Diaconus (i.p. 187) contains thewords persons to the ministry {KaOia-ravov
'hanc formam tenentes apostoli etc.', doKiixda-avres 42), and afterwards
and Card. Pitra {Spicil. Solesm. i. p. provided for a succession so
{fxera^v)
293) considers that 'forma' here repre- that vacancies by death should be
sents eTTivofiT] (so too even Ewald filled by other approved men {ere p 01
Cesch. VII. congratulating
p. 269), 8edoKi,iJ,aafj.evoi presby-
avdpes). The
himself that the sense of iTTivo^xr] is ters at Corinth, who had been rudely
thus decided. A late Latin para- ejected from office, belonged to these
phrase would be worthless as an au- two classes some were appointed
:

thority, even if this view of its mean- directly by the Apostles (KaTaaradevTas
ing were correct. But a comparison of vrr fKeivcov) Others belonged to the
;

the order of the Latin with the original second generation, having been ap-
of Clement shows that the words mean pointed by the persons thus immedi-
'the Apostles following this precedent ately connected with the Apostles
set by Moses', and that 'forma' there- {KaTacTTadivras v(j)' iripatv fXXoyifjioiv
fore has nothing to do with iiTivo\ir]. didpaiv).
134 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XLIV

TriP XeiTOVpyiav avTWV. tov^ ovv KaraaTadevTa^ vtt

eKeivuiv rj erepuov eWoyijucov dvdpwv, avvev-
fxera^v vcf)

^OKrjcrdo'r]^ Trj^ 6KK\r](rLa9 Trda-f]^, kui XeLTOvpyf]G-avTa<i

dfiefJLTrTdi^ Tw Troijuvio) tou XpKTTOv juETa TaTreii/ocppo-

avi/r]^ Jicru^cos kul dfSavavG'co^y iaejuapTvpr]/tx6vous re ttoX-
5

Aols ^jOoVofs UTTO TrdvTWV, TOVTOv<s ov diKaio)^ vofju^ofiev

1 fiera^v] /xeTo^v A. dvdpwv] AC; add. eKXeXeyfjLifovs S. 3 Xeirovp-

yi^caPTas] XiTovpyrjaavTaa- A. 5 a/3avai5o-a)s] d^avdaus C. fiefxapTvpr]-

[jL^vovs] fiefiapTvpyifievoKT A. re] AC; om. S. 6 rotJTovs] AC; add.

1. Toiii ovv KaracTTadevTas K.r.X.J Arist. Et/t. Nic. ii. 7, iv. 2, ^avav-
This notice assists to determine the aia isexcess of fxeyaXoTrpeneia
the
chronology of the epistle. Some of
'
lavish profusion ', the result of vul-
those appointed by the Apostles had gmity. Somewhat similar is the
died {01 Trpoo8onropi](ravT(s), but others sense which the word has here and
were still living (pi KaraaraOfVTes vn in the passages quoted, vulgar self-
'

iKfivav). See the introduction, i. p. assertion '.

349. Here again pLera^v means ^after- 8. dpLepi,TrTcos Koi ocj/ws] So I Thess.
'wards\ as above. ii. 10.
2. (TVvev8oKr]a-aar]s K.r.X.] Wotton TrpoaevtyKovTas to.
Scupa] What
quotes Cyprian's expression 'plebis does Clement mean by by
sacrifices,
'

suffragium referring to the appoint- gifts (boipa) and offerings {Trpoa-cpopas)?

ment of Church officers, Epist. Iv In what sense are the presbyters said
(p, 243), Ixviii (p. 292). Add also tohave presented or offered the gifts?
the more important passage Epist. The answers to these questions must
where the part of the
Ixvii (p. 288), be sought in the parallel passages ;

laity in such appointments is de- 18 6v(Tia T(S Oea nvevpia avvTeTpipifie-

scribed. See also the account of the vov, 35) 36 dvcria alveaeas 8o^d(rei

appointment of Polycarp to the epis- fif Koi Kel 686s f] 8ei^a> avra to acori]-

copate in the spurious Pionius, Vit. piov roil Geov- avrrj tj 680s, ayaTrrjToi,
Polyc. 23. iv fi evpop.ev to croyTijpiov ^piav 'irjcrovv
4. rat TTOipivito roii XptcrroO] The XpicTTov Tov dpxi'fpkci ru)V 7rpoa(f)opmv
phrase occurs again 54, 57 (comp. TOV TvpocTTdr-qv koX ^or]6ov r^s
ijpicov,

16). See also Acts xx. 28, 29, i Pet. dcrdeveiai i]pt,cov, 4^ SKaaros vfiav,
v. 2, 3. aSeXc^oi, iv tm tSt'o) Tdyp,aTt fvxopicr-
^. a^avav(Tws]'ufiassumzng/j\ The retVo) TM ew iv dyadfj avvi8r]crei
adjective occurs Apost. Const, ii.
3 VTrdpx<>>v, [ifj TrapfK^aLvcov Tov (opicrfxevov
eVro) 8e evcrivKayx^o^, d^avavaos, dya- Trjs XfiTovpyias avroii Kavova, ^ $2
TrrjTiKos, where again it refers to 6v<Tov rw GeoS dvaiav alveaecos Kai
the qualifications for the ministry. TW V^'lCTTOi Tas evp^Qf (TOV K.T.X.
VTToboS
See below 49 ovbev ISdvavcrov iv These passages are illustrated by
dydirrj, ov8iv vnp^<pavov, Clem. Alex. Heb. xiii. 15, 16, 81' ovtov ovv (i.e.
Pacd. iii. 6 (p. 273) [t.iTa8orkov (f>i\av- Sia Toil dpxi^fpicos 'irjcrov, VV. II, I2)
OpcuTTcos, ov ^avavcrcos ov8e aXa^oviKas, dva(j)ipa)p.ev dvaiav alveaews 8id nav-
Job xli. 26 (Theod.) viol ^avava-ias Tos Ta> Qeco, TovTea-riv, Kapnov x^i'^^^"
'

(Heb. fTTl^ 'pride, arrogance'). In ofioXoyovvTcov tco ovopiaTi avToii ttjs

 XLIV] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 135

aTTofidWeordai rrjs
XeLTOvpyia^. dp-apria jap ov jULiKpd
rj/ULiv 6(TTai,
ecTTai, eav tovs ajmejULTTTcos kul o(riu) Trpoa-evey-
eai/

Koura^ TO. doopa rrjs 67no'K07rf]'S aVo/SaAw/xei/. juaKapiOL

10 ol
7rpoo^OL7ropt'](ravT6 Trpea-^UTepoi, oWive^ eyKapirov
Kal TeXeiav ecr^ou rrju dvaXvcnv' ov yap ev\af3ovi>Tai
7 aTTo^dWeaOai.] C
ovv S. airopaXeadai A. ;
It is rendered by an active verb
in S. See the lower note. \eLTovpylas] Xirovpyiaa A. 8 ^arai]
AS ;
ecTTiv C. 9 iJ.aKdpwi\ AC ;
add. yap S.

8e evTTOuas koI Koivcovlas fXTj

enLkavdd- time and in the right place and
vecrde, roLavran yap SvcriaiS evapecTTel- through the right persons. The first
Tai 6 Qeos, to which epistle Clement day of the week had been fixed by
is largely indebted elsewhere. The Apostolic authority not only for com-
sacrifices, offerings, and gifts there- mon prayer and breaking of bread
fore are the prayers and thanks- (Acts XX. 7) but also for collecting
givings, the alms, the eucharistic alms (i Cor. xvi. 2); and the pres-
elements, the contributions to the byters, as the officers appointed by
agape, and so forth. See esp. Co7ist. the same authority, were the proper
Apost. ii. 25 at rure 6v(Tiai vvv ev)^al persons to receive and dispense the
Koi deijaeis koi ev)(api(TTLai, al tots contributions. On the whole subject
dnapxai Kal Se/carat Kal dc^aipe'juara see Hofling die Lehre der dltesteii
Kal 8copa vvv rrpocrcpopal al dia tcov Kirche vom Opfer etc. p. 8 sq (Er-
oaiccv eniaKOTTdiv 7rpocr<pe pop.e- langen 1851).
vat, KvpiM 27 irpoar}Kei ovv
K.T.X., 10. eyKapnov k.t.X.] The same com-
Kal vpas, dSeX0ot', dvaias vpav rjToi bination of epithets occurs again
npo(T(jiopas Tw eTTiaKoTrco 7rpo(r(pe- 56 ecTTai avTols eyKapiros Kal TsXeia ij

peiv cof
apxi^epel K.r.X., 34 Toiis TTpbs Tov Qeov k.t.X.

Kaprrovs vpuv Kal to. epya rav x^cpoov 11. reXet'ai'] i.e. 'z mature, ripe
vpwv els fvXoyiav vpwv Trpocr(f)f pomes age ',
so that it has borne fruit {eyKap-
avTO) (sc. r ini(TK6na>)...Ta dapa vpcov Tvov). Comp. the compound TeXeio-
8i86vTis avTa (OS lepel GeoC, 35 M~ Kaprrelv which occurs several times in
Ken edcras vyxay (o Qeos) 6veiv aXoya Theophrastus (e.g. Hist. PL i.
13. 4,
fa5a...oi) driTTov Kal tcov ela(popSv vpds Cans. PL iii. 6. 9). The work of these
qkevOepuxTev cov o'<^etAeTe rots lepevaiv presbyters had not, like those Corin-
Kal Tav els tovs deopevovs evTroCiav thian elders whose cause Clement
K.r.X., 53 bwpov 8e ecTTi Qea eKaaTov rj pleads, been rudely interfered with
irpoaevxTj Kal evxap'^o"'''''^-
These pas- and prematurely ended.
sages show in what sense the pres-
' '
dvdXvcnv'\
TTjv their departure ;
'

byters might be said to offer the comp. Phil. i. 23, 2 Tim. iv. 6. The
gifts'. They led the prayers and metaphor seems to be taken from the
thanksgivings of the congregation, breaking up of an encampment (see
they presented the alms and contri- Philippians I.e.), so that it is well
butions to God and asked His bless- suited to Tvpoohonvopr]<javTes.
ing on them in the name of the
'
ovK fvXa^ovvTai prj] tJiey have no
whole body. Hence Clement is fear Icst^ :
comp. i Mace. iii.
30, xii.
careful to insist ( 40) that these of- 40 (v. 1.). In Acts xxiii. 10 evXajBrj-
ferings should be made at the right 6els is a false reading.
136 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XLIV

jur] Tf9 avTOu^ fjieT acTTricrr] cctto tov Idpujuevou avToT^

TOTTOv. opMfjLev yap on ei/iov^ vfJLeT^ jULeTrjyayeTe /caAws

TToXirevofjievov^ e'fc r^? djuLefXTTTO)^ avToT^ fTerijurjiuLevti'S'f

XeLTOvpyia^.
XLV. <pL\oveLKOL eVre, dhe\(poi, Kai ^rjXwTai irepl 5

Tcov dvriKOVTMv ek (r(jOTr]piav. ivKEKVcpare els ras

ypacpds, Tas dXrjOeTs, Tas f^ia] tov Tri/evjuaTOs tov

2 /Merr]ydyere] fierayayere A. 3 xoXiTevofiivovs] AS ; woKi.Tevffa/j.ivovs C.
dfiifiTTTus] AC ; om. S, perhaps from a feeling that it was not appropriate with
TTL/x7]iJ.ivr]S. 4 XeiTovpyia^} XiTovpyeiacr A. 5 ^CKbveiKoC\ (piXoviKoi A.
^crre] earai A. 6 tQv dvrjKovruvl C (as I had conjectured); ...avTjKovrojv A.
S inserts a negative. See the lower note. evKeK^LXparel ev re A; iyKKii<par

C; ei iyKeK6<paTe S. ras ypacpds] A; rds lepas ypa<pds CS. This is probably

taken from 53 iTrlaracrde rds iepds ypa<pas...Kai iyKeKij^are k.t.X. 7 rds dia
tov] CS ; def. A : see the lower note. No better way of filling the lacuna in A
2. Tonov] On the place of the de- serve') a thing for a person' (comp.
parted see the note on 5. There is e.g. Eur. Orest. 828 iraTpmav Tip.i,v
here also an allusion to the other Xapiv with Soph. A7it. I.e.) and thus ;

'

they afford no countenance for a pas-

'

sense, office ;
see 40 (with the
'
note). sive use Tifiacrdai tlvi to be bestowed
3. fTfTifiTjfievrjsf} ''respected by as an honour on a person '. The in-
ihejn\ So all the authorities. But stances of the passive, which are
I am disposed to read TerrjprjiJLepTjs: quoted in their note, all make against
comp. I Thess. v.
23 afjiix7rra)s...T7]pT)- this interpretation ; e.g. Euseb. //. E.

6eir). My emendation was accepted X. 4 y^P<^po^ 4>povi]aei irapa Qeov ren-

by Gebhardt (ed. i), and indeed it fiTjpevey Const. Ap. ii. 26 o eTricrKonos
seems to be required notwithstand- ...Of oil d^ia reTiprjixivos- If TeTip.rip.i-

ing the coincidence of our existing vj]s can stand at all here, it must
authorities. In their second edition mean '

respected ', i. e. duly dis-

'

however Gebhardt and Harnack re- charged'. Hilgenfeld (ed. 2) speaks

turn to explaining it 'offi-
TfTifiTjfievrjs, favourably of TfTT)pr)p,epr]s.
cio quo inculpabiliter ac legitime XLV. 'Your zeal is misplaced,
honorati erant and supposing that
', my brethren. Search the Scriptures.
mean 'aliquid
Tinap Tivi Ti can alicui You will indeed find that God's ser-
tamquam honorem tribuere'. But vants have been persecuted, but their
the passages quoted by them, which persecutors are always the impious
seem to favour this meaning, Pind. and unholy. Did pious men shut up
OL Fyt/i.] iv. 270 Uaiav re aoi rifj.a
[1. Daniel in the lions' den ? Or cast
<j)aos,Soph. Ant. 514 eKeiva bvaa-e^rj the three children into the fire.'' This
Tifxai xapiv [comp. also Aj. 675], are was the deed of the wicked who knew
highly poetical. Moreover even in not that God mightily shields His
these the expression must be referred faithful people. And so has crown- He
'
to the original meaning of rifxav, to ed the sufferers with everlasting re-
respect (and so
'
to scrupulously ob- nown and honour.'
 XLV] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 137

dyiov eirio'Taa'de otl ou^ev adiKOi/ ovde TrapaTreTroit]-

fxevov yeypaiTTaL ev avTuTs. ou)(^ evpt](reT6 diKaiov^

^
(xtto ocricov hi-
aVo/^e/SA^Z/xeVof? dv^ptav e^L(x)')(6f]crav

KULOi, dW VTTO dvofJLUiv' e<pvXaKL(j6ri(Tav , dXM vtto

dvoa-idiv e\L6dcr6r](Tav vtto Trapavofxtov d7reKTdv6f](rav

VTTO TtJov fJLLapov Kui u^LKOv ^fjXov dveLXrjcpOTcov. Tavra
occurred to me in my first edition than rds tov. I saw that the p-qaeis of all previous
editors could not stand, as the usual expression is either jrve^iiJ.aTos aytov or rod
irvev/xaTos roD ayiov. 8 eTriaTaade] einTaaOai A. 9 7e7/3a7rrat] A ;yiypaiTTo
C. evpTjcreTel C ; ...vprjaerai A; mvenitzs present) S.
(a. 12 virb irapa-
v6fi'j}v] C; vTTOTra . .
vo/nuv A; dW inrb irapavb/J.^av S see I. p. 142.:
13 invh
tCov^ A; airo tuv C; aXX' vvb (or dirb) tlHv S. See the last note. fiiapov] C
(as I had conjectured, ed. i); /xiapuv AS. ddiKov] AC ; ddiKuv S : see i.
p.

143. ravTo] AC; /cat ravra S.

5. ^iXoveiKoi ea-re k.t.X.] By read- tors. confirmed to a greater

It is

ing rtof dvrjKovTCiv, instead of extent than I could have hoped by

fir/ avrj-
KovTcov (by which previous editors CS, which have Tas dta tov irvevfiaTos.
supplied the lacuna of A), I changed It is difficult however to see how
ecrrefrom an indicative to an impera- there was room for so many letters
tive Contend zealously, if you will,
;
'
in the lacuna of A ;
for the space
but let your zeal be directed to things left for TacrdiaTov most is at half a
pertaining to salvation
'

; comp. Gal. lettermore than is taken up in the

iv. 17, 18, I Pet. iii.
13. There is a next line by otiov8, i.e. six letters.
GeoO Cv^os, and in some sense also a Since the lacunae here are at the
Qeov (piXoveiKLa. My conjecture was beginnings, not (as commonly) at the
approved by Tischendorf and ac- ends of the lines, there can be no un-
cepted by Gebhardt, and is now con- certainty about the spaces. I have

firmed by C. S translates eVre as an therefore placed 8ia in brackets.

indicative, and is obliged in conse-
'
8. napaTvenoirjij.ei'ov] counterfeit,
quence to insert a negative with dpr]- spurious\ For the metaphor see
KovTcov, thus falling into the same trap Basil. (.?)
ill Esai. i. 22 (l. p. 416 e)
as the editors. Compare Barnab. IJ.i]7rov Ki^SrjXos fj bpaxp-T), TOVTecTTi, p,i]-

17 fKniC^i. fjLov tJ yjrvxv ^3 emdyfiia 770V86yp,a TraparreTToi.Tjpei'ov, with the

liov pLTj TrapaKfXomepai ti rav avrjKovTuiv whole context in which the metaphor
(Is aciTTjpiav. For dv^Keiv els see also is developed. So TrapaTroielv Justin
Ign. Philad. i, Smyrn. Polyc. Phil. 8, Dial. 69, 115, TTapaTToiTjcTis Iren. i. g. 2.
13. For TO.
dvr]KovTa with a dative II. e(f)v'KaKia6r](rau\ Many editors
see 35, 62. read but this is open
evecfyvXaKiadrja-av,
6. eV/ceKvc^aTe] See the note above to objection, for there seems to be
40. no authority for a verb encfivXani^o) ;

Tai 8ia TOV nvevnaros] The

7. emen- and indeed such a compound is hard-
dation rds TOV nvevfjLQTos, which I
pro- ly possible, for (pvXaKL^a is derived
posed somewhat hesitatingly, was not from (fyvXunrj but from cj)vXa^.
adopted by Gebhardt in place of 13. fiiapov] The emendation {piapbv
the prjaeis TTvevfxaTos of previous edi- which I made in
for pLiapcov) my first
138 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XLV

7rda")(^ovre^ eiz/cAews i^veyKav. tl yap eiTrcojuev, d^eX-

(pol;Aavir]\ VTTO Tiav (pofSovjUievcov tov Qeov 6(3\t]6ri el's

XuKKOv XeovTiav ; r] 'Avavia^ kul 'A^apia^ kul MtcrarjX
VTTO TCdv 6pr](rK6VovT(ov Tr]v jueyaXoTrpcTrrj Kal evdo^ov

6pr](rKeiav tov v^kttov KaTeLp')(dr]arav ek Kafjuvov Trvpos', 5

IULt]6a/UL(Jos
Tovro yevoiTO. Tii/es ovv oi ravTa dpacrav-
res ;
ol (rTvyt]Tol Kal TracrtTs KaKia<s TrXripei^ ei? too'ovto
tov<s ev ocria Kal d^wjuio TrpodecreL
epripL(rav dv/mov cocTTe
^ouXevovTa^ tw Oew el's aiKLav firepif^aXeTvf, jut]
eldoTe^

I e^/cXecSs] evKKaMcr A. eiirupLev^ eiirofiev A; etiroiiiev C; dicam (errrw) S.

5 TOV v^piaroii] AC. The

present text of S has N''"1DT tou Kvplov, but this is
doubtless a corruption of XD''"1DT tov v^larov. KaTipx6ri(xav'\ A; Kadelpx^i]-
<jav C. 7 (TTvyrjToi] CS ; arvrjToi A. et's] AS ; om. C (owing to
the last syllable of the preceding word -ets). 9 n-epi^aXe'iv'] AC ; jaciant S.

edition is now confirmed by C. For If the reading be correct, the idea of

the confusion of and w in A o com- the preposition (as in TrepnriTTTeiv)

pare etTrojLiev and see above,

just below, must be 'sudden and complete
I.
p. 120. Here the immediate neigh- change'. But I cannot find any
bourhood of tQ)v would suggest the parallel; for in Eur. Ne/. 312 0o/3os
change to a transcriber. Compare yap es ro delfia nepi^aKdv p.' ayei the
I
fxiapas Koi avocriov ardaeas, 3 meaning of the word is wholly differ-

^ijXov adiKov Koi aae^rj apeikrjCJjoTas. ent. Elsewhere (see Schweighauser

5. dprjaKeiav] The word is here Lex. Polyb. s.v. Trepi^dWeadai) wepi-
used in its correct sense (see Trench jBaXXeiv has been substituted for napa-
N. T. Syn. ist ser. xlviii) for the ; ^aXXeiv, and this may possibly have
incident turns on an act of external been the case here. So Heb. xiii. 9

worship. and
7repi(j)fpea-6e napacfiepeade are con-
6. nTjOa/jLcos 'Let us not
K.T.X.] i.e. fused. Comp. 55 irapi^aXev. Our
entertain the thought, let us not so Greek MSS however are agreed in
pervert facts '.
reading irepi^aXelv here.
8. f^T]pi(Tav] 'persisted ift strife\ 10. VTrippaxps K.r.X.] 'Ynip}xa\os IS
So Plut. Pomp. 56 ovK e^epia-as aXX' said of God, 2 Mace. xiv. 34 (comp.
oiov i^TTTjOeli, Appian. Be//. Civ. ii. Wisd. X. 20) :
vTTfpaa-ma-TTjs is fre-

151 '^CKoviiKOTspoi Se roiy i^epL^ovaiv quently so applied (especially in con-

ovTfs. So too e^epicTTijs Eur. Supp/. nexion with ^oTjOos), Ps. xviii. 2, xxviii.
894, f^epia-TLKos Diog. Laert. x. 143. 7, 8, xxxiii. 20, cxiv. 17, 18, 19, etc.;
For the whole expression comp. i comp. 56 TTocror vTTepacnri(rp.6s (cttiv.

elsToarovrovaTTOvoiase^eKava-av. Hilgen- 11. fv Kudapa (rvvei8j]a-ei\ The same

feld reads e^rjptdia-av, but this, besides expression occurs i Tim. iii. 9, 2 Tim.
being unsupported and unnecessary, i.
3 ; comp. Ign. Tra//. 7.
would give a wrong meaning, for epe- TrampeTM] See the note on i.

OlCai, i^epiOi^u), are transitive. 14. iyypa(^oi\ notab/e,

''recorded.,

9. 7repi/3aXet!/j
^
to drive round\ famoiis\ The word occurs also in a
 XLVl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 139

10 on 6 u^KTTO^ v7rpiuLa^o<s KUL vTrepacnna'rtj's eanv twv

ev KaOapa o'vueL^tjo'ei XarpevovTcov tw Trai/apeTw 6v6-

juuTi avTOv' lb Y\
do^a eU tov<s aicoi/a^ tixiv alcovwv.

dfjiriv. ol ^e virofj-evovTe^ ev TreTroLdrjo'eL ^o^av Kal

Tifxt]!/ eK\r]povofJiy](Tav, 67rt]p6ri(rav

Te kul eyypacpoL eye-
15 VOVTO CtTTO TOV OeOU eV TW fJLVYIjJLOO'VVlO aVTtOV ek TOfS

alcova^ TMV alojviav. djuriv,

XLYI. ToLOVTOL^ ovv uTTodeiyimacriv KoWt]6rjvai Kai

t]jULd deT, dde\(poi. yeypaTTTai yap' KoAAAcee to?c atioic,

12 Tuf atdjfuv] S; ruvai. . . . .

A; om. C. See above, 32. 14 ^77pa^ot]
C (as conjectured by Laurent p. 424); ewacppoi. A. For ^yypa(poi iyivovTo S has
scripti sunt. 15 airCov^ A; avrov CS. 16 ct/iTjf] AC; om. S.

17 ovv\ AC; om. S. 18 KoXXacj^e] KoXXairOai. A.

fragment ascribed to our Clement in fiodwov avTav (and indeed the general
Joann. Damasc. Eclog. i. 49 (li. p. 752 use of the genitive with fjivi]p,ua-vvov in
ed. Lequien) oQ^v eyypacpov Trepl avroxj the LXX of the persons whose memo-
(i.e. TOV A^padfi) IcTTOpiav yeveadai rial is preserved) points distinctly to
(OKovofj-rjaev ;
but see especially Herm. avTwv.
XLVI. Copy these bright exam-
'
Sivi. V. 3 e(TTai jj Bvcria crov deKTr/ napa
roS 0ec5 Kal eyypa(j)os ecrrai ^ vrjareia ples. Cleave to the righteous, to the
avTT] (comp. Vzs. i. 3 evypa(f)i]aovTai elect of God. To what end are these
fls ras ^ifSkovs rfjs C^fjs), Apost. Can. strifes and divisions? Have you for-
19 o yap ffiTTnikav (ura /xt) j/ooSi/tos gotten that, as there is one God, one
eyypa(j)os \oyi.a6rf(TeTai napa rw eco, Christ, one Spirit, so also there is one
29 o yap Orjcravpi^cov iv rfi (BacriXfia body? Would you rend asunder its
eyypa(Pos epyarr^s Xoyiadijaerai rrapa limbs? Remember how the Lord de-
rm 06 w (Lagarde's ReI. Jur. Eccles. nounces the through whom the
man
pp. 78, 79, see Hilgenfeld Nov. Test, offences shall come. Already have
extr. Call. I v. pp. 102, 104; this your feuds been a scandal to many,
writing elsewhere bears traces of the and yet they continue.'
influence of Clement's epistle, e.g. in 18. KoWaa-de k.t.X.] This quota-
23 which reproduces the language tion is no where found in the Old
of Clem, g 40). It is however un- Testament. The nearest approach is
necessary to substitute vtrh for atro Ecclus. vi. 34 tU a-o(j)6i avTw npoa-- ;

with Hilgenfeld; e.g. in this very KoXXrjdr]Ti. Similar words however

chapter we have a'no^i^'K.r\\i.ivovi airo occur in Hermas V/s. iii. 6 /xr/Se koX-
oaiav dv8poov see also i Cor. i. 30,
:
Xcifxevoi To2s ayiois, Still, vill. 8 oi iv

James i. 13, with the examples in Tali npay jjLaT fiats e/x7re(^vp/xeVot Kal fxTj

Winer xlvii. p. 389. The phrase KoXXa>p.{voi Tols ayioLs, Sun. ix. 20
TO fivrmoavvov avTov, or avTciov, iscom- ov KoWatVTai. toIs bovKois tov 0eov.
mon in the LXX. It might be a It is perhaps another of those apocry-

question here whether we should phal quotations to which Photius

read avToii or avTu>v, but 26 to (ivt)- alludes (see the notes on 8, 13, 17,
140 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XLVI

OTI 01 KOAAcOMeNOI AYToTc Af' AC 9 H C N TAI . KUl TTOcAlI/ eV

eTepo) TOTTCD Xeyei' Mer^ ANApoc A9a>0Y aOojoc ecH kai

MGTA EKAeKTOY eKAeKTOC eCH KAI MeTA CTpeBAOY AlA-

CTpeyeic. KoWrjOcojuev ovu rot? ddiooi^ Kal hiKaioi^'
''
ela-iv ^6 ouTOL eK\6KToi tov Oeov. Iva tl epei
Kai 5

dvjULOi Kal ^I'^oo'TacriaL Kai crxf^f^l^ccTa ttoXc/ulo'S t6 ev

vjuiV, i] ov')(l
eva Oeov e^oiuev Kai eva XpicTTOv Kai ev

6 irSXe/j-Ss re] AC ; S has the plural (as determined by ridui) irSXefji.ol re and
adds et cotitentiones J^DI'ik'QI, which probably represents koX yudxat, since the same
word elsewhere stands for jj.6.xo.<. (e.g. James iv. i, Pesh., Hcl. ;
2 Tim. ii.
23,

23, 29); or possibly Clement is giving itis stronger than ardats Si as :

from memory the sense of some ca- ardais developes into Sixoa-racria, SO
nonical text or texts. This passage 8t;Yoo'''"o''o widens into axicriJia.
is imitated by Clem. Alex. Strom. 6. TToXenos re iv vp.lv] comp. James
V. 8 (p. 677) yeypairrai S, Mera dvSpbs iv. I.

adcoov adaos ecrr] kol fxtra eKkeKTOV 7. ovxl eva Qebv k.t.X.] From Ephes.
eKkeKTos ear] kol fiera crrpe/SAoi) 8ia- IV. 4 sq V (T<opa KOL ev 7rvevp,a,
CTTpi'^eLs' KoWaaBai ovv Tails dyiois Kadas Kal iKX-qdrjre ev jxia eXirlBi r^s
npocrrjKei, on ol KoX\a>p,evoi avrois aytacr- nX'qaeas vpav' eis Kvpios, pia ttict-

drjo-ovTai, where the change of form ns, ev ^dnriapa, els Qe6s...evl di

suggests that the Alexandrian Cle- EKacrrcu ripav eboOrj rj xdpts K.r.X. ;

ment did not recognise the source of comp. I Cor. viii. 6, xii. 12 sq. See
the quotation in his Roman name- also Hermas Sitn.
ix. 13 ea-ovrai els

sake. Part of this passage is loosely ev ev aapa. -Kal rjv avrmv

TTvevfJia, els

quotedalsoby Nicon thus KokXrjdmfifv : ev TTvevpa Ka\ ev acipa, ix. 1 8 earai -q

ovv To7s adcoois koi BiKalois' etcri Se ov- (KKXr](Tia Toi) Qeov ev (rmpa, pia (ppovrj-
roL KXeKTo\ Toi) Oeov' yiypanrai. yap' (Tis, eis vovs, pia Tiicrns, pia dydnr],
KoXXacr^ai {KoKKaaOe) toXs dyiois, on Ign. Magft. 7.
ol KoXXoinevoi avTols dyiaadrjaovTai (see This mention of Qeos, Xptcrro?,
above 14). Tvvevpa, has a parallel in the reference
2. Merd dv8p6s k.t.X.] An accurate to the Trinity quoted by S. Basil {de

quotation from Ps. xviii. 25, 26 but :

Spir. Sanct. xxix, ill. p. 16) as from
the application of the passage by S. our Clement, but not found in our MS
Clement to the influence of good or and probably belonging to the lacuna
bad companionship is wholly wrong. from 5^) Cff 7^P o eof kcli ^fj 6 Kvpios
The 'Thou' of the Psalmist is God Irjcrovs Xpicrros Kai to irvevpa to ciyiov.
Himself, and the passage teaches Owing to this parallel, I have taken ev
thatHe deals with men according to TTvevpa as an accusative and connect-
their characters. ed it with the preceding words, rather
5. The words are ar-
e'peis K.T.X.] than as a nominative, in which case
ranged an ascending scale
in see ;
it would be attached to the
following
the notes on Galatians v. 20, 2 1 Gu- .
clause, Kal pia kXtjo-is ev Xpttrrto ;
but
p.01 are 'outbursts of wrath,' as in I.e. the construction is doubtful. The
At^ocrraa-ia is weaker than trxicrixa, as construction and punctuation has
 XLVlJ TO THE CORINTHIANS. 141

TTvevfJia Tfj^ 'X^dpiTO^ to eK^uGev (p' rjfjia^ ; Kal fiia

K\f](Ti<i eV XpicTTw ; fW Ti dieXKOjuev Kal dia(T7rwiu6u to.

^o Tou XpKTTOVf Kal (TTaarLa^ofJiev Trpos to (TuyfJLa to
jueXr]

l^LOVy Kal ek TOcravTrjv aTrovoiav ep^ojueda wcrTe eVf-

XaOecOai tijua^ oti imeXr] ecTjuev dWtjXcov ; iui/f]cr6r]Te
'

Twv Xoycdv h)(rov tov Kvpiov tjiucov' elrrev

yap' GyAi
Tit. iii.
9, Hcl.). The connecting particles in the Greek are favourable to such
an addition; but it is
suspicious, as being perhaps borrowed from James iv. i.
9 dieXKo/xev] AS ; dUXKw/iiev C. 13 'ItjctoO tov Kvpiov iipuv} A; tou Kvpiov
rjfiuv Iriaov xP'-O'tou CS.

been confirmed by the Syriac, since TO ayadd iXdelv Set, paKapios 8e 81 ov

I first
proposed it. epxfTat' opoicos Kal to. kuko dvdyKT]
12. ^eXfjeafjiev] Rom. xii. 5ot7roXXoj iXdelv, oval 8e 8t' ov epxeTai. S. Cle-
ev a-afia ecrfieu iv Xpiara), to 8e Kad' ment here may be quoting from our
fls dWi^Xav fieXrj.
canonical gospels (confusing them
13. OJatK.r.X.] Two different sayings together), or from oral tradition, or
of our Lord are here combined. The possibly (though this seems the least
Jirst is recorded in Matt. xxvi. 24, probable supposition) from some
Mark xiv. 21, oval 8e rw dvdpcoTra written account no longer extant, e.g.
fKeivco 81 ov 6 vios tov dvQpuiTrov irapa- the Gospel of the Hebrews. The
8i8oTai' KaXov rjv avria el ovu iyevvrjdrj
first solution presents no difficulties;
6 avBpanros fKe'ivos ;
and more briefly for the insertion of ^ eva tSv iKXeKTciv
in Luke xxii. 22, 77X171/ oval rw dvdpwTra) pov a-Kav8aXiaai is not a more violent
(Ke'ivu) 81 ov 7rapa8i8oTai. The sec07td change than is found in many of his
runs in Matt, xviii. 6, 7, ov S' av (tkuv- Old Testament quotations; e.g. the
8aXi(Tr] fva tQ>v piKpoiv tovtchv Ta>v perversion of Is. Ix. 17 at the end of
TTKTTevovTaiv fls epe, avp(j>epft avT(3 iva 42. See also the fusion of different
Kpepacrd^ pvXos ovikos nepl tov Tpd- passages in 18, 26, 29, 32, 35, 39,
)(r]Xov avTov icai KaTaTTovTurBrj iv tc5 5O) 52, 53- The quotation of Clem.
TTeXdya, Tr)s BaXacrcrrjS .ovai rw dvOpcSnco
. . Alex. Strom, iii. 18 (p. 561) is not an
8l ov to (TKav8aXov 'ipx^Tai '. in Mark independent authority, for it is evi-
ix. 42, OS av (TK. . T. p. T. T. IT. fls dently taken from the Roman Cle-
ipi, KaXov icTTiv avTa pdXXov d Trept- ment.
KetTai p. dv. t. avTov Ka\ ^e^XrjTai I have no doubt that the
TV.
rp. Syriac
(Is Triv ddXaaa-av. in Luke xvii. i, 2,
has preserved the right reading and ;

aviv8eKT0V icTTiv tov Ta (TKav8aXa prj

this for three reasons. (i) This
iXdelv, ttXtjv oval 8l ov ep^fTai.' Xva-i- reading is farther from the language
TeXel avTco Xidos pvXiKos TTfpiKfiTai
ft of the canonical Gospels and there-
ir. T. rp. avTov (cat eppinTai els ttjv fore more likely tohave been changed;
6dXacrcrav, rj
iva (TKav8aXi(rrj Ta>v piKpaiv (2) Clement of Alexandria, Strom.
tovtwv eva. Hermas Vt's. iv. 2 has iii. 18 (p. 561), so read the passage in
oval ToTs aKovcraa-iv ra prjpaTaTavTa Kal the Roman Clement ; (3) The word
napaKovaaaiv' alpeTcoTepuv rjv avTols to 8ia(TTpe-^ai explains the sequel to
pi] yevvr]6fjvai. : and in Clem. Ho))i. (TX}(Tpa vpQiv TToXXovs 8ieaTpe\lrv ('per-
xii. 29 a saying of our Lord is quoted, verted not one, but many'), it being
142 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XLVI

ANGpoinqi eKeiNCp- kaAon hn aytw ei oyk e'reNNHBH,

h
Ttp
e^4A TOON eKAeKTOiN Moy ckanAaAicat KpeTrxoN hn aytco
nepixeGHNAi myAon kai KATAnoNTicGHNAi eic THN BaAaccan,
H GNA T03N eKAeKTOON MOY AlACTpeyAI. TO CTX'-O'fJ.a VflOiV

TToAXoj)? diecrrpe^ev, ttoWovs ek ddvixiav efSaXeUy ttoA- 5

\ovs ek ZiOTTayfiov, toi)s iravTa^ ti/iias ek \v7rrjv Kai

e7rifjLOvo<i vjudov ecTTiv tj o-raais.

I oi)/c] A; ixi] C 4 rwi/ eKXeKTUP jj-ov Siaarp^ypai] S Clem ; tuv fxtKpuv

fiov ffKavSaXiaai. AC. See the lower note. 6 rods Travras] AC; rovs de

iravras S. iifMas] AS ; viMci% C. u a^rou re...'A7roXXw] A; eavrov Kai

after Clement's manner to take up ^StvaKaTarTKrjvwa-aixev TreTrotBoTes

and comment on a leading word in K.T.X. I have collected these ex-
his quotations; e.g. 14 an Bpconcf) amples, because this characteristic
eipHNiKcp followed by 15 koWtj- determines the readings in three
dcjfiev Tois
IJ.T evaejSfias elprjvev- passages of interest (here and 35,
ova-tv, 27 d) N OYX' AKOYONTAI 57 comp. also
; 51), where there are
followed by 28 navrcov ovv jSXeTTO- variations.
KalaKovonevcov, 29erNH9H
fifvcov 6. Sto-ra-y/xw] The word is rare,
Mepic KYpfoY---Ari<5^ Ar^wN fol- but occurs in Hermas Stm. ix. 28,
'
lowed by 30 Ay lov ovv fiepU, Plut. Mor. 214 F.

3o0e6c...AfAcjociN xApiN followed XLVII. '

Read the epistle which
by ols ;^apif otto tov Qeov SeSorat,
iq
Paul the Apostle wrote to you long
34 OCA HTOfMACeN TOTc YTTO- ago. See how he condemns strife and
MeNOYCiN AYTON followed by 35 party spirit in you. Yet then you
TLva ovv apa iarlv to. iT0ifia^6p.eva had this excuse, that you chose as
Tols vnojievovaiv; 35 oAoc H leaders Apostles and Apostolic men.
Aeiico AYTCp TO CCOTHpiON TOY Now even this palliation of your
0eoY followed by 36 avri] 686s... t)
offence is wanting. It is sad indeed
iv fi evpofiev to crwrr/pioi/ ij/xwv, that two or three ringleaders should
36 ecoc AN Geo TOYC exGpoYC fame of the Corinthian
sully the fair
K.T.X. followed by rives ovv ol ix^Bpoi, Church and bring dishonour on the
46 (just above) mcta ANApoc name of Christ.'
a6ca30Y ABcpocecH ka} mgta 8. TTjv fTTia-ToXrjv] It must not be
CKAeKTOY eKAeKToc ecH followed inferred from this expression that Cle-
by KoW-qQutfiev ovv rols ddcoois... ment was unacquainted with the 2nd
ela\v 8e ovtol cKXeKTol rov Oeov, Epistle to the Corinthians; for exactly
48ANofiATe MOI nYAACAlKAIO- in the same way Iren^eus (i. 8. 2)
CY N H c K.T.X. followed by ttoWcjv ovv writes ev rf) irpos KopivOiovs (where the
TTvXoav dveayviav i]
iv diKaioavvrj present Latin text specifies 'in prima
avrr] eVriV, 50 (I)N A(t)e9HCAN a! ad Corinthios epistola'), and again
anomIai k.t.X. followed by 51 oaa (iv. 27. 3) 'in epistola quae est ad
ovv TrapfTrfcrap.ev...a^icoa'a)iJLfv a(f)edii- Corinthios', and (iv. 27. 4) quotes
vai Vp1v,^$y KATACKH NCOCei STt' 2 Thessalonians as 'ea quae est ad
eAn(Ai nenoiGtoc followed by Thessalonicenses epistola'. So also
 XLVIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 143

XL VII. 'Ava\d(3eT6 Tr]v ema-ToXriv tov juaKapiov

riauXoU TOV dTTOCTToXoV. TL TTpCOTOU VjuTv eV
dp^rj TOV
10
evayyeXlov kypayfrei/ ;
eV dXrjdeia^ 7rvevfiaTLK(Jo^ eire-

(TTeiXev avTOv re Kai Kt]<pd re Kal AttoAAw,

vfjLLv Trepl
dia TO Kal t6t6 TrpocrKXicrei^ v/mas TreTroifjo'daL' dXX' f]

diroWu: Kal K-qcpa, C, thus conforming the order to i Cor. i. 12 (comp. iv. 6). S has
the same order as A, but omits re in both places. It also repeats the preposition

before each word, but no stress can be laid on this (see above, i. p. 137).
1 2 Trpoa-KkicreLs] A ; divisioties S ; wpoffKKrjcrei'i C. For this itacism see above 21.

Orig. c. Cels.
63 eV ttj npos Tmodtov
i. repov, and even in later writers.

4>r]cri,
iii. 20
npbs QecraaXoviKels,
Tjj 9. Trpcoroz/] 'yfrj/ and foreniost\ re-
Method. Symp. iii. 14 (p. 22 Jahn) ferring to the position and promi-
Xa^erco 8e jjieTa x^i^pos 6 (BovKofievos rrjv nence assigned to this topic in the
npos Kopivdlovs emaroXijv, Macanus
First Epistle to the Corinthians. It
does not seem to be quite correct to
Mcignes Apocr. iii. 36 (p. 131 Blondel)
Kal ev TTj TTpos Kopivdiovs Se emaToXr] explain the word with different com-
Xeyet Ilepi Se tuiv rrapdevcov itriTayrfV mentators either (i) Of time purely,
Kvpiov ovK e'xa k.t.\., Hieron. Epist. in which case it adds nothing to h
Iii. 9 (l. p. 264) 'lege Pauli epistolam dpxi) TOV evayyeXiov or (2) of qttality
;

ad Corinthios, quomodo diversa mem- purely, as if it signified the primary

bra unum corpus efficiunt', Anast. value and excellence of the injunc-
tion.
Sin. Hodcg. 12 (p. 97) Ik r^? Trpos
'
Kopiv^t'ovy, and Chrysostom in his fV apxh K.r.X.] i.e. in the first days

preface to the Colossians (xi. p. 322 of the Gospel, soon after your con-
B, ed. Bened.) refers to 2 Timothy as
version.' The expression occurs in
q npos Tipodeov {fTnaToXrj). Where S. Paul himself, Phil. iv. 15. See
the context clearly shows which also the note on Polyc. Phil. 1 1
'
in

epistle meant, no specification

is is principio'. It is quite impossible that
needed. On the other hand I have apxj}TOV evayyeXiov can mean (as
not observed any distinct traces of Young, Cotelier, and others suppose),
the influence of 2 Corinthians on 'the beginning of his epistle' as
Clement's language or thoughts. containing his evangelical teaching
fxaKapiov] Polyc. P/l//. 3 rov p,aKa- (Iren. iv. 34. i
'legite diligentius id
piov Kai ev8o^ov UavXov, lb. ^ II quod ab apostolis est evangelium
'beatus This passage of
Paulus.' nobis datum').
Clement 11. Trepi avTov re k.t.X.] I Cor. i.
perhaps the earliest in-
is

stance of the specially Christian sense 10 sq. The party whose watchword
of paKcipios comp. Rev. xiv. 13
:
was e'ya> XpicTTov is passed over in
p,aKapioi ol vtKpol ol ev Kvpia aTTodviq- silenceby Clement, because the men-
(TKovrei oTrdprt. In 43 he applies tion of them would only have com-
the epithet to Moses; in 55 to plicated his argument. Moreover it
Judith. The word
continues to be is not probable that their exact theo-
used occasionally of the living, e. g. logical position was known to him or
Alex. Hieros. in Euseb. //. E. vi. 11 his contemporaries.
8ia KXi]p.(VTos Toil nuKdpiov 7rp6(r/3v- 12. See above on 21.
Trpoo-KX/o-ets] J5
144 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XLVII

7rp6a'K\ia-is eKeivt] y]ttov djuapriav vjuuv 7rpo(rr]veyKev'

7rpo(reK\i6r]T6 yap a.Troa'ToXoi^ iJ.efJLapTvpr)fJLevoL<5

Kal

dvdpi SeSoKf/xacr/xeVo) Trap avTo7s. vvvi he Karavor]craTe

TLve^ vfjid^ diearTpeyjyav Kal to (re/uLvov Trj^ Trepi/BoriTOv

dyawrjTOi, Kai
(piXadeXcpLas vjulmv efxeKacrav. ai(rxp(^ 5

Xiav Trjs k^<^i

Xpio'Ttp dyioyrjs, ev
ai(rxp(^} dva^ia
dKOvecrdai Trjv (SefiaiOTaTrjv Kai dp-^aiav KopivOiwv 6k~
KXrjcriav hi eV rj duo TrpocrcoTra (rraaia^eiv 7rpo<i
Tovi

7rp6<rf3vTepov9.
Kal avrt] rj aKor] ot jjiovov 6i<s rifjid^ ^X^'
I 7r/3ocrKXc(ris] irp6(XK\r]ais C; irpoaKK-qaeL^ A. ^rroi'] A; iJTTova, C, and
so apparently S. irpoffrjveyKev] A; iirrjveyKe C, and so apparently S.
2 irpoaeKkWyfTe] A; irpoueK'K'rjdrjTe C. /lefiapruprj/j.^vois] AS; dedoKifxacxfiivoi.^

C, which reads conversely ixeixapTvpr]/j.iv({j for 5e5o/ci/xacr/a^i/y in the next line.

3 Trap' avTo2s] AS ; Trap''

avrGiv C. 4 Trepi^orjTov] AC ; om. S translating
^epaioTaTTjv, as if /Se^atoVrjTa. 5 e/xeloiaav] e/jLiwa-av A. alcrxpa., dyaTTjjroi]
AC ; om. S. 6 Xpia-T<^'\ AC; add. Irjcrou S. dywyrjs] AS; dydTrrjs C.

'
2. ^ffiapTvprjfxevois] attested, fa- commonly of any systematic disci-
mous^ : see the note on 17. So Ign. plinary or scholastic training.
Eph. 12 nnvXov...Toi) iJL{fj,apTvprifi,4vov. 7. a.Kovfa-6ai\ i.e. 'It is a disgrace-
3. aiiSpt SeSoKi^acr/iefcp] ApoUos ful state of things, that it should be

therefore is not regarded as an Apo- reported^ the word aKoveo-^at being

stle ;
see Galatians pp. 96, 98. dependent on al(Txpa...Ka\ dvd^ia. I
4. TO aejJivov c.r.X.] Comp. I wcrre mention this, because the construc-
TO crefivov kol TTfpi^orjrov Koi Tvacriv av- tion is generally mistaken some ;

Bpoorrois d^iayanrjTov ovofia vpiitv fieyd- editors wanting to understand del

XcBj ^\a(T(^r]ixr)6f]vai. and others substituting daoveTai for
5. alcrxpo- <ai- Xiav al^xpa] Comp. dKoveadai. For the plural alcrxpa
53 fTTLcrTaade Ka\ KaXcos inicTTacrOe. K.T.X. see Jelf's Gramm. 383.
See also Theoph. ad Autol. i.
17 Kokh. dpxaiav'\ This epithet seems not to
Kai Ka\a Xiav, Hippol. p. 36 (Lagarde) be consistent with the very early date
Travra jxev KoXa Ka\ KoXa Xiav to. tov which some critics would assign to
'

Qeov, Clem. Recogn. iii.

25 Ignoras, Clement's epistle see i. p. 364 sq,
:

O Simon,valde ignoras', and per-

et and the notes on 5, 44.

haps Hermas Matid. viii. ov boKel a-oi 8.

7rpoo-a)7ra] ^persons', or rather
ravra irovrjpa eivai Ka\ Xiav Tvovrjpa rots 'ringleaders''; as in i. See the
dovXois TOV Qeoi) be the right ; (if this note on Ign. Magn. 6.
punctuation). The very words alaxpd 9. OKO))] Thus it was a rumour or
alaxpa occur in Maximus
Ka\ Xiav (?) report which had reached the ears of
on Jude 7 in Crajner's Catena p. Clement and the Roman Church re-
157- specting the feuds at Corinth; like
^
6. dywy^s] edt(catio)i\ Uraimng\ those earlier accounts of irregularities
as below 48. The word is used in the same Church which reached
 XLVIIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 145

10 pt^cev aWa Kal eU tov^ eTepoKXivel^ vTrap^ovra^ d(p'

rjjucoi^f wcrre Kal ^\aa-(pr] juLLa^ eTrKpepecrdai

ra dvofj-aTi
Kvpiov dia Tviv vjJLerepav dcppoG'vvriv, eavToi^ he klv^uvov
eire^epya^ecrSaL.
XLVIIl. 'E^dpcDjuev ovv
TovTO ev Tayei kul Trpocr-
15 Trea-wjULev tm ZecTroTr] Kai KXaucrcojuLev iKeTevovTe<i auTov,
OTTft)? iAeft)9 yeuojuevo^ iTriKUTaWayf] i^fXiv Kai 7rt Trji/

(refjivriv Tf]9 (J)i\ade\(pia<s t^julmv dyvrji/ dytoyrju diroKaTa-

aTricrrj rifjid^. TrvXr) yap diKaiocuvri^ dvetoyvla eh ^corjv

7 Kal] AC; om. S. 11 Tifiuv] AS; v/xQv C. 12 eauTots 8^] A; eavTo?s

re C; etvobis ipsis S. 16 I'Xews ytvbfj.ivo'i] A; yevbiievo'S tXewj C. V'"]

AS; vfuv C. \oo5e\y resftf/ta( izos ad prion-m zV/am
iirl T7]v K.T.\.] S tra.ns\a.tes

modestiaiJi nosfi'am ainoris frateriiitatis et ad piirain illam conversationcin, but this

probably does not represent a various reading. 17 T]\x(hv\ AS; vix.(hv C.

18 Vas] AS ; vim% C. dj/e^wa ets fwV] A; et's fwV o.vei^'^vta. CS.

the ears of S. Paul (i Cor. v. i oXws on 32 and Winer xxii. p. 163.

aKoviTai. K.T.X., xi. 1 8 aKoixxt (TXi(T\iaTa XLVIIl. 'Let us put our sin away.
K.T.\., comp. i.
11). It is quite a mis- Let us fall on our knees and implore
take to suppose that the Church of God's pardon. Righteousness in
Corinth had formally and by letter Christ isthe only gate which leads
asked advice; see the note on i to life. Is any one faithful, wise,
learned, energetic, pure ? He should
10. eTepoKXivels] See the note on be the more humble in proportion as
11- he is greater. He should work for
^,
the common good.'
'so that blasphemies''; em-
y Oil heap 16. fTTiKaTaXXay^] While no other
(peptadaibeing middle as frequently instance of the verb eVtKaraXXno-o-eH'
elsewhere, and the subject being vixas is given in the lexicons, the sub-

or possibly rovs erepo/fXtveTs imapxov- stantive appears in Theophrast. Cha-

Tas. Comp. Rom. ii. 24 to yap ovop.a ract. 26 Tov \akKOV rrjv (niKaTaWayjjv,
Toi) Qf oil S(' vp.as ^Xaa^-qpLeirai iv rots where it seems to signify 'the dis-
eduecriv, Ka6a)S yeypanrai. count'.
12. Kivhwov] i.e. the danger of in- TTjv a-efivriv k.t.X.] The expression
curring God's wrath, as ^ 14 klv8vvov is copied by Clem. Alex. Strom, iv.

vTToia'op.fv 4^ toctovtco fiaXXov 17 (p. 613) (Tfp.VT]

OVV TTJS (j)i\avdpoi-
pLiyaVi r)

vnoKflp.e6a Kivbvva. TTias Koi ayvf]dyayrj Kara tov K\r]p.VTa

TO Koiva(f}{\es frjrei, where the insertion
'
eTre^fpya^fo-daL] withal
13. to cre-

ate''; for this is the force of eV/, as in of Kal relieves the sentence. Comp.
Demosth. de C07: p. 274 iv S' firt^tip- the words at the close of this chapter.
'

yacraro toiovtov o Trao-t roTs TrpoTtpnis ^Ayayrj is condiict\ as in '^ XT- see
enedrjKe Ti'Kos. Here eavTo7s will be also 2 Tim. iii. 10, Esth. ii. 20, x. 3,
equivalent to vfilv avrols : see the note 2 Mace. iv. 16, vi. 8, xi. 24.

CLEM. II. 10
146 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XLVIII

avrr], Kadw^ yeypaTTTai' 'ANoi^Axe moi hyAac aikaiocynhc,

i'na eiceAOoiN eN aytaTc elOMoAorncooMAi toj Kypi" <>-Yth

ri nVAH TOY Kypi'oy, Ai'kaioi eiceAeYCONTAi eN ay'th. ttoX-

\(jov ovv TTvXodv dv6Myviwv, rj ev ^LKaiocrvvr] avTrj ecTiv

>7 eV XpiG'Tw, ev r] /ULUKapioi Trotj/re? ol elcreXdouTe^ kui 5

I avTTj'] A ;
icrrlv a^jT-q C, and so apparently S. avoi^are] AC ; aperi S.
1 'lva\ S Clem ; oni. AC. See the next note. i^o/jL6\oyT]awfjt,ai AS ; ef o,aoXo-

yndofjiai. C with Clem. See above, l.

p. 143. 5 r[\ AC; cm. S apparently.
9 diaKpiaet^ C; diaKpiaKpicrei. A, as read by Tischendorf; see prol. p. xix.
As far
as the c he appears to me to have deciphered the MS correctly. Jacobson, instead

of cei, reads it cm. This seemed to me more like the traces in the MS, but I
could not see it distinctly. See below. rJTU} yopybs ev ^pyocs, tJtco d7i'6s]
Clem (see below) ; ^Vw ayvos AC. S has sii homo {quispiani) Jidelis, sit validus.

1. 'Avoi^are k.t.X.] From the LXX of the later Clement is much too
Ps. cxviii. 19, 20, word for word. This loose to be a guide here, and he pro-
passage, as far as rJTco yopyos Iv epyois, bably inserted the tva to improve the
is loosely quoted with interpolations grammar of the sentence.
of his own by Clem. Alex. Strom, i, 3. TToXXcoj' ovv TTvXav /c.r.X.] Per-
7 (P- 33^ sq), who gives his authority haps a reference to our Lord's saying.
as o KX?7^r;s eV Trf wpos Kopivdiovi eVi- Matt. vii. 13, 14.
a-ToXfj. Elsewhere Strom, vi. 8 (p. 5. 7?
eV XpioTcp] John X. 9 eyco elfii
772), after quoting Ps. cxviii. 19, 20, 17 dvpa, Hermas Sifu. ix. 12 ?) TrvXij 6
he adds (by a lapse of memory) e^rj- vlos TOV Qeoii eVri (and the whole sec-

yovfitvos Se to prjTov tov Trpo(f)r]Tov tion), Ign. Philad. 9 avTo^ &>v 6vpa tov
Bapvd^as eirKpepei, IIoXAgSi' TrvXav TTUTpos, Clem. Hom. iii. 52 Sta tqvto
avea)yvi(ov...ol elaeXdovres, though a avTos aXr]6f]s wv TTpo(pvTT]s eXeyev, 'Eyw
few sentences below he cites the words elfii 7j TTvXr] Trjs ^(orjs k.t.X., Hegesipp.
eoTO) Toivvv TTicrros . . .
ixakXov p.L^a)i> in Euseb. H. E. ii.
23 aivayyeiXoy
ehai, as from 'Clement in the letter r\pXv TLs 1] 6vpa TOV 'irjaov.
to the Corinthians'. His two quota- 6. oa-LOTTjTi K.T.X. ] Thc usual com-
tions do not agree exactly either with bination of oa-ios and dUaios. See
the original text of Clement or with the note on ii.
5.
one another. These facts make it 7. tJto) Tis TTiaTos K.r.X.] i.e.
'
If a
clear that he cites chiefly from me- man has any special gift, let him
mory, and this must be borne in employ it for the common good, and
mind in using his quotations to cor- not as a means of self-assertion.'
rect the text of the Roman Clement. The same gifts of the Spirit are enu-
2. f^op,oXoyT](T(op.ai\ The best MSS merated, though in the reverse order,
of the LXX have (^ofxoXoyria-ofiai, in I Cor. xii. 8, 9 w f^^v yap 8ia tov
which is substituted for the conjunc- TTvevp.aTos b'lboTai Xoyos (Tocplas, aXXco
tive by most editors here, but e'^o- Be Xoyos yvaxreois KUTa to avTo Trvfiifia,

IxoXoy^aanai will stand; see Winer eTepco TTicTTts ev rcS avT<a TTvevp-aTi.
xli.
Hilgenfeld inserts "tva
p. 300. Unless Clement is using this lan-
before etVfX^coV, following Clem. Alex. guage without warrant, the temper
Strom, i. 7 (p. 338); but the quotation of the factious Corinthians of his
 XLVIIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 147

KaTevdvvovre^ wopeiav avTwv iv 6(TL0Tf]TL Kal

ttjv

hiKaiocrvi't], aTapa-^co^ iravTa e7rLTe\ovvTe<s. r]T(t) ti^

7ri<Tr6<s, fiTW hvvaro<5 yi/wo'iv e^eiTreTv, r]TU) (TO(po^

ev

diaKpicrei Xoycov, tjrco yopyo^ eV epyoi^, rirco dyi^os'

10 TOG-ovTU) bcra)
yap lucdWov Ta7reivo<ppove7u 6(pi\etj

scientiam possidcat (possidebit), lahoret [laborabii) sapiens in interpretatione verb-

onim, sit piirus in operibiis. This represents substantially the same Greek with
AC, k.t.X. must have been
except that lyVw Si^faros '^v!ii(jiv i^enre'iv, tJto} <jo<pbs

corrupted into ^w duvaros, yvucriv gfet, iroveiTio (ro^os, as Bensly points out.
10 Toao^TLiJ yap'] AS; Clem Tocro6T(p (om. yap) C; toctovtov tis Anton Max.
yap] AS; om. C. rairei.voippovel.v o^etXet] AC Clem; d(pel\ei raireLvocppovelv
Anton Max. ;
dub. S. 6<j)el\ei] ocpiXei A. fcy] AC Clem Saov Anton Max.
;

time must have closely resembled 8e IBpabvrepov, Epict. Diss. ii. 16. 20
that of their predecessors in S. Paul's eV fj.ev rfj cr;^oX^ yopyoi Kal Kara-

yXoaaoi, iii. 12. JO aa-Kr^aov, fl yop-

age. '
8. yvaaiv e^iine'iv] to litter, ex- yos el, \oi8opovp.evos avex.^<T6m k.t.X.,

pound a yvaxTii, i.e. 'to bring out the M. Antonin. xii. 6 el ovv yopybs el,

hidden meaning of a scripture'. For TavT-qv depcnrev(Tov. The departure

this sense of yvaxm see the note on in the later usage of the word from
Barnabas 6. The possession of its Attic sense 'terrible' is noted by
yvwa-is was
an old boast of the fac- the old lexicographers. The pas-
tious Corinthians,i Cor. viii. i, 10, sage is twice quoted by Clem. Alex.,
8; and the vaunt has not
II, xiii. 2, Strom. \. 7 (p. 339) avTiKa o KXt?^??? ev
without reason been attributed espe- TT] TTpos Kopivdlovs eniaToX^ kuto Xe^iv
party among them which
cially to the (f)r]ai, Tas 8ia(f)opas eKTidefxevos
'
twv
claimed as its leader Apollos, the KaTo. KKXr](Tiav SoKifxayv,
TTju
Hrco tis
learned Alexandrian, 'mighty in the TTKTTos, i]Ta) BvvaTos TIS yvaxriv i^eLnelv,
ev
scriptures' (Acts xviii. 24). TjTo) aocf)bs SiaKplaei Xoycov, tjtco

9. SiaKpi'o-et]
The reading of A yopybs iv epyois, and Strofu. (p. vi. 8

(if it be correctly given bt-aKpiaKpiaiv) 722 sq) ecrrco to'ivvv ttkttos o tolovtos,
is a corruption of dtaKpia-iv ( = Sta- eVro) hwaros yvaxTiv e^enrelv, rjTco ao-

Kpia-l) which
itself arose out of 8ia- (})us ev diaKpicrei Xoyaiv, tJtco yopybs ev

Kpiai and this out of Siofcpto-et

see :
epyois, r;rco dyvos'
ToaoiiTa) yap fiaXXov

for other instances of a like error the TaTreivocf^povelv oipeiXei,

ocra SoKet p.dX-

note on 15. Otherwise Xov elvai- 6 'KXrjprjs ev Trj npbs

p.ei^(x)v
dvaa-Tija-oiiai

8t.aKpi<Te(Tiv might be read (see above, Kopivdiovs 4)t](tL

The correction
I.
p. 120, for similar corruptions),
as adopted in the text (after Hilgenfcld)
the plural SioKpiVei? occurs Rom. xiv. seems to be justified by these two
I I Cor. xil. lo
quotations. It does not however
diuKpia-eis biaKoyLaixwv,
find any supportour existing au-
in
8iaKpi(T(ii TTvevp.aTU)V.
of the MS
The reading
yopyos] ''let him be energetic'.
TjTM
thorities.
In later writers yopyos is 'active, may be explained as arising out of a
quick, strenuous'; e.g. Uion. Hal. confusion, the transcriber's eye pass-
de Comp. Verb. p. 133 (Reiske) to ing from one similar ending to an-
p.iv avriiv \tQ)V /cwXwi'] yopyorepov
to other.

10 2
148 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [XLVIII

^OKeT /utaWov juei^MU elvai, kul (^riTelv

to KOivwcpeXes
Tracriv Kai jut] to eavTOV,

XLIX. 'O e;^wj/ d<ya7rf]v

ev Xpi<TTw 7roit]craTM Ta
Tov Xpio'TOv TrapayyeXfJiaTa. tov decTjULOv Trj^ dyairr]^
Tov Oeov tU ^vvaTai e^riyrjcracrdai ; to (jLeyaXeiov Ttj^ 5

KaWovfj^ aVTOV t/? dpK6TOS 6^6i7r67v*^

TO v^o^ el's 6

dvayei ^; dyctTrr] dv6Kdit]yt]T0V ecTTiv. dyairr] KoWa

rifjid^ TM Oew' dyaTrr] KaXvTTTei TrXrjdo^ djuapTiwv
dyaTTf] iravTa dve')(eTai, TrdvTa fiaKpoOvfJiei' ovZev /3a-
I txel^osv'] AC Clem; om. Anton Max. 3 ttoitjo-cItw] CS. So also
Tischendorf reads A, but other collators give it TriprjcraTW. I could not satisfy

myself. On the first two inspections I inclined to TriprjaaTu, but on the last to
iroLTjaaTd}. There are various readings iroiQfjLev, r-rjpiS/xev (both well supported) in
I
Joh. V. 2. 6 apKerbs] ACS. Bryennios represents C as omitting apKerbs,
but this is a lapse of the pen. 7 earlv. ayairrj'] A; iarlv 7} dyairr, C.

I, fiaXKov yi-ei^av] See Matt, xxiii. Koivai<f>\es.

II. For the double comparative see XLIX. '
Who shall tell the power
the note on Philippians i. 23. An- and the beauty of love ? Love unites
tonius Melissa Loc. Comm. ii. 73 (34) us to God : love is all enduring: love
and Maximus Serjn. 49 both quote is from pride and vulgarity:
free
this sentence as from Clement in a love brooks no strife or discord. In
somewhat different form, to(tovt6v tis love all the saints were perfected.
fiaXkov o(f)eiXei Tmreivocfipovf'iv, ocrov In love God took us to Himself.
8oKel pioXXov elvuL but they cannot : In love Christ gave His body for
be regarded as independent authori- our bodies and His life for our lives.'
ties for omitting /xe/^wv, since in such 3. 'O 6X0)1' K.T.X.] This resembles
collections of excerpts the later com- our Lord's saying in John xiv. 15 eav
piler generally borrows directly from ayarraTe /Lie, Tas VTo\as tos ifxas Triprj-
his predecessor : see PhiHppia?is p. o-eTe (v. 1.
TT^prjaaTi) :
COmp. I
Joh. v.

251, note 2. The Syriac connects 13-

Hak\ov with hoKei. 4. TOV Seo-^w] i.e. 'the binding
^qreiv K.r.X.] I Cor. X. 24 fiT]8f\s power': comp. Col. iii. 14 ttjv aydirrjv
TO eavTOV ^rjTeiTO) dWa to tov (Tepov, Q eaTiv cnjv8e(rp.os Trjs TfXeioTTjTOS.
and t3. ver. 33 t^V Cv"^^ ''o ffJ^avTov This clause is quoted by Jerome ad
<TVfjL(popov aXka to Tav noWav. For Ephes. iv. i (vii. p. 606) 'Cujus rei et
CriTelv TO eavTov see also I Cor. xiii. 5, Clemens ad Corinthios testis est,
Phil. ii. 21. scribens Vmculum charitatis Dei qui
TO Koiv(ocf)\es]
'
the common ad- {quis) poterit enarrare ?
'

vantage'' ; comp. Philo de Joseph. 6. apKeros ^enre7v] Previous edit-

II. p. 47 M- ^'o- TO KOivdi^ikk^ cfiddvovTa ors had misread the MS A, and writ-
Tovs aXXovi, M. Anton, iii. 4 ;^copis ten dpKfl, (wv eSet, eliTflv. For the
/ieyaXr/s Koi Koiv(o(fi('KovsdvayKT]s.,Apost. construction of dpKero? see i Pet. iv. 3.
Const, vi. 12 (Tv^rjTovvTes npos to The word occurs also Matt. vi. 34,
 XLIX] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 149

10 vavcrov eV dydTrrj^ ovdeu V7rep^(pavov' djaTrtj cr^ia-fjia

ouK ex^h dydirri ov crraa-id^eL, dyaTrt] iravra ttoieT ev

ojuovoia' ev rr] dyaTrrj eTeXeiwdria'av Travre^ o\ 6K\eKT0i

Tov Oeou' ^tx dydirn^ ov^ev evapeaTOV icTiv rw Oew*

rrpoo'eXdlSeTO tjjud^ 6 ^ecnrorr]^'
ev dyaTrrj hia Trjv

i^ dyaTrrjv, rjv 'e(T)(ev Trpo^ f]fjid<i,

to aljua avrou edooKev

VTvep rjjucov 'hicou^ Xpio'TO^ 6 Kvpio^ rifj-wv ev SeXtjjULaTi

OeoVj KUL Trjv (rdpKa VTrep Tf]<s (TapKO<s rifj.wv Kai Tr]V

yj/'Uxvi' VTrep twv yp-v^f^^v rifJLwv.

The whole of the preceding passage is disturbed in CS by false punctuation.

8 TrXriOo's] AC ;
but S translates N115J' vmrutn:
'
13 oi)Uu...t(^ Gey] AC,
and so Clem (except that he omits ^cttlv) Deo placere nemo potest (as if oi)5efi
;

ei)ajOeo-Teti' karw ry 9e(J) S. 14 ^A^as] AS; i-^as C. 15 ^5w/cec] A;

didujKev C. 16 i/irep 7]fxuiv T7;(roOs Xpta-T6s] AS ; itjaovs xptcTTos virep rj^wv C.
18 tQv i/'i/xwj'] AS ; T^s i'vxv^ C.

X. 25, Hermas Vis. ill. 8. the language of S. Paul and the lan-
TO v-^os K.T.X.] See the elabo- guage of S. Peter is a token of the
rate metaphor in Ign. Ephes. 9 ava- large and comprehensive sympathies
(jiepofievoL els ra i''^tj 8ia rrjs iirjx^avris
of one who paid equal honour to
^Irjaov XpuTTov k.t.X. The passage of both these great Apostles ( 5), though
Clement from this point, as far as rival sectariansclaimed them for their
T^s ^aaiXeias roii XpicrTov ( 5'-'))
i^ respective schools. See Galatians p.
loosely quoted and abridged by Clem. 323, with notes above 12, 33.
'
Alex. Strom, iv. 17 (p. 613 sq). jSai/auo-oi/] coarse, vulgar, self as-
8. ayanT) KakvnTfi k.t.X.]
'
//trows serting, arrogant\ See the note on
a veil over, omits to notice, forgets, d^avaicTdis 44-
forgives'. The expression is taken 10. (Tx^o-pa ovK e'xei k.t.X.] The ex-
from I Pet. iv. 8 (comp. James v. 20), pressions are in an ascending scale
which again seems to be a loose quo- (i) 'knows nothing of outward
tation from Prov. x. 12, where the schisms'; (2) 'does not even foster
original has WV^^'h^ 'all sins' for a factious spirit'; (3) 'nay, preserves
'a multitude of sins', and the Lxx entire and universal harmony'.
is 8e iv. 18 6 8e
rendering still wider, iravras 12. eTeXeicodrja-ap] I John
Tovs /ii)(pikovfiKoiivras KaXvnTei (f)iXia. (fio^ovfievos ov TereXeiaTai
ev rfj ayanr].
this Hebrew metaphor of cover-
'
For 14. 8ia Tf}v dydnr^v /c.t.X.] Comp.
ing' see Ps. xxxii. i, Ixxxv. 3, Neh. John XV. 12, Gal. ii. 20, Ephes. v. 2.
iii.
37 (iv. 6). 17. Ka\ TTjv adpKa] Wotton quotes

9. dycnrr] Trdvra at'e;^;eTai] An imi- Iren. v. I. l tw I8ia> a'lpaTi Xvrpooaape-

tation of I Cor. xiii. 4, 7, 17 dyanr] vov T^pas TOV Kvpiov Koi Sovtos ttjv
.Trdvra aT(yei...7ravTa vno- Ta>v rjpeTepcov \lrvxoc)V Koi
jxaKpodvfjLe^. .
^vxv^ virep
p,Vt and indeed the whole passage
:
TTjv(rdpua Tr)v euvTOV dvTL tu)v rjpeTepav
is
evidently inspired by S. Paul's a-apKwv, which seems to have been
praise of love. The juxtaposition of taken from this passage of Clement.
I50 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [l

L. OpuTe, dyairriToi, Trtos jjieya Kal davfjcacTTOv

eoTTiv r] ctyciTn], Kal Trjs reXeiOTrjTO^ avTrj^ ouk ecTTLV

i^riyrjo'L^'
ti^ iKavo^ ev avTrj evpeOrjvaif el {jlyi
ob<i av

KaTa^iwo'r] 6 0eos ; decojueda ovv Kal alriofjieda (xtto

Tov eXeov^ avTOv, iW tV dydirr] evpeOw/uLeu ^i'xa irpoo"- 5

KXicreu)^ di/6pco7rivt]s ducojuot. al yeveal irdaai diro

'A^ajUL 'ecos Ttjcrde y'ljuepa^ TraprjXOov, dW ol ev dyaTrrj

1 i] aYttTT?;] A; dydin] C. ai/Trjs A; avrov C. S translates ejusdeni [ipsiics)

perfectionis. It seems to have had a.irr\s and made it agree with reXetoTTjToj.
oiK iarw /c.t.X.] AC S translates non est sen?io ulliis
; sufficiens ut iiiveniatur, thus
reading i^riyrjais ns and making iKavbs feminine. 3 e^rjy7](ns] e^Tjyrjcretcr A.
ei fiT]] AC
S apparently adds iv dyaTrrj
; koI, but a false punctuation has confused
the translation of the whole context. ovs av Kara^Lihcrri] Tischendorf seems to
N
have rightly deciphered A oycakat&Iicoch, though the superscribed
as reading
N is not distinct. 4 Karaf tcitr?;] S ; /caraSiw^ t; C. For the reading of A see
the last note. 5ew/te^a] supplicenms S; ^a A; deo/xeda C; I had conjec-

L. 'In this marvellous love let us avTois dnl) tov Qeov, KaKel fiexpi t^s
pray God that we may live. We can dvacrTdaecos (fioiTaai, Trepi/xeVoutrat ttjv
only do so by His grace. Past dvdfTTaaiv k.t.X. See also Apost.
generations, thus perfected in love, Const, viii. 41 Xf>>pos eva-e^atv dvei-
now dwell in the abodes of bliss, fiivos K.T.X., Lebas-Waddington Asie
awaiting His kingdom for He has : Alineiire Inscr. 168 eva-e^ewv x^P^^
promised to raise them again. Happy be^aTo rrda-i (f)iXov. For x^pov evae^wv
are we, if we pass our time here in the existing text of Clem. Alex, has
harmony and love. For then our sins
'

Xcipciv eva-ejBav, the country, the

will be forgiven us we shall inherit : realms of the pious', which suggests
the blessing promised to the elect of a more sensuous image, conveying a
God through Christ.' notion similar to the 'Elysian fields'.
2. TTjs TeXeioTTjTos K.T.X/\ See I
John The one might be translated 'locus
iv. 18 ov TfreXeicoTai iv rrj dyant], above piorum', the other 'campus piorum '.

49 ereXfiddrja-av, and below ol iv But x^pos, rather than x'^P^i accords

dydnrj TeXeicodevres ; comp. i
John ii. with the language of the Roman
5, iv. 12. Clement elsewhere. A place in Si-
3. iv avrfi i5p.]Comp. Phil. iii.
9. cily,named after two brothers famous
6. al yeveai ndaai] Comp. 7 els for their piety, was called indiffer-
TCLS yeveds nacras. ently 'Evae^cov X'^P^ ^^^ 'Evaefiav
8. -}((iipov ev(Te^a>v'\ ''the place as- Xapos see Bentley's Dissert, on Pha-
;

signed to the pious\ like rov d(f){c\6^- lar. V (l. p. 238, ed. Dyce).
vov TOTTOv rrjs 86^r]s 5> Or rov I8pv- 9. eV Tri iTna-Konfj K.r.X.J Luke xix.

fifvov avTols TOTTOV 44- See the note 44 Toi/ Kaipov Trjs iTna-KOTTTJs crov, I Pet.
on 5, and comp. Iren. v. 31. 2 (quoted ii. 2 8o^dcra>aiv tov Qeov iv rjfjiepq. im-
1

by Wotton here) at ^vxal direpxovrai Wisd. iii. 7 '^^i iv Kaipw im-

crK0Trr]s,
els TOV [aopaTOV] ronov tov dpKTfievov aKonrjs avToiv dvakuij.\lrovcriv, Polycra-
 ^]
TO THE CORINTHIANS. 151

Te\eico6evTe^ Kara. Ti)V rod Oeov X^P^^ 'exovcriv x^P^^

evcref^Mi'' ot ev Trj iTricTKOTrf] rf]^ f3a-
(papepcodrjo'ovTaL
10 (TiXeia^ Tov Oeov. yap' EiceAeexe eic ta
yeypaTrrai
TAMeiA MIKpON OCON OCON, eOOC OY HApeASH H dpfH KAI
BYMOC MOY, KAI MNHCGHCOMAI HMepAC ATAOHC KAI ANACTHCCO

YMAc eK TOON eHKooN YMooN. fxaKapiOL r)fJiev, dyain^TOL,

el ra 7rpo(rTdyfiaTa tov Oeov eTroiovjuei/ ev ofJiOvoLa

15 dyciTrris, ets to dcpedrjvaL riijuv

hi dya7rr]<s Ta^ djuapTia^.
tured deJjfieOa (ed. i). odv] add. dyaTryjTol S. AC ; atVw/xe^a] AS ;

ahoifieda C. 5 avrov] AC tov Qeov S. ;Trpocr/cXt'o-ews]

A ; TrpoaKXyjcTeais

C ; adhaerentia S. On this itacism see above, 47. 7 rriahf. iifxipas] ;

A
TTJs T)fxpa% T'qcrde C ; while Clem has rijade ttjs rjfiipas.
The reading of S is inde-
terminable. 9 01] AS; 01 de C. 10 Oeov] CS; -Y A; Tischendorf
reads XY but I could only see Y) the first letter being hopelessly blurred.
5

eiaiXdere] CS ; eiffe\.... A. It is quite possible that read eiaeXOe with the A

1 1 ra/xeta] ra/xia A
LXX, but the other authorities point to el<Ti\6ere. ;

Tap-iela C. 12 dvpi.6s\ dv... A; 6 0v/x6s C. 13 vi^ev] CS ; icr/xep A.

15 TJfUv] AS ; V/MV C.

tes in Euseb. H. E. v. 24 nepLfiivcov II. ranela] ''the inner chmnber\

Tf]v OTTO Tcov ou'pai'coj/ iTVL(TKonr]v
ev fj
(k "nn. On the form see Lobeck Phryn.
vfKpav avauTTjcreTai,. p. 493, Paral. p. 28. The same ten-
10. EtVeA^ere K.r.X.] A combination dency to elide the t before et
appears
of passages. The opening is taken in vyeia 20. In 21 however our
from the LXX Is. xxvi. 20 e'icre\6e els chief MS writes rapneia.
TO. Tajiela crov, dnoKkelaov rrjv dvpav aov, oaov oo-ovl Comp. Heb. x. ;^y (with
aTV0Kpv^r]6i fxiKpov ocrov bcrov, ea>s av Bleek's note).
Tvapekdr} tj opyrj Kvplov : the close pro- dpyrj Koi Ovfios^ opyrj is the settled
'
bably from Ezek. xxxvii. 12 dva^u temper, anger' ; 6vpi6s the sudden
vfias eK Twv fjLvrjfiaTMv vficov. The in- outburst, wrath '. See the distinc-
'

termediate words Kal fjLvrja-dijcropLai tion in Trench's A^. T. Syn. ist

ijixepas dyadr^s are not found any- ser. xxxvii, and to the passages
where. They may possibly be in- there collected add Joseph. B. J. ii.
tended to give the general purport 8. 6 dpyr]s TapLtai SiKatot dvfiov KadeK-
of the promise which they introduce :
TiKoi, Hermas Mand. v. 2 ex he ttjs

see a parallel instance in 52. The TTiKpias dvfios, eK Se rov dvp-ov dpyi^,
combination of the two passages K.T.X.
from different prophets was probably 14. enoiovpLev] If the reading be
suggested by the verse in Isaiah correct, the point of time denoted in
which immediately precedes the ea-pLev must be the second advent, so
words quoted, dvaaTijaovTm ol veKpol that the deeds of this present life are
Ka\ iyepOrjaovrai ol ev to'is pLvrffieiois (Is. regarded as past.
xxvi. 19). Comp. 5 Esdr. ii. 16 'et ev ofiovoia dydrrrjs] 49 dyaTrrj ndvTa
resuscitabo mortuos de locis suis et TTOiet ev op,ovoia.

dc monumcntis educam
'
illos etc' 15. 81 dyanrjs] through God's lovc\
152 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [L

Makapioi (Ln A(t)e9HCAN ai anomi'ai kai

'yeypaTTTUL yap'
a)N eneKAAY(})OHCAN MAKApiOC ANHp of OY ^AH
ai AMApriAr
AoriCHTAi Ky'pioc AMApTiAN oyAe ecTiN eN Tcp CTOMATi ayt[oy]
AoAoc. ovTO<s 6 /uLaKapKrjuos eyeveTO eirt tovs eKXeXey-

fxevov^ viTO Tou Qeov dia 'Irjcrou XpiCTToO tou Kvpiov 5

tjfjLcov, ip ri
ho^a eU tovs alcoi/a^ tcov ulcovcov. d/ULrjv.

I /ua/c<ptoi] fj-aKaKapioi A. 2 o] A; (^ CS. There is the same v. 1. in

the LXX. 5 Tov Oeov] A ; Qeov C. 7 TrapeTriaa/xev Kai eTroirjcrafievI

CS ; -irape.../j.v A. See the lower note. 8 aipedrivai. ijfuy] CS, and so pro-
bably A. See the lower note. 10 t^s iXTridos] AC ; spei nosfrae S, but it

probably does not represent a different Greek text. 1 1 (p6^ov] AC ; add.

'
of which we become partakers by self de litera B adhuc conspicua',
ourselves living in love. There is suggested that the reading of A was
the same transition from the be- not Trapf(BT]pev but napenea-afKU and
liever's love to God's love in 49 that the following words koL inonjaa-
8ix^ ayaTTJ/y k.t.X. fiev were omitted owing to homoeote-
I. MaKupioL K.T.X.] From the LXX leuton, for there certainly is not
of Ps. xxxii. I, 2, word for word, as room for them. I believe he is right.

read in A (S writes a(f)fidT](rav). For Having my attention thus directed to

ov B has a. In Rom. iv. 8 it is a the matter, I looked at the MS again.
question whether ov or w is the cor- I could not discern a B but saw
rect reading. traces of a square letter which looked
4. ovTos 6 fxaKapicrixos] Suggested like n followed by a curved letter

by Rom. iv. 9, where after quoting which might be e. Not satisfied

the same passage from the Psalms with my own inspection, I wrote
S. Paul continues, o fiaKapiap,6s ovv afterwards to Dr E. M. Thompson,
OVTOS (n\ Trjv irepiToijLTjv k.t.X. For now chief librarian of the British
fiaKapia-jibs see also Rom. iv. 6, Gal. Museum, to obtain his opinion. He
iv. 15 (note). read the letters independently exactly
7. TTapenea-aiiev koI eTroirjaapev] as had done, and says confidently
I

There can be no doubt about the that the reading was napeTrfo-apev.
reading of our two new authorities; This reading is favoured by the words
for though the last word indeed, as which follow KoXby yap dvdpwTTco e^o-
now read in the Syriac MS, is poXoyela-dai nep). rav TvapaTTTbajxaTOiv
.^^-^^
(see the note on 46), as also by
transgressi suvuis, the diacritic point the loose paraphrase of the younger
has been altered and it was originally
Clement Strovu iv. 18 (p. 614) r\v Se
fecimus. But what was the Koix ne piTTfcrr] cikcov TOiavTTj tiv\ irepi-

reading of Kl The editors have (TTa(Tei dia tus TrapfpTTTcoafts roii avri-
hitherto given Trapefirjixev ;
but the KSLpevov,where nepmidri seems to
older collators Young and Wotton have been suggested by the associa-
professed only to see nape...pev, and tion of sounds.
after C was discovered, Gebhardt LI.
'
We must therefore ask par-
(ed. 2), observing that nothing was don for our sins. Above all ought
said either by Tischendorf or by my- the leaders of these factions to deny
 Ll] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 153

Oaa
'

LI. ovv Kal eTroit^craiuev ^la

irapeirea'afjiev
Tii/os Tcov Tov dvTLKeifJLevov, d^LuxTWfjiev d(pe6r]vaL rifjiiv

Kai eKeivoL ^e, o'lrive^ dp^rjyoi crracrews Kal

hi^oo'TacrLas
10 e'yevr]6r](Tav ,
ocpeiXovcnv to kolvov tPj's e\7ridos crKOTreiv.

01
yap juLETa (f)o(3ov
Kal d'yaTrt)^ TroXiTevofievoL eavTOv^
veXovcLV fj-dWov a'LKiai<s
TrepLTriTrreiv r] toi)s 7rXt](r[oVj

del S. 12 Qi\ov(jiv\ AC ; cogimt (coarctant) S. akias] oiKiaia A.

Tischendorf (pi-ol. p. xix) considers that it is altered into aiKtatcr prima niami, but
I could not distinctly see this correction. toi)s TrXTjcrio;'] AC ; rots TrXrjaiov S,
which also omits 8e eavTuv, thus throwing the syntax into confusion.

themselves for the common good. took exception and said 'Emen-
It is well
always to confess our datione veteris scripturae vix opus
wrong-doings, and not to harden est [a-vy]yv(i3n[T]v] ;
literarum yi/oyp,
our hearts. Let us take warning by pars superior in codice superest,
the fate of the factious opponents of quapropter de vera lectione vix du-
Moses who were swallowed up alive bito dubitat vero Lightf. et dicit
:

in the pit, and by the fate of Pharaoh etc' He took no notice of my

and his host who were overwhelmed grammatical objection to this con-
in the Red Sea, because they har- struction of d^iovv. I had urged that
dened their hearts.' the instances where d^iovv appears
'
7. 8id Tivos K.r.X.]
dj any of the to govern an accusative of the thing
wiles (or of the ministers) of the ad- claimed (e.g. Dan. ii. 23, Esth. v. 6,
versary'. ix. 12, Xen. Mem. iii. 11. 12) are not

8. TOV dvTiKei^evov] So o di/rt'SiKos decisive. I might have added a

I Pet. V. 8, and further lexical objection ; for neither
perhaps 6 avrevepySv
Barnab. 2. 'O avriKeifxevos itself is
. in the LXX nor in the N.T. nor in the
not so used in the New Testament Apostolic Fathers are dvyyivuxTK^iv,
(except possibly in i Tim. v. 14), but avyyvmixT], ever said of God. The fact
occurs Mart. Polyc. 17, and in later is that the MS is eaten into holes here

writers. and nothing can be read. The letters

d(j)f6rjvai jj/xiv] So the lacuna in can only be conjectured from the in-
A is now supplied in our new dentations left. Dr E. M. Thomp-
authorities in place of
crvyyvcofiijv.
son of the British Museum whom I
Among other suggestions I had pro- consulted and whose practised eye I
posed d(l)e6fjvai in my notes comp. ;
should trust much more than my
50 *'S TO d(pedrivai rifUv...yypaTTTai, own, gives it as his opinion that
yap- MaKopioi a>v d(f)edr]crav K.r.X. It (Tvyyvaprjv would not fit into these
is entirely after Clement's manner to indentations but that a(f)fdT]vair]p.[iv]
take up the key word of a quotation might.
and dwell upon it see the instances ;
9. dixoa-raa-las] See the note on
collected above, 46. There can be 46.
^
no doubt therefore that Tischendorf 10. Tu Kocvnu Tijs 'X7riSo9] Comp.
misread A.
Nevertheless he re- Ign. KpJies. I
v-nkp tov kolvov 6v6p,aTOs
iterated the statement to which I Kal eXTTiSos with the note.
154 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [li

/ixaWov 06 eavTwv KaTayviooriv (bepovcriv rj t^s irapa-

hehofjievr]^ rifXiv /cotAw? Kal diKaicos ofiofbiavia^. Ka\ov
<ydp ctvOpcoTTtp e^OfJioXoyelorOaL Trepl twv TrapaTrTWfia-
Twv f] a'K\r]pvvai Tt]v Kuphiav avTOu, KaSco^ eaKXripwdf]
riKaphia tmv o'Taa-ia^ovTMv irpo^ tov depdirovTa tov 5

Oeov MwiJcrfji'' wv to Kpijua TrpodrjXov iyevrjdri. Kare-

I3r}(rav yap ek a^ov ^coi^Te^,
Kal Ganatoc noiMANe?
aytoy'c- (papato Kai ri (TTpaTia avTOu Kal Travre^
ol YiyovfJievoL AiyvTrTOVy ta re a'pmata kai oi anaBatai

avTwv, ov ^i' dWt]P TLva aWiav i/SvOicrOrjcrav ek Oct- lo

XacTcrav epvQpav Kal diruiXovTO, dXXd did to (TKXt}-

A aTa(TidvTO}i> CS, but there is a tendency in S in these cases

5 (TTacria^oPTUJv'l ;

to translate by a past where the principal verb is a past, as here. Oepa-

irovTo.] AS; avdpwirop C
See the lower note. 9 M-yircTov'] S; ...virrov A;
ai/Tov C. Perhaps the archetype of C was partially erased here and ran a. .v. tov.
dccijSdrat] ava^arais C. 10 ou] ol A. 12 airiav'\ here A; after KapSias C.

13 7^ AiyviTTOvl yqacyv... A; At^i^Trry CS. 14 Mwu'crews] jj-Lovaeti^ A;

2. KaKov...ri\ Matt, xviii. 8, Mark 32, 33 rjvoixdf) rj yrj koL Kariirifv avrovs
ix. 43, 45 ;
see Winer 6^;'rt;;. XXXV. ...Kal KaTejSrja-av avrol koX oaa iariv
p. 255. avTa>v ^mvTa els a8ov. Comp. ApOSt.
4. (TKKripvvai x.r.X.] Ps. xcv. 8; Const. \\. 1'] t^aBav kcli^ A^npihv (^(hvm
comp. Heb. iii. 8, 15, iv. 7. Karf^Tjo-ap els adov koI pd/3Sos ^Xaa-
TOV SepaTTovTo] See the various
5. Trjcracra K.T.X. (comp. 43) ;
see also
reading in C. Moses is called av- ib. vi. 3.

6p(07rns TOV Qeov, Deut. xxxiii. I, Josh. 7. noip.ave'i] Clement is quoting

xiv. 6, I Chron. xxiii. 14, 2 Chron. from Ps. xlviii (xlix). 14 cos npajBaTa
XXX. 16, Ezra iii. 2. Familiarity with eV aSrj edevTo, daparos noLfxavel avrovs.
the phrase (which is especially The reading could not have been
prominent where
in Deut. xxxiii. i, foreseen, and the lacuna in A was
it prefaces the Song of Moses) would supplied with KareTriep, before our new
lead to its introduction here. Else- authorities revealed the true reading,
where 53) (
C alters the designation 9. ra re apjiaTa koI oi dva^arai]
dfpaucop TOV Beoii in another way. The expression is borrowed from the
On hand 6fpaiTa>v tov Oeov
the other Mosaic narrative, where it occurs
is a coirimon designation of
itself several times, Exod. xiv. 23, 26, 28,
Moses (see the note on 4), and comp. xv. 19, Jar. li
(xxviii). 22, Hagg.
might well have been substituted for ii. 22.
the other expression here. But the 12. ras davveTovs Kapdias] As Rom.
preponderance of authority must be i. 21 eaKOTLo-di] ?) da-vpeTos avrcop
considered decisive as to the reading. Kapdla.
6. KUTe^rjo-ap yap k.t.X.] Num. xvi. LI I. 'The Lord of the universe
 Lii] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 155

pvvBtjvai avTcov t9 dcvveTOVi Kap^ia^ jueTa to yevecr-

Sai ra ra repuTa ev yrj AlyuTTTOu
(rtiimeTa Kai did
Tov BepaTTOVTo^ Tov Oeov Mcovaecos.
15 LII. ddeXcboi, 6 dea'TroTrj^
'ATrpocrBerj^j VTrdp^ei
Twv aTravTwi/, ov^ev ou^evo^ XP^X^'^ ^^ M^ '^^
e^o-
jULoXoyeTarOaL avTw. (pricriv yap 6 eKXeKTO^ Aavei^'
'EloMoAorHCOMAi Tto Kypicp, KAI Apecei aytuj ynep mocxon
NeON KepATA eK(})epONTA KAI OnAAC lAeXOOCAN nTOO)(o"l KAI

2G eY4)pAN9H'TOOCAN. KUl TTuXlU XcyEL' YCON TCu 06 0) OyCIAN

AiNeceooc kai AnoAoc tco yyicTcp tag ei)^d^c coy' kai eni-

/j.(i}(TCi}s C. 16 0^5^;'] .. dev A ;

om. CS. to] A ;
rod C. The oudev
has obviously been omitted by carelessness before ovSevos, and thus has necessitated
the further change of to into tov. 17 avT<^] AC add. ixovov S. Aaveid] ;

8d5 AC. See above, 4. 19 veov] vaiov A. 19, 20 KipaTa...ev(ppavdri-

Tuaav'] AS; om. C. 21 2 Kai e7rt/cdAe(rat...5o|dcrets fie] AS; om. C.
21 ewLKoKeaai] eTriKoKeae A.

wants nothing. He demands of us ing with the Stoics. The parallel

only confession. He asks no sacri- passages quoted above would sup-
fice, but the sacrifice of praise and port the connexion of risiv di^avTinv
thanksgiving for so the Psalmist
;
either with dnpocrBerjs or with 6 Seo--
teaches us.' The latter seems more forcible
TTOTTjs.

15. 'Anpoaderjs]
''

wants iiotJiiiig be-

and more natural here, besides that
sidcs\ Comp. Joseph. Ant. viii. 4. 3 o decrnoTTfs rav aTravrav is a common
aTrpnaBees yap to delov anavrcdv (with phrase in Clement, 8, 20, 23- It
the context), Act. Pant, et Thecl. is however connected with 6 Seo-n-orr/s
17 47 Tisch.) eeoff aTrpoorSeT?'?,
(p. in the Syriac.
Clem. Horn. xi. 9 6 Qihs yap dvtvSerjs 18. 'E^o/ioXoyrycro/Ltat (c.t.X.J Comp.
<ov avTos ov8evos Seirai,
Epist. ad Ps. Ixix. 31, 32, Ka\ dpiarei Geco virepTto

DlOgn. 3 o iToi.r](jas TOV

ovpavov kol ttjv jxoijxov VOV KfpaTa eKCpipovra Ka\ oir-
yyjv Koi TvavTa ra iv avTo'is .ovhevos av
. . \as' ISercoa-av k.t.X. The introductory
avTos Trpoa8eoiTo tovtcov k.t.X., A- words i^op.o\oyri<TOjj.aL Tw Kvpicp are
thenag. Suppl. 13 6 roxihf^ rov irav- not found in the context, though they
Tos 8r]fiiovpyos Koi 7raTfjp...dvfv8e^s koI express the sense of the preceding
dirpo(r8eris, 29 dvev8ees...T6 de'iov, verse ali/ecrco TO ovofxa k.t.X., and occur
Resurr. 12 Travro? yap iHTiv dnpocr-
J^ frequently elsewhere.
8er]s, Tatian ad Grace. 4 6 yap irav- 20. Qvaov K.T.X.] The first part
Tcov avevderjs ov 8inj3\rjTf(is vcf) rjp.wv 6vaov...8o^da{i,s p.e occurs in Ps. xlix
coy eVSfjjy, ad Ant. ii. 10
Theophil. (1). 14, 15 word for word, except that
dviv8ir]% See also Acts xvii. 25
u)v. the second aov is omitted in some

with the passages from heathen wri- MSS : the last clause is taken from
ters collected there by Wetstein. Ps. li. 17 QvdLa TO) Qeo) nvevfia crvv-
This was a favourite mode of speak- TeTpififiivou.
156 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [lh

KAAecAi MG eN HMepA OAiyewc coy, kai eleAoYMAi' ce, kai

AolAceic Me' eyciA r^p to) Oeo) hngyma cyNTeTpiMMeNON.

'
LIII, Girio'Tao'de yap Kai KaXw^ eTrio'Taorde Ta<s

lepa^ ypacbas, dyaTrriToi, Kai iyKCKvcpaTe ek ra Xoyia

Tov Oeov' ek dvajULvrjcii/ ovv ravra ypacpofjiev. Mwv- 5

crew? yap dua/SaiuovTO^ els to opos Kai iroiria-avTO'i

Tecra-epaKOVTa t^juepas
Kai Te(r(TepdKOVTa vvKTas ev

vrjG'Teia Kai Taireivuicrei, e'nrev

Trpos ovtov 6 Qeos'
MooycH, MooycH, kataBhOi to ta)(oc eNTeyQeiM, on hnomhcgn
6 Aaoc coy oyc e^HfArec eK rnc Airynroy nApeBHCAN ta)(y io

I (jov\ A; om. S. 3 kTri(jra.(jQt\ eTTKXTaadai A. yo-p] AC; add.

dSeX^oi S, omitting d,-yaTrriTol 1. 20; see above, 1. 4 /cat iyKSK'LKpa.Te]
CS ;
.. eKvcpare A. CS. In A only the final stroke 1, being
5 ypdcpofxev]

part of the N, is Tischendorf says 'ante Muvcreus praecedit punc-

visible (though

tum, non quod Jacobsonus videre sibi visus est').

1 6 dva^alvovros] A, not
dva^dvTos as Jacobson would read; for the is distinct and cannot have formed
1

the first stroke of n as he supposes; dva^dvroi C. S has a past tense, but on such
a point its authority cannot be urged. As usual C alters the tenses where they
do not seem appropriate; see above, i. p. 126. ets] C; ...a A; ws tt/jos (or ws

eh) S. 7 T<T(TepdKovTa\ recrcapdKovra C

both places. In either case the
in

word is mutilated in A, so that we cannot determine the form, but the preference
of this MS for the forms in e can leave little doubt.

I. e^eXovfiai] For this future see Tas Ifpas ypatpas^ Comp. Polyc.
Buttmann Gr. Sprachl. 1 1, p. 100, F/zzL 12
'
Confido enim vos bene
Winer Gramm. xciv. Clem. Alex. exercitatos esse in sacris literis et
Stf'oin. iv. 18 (p. 614), after Sia ras nihil vos latet'. So 2 Tim. iii. 15
TTappLnT(o(ri,s tov dvTiKeiixevov (already [to] iepa ypdp.fiaTa, the only passage
quoted p. 152), goes on fiifirjaa/xevos in the New Testament where this
TOV Aav\8 y^aXel '^^oyio\oyrj<TOfJ.ai k.t.\. epithet is applied to the Scriptures.
avvreTptfiiMevov, Stringing together It occurs above 43, and in 2 Mace,
the same quotations as in this chap- viii. 23, and is so used both by Philo
ter of the Roman Clement. and by Josephus.
LIII. 'You are well versed in the 4. eyKetcvcpare] See the note on 40.
I therefore
quote them spent^ as several
''

Scriptures. 6. 7roii](TavTos]
only to remind you. Remember how times in the N.T. See the references
Moses entreated God for the people, in Grimm's Clav. Nov. Test. s.v. iroifw

how he would accept no honour for II. 527 (ed. Thayer).

d, p.
himself, but asked to be blotted out 8. iiixiv irphs avTov /c.r.X.] The first
with them, if they might not be for- part, as far as p,aWou 7 tovto, is taken
given.' from Deut. ix. 12 14, which how-
3. iivla-TacrBe (c.r.X.] For the form ever commences somewhat differently
'
of the sentence see the note on 47 Kai eiVe Kvpios Trpos p.
'

Kva.(TTr]6i,KaTa-
aiaxpa, ayaTrrjroLy koi Xiav ato'^pa. ^rjdi TO To-xos, the remainder following
 LIIl]
TO THE CORINTHIANS. 157

eK THC oAOY fc eNereiAoo aytoic, enomcAN eAYxoTc x<^-

N6^'mata. Kai etirev Kvpio<5 7rp6<s

avToV AgAaAhka npoc
Ce AHA? KAI AlC AerOON, 'EcopAKA TON AaON TOyTON, KAI lAoy

ecTiN cKAHpoxpAXHAoc- GACON Me e^oAeepeycAi AyToyc, kai

^5 e2AAeiV<^ TO ONOMA AYTWN YnOKATCO0eN TOY OypANOy KAI
noih'coo ce eic IOnoc MefA kai Gaymacton kai noA'i' maAAon

H TOYTO. KAI elneN MooycHC MhOamooc, Kypie* A(fec ThN

AMApxiAN TO) Aao) ToyTOO V KAMe e'sAAeiyoN cK BiBAoy zoaN-

TooN. to ixeyaXn's dyaTTfi'S, ih reXeiorrjTOs di/V7repf3\r]rov'

9 Mmayj, Muivarj] ...a-rjfiuvffy] A; /jiwcrrj, /lucr^

C (this MS is most capricious, and
both before and after this uses the other form fiiovaris) om. S. 10 (k yyjs ;

AiytjiTTov] C ; eKyrja v A ; ff AlyvTrrov S, with the Hebrew. 11 eiroiriaav]

AC (lxx a with the Hebr) ; appears in B of the

Kai eirol-qcrav S. The Koi

x'^^^'^l^"-'^^^ AC xtoj/ei'/Lia (owing to the absence of rihtii) S.

X^XX. ;
In the
LXX A has x^vivTo., B xwv6v,ua with the Hebr. 14 eo-rti/] def. A kari CS with ;

Clem. The editors (myself inchided) following Young had supplied the lacuna in
A with \ab% from the LXX (t'SoiJ \o.h<i aKXrjpoTpdxv'^f'^ iffrtv), though Potter (Clem.
Alex. Strom, iv. 19, p. 617) had warned them that Clement of Alexandria supplied
the right word (eo-rti'). 'ia<jov'\ AC; koI 'iaaov S.
In the LXX B has koX vvv
iaaov. i^oXedpevcrai] ....edpevcrai A; i^oKodpevaai C ; e^oXedpeijcra} (or -\o9p6(Tw)
S apparently. r 7 elTrev] def. A ;
elTre C. ttjv afiapriav] AC; pcccatuiii
hoc S. 19 w ii.^y6\r\%\ A ; fieydXrjs (om. w) C.

the LXX very closely (compare also both writers from Exod. iii. 4.

Exod. xxxii. 7, 8). After naXXov ^ 16. davfxadTov] So quoted also by

TovTo the parallel narrative in Exod. Clem. Alex., but it is la-xvpov in the
xxxii is taken up, and the substance LXX. The combination fieya koI
of vv. 10, 31, 32 is given in a com- Bavfxaa-Tov occurs also 8 26, 50.

pressed form. See Bamab. ^ 4 Xeyei liKelov

TToXu fioKkov rj roCro] i.e.

yap ovTMS Kvpios, Mavari, Mcovaij, Ka-
Td(3r]6i TO TO-xos, OTL ijv6fj.rj(Tev
aov ovs e^'qyayes eK yfjs Alyvirrov, and
again S^ 14 enrev Kvpios irpos Mmvariv,
Mcuvcrfi, Mcauo-^, Kardlirjdi to Ta^os oti
6 Xaos (Tov ov i^rfyayes eK yfjs AlyvTTTov
rfvofi-qcrev.
The coincidence in the
repetition of the name Mwiio-?;, Mwva-^,
is not sufficient to show that the one
writer was indebted to the other (as
Hilgenfeld seems to think, here and
TovTov, an attempt to render the
6 \aoi Hebrew idiom 1300 3"1, 'greater
than it'. See ii. 2 from Is. liv. i.
Clem. Alex., Strom, iv. 19 (p. 617)
avTiKa ovx o Mavcrfis k.t.X., para-
phrases the remainder of this chapter
from Kol firrev k.t.X., giving the same
quotations as the Roman Clement.
a> a>] According to the rule of
19.
the gramm.arians the interjections
should be so accentuated, not J, J ;

p. xx) for, though the name is not

;
see Chandler Greek Accentiiatioii

repeated at this place in either of the 904, p. 246 sq. The editors here
Mosaic narratives, it may very easily vary
have been inserted independently by
158 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [liii

OepaTTiov Kvpiov, alreiTaL acpeciv

7rappy](Tid^eTaL 7rpo<s

Tw TrXrjdei rj kul eavTov i^aXeKpdfjvai jueT auTwv d^ioT.

LIV. Tis ovv eV vfjuv yevvalo^ ;
rk ev(T7rXay')(yo^ ;

tU 7re7r\t]po<popr]iuLevo^ dyoLTrt]^ ; eWdru)' Gl cl' e'/ie

(TTaa-L^ Kal Kal cr^icriuaTa, eK')(wpw, ctTrei^i ov eav 5

epi's

l3ov\r]G-6e^ Kal ttokm to. Tvpoa-Taa-arofJieva

vtto tov
7r\r}6ov^' fJLOVov to TroijULUiov tov
XpiCTOv eiprjveveTO)
jucTa TMU KaBeorTafjievcov irpeorfBuTepcov. touto o vroit]-
I OepaTTUv] AS ; SeairbT-qs C. 3 V-''''] AS ; 7)ijuv C. 4 TreirKtjpocpo-
pr}lj.evos\ AC ; flemis (impldus) S. See the lower note. 5 iKX^P'^^ AC ;

e7w e/cxwpw (apparently) S. 6 ^oiX-qaQe] povXrjadaL A. 9 k\^os]

K\aioa A. 10 T67ros] tottcjct A. 12 TroXireiav tov Qeov] A; rod Geoi;

I. OfpaiTcov] Bryennios adopts the being consecrated by S. Peter, may

reading of C Sea-n-orrjs, i.e. as a
*
have acted as he here advises others
master'; but this does not represent to act, and have refrained from active
the fact and cannot be right. ministrations {napaLTrja-nfievos rjpyei)
the deaths of Linus and Cletus.
'
LIV. Is any one noble, tender- till

hearted, loving? Let him declare Compare Cic. pro Mil. 93 (to which
his willingness to withdraw, that the Fell refers) 'Tranquilla republica
flock of Christ may be at peace. He cives mei (quoniam mihi cum illis

will not want a place of retirement. non licet) sine sed per me me ipsi,
The whole earth will be ready to tamen, perfruantur ego cedam at- ;

receive him, for T/te earf/i is the que abibo.' It would seem (from

Lord's and the fulness thereof. This the reference to patriotic kings and
has been the conduct of the true rulers in the next chapter) as though
citizens of God's kingdom in all Clement had read this passage.
ages.' There are several echoes of this
3. Ti's ovv K.T.X.] This passage, as passage in John of Ephesus (iv. 13,
far as Kadea-Tajxevatv 7rpf(TJ3vTep<oi>, is 48, 60), as pointed out by Bensly.
quoted in a collection of extracts If these be not accidental he probably

preserved by an anonymous writer in got them from the vTvop.vr\p.ari(Tp.o\

Syriac see above, i. p. 183.
;
which supplied Epiphanius with his
Epiphanius also {Haer. xxvii. 6, p. quotation, or from the collection which
107) quotes a few words, but incor- the Syriac writer had before him.
second hand (see above,
and at 4. TreTrXr] pn(})oprjpivos'\
In the New
rectly
I. 408 He had read them in
sq).
Testament this verb has only the
p.
certain vnopLvrjiiaTia-fioi, which I have following senses: (i) 'to fulfil', 2

elsewhere 327 sq) given reasons

(l. p. Tim. 17; (2) in the passive
iv. 5,

for supposing to have been the 'Me- 'to be fully believed' (e.g. Luke i. i),
moirs' {inrofivrjp,ara) of Hegesippus. or 'to be fully persuaded' (e.g. Rom.
The passage suggests to Epiphanius iv. 21). Here, if the reading be cor-
a solution of the difficulty attending rect, it must be equivalent to irenXr]-

the lists of the early Roman bishops.

' '

panevos, but of this sense,

filled full ;

He conjectures that Clement, after though natural in itself, the lexicons

 LV] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 159

eras eavTM jueya k\60<5 ev XpKTTw TrepnroirjcreTaij kui

10 7rs TOTTOS ^eperaL avTov toy ycip KypioY y fh kai to

nAh'poOMA AYTHC. TaVTU OL TTOXLTEVOfJieVOL Tr\V d fJiET a fJLE-

XriTOv TToXiTeiav tov Oeov eiroirja'av kul Troitjcrovcriv.
'

LV. ha de kul vTroBelyiuaTa edvwv eveyKoyjuev'

TToWoi (3a(rL\e7 Kai riyovfievoL, Xoijulikov tlvos evcTTav-

15 TO^ Kaipov, )(^pr)(riJ.oZoTf'i6evTe^ Trape^coKav iavrov^ ek

TToXiTeiav C. 13 inrodeiy/jiaTa] AS [ribiti however being omitted); inrofivri-

/j-ara C. iveyKw/j-eu] AC ;
add. voih S. 14 ttoWoI... Kaipov] C; nmlti
reges et magnates e principibiis pofmloriim, qui quum iempiis afflictiojiis v el amis f
alicujus instaref pop^do S. This is unusually paraphrastic, but perhaps does not
represent a various reading. There is however a confusion of Xoifios and Xifios.

do not furnish any example nor have free will withdrawn into exile to lull
I succeeded in finding a distinct factions. Among ourselves many
instance. In the only passage how- have become slaves to ransom or to
ever where it occurs in the LXX, feed others. Even women, strength-
Eccles. viii. 1 1
eVXrypoc^opj/^?; Kap8ia ened by God's grace, have been brave
vlcivTOV avBpwTVOV iv avTols tov noirjcraL as men. Judith and Esther by
TO novTjpov, the corresponding Hebrew their patriotic courage delivered the
is 2? i<m, 'the heart was full to do people from slavery and destruction.'
etc' The word seems to be confined 14. TToXXol /Sao-tXeTs k.t.X.] Stich
almost exclusively to biblical and feats of patriotism as were exhibited
ecclesiastical writings. by Codrus, by Bulis and Sperthias, by
8. KadeaTUfMevav] '"duly appointed,^ M. Curtius 'Quantus amor patriae
;

as described in the earlier chapters, Deciorum in pectore, quantum dilexit

43)44 (toi/s KoraaTadevTas vtt' eKfluav). Thebas, si Graecia vera, Menoeceus.'
10. TOV yap Kvpiov (c.r.X.] noble A The Xoi^iKos TLs Kaipos is a type of
application of Ps. xxiv. i. He retires the sort of crisis which called forth
in God's cause, and there is room these deeds of heroic self-sacrifice.
for him everywhere on God's earth. Origen (vi Joann. vi. 36, iv. p. 153)
TroXiTv6p.evoi ...TToXiTeiap] The
11. refers to this passage, p.e\i.apTvpr]Tai
idea of a spiritual polity to which the Se Kai napa Tols i'dvecriv oTi noWoi
several members owe a duty is pro- Tives, XoijjiiKciv iv(TKT]-^avT(33v iv Tois
minent in the context (e.g. vno tov eavTuiv TraTpiai vo<jr]p.aTa>v, eavrovs

ttXtjOovs), and is still further developed iT(f)dyia vTTep

tov koivov irapabeScoKaai'
by the comparison with secular states Kai TrapaSe'xfTat Tavd^ ovtcos jfyovevai
and statesmen in the following chapter. ov< oKoyuis TTKTTevcras Toii laTopiais o
12. noXireiavTov Qeoii] Comp. MarL TTiCTTos KXrjfjiris vtto IlavXov fiapTvpov-

Polyc. 17 Tr]v dveTriXrjTTTov avTov no- nepos. In several other passages also
XiTelav. {c. Ccls.
i.
31, I. p. 349; in Joann.
LV. Even heathen nations have 393 ad Rom. iv.
'
xxviii. 14, IV. p. ;

examples of this self-denial.

set bright he uses similar lan-
II, IV. p. 541)
Kings and rulers have died for the guage, but without mentioning Cle-
commonweal statesmenhave ofthcir
: ment's name.
i6o THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [
LV

BavaTOv, \va pvccovTai did tov eavTwv aijuaTO^ roi)?

7ro\ira<s, ttoWoi i^e-^coptja'av

idia)v ttoXewv, \va jurj

(TTacria^coG'ii/
ettl irXeiov. eTrKTTajULeda 7roWov ev i^fjuv

7rapahedo}KOTa<s eavTOVi ek heafjia, ottw? CTepovs XvTpw-

(TOVTai, TToWoi eavTOVi TrapedcoKav eU douXeiav, Kai 5

Xal3ovT6 Ta^ rijULa's avTMV eTepovs e^wfjucav. ttoXXul

yvuaTKe^ evdwajuayOeTcraL dia Trj^ ')(^apiTO<s

tov Qeov

5 irapiSwKav] A and so S (apparently) ^iu)Kav C.

; Soi/Xe^ac] A ; Bov\eLa.s

C Bryennios Didache p. P7').

(see S has a singular. 8 'lovM] tovSeid A.

9 rrp TToXews] AC urbe sua S.

;
12 5t' aydw-qv.. Xaov] AC ; propter amorem

2. TToXXot i^e\(iipy]<Tav /c.r.X.] Like of oTTwy with a future is possible (see

Lycurgus at Sparta, or Scipio Afri- Winer xii. though it does
p. 304),
canus at Rome. Of the latter it is not occur in the New Testament,
remarked by Fell that dementis '
where Iva is several times so used.
nostri fere verbis urbi valedixit, di- But we ought perhaps to read Xnrpw-
cens Exeo, si phis qtiam tibi \tibi acovrai, though both our Greek MSS
quant] expedit crevV (Seneca Epist. have Xvrpcocroi/rai.
^
86). 6. Tcis TCfias avTwv] the value of
3. Iv r\\ilv\ Gundert {Zeitschr. f. themselves.'' The form avrav (adopt-
Luther. Theol. 1853, p. 649 sq) ex- ed by Hilgenfeld) must certainly be
rejected from the New Testament,
'
plains this among us Romans,' sup-
posing that Clement is still referring and probably from Clement also see :

to examples of heathen self-devotion. above 9, 12, 14, 30, 32.

This view is adopted by Lipsius (p. ii^mfxicrav] The word is used se-
155), Hilgenfeld, and others. But, veral times in the LXX and gener-
whatever may have been the miseries ally as a translation of b^^xn 'to give
inflicted on the Roman citizens by the to eat': comp. also i Cor. xiii. 3.
civil wars and by imperial despotism, Like so manyother words (e. g. x'P'
the mention of slavery and ransom Ta^eadai, the note Phlllppz'ans
see
seems to be decisive against this in- iv. 12), it has in the later
language
terpretation. Here, as in the parallel lost the sense of ridicule or meanness,

passage may refer indeed

6, eV r]\ilv which belonged to it in its origin ;

to Romans but to Christian Romans, and Coleridge's note on its 'half sa-
of whom a considerable number be- tirical' force in i Cor. xiii. 3 (quoted
longed to the slave class and the in Stanley's Corinthians I.e.) seems to
lower orders. The ransom of slaves be overstrained. On the other hand,
and the support of captives were re- it isespecially appropriate of feeding
garded as a sacred duty by the early the poor and helpless, the sick man
Christians generally, and the brethren or the child.
of Rome especially were in early TToXXai yvvaiKfs Ac.r.X.]
The whole
times honourably distinguished in of this passage about Judith and
this respect see the notes on Ign.
: Esther is paraphrased by Clem. Alex.
Suiyrn. 6 and on Rom. i. Strom, iv. 19 (p. 617), immediately

4. \vTp(i>(TovTaC\ This construction after the paragraph relating to Moses

 LV] TO THE CORINTHIANS. l6l

eTrereXecravTO ttoWol dvdpeta. 'lovdid n fJ-aKapia, ev

(rvyKkeicrfxta ov(rr]'s rrj^ TroAews, rimcaTO irapa rcov

els tv.v 7rap6f^l3o-
CO
TTpea-fivrepuDv iadfjvai avTr\v e^eXdelv
\^v Twv ovv eavTt]v tw klv-
Trapadovcra
dX\o(pv\iov'
^vv(t)
e^rjXOev TraTpldo^ Kai tov 'Xaov
di djctTrriv Ttj^
rod 6vT0<s ev crvyKXeKTiuw, Kai TrapedooKev KvpLO^ 'OXo-
ev ^n^^'ic^- ov^ nTTOVL^Kol ij reXeia Kara
(pepvr]v X^'-P'-

civitatis patrutn suorum et propter populum S. 13 (jv^kKuc\i.(1'\ cv^KKi.aix.w A.

14 Q-r]kda{\ d-r]Kia.(S A. 7\TT0Vi'\ -qTrovei A ; tJttov CS.

(already quoted p. 156); and some- Lipsius {Zeitschr. f. Wissensch. Theol.

times he gives the very words of the 1859, II. p. 39 sq) and Hilgenfeld {ib.
elder Clement, e.g. r? reXeia Kara k'kttiv 1858, I.
p. 247 sq, 1861, IV. p. 335 sq),
''Ea-drjp. But he does not acknow- who both have directly refuted Volk-
ledge his obligation in this passage, mar's theory; and indeed the date
though in the preceding chapter he and authenticity of Clement's Epistle
has directly quoted the Roman Cle- are established on much more sub-
ment. stantialgrounds than the shadowy
8. 'lovhXff] This passage has a and argument by which it is
fanciful
critical value as containing the ear- attempted to postdate the Book of Ju-
liest reference to the Book of Judith, dith. On this book see also an arti-
which was apparently unknown to, cle of Lipsius Jiidische Quellcn stir
as it is unmentioned by, Josephus. Jtidithsage {Zeitschr. f. Wissensch.
Volkmar {Theol. Jalirb. 1856 p. 362 Theol 1867, X. p. 337 sq). For more
sq, and 1857 p. 441 sq, Einl. in die on this subject see the introduction,
Apokr. I. I. p. 28, and elsewhere), I.
p. 353 sq.
followed by Baur {Lehrb. der Christl. TOV \aov\ 'the chosen peopW
12.

Dogmeng. ed. 2, p. 82, and in other (see the note on 29), and thus op-

places), Hitzig (Zeitschr. fiir Wis- posed to aKko<^vKoi.

senscJi. Theol. i860, ill. p. 240 sq), 14. eV xfP' ^J/Xeias] Taken from
and Graetz {Gesch. der Juden vofit Judith xiii. 15 firdra^ev avrbv 6 Kvpios
Utitergang 132 sq, ed. 2, 1866),
etc. p. iv xf'P' GrfKe'ias, xvi. 5 Ki'pios Travro-

places the writing of that book after Kparcop rjBtTricrfv avroiis iv X^'-P'- 6rjkela^.
the Jewish war of Trajan, and as The expression iv x^''?'-
therefore
a consequence denies the authenti- would seem to be the common Ara-
city of the Epistle of Clement. More maism, equivalent to Stci : see the
sober critics however date the Book of note on Galatians iii. 19. On the

Judith about the second century be- other hand the construction irapa-
fore the Christian era, e.g. Fritzsche bovvai iv x^'P' (^ *'" X^P^'-^) '^ com-
Einl. p. 127 sq, in the Knrzgef. mon in the LXX as an equivalent to
Handb. zti den Apokr., Ewald Gesch. Tvapahovvai eh x^'pa^' ^-S- the same
des Volkes Isr. I v.
pp. 396, 541 sq, expression Ti^ IflM
is translated first

Westcott in Smith''s Dictionary of K(H Trape^wKfv iv x<'P'' (A) and then Ka\
R. A. in Josh. x. 30, 32.
the Bible I.
p. 1174, besides TTiipebu>KC" fls xf'P"S'

CLEM. II, II
l62 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [LV

TTLCTTLV ^GcrdrjpKivdvuM eavrrjv irapefiaXev, tva to hio^e-

KcitpvXov
Tov 'IcrpariX jueWov dTroXeadai pv(rr]TaL' dia
yap Trj'i vt]a'T6ia<s Kal Ttj^ TaTreivcoo'eio'i avTrj^ rj^nticrev
TOV TravTeTTOTTTriv deoTTTOTrjv, Qeou twv alcovcov 69 Idcov

TO Taneivov tyi^ yfyvx^s avTrj^ ipvcraTO tov Xaov, (Jov 5

T^ttjOtt'
eKLvhwevaev.
LVI. ovv ivTv^cojULev Trepi twv ev tlvi
Kal rifJLel<s

TrapaTrTwjuLaTL VTrap^ovTcov, OTrws ^odfj avToTs eTneiKeia

Kal Ta7reivo(ppoa'vvr] els to ei^ai avTOvs fir] i^/uuv dXXa

I TO 5<j}dKdcpv\ov'\ A; d<i)dKd.(pvWov C ; tribum S. 3 ttjs raTreira-crews]

A; TaTreti'ticrews C. 4 Ze(jTrbTy]v\ om. C obviously by homoeoteleuton. S

K',
has spectatorem universi et dominiim saeailo7-tim deum, as if the order had been
deaTrSrTjP tCov aiwvuv 6e6v. 5 epiaaro] A; eppiaaro C. uv x^P'-^

iKLvSvvevcrevI AC (but eKivdivevae C) ; ex us proper quae erat {populns] i>i peri-

culo S, probably only a mistranslation. 7 Tuiv ..
.virapx6vT(i}v] AC ; qui appre-

I. TO SmSeKac^vAoi'] So Acts xxvi. (2 Cor. iv. 4) or the ruler (Ign.

7, Protev. Jacob. i ; see above to Ephes. of this age or seon {rov
19)
dcobeKcia-KrjTs-Tpov 31 with the note. alavos TovTov). See also the passage
3.
'
desired, entreated\
r/^tcocrei/] in Clem. Hom. xx. 2 sq.
with an accusative of the person and LVI. 'Let us intercede for offen-
without any dependent case or clause ders, that they submit in meek-may
expressing the thing asked as e.g. : ness and humility. Let us be ever
I Mace. xi. 62 KOI r]^LO)a-av ol otto rd(rjs ready to give and to take admonition.
TOV 'icovddav Koi edaxev avTols 8e^ids, The Scriptures teach us that chas-
Clem. Horn. iii. 55 "'P''^ avTov d^icd- tisement is an instrument of mercy
a-riTe.
With an a final
infinitive or in the hands of God, that He inflicts
clause added
use of d^ioiiv Tiva is
this it as a
fatherly correction, that it is a
more common. On another more blessing to be so chastised, that the
questionable construction of d^ioiiv man who endures patiently shall be
see above 51. restored again, shall be delivered
4. TravTeTTOTTTrjv^ So below 64, from all perils, shall end his days in

Polyc. F/ii/. 7, Clem. Horn. iv. 14, 23, peace, and be gathered into the gar-
v. 27, viii. 19. The word is not found ner like the ripe sheaf, in due season.'
in the LXX or New Testament. In the 7- eV Tivi TrapanTcofiaTi k.t.X.] See
Orac. Sibyll. prooem. 4 Trai^eTroTrrj;? Gal. of which this passage is
vi. I,

occurs; and in heathen writers -nav- perhaps a reminiscence. The i^nels

a common epithet of Zevs.
oTTTTjs is and r]pilv seem to refer especially to
Qeop Tav aicofcoi/]
^
the God of all the rulers of the Church and to con-
the ages'' :
comp. irarr^p Tmv aldvav trast with the vfiels, the leaders of the

35) ^acriKevs tcov almvcov I Tim. i. feuds, at the beginning of 57.

17; comp. Ps. cxlv. 13 rj ^aaiXeia 8. eVteiKeia]
''

a Spirit of concession\
(TOV /3ao"iXeta TravTcav rav alcovcov. The See the notes on i
eTnfiKrj and 13
devil on the other hand is the god eVtetKeta. The context here points to
 LVl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 163

10 Tw SeXrifJLaTL tov Oeov. outw's yap eoTTai auToT^ ey-

Kapiro^ Kal TeXeia tj Trpos tov Oeov Kat tows dyiov<s julct

oiKTipjiicov /ULvela. dva\d(5(x)fJLev TraiZeiav, ecj) rj ov^eh

dyavaKTeIVy dyaTrriTOi. r] vovdeTrjO'i^j ttolov- rju
ScpeiXei
Hieda ek dWtjXovs, KaXt] eaTLV Kat virepayav M(pe\iiuL0<5'
15 KoWa yap rjjud^ tw deXrjjULaTi tov Oeov. ovTii)<s yap
(prjcriv
6 dyiO Xoyo^' TTAiAeyooN enAiAeyceN Me 6 Kypioc,
KAi TO) 0(XNAT(|) of nApeAcoKeN Me. "On r<^p AfAnA KYpioc

hensi sunt S (comp. Gal. vi. i). 8 eTrte^Keta] eirieiKia A. lO ofJrws] AC.
Bryennios here, and again six lines below, tacitly reads ourw, and is followed by
Hilgenfeld. C however has its usual contraction for -us, not for -w, and therefore
agrees with A in both places. ii rj Trpbs...ayiovs] AC; sive in dcum sive in

sandos S, as if it had read ^...^ for KoX...KaX. t6j'] A; om. C. 12 ot'/c-

TipfjiQv fivela] oiKTeip/jLUv/jLvia A. Traideiav^ iraidiav A. 13 6<pei\ei] ocpiKet.

A. vovO^rrjaisj vovdeTr]<reLcr A.

its derivation and primary meaning, 01 ayioi frequently has, e.g. Job
els TO el^ai avTovs k.t.X. XV. 15, Zech. xiv. 5, Ecclus. xlv. 2,
10. eyKapnos koI reXet'a] See the Tobit viii. 15, i Thess. iii. 13 (pas-
note on 44, where there is the same sages quoted by Hilgenfeld). This
combination of epithets. is a possible interpretation (comp.

11. irpos TOV Qfov K.r.X.] i.e. The

1]
I Tim. v. 21 SiajjiapTvpopai ivwrnov
record of them before God and the TOV Qeov Koi XpicrTov Irjcrov Kai tcov
Church will redound to their benefit, i<\eKTa,v dyyeXcov), but the com-
and they will receive pity. The ex- mon usage of 01 ayioi in the Apostolic
pression Tj Trpos TOV Q{6v fiveia is al- writings is a safer guide.
'
most equivalent to the Old Testa- 12.
dvaXa^o)p.ev TraiSet'ai'] /et i(s

ment phrase p.vr)p.6(Tvvov evavTi Kvpiov, receive correction''; comp. Heb. 7 xii.

Exod. xxviii. 23, xxx. 16, Is. xxiii. 18, (Is 7rai8eiav vnopiveTe k.t.X.
Ecclus. 1. 16, comp. Acts x. 4. See 13. 7; vovdeTTjo-is] On the difference
also 45 iyevovTO
k'yypacfioi
airo tov between vovdeaia {vovdeTTjo-is) and
Qfoii v tS> ixvTjfioavva) avTav. waiSeta, see Trench N.T. Syn. ist ser.
Tovs ayiovs] 'the Christian brother- xxxii comp. Ephes. vi. 4.
;
the On
hood', as in the Apostolic writers : forms vovdea-'ia, vovderrfo-is, see Lobeck
comp. Ign. Smyrn. i, Mart. Polyc. Phryn. p. 512.
20. See 2 Cor. viii. 21. Two other 16. riatSfucui' K.T.X.] From the LXX
interpretations have been proposed : Ps. cxviii. 18 word for word.

(i) 'the saints\ i.e. the beatified dead, 17. "Ovyapdyana k.t.X.] From LXX
which case Prov. iii. 12 word for word, as
in -f] Trpos tovs ayiovs p-veia SA;
is supposed to refer to invocation of but for B has eXeyxfi. The
Tvaihevei

saints. needless to say that this

It is Syro-Hexaplar text wavers, giving the

idea would be an anachronism in Cle- equivalent to TraiSevei in the text and

ment and for some generations after. to eXeyxei in the margin. In Heb.

(2) 't/w holy angcls\ a sense which xii. 6 it is quoted with mudevei as
II 3
1 64 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [lvi

nAiAeyei, mactitoT Ae hanta yion on nApAAexexAr TTAiAeycei

Me r^p, (pyjCTiV) AiKAioc eN fcAeei kai eAer2ei Me, |'eAeoc"|* Ae

AMApTOOAOON MH AinANATOO THN KG^AAhN MOy. KUl TTaXlV

Xeyei' Makapioc ANSpoonoc on HAepIeN d Kypioc, NoyOe-

THMA Ae nANTOKpATOpOC MH AHANAINOy AyXOC f^p AAfeiN 5

noie?, KAI haAin AnoKAOi'cTHCiN euAiceN, KAI Ai xeTpec

AYTOY lACANTO. e?AKic e? ANAfKoaN e2eAe?TAi ce, In Ae tw
eBAoMO) OYX AyexAi coy kakon' cn Aimo) pyceTAi ce Ik 9ana-
Toy, In noAeMCp Ae Ik x^'P^c ciAHpoy Aycei ce* kai And
MACTiroc r^<i>ccHC cl Kpy^ci, KAI oy MH ^oBhGh'ch KAKOON 10
InepXOMeNOON* AAi'kOON kai ANdMOON KATAreAACH, ATld aI
1 SIkmos] AS; K^pios C. ?\eos] e\aiocr A; ^Xeov (i.e. fKaiov) C and so S.
See the lower note. 3 a/xaprwXQv] A; a/j.apTO}\ov C, and so S, but the singular
depends on the absence o^rilnii. 4 of] A; ov hv C. There is nothing to repre-
sent hv in S. 5 atravaivov] AC; rejiciat (or rejiciatniis) S, and so the Pesh.
8 oix fi'/'erai] ovKO'^erai A; ov fiT] axj/riTai C; fzon attredabit S. Both readings
are found in the MSS of the Lxx. h Xt/i^J] AC; add. 5^ S. 12 ov firj

<po^r]9ys] A; oii (po^-qd-fiarrj C. Both readings are found in the MSS of the LXX.

here : in Rev. iii. 19 both words are all existing MSS of the LXX, the He-
combined, iyu> oa-ovs eav <piXa, fXey;^ca brew being ipi? ;
but eXaiof (i.e. eXeoy)
KoX 7rai8voi. Clem. Alex. Paed. I. 9 might not unnaturally be substituted
(p. 145) has TToiSewi, but his quotation by some early transcriber on account
is perhaps not independent of the of the preceding eV eXe'et. It is there-
Roman Clement. On the other hand fore impossible that Clement
not
Philo de Conj. Enid. grat. 31 (i. found this reading in his text of the
p. 544) quotes it with iXeyxei. This, lxx; see another instance of the
which corresponds with the Hebrew, same error above, 18 (note). For
was probably the original reading of the curious confusion of eXeoy {eXmos)
the LXX, and all the texts with rrai- and eXaiov (eXeov) in the liturgies
^evei may perhaps have been derived see Swainson's Greek Liturgies pp.
directly or indirectly from the quota- 90, 127, 265, 331; where the
xliii,
tion in the Epistle to the Hebrews. answer of the people, eXfor, elpTJvrj,
I. IlatSei^a-et K.r.X.] From Ps. cxli. becomes by expansion eXeop (eXaiov)
5,word for word, if we read i'Xaiov. elp-qvrjs, dvaiav alvio-ecos. The sym-
Our chief MS however has eXatoo-, i.e. bolism of the oiive as denoting peace,
eXeos (for SO the scribe generally writes and the manifold ritual uses of oil
the word; see i. p. 121). On the (see Smith-Cheetham Diet, of Christ.
Other hand, the original reading of Antiq. p. 1453 sq) would assist in this
the LXX was unquestionably eXaiov confusion.
(eXaiov is the <?//, eXaios the olive- 4. '^aKo.pioi /c.r.X.] From LXX Job
tree and therefore out of place here) V. 17 26 as read in BS, with slight
as it is in SBA, and apparently in and unimportant differences. The
 LVIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 165

eHpi'ooN Arpi'f-oN of Mh (t)oBH0HC. Oflpec fAp Afpioi eipHNey-

coyciN cor 6?ta tncoch, oti eipHNeycei coy d oikoc" h Ae
AlAITA THC CKHNHC COy Oy Mh AMApTH, rNOiCH Ae nOAyOTI

15 TO cnepMA coy, ta Ae tckna tocnep coy to hamBotanon

Toy Arpoy* eAey'cH Ae eN cocnep cTtoc copiMoc kata
tacj)co

KAipoN GepizoMeNoc, r tocnep eHMooNiA aAoonoc KA9' tOpAN

cyNKOMic0e?cA. ^XeTrere, dyaTrrjToiy irooro^ V7rpa(r7ri(r-
fjLO^ ecTTLV Toh TTai^evofievoL^ iiiro tou dea-noTOv Trarrip
20 yap dya6o9 wv Traihevei ek to e\et]6r]t/ai f^juds hia tPjs
6(ria9 Traidelas avTOu.
LVIL '

Yjueh ovv, ol ttjv KaTa^oXr]v tP]^ o'Taaeco^

yap] AC; 5^ S. 13 eipyjveijaei] AC; dprjueveL S. i) 8i 8iaLTa...a/J.dpTrj]

AC; om. S. 14 coli] AS; om. C. 15 ira/x^oTavov] LXX; ravou A;

irafxprjTavov C. 16 i\evari] AC; but Bryennios tacitly prints iXe^aei.
18 (Tvi'KOfMia'Oe'icral <tv (Tdeiaa A; crvyKopnadeicra C. 20 iXerjOTjvai] CS;
...-qd-qvaL A. Tischendorf justly remarked on the common restoration vovderTidrj-

vai; 'id vix recta, syllabae non ita dirimi sclent [i.e. vovdeTlrjdTjvai].
quum Re-
quiritur potius simile verbum ac irTo\rjd7]vai..' 21 iraideiasl C; 7r..5tacr A.

text of A presents considerable varia- different.

^

tions, chiefly in adding clauses which 15. TO irayi^oTavov] the manifold

are found in the Hebrew but wanting ]ierbage\ It seems to be a arra^
inBS. The points in which Clement's \iyo\x.ivov till quite a late period.
quotation agrees with A, as against There is nothing in the Hebrew
BS (e.g. ovx ayjrfTni for ov /jlt] ayjrrjTai), (QC'y) to explain the adoption of so
are insignificant. unusual a word.
7. e^aKis K.T.X.] For this Hebraism 16. ev rd^o)] A Hebraism for d%
where two successive numbers are rdfpov ;
see another instance on 55
given to denote magnitude and in- naptduxev iv X^'-P'-

crease, see Prov. vi. 16 Hebr. (six, 17. A word, it would ap-
6r]H(ovid]
seven, as here) ;
Micah v. 5, Eccles. pear, almost confined to the Lxx,
xi. 2 (seven, eight) ;
Exod. xx. 5, etc. though drjfjLayv is as old as Homer,
(three, four) ; Job xxxiii. 29 Hebr. Od. V. 368.
(two, three). 18. inrepaania-fjibs] ''protection^, 2
10. KOKciv] The LXX text prefixes Sam.xxii. 36, Ps. xviii. 35, Lam. iii.
64,
drru (SB A). In the Syriac version Eccles. xxxi (xxxiv). 19. It does not

aSiKcoj/ is made dependent on kukuiv occur in the New Testament. See

'the evils of the unrighteous'. the note on virepacnna-T^s above, 45.
12. ^^pes yap K.T.X.] As in the vision 0/ His ki)idncss
' '
20. dyados tSv]
of Hermas Vis. iv. i, 2, where the (as e.g. Ps. Ixxiii. i), corresponding
wild beast is thus pacified. to ov yap dyana K.r.X. above.

13. r)
Se St'atra] 'the abode
^

;
see LVIl. 'And do you leaders of the
above 39. The Hebrew is quite schism submit to the ciders, and ask
1 66 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [
LVII

7rou'](TavTe^, inroTci'yriTe toT^ 7rpe(rl3vTpoi<s Kai irai-

devdrjTe els fJierdvoLaVy Kafjiy^/avTe's Ta 'yovaTa Trjs

Kaphlas vfjiuiv' judOeTe VTroTao'a'ecrdaij diTo6efJ.evoi Trjv

dXd^ova Kal v7repri(pavov Trjs y\co(rcrr]S vjulcov auSa-

^eiav dfxeivov yap eoTTiv vfjuv ev tw ttoijuviu) tov 5

XpLCTTOV fiLKpovs Kal iWoyijuovs evpeSfjvai, t] KaS'

V7repo-)(riv
doKOvvras 6KpL(pfivaL
e'/c t^s eA.7rtSos avTOv.
ovTcos yap Xeyei r) iravaperos crocbia' 'lAoy npoh'coMAi

4 aXd^ova] AC; aXa^oveiav S. y\d)a(T7]s] A; yXwTTrjs C. 6 eXXo-

yl^ovs] A; add. vfj-Sis C. S is doubtful. 8 'I5oi)] AC; add. yap S. 9 Si-

5d|a;]AS; didd^ai. C. 10 vwTjKoijaaTe] AC ; vTrrjKoueTe S. 13 ijviKa civ]

C; A; si (i^j') S. 14 iifuv pri.] AC; ufiQiv S. 15 Trapfj] C; .

.prj

A ; om. S. orav] orap A. 16 6\i\f/t.s'] A; add. Kal crevox'^pi-o- C, a

pardon of God on your knees. It is eXni8os avToii] i.e. tov Xpi-

TTjs

you should be of no
far better that (TTov, either a subjective or an ob-
jective genitive, the hope which He
'
account, so that the flock of Christ
may have peace. Remember how holds out' or 'the hope which reposes
sternlyWisdom rebukes the dis- in Him'.
obedient in the Book of Proverbs. 8.
77 navaperos cro0ta] The Book
She will laugh them to scorn when of Proverbs, besides the title com-
destruction cometh as a tempest. monly prefixed to the LXX Version,
They mocked at her counsels before, Uapoipiiai or napoip-iai '2aXop,covTos, IS
and she will not hear them then.' frequently quoted by early Christian
1. vnoT. Tols Trpfcr/S-] The same ex- writers as ?) navapeTos crocfiLa 'the Wis-
pression occurs, I Pet. v. 5. dom which comprises all virtues'
2.Kofi^avres fc.r.X.] Compare the (for Travaperos comp. i) ;
see esp.
expression in the prayer of Manasses Euseb. H.E. iv. 22, where speaking
{Apost. Const, ii. 22) vvv k\ivo> yow of Hegesippus he says, ov p,6i/os 8e

KupSias. So too Greg. Naz. Carm. ii. ovTos aXXa Kai F,lprjvaios Koi o nas
50, ver. 58 ovTTOTe aoi Kdp.\JAa) yovvar rav apx^aioiv )(^opos navaperov ao(piav
(fifis Kpa8irjs (11. p. 946, Caillau), and TasSoXojjLcovos TTapotp-ias fnaXovv. Some-
similarly Sir C. Hatton to Q. Eliza- times it bears the name aocpla sim-
beth (Froude's History xi. p. 166) 'I ply; e.g. in Just. Mart. Diai. 129
can use no other means of thankful- (p. 359 a), Melito in Euseb. H.E.
ness than by bowing the knees of my iv. 26, Clem. Alex. Protr. 8 (pp.
own heart with all humility' etc. A 67,68), Paed. ii. 2 (p. 182 ?/
6da a-o(})ia),
'

strong oriental metaphor like gird- Strom, ii. 18 (p. 472), Orig. Horn.
ing the loins of the mind' (i Pet. i. xiv in Gen. 2 (ll. p. 97), besides
13), or 'rendering the calves of the others quoted in Cotelier. It is a

lips' (Hosea xiv. 2). probable inference from Eusebius

4. akli^ova /cat vTvep7]<^avov\ See (11. both Melito and Heges-
cc.) that
Trench N. T. Syft. ist ser. xxix. ippus derived the name from Jewish
7. boKovvTas\ ''held in repute^; sources, and this is borne out by the
see the note on Galatians ii. 2. fact that the book is called noun,
 LVIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 167

YM?N Imhc hnohc' pficiN, AiAaIoo Ae YMAC TON Imon AdfON*

loeneiAh IkaAoyn oyx ynHKoycATe, kai eHereiNON Adroyc
kai

KAi OY npocei'xeje, aAAa AKypoyc enoieire tac bmac Boy-

Aac to?c Ae 6M0?c eAerxoic
ToirApoYN katoc) hneiGhCATe-
TH YMerepA AnojAeiA enireAACOMAi, KAjAXApoyMAi Ae hnika
AN epXHTAl YM?N OAeBpOC KAI WC AN ACJ)IKHTAI yM?N ACJiNCO
15 BopyBoC, h Ae KATACTpO(t)H OMOIA KATAITlAl HApH, h OTAN
epXHTAI YM?N eAl'yiC KAI HOAlOpKIA, eCTAI f^P, OTAN eniKA-
familiar combination in S. Paul, Rom. ii.
9, viii.
35. S has afflidio (t?3V?1N) et
angttstia quae a proelio (X2"lp IJD^)
(J^''tJ'12n) where affiictio represents ^Xii/'ts
;

and augnstia quae a proelio is a paraplirase of woXiopKia. The alternative that

angiistia quae a proelio represents arevoxiiipla. /cat iroKiopKia, treated as a iv dia Svo^v,
i? not
likely. The space in A will not admit Kal (jTevox^p't-a-, and these words are
wanting also in the LXX. eiri.KaKi<T7}ijde\ eirLKoXea-riadaL A.

'Wisdom', by rabbinical writers (see Hieron. Pro/, in Libr. Sal., ix. p.

Fiirst Kanon des Altai Tcstamoits^ 1293, etc.). Joannes Damasc. de Fid.
186S, p. 73 sq). The personification OrtJi. iv. 17 (l. p. 284) says r\ Txavdpe-
of Wisdom in the opening would lead Tos, Tovrecrriv rj 'Eoipia tov 2oXo/Licoi/ros
naturally to this
designation; e.g. KOL 2o({iia TOV 'Irjaov, thus including
rj

Iren. I, Philo de Ebr.

iv. 20. 3, v. 20. both these apocryphal books under
8 (1. p. 362), though Philo himself the term, but excluding Proverbs
quotes the book as irapoifilai ib. 20 which he has before mentioned as
(I. p. 369). Whether the epithet TTapoifjLLai ;
and so Jerome Praef. i7i

TTavap^Toswas first used by Clement Libr. Salom. (ix. p. 1293) '

Fertur et
and derived from him by later writers, Travaperoff Jesu filii Sirach liber et
or not, it is impossible to say. At alius \//'vSe77iypa<^of qui Sapientia Sa-
the same time the title Travaperos r\
lomonis inscribitur'. Moreover the
given, not only to the canoni-
aocjiia is name of 'Wisdom' is occasionally
cal Book of Wisdom, but also to the given also to Ecclesiastes (Fiirst I.e.
apocryphal Wisdom of Solomon p. 91) and to the Song of Songs

(Method. Symp. \. 3, ii. 7, noted by and Cotelier here).

(Fiirst I.e. p. 85,
Hilgenfeld Epiphan. de Metis, et
;
And more generally the third
still

Pond. 4, II. p. 162 ed. Patau Greg. ; group of the Old Testament writings,
Nyss. c. Eunom. vii, ll. p. 638, Paris the dyiuypa(f)a or ypaffiela, is some-
1638; [Athanas.] Synops. 45, il. p. times called riDDn 'Wisdom' (Fiirst
132 F, rr]s (ro(f)ias ^oXopiMVTos rfjs Xe- because it comprises Pro-
I.e. p. 55),

yopLfvrjs Tvavaplrov and others and

;
: verbs and the allied books, as it is
its title in the list of books elsewhere called v//-aXpoi or vp.voi (see
prefixed
to A is ao(Pia jj TravdpfTos), and to the above 28) from another most im-
apocryphal Ecclesiasticus or Wis- portant component element.
dom of Jesus the son of Sirach 'iSoii K.
quotation
r.X.] A close
(Euseb. Chron. 01. cxx.Kvii quem
'
from the LXX Prov. 23 33. The i.

vocant Panareton, Dem. Evang. viii. variations are unimportant, and not
2 p. 393 \r](Tov^ o Tov 2eipa)( 6 ttjp greater than between one MS and
KoKovjxivrjV navapfTov ao(f}iav a-vvrd^as, another of the LXX.
1 68 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [lvii

AecHcGe Me, erob Ae oyk eicAKoycoMAi ymoon* ZHT^'coYCl'N

Me KAK0\ Ka'i OYX eYpHCOYCIN' eMl'cHCAN r^p C04)IAN, TON

Ae (})dBoN TOY KYpi'oY oy npoeiAANTO, OYAe h'OeAoN cmaTc

npocexeiN BoyAaIc, eMYKTHpizoN Ae eMofc eAerxoYC" TOifAp-

OYN eAONTAI THC GAYTOON OAOY TOfc., KApnofc, KAi THC 5
'

eAYTOON AceBeiAC nAHcGhicoNTAi an9' (Ln r^p hAikoyn^nh-

rriOYC, (})ONeY6H'coNTAi, kai eleTACMOc AceBeTc oAe?* d Ae

eMOY akoy'con KATACKHNoiicei en' eAniAi nenoiGoac, kai hcy-

XAcei A(t)dB(jac And hantoc kakoy.

I fTjTiJcroi/fftJ'] ^-qrrjfTovcTi. C; fiyr A; ^rjToOcnu (?) S. 3 rod] A; om. C.
TrpoeiXavTo] irpoeiXa... A (as in the LXX; Tischendorf who formerly read ivpoaCka
afterwards accepted my reading of A); vpoelXovro C (see above, I.
p. 127); ekge-
runt S. 7 i^eraaiJibs dae^eis oXet] C;
impiortcm perdit ipsos S. inqtdsitio
8 7re7rot^(is] conjidens S, using the same expression which occurs just below ( 58)
as the rendering of TreiroLdores; om. C : see the lower note. 10 iravaylu)] C;

6. n\r](T6y](yQVTai\ Our principal MS Alex, however clearly so quotes it,

(A) us at this point. The letters
fails Strom, ii. 22 (p. 501 sq) 7? iravapeTos
Tr\r](rdT}(Tov occur towards the end of '2ocf)La Xeyfi' 'O 6e ifiov aKovaiv Kara-
the last line in a page, fol. 167 b. (TKrjvaxjeL in' tXTrt'Si ireTroidcoi' / yap rrjs
The margin is torn, so that a few iXnldos anoKaTda-Tacris oixcovvfxcos iXnls
lettershave disappeared. It resumes ftprjTai' 8ia [1. 810] Toii Karaa-Krivcocrei.
again at the beginning of 64, a leaf rfi Xe^ei TrayKoXois npoaedrjKe rh Ile-
having been lost ; see the introduc- noidas though elsewhere, Strom, ii. 8
tion, I.
p. 118. (p. 449), iv. 23 (p. 632), he has
7. e^7-acr/Lioy] ^enqiiiry\ Hnvesti- avanavdiTai eV eipiivrjs (-vrj) Trenotdas.
'

gatioH\ i.e. trial and judgment', It is clear that rreTroidcos is genuine

as in Wisd. iv. 6. The Hebrew in the text of our Clement ;
since he
however is ni?Ci', 'security', i.e. dwells upon it in the beginning of
'false confidence'; which the LXX the next chapter, KaraaKTjvaxrcofiev
translators seem either to have mis- ireiToiBoTes k.t.X. For other examples
read or to have connected with h'^^, of this manner of emphasizing the
'to ask, enquire'. In the earlier key-word of a quotation see the
part of the verse the LXX departs note on 46. From the manner in
widely from the Hebrew. which Clem. Alex, begins his quota-
8. TreTToi^cos] This word does not tion from Prov. i. 33, it may perhaps
occur in the great MSS of the LXX be inferred that the passage of his
( SBA) ;
nor indeed, so far as I know, elder namesake was in his mind.
is the reading KaraaKrjvdaei iir (v. 1. LVII I. 'Let us therefore obey,
iv) eXiridi neTToidcis found in any MS that we may escape these threatened
of this version, though avaTrava-fTai judgments, and dwell in safety. Re-
iv flpi]vj] TTCKoidtos appears in place of ceive our counsel, and you will never
it in no. 248 (Holmes and Parsons), have occasion to regret it. As surely
this last being a Hexaplaric reading as God liveth, he that performeth
(see Field's Hexapla ad loc). Clem. all His commandments shall have
 LVIIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 169
'

10 LVIII. Y7raK0U(TMiJ.ev ovv rw iravayicp Kal ev^o^co

ovofJiaTL avTOv, (bvyovTe^ tu^ Trpoeiprjiuevwi
dia Trj^

a'0(pLa9 TOT'S
dTreidovo'LV aVeiAot?, \va KaTa(TKr]Vcoa'(ii}xev
TreiroLBore^ eVz to ocniaTaTOv Trj^ fJLe<ya\iO(Tvvt]'$ avTOv
tyju (TVfJifiovXnv Kal ecTTai
ovofjia. de^aade t]iU(joVj

15 dfjieTafjieXriTa vfjuv. ^rj yap 6 Qeo^ Kai ^r]

6 KvpiO'S
'Irjcrov^ XpiCTO^ Kai to nvevfjia to ayiov, i] t6 ttkttis
Kal ri eXirh twv eK\6KTwUy oti 6 7rotf](ra^ eV Tairei-

vo(ppO(Tvvr] jUET sKTevov^ eTTLeLKeia^ djueTajUieXrjTM's t

S translates as if ayiij). In 35 Trapdyios is fully rendered. 11 (pvySi'Tes] C;

^evyovres (?) S. 13 ocnuTaTov] C; S renders as if 6cn.ov, but the translator's

practice elsewhere in rendering superlatives is so uncertain, that no inference can
be drawn as to the reading. 14 Tj/j-Qv] add. d8\(poi [p^ov] S.
^rj] CS ; Basil omits this second fij. Kiyptos] twice in S, at the end of one line

and the beginning of the next.

a place among them that are saved in the LXX, e.g. i Sam. xx. 3, xxvi.

through Jesus Christ, through whom 16, xxix. 6, I

Kings xxii. 14, 2 Kings
is the glory unto Him for ever.' v. 20, etc. So too Rom. xiv. 1 1

10. Travaylco] So also above, 35 ; ^c3 e'yw, \iyei Kvpios, on ffiol k.t.X.

see the note there. (where S. Paul is quoting loosely

11. TTjs (To(f>iai] Wisdom is re- from Is. xlv. 23, combining it how-
presented as the speaker in the pas- ever with the ^o5 iya> k.t.X. of Is.

sage of Proverbs just quoted. More- xlix. 18); comp. 2 Cor. i.

18, and see
over this name ^ocj^la was given to Fritzsche Rotn. 1 1, p. 242 sq, in.
the whole book ;
see above, p. 166. p. 187. For a similar reference to
^
12. KaTa(TKT]voo(T(x)^v] dwelli)ipeacc^ . the Trinity see above, 46. Here
As the common LXXrendering of They are described as 'the faith and

pK', for which purpose it was chosen hope (i.e. the object of faith and
doubtless in part owing to the simi- hope) of the elect'; for r}
re ttiWis

larity of sound (see the note on /^tu/io- are obviously in apposition to

K.T.X.

(XKOTTTidev, 41), it implies the idea of the preceding words. For iXms,
'rest, peace'. meaning 'the object of hope', see the
15. A somewhat
dfxeTaiiiXrjTa] note on Ign. Magn. 1 1
'irjo-ov Xpia-rov
favourite word of Clement, 2, 54. TTJs fXnidos rj/icoi-; comp. i Tim. i. i.

So d/aera/ieXr^Vcos, below. For the On the other hand the sense of ttiotis
plural see Kiihner Grajiini. II.
p. 59 sq. is different in Ign. Siiiym. 10 jy

^^ yap K.T.A.] This passage is quoted TiKi'ia TTicTTis, 'lijaoi/s XpicTTos (see
by S. Basil, de Spir. Sanct. 29 (ni. the note there).
p. 61) ;
see above, where theI.
p. 169, 17. t6)u f/cXeKTwi/] A favourite
quotation is given. For the form of word with Clement, g i, 2, 6, 46, 49,
adjuration ^^ 6 ee6r...ort, 'As surely 52, 59-
^^
^ ^

as God liveth...so surely', comp. ^^ 18. p,fT KTf VOVS fTTUlKeUls] Thc
Kuptoy ort... which occurs frequently phrase occurs again below, ^ 62. It
170 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [lviii

VTTO Tov Oeou deBojueva ^LKaiiofJiaTa kuc irpocrTayfJiaTa,

ovTO's evT6Tayfjievo^ Kai eWoyijUO^ ecTTai ek tov dpidfjiov
TCdv ccotojULei/wv ^id 'Irjaov XpicTTOVy hC ov ecTTLV avTw
ri hopa ek tov^ alwva^ twp aicovcov. djurjv.

LIX. 'Edv de TLve^ dTreidf^cruiarLV rots vtt' avTOv 5

^L riiJicdv 6lpt]jU6V0L9, yivwcTKeTiacTav otl TrapaTTTcocreL kul

KLV^vvu) ov jULLKpa
iauTOv^ evhridovariv, rifieL<i
de ddMOi

I /cat TrpoffTdyfiaTo] C ; om. S. 1 1

ddpavcTTov] C ; add. dens S.

isa sort of oxymoron, or verbal para- the number of His elect through
dox, like 'strenua inertia', 'lene tor- Jesus Christ, who called us from,
mentum '
for emeUeia involves the
: darkness to light. Open our eyes.
idea of 'concession'; comp. i Thess. Lord, that we may know Thee, who
iv. 1 1 (piXoTifieladai i]avxaC^i-v. So alone art Holiest of the holy and
Greg. Naz. Oraf. iv. 79 (i. p. 116), Highest of the high who settest up ;

speaking of Julian's persecution, says and bringest low who bestowest ;

iTTieiKMs ifiia^ero. The substantive eVi- riches and poverty, life and death ;
e'lKeia occurs also 13, 30, 56: the who art the God of all spirits and of
adjective imfiKijs, i, 21, 29. The fre- all flesh; whose eye is all-seeing,
quency of these words aptly indicates and whose power is omnipresent;
the general spirit of the letter; see who multipliest the nations and
the note on i, and the introduc- gatherest together Thine elect in
tion, I.
p. 97. Christ. We beseech Thee, Lord,
2. eXXoyifxos] Used here, as in assist the needy, the oppressed, the

57, for those who have a place feeble. Let all the nations know
among the elect of God see also : that Thou art God alone, and Jesus
Comp. Plato Phileb. 17 E
44, 62. Christ is Thy Son, and we are Thy

OVK eWoyiixov ov8 evapidyLov. people, the sheep of Thy pasture.'

TOV dpidfiov] As above 2, 35, 5. VTT avTov] i.e. TOV Qeov. In
and below 59, with the note. the same way they again claim to
rav am^ofievcov] 'of those that
3. be speaking with the voice of God
are in the ivay of salvation\ as below, 63 rot? v(j)' -qyicov yeypafjifie-
Luke xiii. 23, Acts ii. 47, i Cor. i.
18, vois 8ia TOV dyiov ivvevfxaTos COmp. ;

2 Cor. ii.
15. The opposite is ol 56 /x^ jj/xiv aWa rw 6e\r]fxaTi tov
dnoXkiinevoi, I Cor. i.
18, 2 Cor. ii.
15, Qeov. See also Ign. Philad. 7 to
iv. 3, 2 Thess. ii. 10. Comp. also TTVevfia ov uXavaTai, aTTO Qfov bv...
Cte/n. Horn. xv. Apost. Const.
10, eXaXovv Qeov (fxovfj, where a simi-
viii. 5, 7, 8. In \he Apost. Const, vm. lar claim is made.
(comp. v. 15) the words are tov
'

5 6. TrapanTaxTfi] '/ati/t', traus-

dpiOjxov Tmv (ra>^oniv(ov as here. gression''; Jer. xxii. 21. Comp. Justin
LIX. If any disobey our counsels,
'
Dial. 141 (p. 371). It does not occur

they will incur the greatest peril ;

elsewhere in the LXX, nor at all in the
while we shall have absolved our- N.T., though TrapaTrT(op,a is common.
selves from guilt. And we will pray Polybius uses it several times comp. :

that the Creator may preserve intact also Sext. Empir. adv. Math. i. 210.
 LIX] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 171

e.KTevr\ tyjv Z.f]a'LV Kal iKecnav Troiov/uievoL, ottco^ tov

10
dpiOfJiov TOV KaTr]pid{J.ri{Jievov
twj/ eKXeKTWv avTOv ev

o\m tu> KOcriUM dia(pv\d^f] ddpavo'TOV 6 hr]p.LOvpyd^

T(Jov aTravTUiv hid tov ri'ya7ry]fJLevov Traido'S avTOu 'Irjcrov

XpicTTOUy di' ov eKaXeaev f)/xa? aVo otkotov^ 6f?

(pco^,

diro dyi/cocrias els eTriyvooo'Lv do^r]<s dvofduTOS avTOu.

13 Xpicrrou] C ;
add. dommi nostri S. ^/xas] C ;
me S ; but this is doubtless
a clerical error in transcribing the Syriac suffix. 14 dTro] C ; koX diro S.

7. ddaoi] As above, 46. For that these expressions 6 T^yaTrrjpivos

the whole expression, aSaos elvai diro (dyanrjTos) Trais (tov, 6 Trais (tov,
occur
dfiapTiai, comp. Num. v. 31. several times in the prayers in the
g. TOV dpidfjLov K.r.A.] See Rev. Apost. Const, viii. 5, 14, 39, 40, 41.
vii. 4
sq. The same phrase tov dpid- Comp. also Epist. ad Diogn. 8,
fiov Ta>v (KXeKTav avTov has occurred
and Mart. Polyc. 14, where it is
already 2. In one of the prayers twice put into the mouth of Poly-
in the last book of the Apostolic carp, who was certainly a reader of
ConstitutioHS (viii. 22) we have 6 Tr]v Clement's Epistle. This designa-
TOV KocrfMov avaTacriv 8ia tcov evepyov- tionis taken originally from Is. xlii. i,

pfva>v (pavepoTTOirjcras Kal tov apiapov quoted in Matt. xii. 18 Ihov, 6 n-als
where
TCOV iKkeKTcov (TOV 8iacf)vXaTTa>v, p.ov ov rjpiTL(Ta, 6 dyaTTTjTOS fiov [fis]
the expression here combined with is ov fvdoKTja-ev pov where rrais
Jj '^v)(i] ;

another which occurs below ( 60) ;

is 'servant, minister' (T3y). Comp.
thus clearly showing that the writer Acts iii. 13, 26, iv. 27, 30. But the
borrows directly or indirectly from higher sense of vlos was soon im-
Clement. ported into the ambiguous word Trais :

11.ddpav<TTov] The word does not e.g. Apost. Const, viii. 40 tov povoye-
occur in the LXX or N.T. It is vovi (TOV TrotSos 'hjaov XpicrTov, Epist.
however not uncommon in classical ad Diogn. 8, Iren. iii. 12. 5, 6, etc.;
writers: e.g. Dion Cass. liii. 24 and probably Mart. Polyc. 14 o tov

adpavcrrov Km oXoK^rjpov tm Biadoxco dyaTn]Tov naidos (tov irjcrov Xpicrrou

TTjv TToXiv 7rap{8(OKev, which passage TTUTijp.And so Clement seems to
illustrates its sense here. Comp. have used the word here.
Apost. Const, viii. 12 8ia(pv\d^r]s 13. KdKf(Tev K.T.X.] From i Pet.
aaeia-Tov. ii.
9 tov k (tkotovs vpai KaX(TavTos els

6 8r]pcovpyos k.t.X.] The same phrase Tu 6avpa(TTov avTov (j^Hs.

The epithet
occurs above 26 ; comp. 33. For davpacTTov which is wanting here is

drjfiiovpyos see the note on 20. supplied by 36 (as read in the

12. TOV Jjyarrrjfievov naibos K.T.X.^ So Greek MSS) dvadaKXei els TO 6av-

again lower down in this chapter, pa(TTov [avTov] (j)ws, where however
dia tov the epithet is omitted in the Syriac
^Irjcroi) XpiaToii riyaTTrjp.vov
iraibos (TOV, and
XpiaTos 6 ttols
'lr/<ro{is and in Clem. Alex.
aov. It is worth observing in con- 14. dyvuxTias]' studdorn ignorance \
nexion with the other coincidences, a stronger word than dyvoUis comp. :
172 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [lix

[Ao9 ^fjuv, Kupiej, iXTTi^eii' eTri to dp-^^eyovov Trdort]^

KTLcrea)<i bvofia crov, dvoi^a's rou^ 6(p6a\juov9 TfJ9 Kapdia^

ijjuwp ets TO yivcaaKeiv (re, tov (jlovov yyicton in yh^hAoIc,
a'tion en Afioic ANAnAyoMeNON, TOV TAneiNoyNTA y'Bpin

I A6s r)iMV, KJjOie] om. CS ; see below. 2 ovofw, <tov] C; nomen ejus
sancticvi S ; see below. Kapbias] cordhun S. 3 o-e] C ; eum S. y;/-'7;Xo?s]

I'l/'t'crrots C; see the lower note. 5 hi<iKvovTo.\ dissipantem S. k6vQiv\

I Pet. ii.
15, It occurs also Job is obviously wanted, it must be
XXXV. 16, Wisd. xiii. i, i Cor. xv. 34. accented dp^eyovov, not apx^yovov,
See also Clem. Horn. ii. 6, iii.
47, as by Bryennios comp. [Aristot.] :

iv. 8, xviii. 13, 18. de Mutid. 6 (p. 399 Bekker) hd

Comp. Apost.
6tj eTriyvaxTiv 86^r]s] TTjv irparrfv Ka\ dp^aioyovov alriav,
Const, hia Xpiarov Kripvyjj.a
viii. 11 o where again we should accentuate
yvoiaeaiS 8ovs rifuv els iiriyvoiaiv rfjs dp^aioyopov, for the expression is

crfjs 86^T]s Ka\ TOV ovofiaros (tov. synonymous with 6 rravrcov i^yep-dv
The language of Clement here seems re Kai yevirap which follows imme-
to be inspired by Ephes. i. 5 sq. diately after. So too perhaps even
eXni^etv] Some words have been
I. in Clem. Alex. Strom, vi. 16 (p. 810)

omitted in the Greek MS, as the first Trjv dpxeyovov i]p,pav, for just below
editor has correctly seen. The words it is defined as
jrpcoTTjv rc5 ovri (fxoTos

supplied in the text, Aos tjixIv, Kvpie, yevea-iv. but in Clem. Alex. Protr.
will suffice. The same omission 5 (P- 56) TO TTvp
(i)S dpx^yovov ae^ovres

existed also in the text from which it may bedoubtful whether the fire
the Syriac Version was made. In is regarded as a principium prifi-

consequence of this, a-ov, a-e, ae, crov, cipians {dpyeyovov)^ or a principiufn

eTraidevcras, i^yiacras, eripriaas, are there principiatum {dpyiyovov). In Greg.
altered to avoid the abrupt transition Naz. Op. I. p. 694 we have to
from the third person to the second ; dpx^yovov aKOTos. The word occurs
and at length words are inserted also Iren. i. I. i (twice), I. 5. 2, i.
before 'A^iovnev to introduce the 9. 3, in the exposition of the Va-
second person. On the recurrence of lentinian system, where likewise the
lacunae in our authorities see above, accentuation may be doubtful. It
I.
p. 145 sq. Hilgenfeld gets over is not found in the Lxx or N. T.
the difficulty in part by substituting Editors seem universally to accen-
avoL^ov for dvoi^as: while Gebhardt tuate it dpxeyopos (see Chandler's
and Harnack deny that the text is G7'eck Accentuation 467); but, I
either defective or corrupt, and at- think, on insufficient grounds.
tempt to justify the transition by 2. Tovs d(f)daXp,ovs K.T.X.] suggested

such passages as Acts i.

4, xxiii. 22, by Ephes. i. 17 sq ev iiviyvaxTei, av-
etc. (seeWiner Ixiii. p. 725). But TOV, TS-e(pa)TL(TpVOVS TOVS OCpdakfJiOVS
the phenomena of our two authorities TTjs Kapdias vp.av els to eldevai vftds
show that Bryennios was right. K.T.X. See also above 36 rjvewxdTi-
dpxfyovov] i.e. Thy Name which
'
aav rjpiiv 01 df^idaKpoX ttjs Kapdias.
was the first origin of all crea- Comp. Mart. Polyc. 2, Apost. Co?ist.

tion', Trda-Tjs KTia-eas being governed vii. 39.

by apx^yovov. As an active sense 3, yivaxTKeiv K.r.X.] Comp. John

 LIX] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 173

5 YnepH(t)ANOL)N, TOV AiAAyoNTA Aor'CMoyc eONtoN, Tov noi-

OYNTA TAnemoyc eic fyoc KUi Toyc y^HAoyc TAneiNoyNXA,

TOV nAoyriZONTA KAI nT63)(IZ0NTA, TOV AnOKTeiNONTA KAI

ZHN noioYNTA, fjiovov euepyETrjv Trvev/uLaTcov Kai Oeov

Traa'f]^ craoKO^, tov eniBAenoNTA gn taic AByccoic, tov
C ; avOpdsTrojv (
= av(jiv) S. 8 ^r}v irowvPTo] redimit et vivificat S. eiepyi-
T-qv] C ; evpeTrjv S.

xvu. 3 wa yivaKTKaxTLV ere tou fxovov Taneivov. See also Matt. xxni. 12,

akrjdivbv Qeop. Luke xiv. 11, xviii. 14.

TOV fiovov K.T.X.] Apost. Const, viii. 7. TOV TrXovTi^ovTa k.t.X.] From
5 6 <ut'
fiovos v\^icrTos...6 iv v^rfKolg I Sam. 7 Kvpios 7rra);^ifet Ka\ irXov-
ii.

KaroiKosv. ri'fet, Taireivol koi dw^ol. Comp. also

{jy^ia-Tov K.T.\.] From the LXX Is. Luke i.
53. See Greg. Naz. Orat. 42
Ivii. 15 o v'^icrros 6 iv vyj^rjXois kut- 5 (l. p. 751) o TTTOixi^av Kai irKov-
oiKutv TOV alcova, ayios ev ayiois Ti^cov Qeos, 6 davaTav Ka\ ^cooyovmv
ovofia avTa, vrp-iaTOS V dyiois ava- K.r.X.

rravofievos. So in the prayer Apost. TOV dnoKTeivovTa k.t.X.] Deut. xxxii.

Const, viii. 1 1 v\j/i(TTe iv vi\rr}\ol.s, ayie 39 iyo) dnoKTevu) Ka\ ^fjv Troirjam,
iv ayiois avairavofieve, doubtless taken I Sam.6 Kvpios davarol Ka\ ^aoyovel:
ii.

from Clement. Similarly the ex-

comp. 2 Kings v. y 6 Qeos iya> tov
pression o iv ayiois dvajravofievos in davaTmaai Kai ^cooTTOirjcrai;
other liturgies, I). Marc. pp. 178, 189, 8. evepyeTrjvJ Comp. Ps. cxv. 7 irri-

D. Jacob, p. 49 (comp. p. 29), S. arpeylfov, yjrvx''] fiov...oTi Kvpios evrjp-

Clirysost. p. 94 (ed. Hammond). yeTr](Te ere.

So too Liturg. D. Marc.
I have substituted v-^jrrjXols, as the p. 188 \//'ii;(^? eJepyeVa.
reading both of the LXX and of the nvivp-aTuiv K.TX^^ Modified from
Apost. Const. Moreover the Syriac Num. xvi. 22, xxvii. 16. See also
here translates by the same words, 62 heu-KOTris T(>v TTvevpaTcov Ka\
XDIIttn i^Dnn, which render v^iotos, Kvpios Trda-rjs aapKos, with the parallels
iv i^r]Kols., in the Hexaplaric Version in the note. Comp. Littirg. D. Jacob.
of Is. Ivii. 15 thus using two difter-
:
p. 45 jxvija-drjTi, Kvpie, 6 Qeos tmv irvev-
ent words. This however is not de- paTOiv Ka\ irdarjs crapKos.
cisive in itself. 9. TOV iTTi^XeTTovTa K.r.X.] Ecclus.
4. TOV TaneivovvTa k.t.X.J From xvi. 18, 19, ajSvcra-os Kai yfj craXevdi]-
Is. xiii. II vj3piv VTreprjcpavrnv Tairei- aovTOi iv Tj] iivKYKOTrfj avTov, ap-a tu
VUXTd). opT] Koi Ta depeXia ttjs yrjs fv rai

5. TOV bia\vovTa'\ Probably from avra Tpopco avcrcreiovTai.

eV//3Xf\//-ai els
Ps. xxxiii. 10 StacTKfSa^'ft ^ovkas idvav, Comp. Liturg. S. Basil, p. 106 o
d^eret he Xoyiapoi/s Xacov. Kadrfpevos ini Opovov 86^r]s Ka\ ini-
TOV TToiovvTa K.r.X.] Job V. 11 j3Xe7Tcov d^vaa-ovs. For the unusual
'
TOV TToiovvTa Taneivovs fls vyj/os Koi iTTifiXeneiv iv, to look into'. Or
dTro\(t)\6ras i^fyeipovTa, Is. x. 33 Ta- 'at', comp. Eccles. ii.
11, 2 Chron.

neivmBriaovTai 01 v^l/rjXoi, Ezek. xxi. 26 xvi. 9.

iTanfivacras to vyj/r^Xov Ka\ xjylrcoaas TOV inoTTTriv k.t.X.] See Ps. xxxii
TO raneivov, lb. xvii. 24 eyw Ku/jios o (xxxiii). which passage Clement
13,
raTTeifaJf ^vKov v^i]Kov kcli
v^j/cov ^vKov may perhaps have had in mind, as
 174 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [lix

eTroTTTrjv dvQpcoTriviav epycov, tov tmv KLV^vvevovT mv

(jOr]6oVf TOV TUJV AnHAniCMeNOON COOTflpA, TOV 7ravT6<s

TTvevfiaTO^ KTiCTTrjv KUL 67ria-K07roVj TOV 7r\r]6vvovTa

edvt] eirl yfj^ kui ek ttuvtcov eKXe^ajuevov tov^ dya-
TTwvTa^ are ^la 'Irjcou XpiCTOu tov rtyaTrrjfJievov Tratho^ 5

(TOiy, ^L oi y]fJLds eTraidevca^, riyiacra^y eTiiutja'a^. dpi-

ovjuev ere, ^ea-TroTa, BohOon yevecrdai kai ANTiAHnxopA

i^fJiMV. TOV^ eV 6\l\lrL t^/ULMV (TtOCTOV* TOVi TaTTeiVOVS
T&v KivdvvevSPTUv] illorum qtd affliguntur S, but it
I is probably a loose para-
phrase. 5 <je\ C euni S. 6 crou] C ; ejtis
; S. i^/uas eTraidevaas,

7]ylaaas, irlpLrjcras} instriixit nos et saiictificavit nos et honoravit nos S. ii^iov-

(i.ev K.T.X.] S prefixes et dicemus illi cum suppHcaiione. 7 tre] so apparently

S ; om. C. It seems to be required, as Hilg. and Gebh. have seen. UcnroTal

he has already adopted an earlier 6. d^iovfiev K.r.X.] See the prayer

verse of the same Psalm in this con- in the Apost. Const, viii. 12 ert
text. For eVoTTTr;? comp. 2 Macc. vii. a^iovfiev (re.,.0Tra)s iravTav in'iKovpos

35 TOV TTavTOKparopos enoTTTOv Qeov, yevrjj wavTcov ^orjdos Ka\ avTiXrjTTTmp

Esther v. I rov Travrav eTroTTTTjv Qeov. (with the context), which is evidently
I. TOP tUv Kivhwevovrav Ac.r.X.] indebted to this passage of Clement.
Judith ix. 1 1 eKaTTovoav ei jBorjdos, Comp. Ps. cxviii (cxix). 114 jSorjBos
avTiki^TTTmp dadevovvTcov, aTreyvaxTfievcuv fxov Ka\ avTiKrjTTTcop p.ov el av.
(TKfTvacTTrjSi nnrjXnio'iJ.evcov acorrjp. For 8. Tovs ev ffXi-^ei K.r.X.] Compare
dvrrj'XTTKTp.evoi comp. Is. xxix. 1 9, the prayer in Litiirg. D. Marc. p. 185
Esth. iv. ad fin. See also Liturg. Xvrpoxrat bearfjiiovs, e^eXov tovs
D. Marc. p. 181 j; e'XTrk t5>v aTrrjX- ev dvdyKais, ireivcovTas ;^opTacrov,
TTia-fievav (comp. Lihirg. S. Basil. oXiyo'^lrvxovvTas irapaKaXeaov,
p. 122), Act. S. Theodot. 21 (in Rui- TreTrXavrjiievovs eTricTTpe-^ov, ecTKO-
nart)
'
Domine Jesu Christe, spes Ticrp-evovs (fxoTaycoyr/crov, TreirrcoKoTas

desperatorum'. eyeipov, craXevofievovs (TTtjpi^ov, ve-

3. TTVevfiaros KTiaTtjv] Zech. xii. I voarjKOTas 'cacrai (ppovpos rj^atv

Kvpios-.-TtXaa-crav iTvevfxa dvBpcoirov iv Koi avTiX-qivTap Kara iravTa yevo-
avrw. Is. Ivii. 16 TTvevfi.a rrap' efiov /ievos, where the coincidences are
^e\ev(rerai, Koi TTVorjv iracrav eyco far too numerous and close to be
enoirjaa. In Amos iv. 13 we have eya accidental. See also Apost. Const.
...KTi^cov TTvexjjjLa,
where it apparently ii. 6.

means 'the wind,' but might easily 10.

aore/3eTs] Comp. 3 ^f\Xov ahiKov
be understood otherwise. Koi da-ejBfj dveiXrjcjjoTas. The reference

iiTiaKonov^ Job x. 12 q be i-maKonr) in da-e^els is not to unbelievers, but

(TOV e(f)v\a^e jiov to irvevixa, I Pet. ii. to factious and unworthy members of
25 TOV TTOifieva Koi iwicrKOiTov Tav the Church. For this word Geb-
yj/vx^f iifxaiv, Wisd. i. 6 o Qe6s...Trjs hardt {Zeitschr. f. KircJie7igesch. I. p.
Kapbias avTov eTricTKOTros dXrjdris. Comp. 307, and ad loc.) conjectures daBevel'} ;

Liitirg. D. Marc. p. 181 enla-KOTre and this may have been the reading
Tra(Tr]v (rapKog. of S. But the occurrence of tovs
 LIX] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 175

eXericrov tov<5 TreTTTcoKora^ eyeipov toI<s ^eo/xet'ot?"'

'io
e'7rL<pdvr]6L'
Tom d(Te(ie'L'i tov^ TrXavM/uevov^ tou lacrai'

Xaov cov eTTLCTTpeylyOi/' y^opTacrov tous TreivwvTa^' \v-

Tpuicrai TOv<i ^ecfjuov^ rifjLwv' 6^aua(rTt]crov tovs dade-
vouvTas' TrapaKoKecrov tov^ oXiyoyp-v^ouvTa^' tnootco-
cAN ere Traura ta gOnh, oti cy e? 6 Oedc monoc, Kai
15 'Iriaov^ XpiCTTO^ 6 Trah crov^ kul HMeic Aaoc coy kai

npoBATA THC NOMHC COy.

domine bone S. 8 toi)s raireivov'i k\it)cjov'\ om. S, owing to the homceoteleuton.
lo e-Ki(pavy\di\ C; Vi.(TTpd(pri9i S. dcrejSeZs] C; aegrotos (audeveh or vo(jo\JvTa.sT)
S; see the lower note. 14 ere] See Bryennios Didache p. py'. It is unre-

presented in S. 156 Trats <jov\ add. dilectus (6 r]yairr}[xivo's) S.

aa-Oivovvrai just below is a serious early Church in the ages of per-

difficulty, and on this account I have secution comp. Heb. x. 34, xiii. 3,
:

hesitated about accepting it. It is and see the note on Ign. Sniyrn. 6.
not sufficient to answerwith Harnack, A prayer for those working 'in the
'
atrGevovvres animo, aadevels corpore mines' is found generally in the
imbecilles sunt' for both words are
; early liturgies comp. Apost. Const.
;

used indifferently either of physical vni. 10 vnkp tSv iv p.eTc'iX\oLs KaX e^o-
or of moral weakness. Supposing piais KaX (f)vXaKa1s Kai Seap-ols ovtchv
that do-f/Sels' were the original read- 8ia TO ovojj.a tov Kvpiov hirj6a>jxev,

ing, the rendering of S may repre- Liturg. D. Marc. p. 181 rolls' ev (pvXa-
sent either aa-Qeveh (a corruption of Kals T)
iv fj,TaX\ois...KaTexop-^vovs irav-

dae^e'is) or vevoa-rjKoras (a substitu- Tas eker}<TOV, ndvTas eXev6epcoaov, Lit.

tion of a familiar liturgical form, as D. JaC. p. 44 jjLvricrdTjTi, Kvpce
appears from Z//. Z>. Marc. p. 185, Xpio'Tiafoiv TCdv iv Sfafiols, t<ov iv

quoted above). The Syriac word (pvXaKa'is, twv iv al)(iJLaXa)aiais Koi

here, {<n''"ID, is the same as in the i^opiais, Tav iv peTokXois Ka\ jBacrdvois
Peshito Luke ix. 2 lacrai tovs aa6e- Kai TViKpals dovXeiais ovtcov iraTepoiv Kai
vfls (v. 1.
da-devovpras). Comp. Polyc. d8eXcf)av Tjfjimv.

Phil. 6 eTncrrpecfiovTfs to. aTroTTenXavr]- 12. i^avda-TTjcrov k.t.A.] Comp, I

fieva, iTVKTKfnToyLevoi tovs dadevels, Thess. V. 14 TvapapLvQiicrQe tovs oKiyo-

which, so far as it goes, is in favour yj/vxovs, dvTtx.'^ade tu)v dadevrnv, quoted
of Gebhardt's emendation. by Harnack.
TOVS nXavafj-ivovs K.r.X.] Ezek. xxxiv. 13. yvcoToaav k.t.X.} I Kings viii.

16 TO TreTrXavrjfjLevov fTriaTp'\f/(o (where 60 yvuKTi Trdvres oi Xaoi Trjs yfjs

oTTCOS
B has TO irKavdjjLfvov dTroaTpe\l/a>). OTL Ku'ptoy 6 Qeos avTOS Qeos Kai ovk
1 1. XvTpaaai tovs Secrjuious] The re- ecTTiv eTi, 2 Kings xix. 1
9 yvda-ovTai
ference in this and the neighbouring Trdaai al /SacrtAftat ttjs yrjs oti ctv

clauses is doubtless to the victims Kupio? o Qeos povos (comp. Is. xxxvii.
of the persecution under Domitian ; 20), Ezek. xxxvi. 23 yvuxrovTai tu i'dvr]
see the note on i. The care of oTi iyci flpt Kvpios K.T.X. Comp. John
' '
the naturally occupied a
prisoners xvii. 3.

large space in the attention of the 15. ))/ieii' K.r.A.] From Ps. xcix (c).
176 THE EPISTLE OE S. CLEMENT [lx

LX. Cv Trjv devaov tou Kocr/uLOu (rvaTaciv ^la

Twv evepyovfjievwv (pavepo7roLt](ra^' (Tv, Kvpie, Tt]V

oiKoviueurjv KTi<Ta<s, 6 ttktto^ ev iracraL's tol^ yeveai's,
diKaios ev Toh KpLfxacTLV, Bav/uiaa-TO^ ev ia-)(y'i
Kat fdeya-

\07rpe7re1ay 6 (ro(po<i
ev tm
KTi^eiv kul cvveTo^ ev tw 5

Ta yevojueva idpacrai, 6 ctyaSo^ ev to?? opcojuievoi^ kul

TTio'Tos ev TOL^ 7re7roi6o(riv eiri (re, eAefiMON kai oiKxip-

MON, a(pe9 rjfJLLV

ra? dvoixia^ rjfjiwv Kai Ta9 ddiKia^ Kat

I 2i>] add. ycLp S. d^vaou] aivvaov C ; comp. 20, where C writes the
word in the same way. rod Kbcrfiov] add. hujus S, as in other passages.

5 6 (TO(})os\ C (TO(pos (om. 6) S.

; koC] C ;
om. S. 7 Trtards] i?iitis [benig-

)nis), probably xpV'''^^i S. 10 Kado.piaov^ Kadape7s C ; purifica S see below. :

12 Kat diKaioavvrj kuI airXdrriTi] om. C ; restored by Bensly from S, which has ei

2 yvare on Kvpios avToi iariv 6 Qeos. . . 'didst reveal the inherent constitution
j)/xeT? [S] Xaos avTOv Koi 7rpo/3ara rfjs of the world by the succession of
vofiTJs avTov :
comp. zd. Ixxviii (Ixxix). external events'; comp. Rom. i. 20.
13, xciv (xcv). 7. The word (^avepoiroiiiv is late and
LX. '
Thou didst create all things somewhat rare.
in the beginning. Thou that art 3. O TVKTTOS K.T.X.] DcUt. vii. Q
faithfuland righteous and marvellous Qeos TTKTTos 6 (fjvXdaaaiv 8ia6i]Kr]v...els
in Thy strength, wise and prudent \i\ias yeveas.
in Thy creative and sustaining en- 6. eSpaaai] Comp. Prov. viii. 25
ergy, beneficent and stedfast to them Trpo rov opt) ehpacrdrjvai.
that put their trust in Thee, merciful 6 ayaOhs /c.r.X.] i.e. 'He is benefi-
and full of compassion, forgive us cent where His operations can be
all our offences. Reckon not every seen, and He is trustworthy where

sin against Thy servants: but purify faith takes the place of sight'. The
us with Thy truth and direct our contrast here is between the things
steps in holiness. Make Thy face to which are actually seen and the
shine upon us, and protect us with things which are taken on trust;
Thy mighty hand and Thine out- comp. Heb. xi. I eanv 8e tt'kttis...
stretched arm from them that hate irpayp-arav eXey)(os ov ^Xenopievcov.
us. Give peace to us and to all the For opcopevois Hilgenfeld has epa-
inhabitants of the earth, as Thou Harnack and Gebhardt (fol-
fievois;

gavest to our fathers when they lowed by Lipsius yen. Lit. Jan.
called upon Thee'. 13? ^"^n) read a-(o(ofievois, the latter
I. 2i/ Tf]v devaov k.t.X.] The main having previously conjectured apicr-
part of this sentence is borrowed in fievois {Zeitschr. f. KirchengescJi. I.

Apost. Const, viii. 22 (quoted above p. Zahn proposes 6(ri,ovp.evois

307) ;

on 59 rov api6\iov k.t.\.). Comp. (Gott. Get. Ans. 1876, p. 1417). There
Wisd. vii. 17 eldevai (Tvaraa-iv k6(tjiov is no sufficient reason however for

KOL evepyeiav crroixeiav. questioning the text. The idea, and

8ia T(ov ivepyovfiivav K.r.X.] i.e. in part the language, is taken from
 Lx] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 177

Ta TrapaTrTCDjuaTa Kai TrXtjiu/jLeXeia^. jurj Xoyia-r] Tracrav

djuapTiap dovXcov aov kul TraidicrKwUf dXXa KaBdpLcrov

o

t]jud^ Tov Kadapio'/uioi' Ttj^ crt} dX}]6eia<i, kul KATeyeyNON

TA AiaBh'mATA f]IUL(ji)V
6N OCIOTHTI Kai ClKaLOaVVt] KUl

aTrXoTfjTi KApAiAC nopeyeceAi Kai noie?N ta kaAa kai

eyApecTA eNoonidN crov Kai evwTTiov tmv dp')(^ovTMV

5 tj/uwv. vaiy ZecnroTa, 6ni(j)AN0N to npdcoonoN coy ({)'

HMAc eic ataGa ev eiprivt],

6s to (rK67ra(r6t]vai tijuid^ th

i7i
jiistitia et in si7np!icitate. The omission is due to homceoteleuton. I have
not inserted the prepositions, because it is a common practice of S to repeat

them, where they are not repeated in the Greek ; see i.

p. i37. i6 ev eipi^cTj]

pads S but ; this is probably due to an error of Syriac transcription, since a single
letter ("I for 1) would make the difference.

Wisd. xiii. I, Ik rav opafxevaiv dyadav Ps. xxxvi (xxxvii). 23, Prov. xx. 24.
ovK 'la-xiKTav fiSevoi tov ovra ovre to2s The word 8ia^rifiaTa, 'steps', is rare,

epyois '!Tpocr)^ovTs eTreyvuxrav tov Te^- except in the LXX and writers influ-
vLTTjv. The language in the latter enced by it.

part of the sentence is suggested by 12. ev ocnoTTjTi /c.r.X.] I

Kings ix. 4
Ecclus. ii. 10 sq tIs eVeTri'crreuo-e (TV eav TTopevdfjS evcomov efxov, Kada>s

Kvpico KOI KaTrjrrxvfdr] ;...8L0Tt oiKTip- eTTopevOrj AavelS, ev ocrioTrjTL KUpbias.

fiaiv Kai i\(rjp.a)V o Kvpios, Kcii a(f)Lr]a'tv 13. TToulv K.T.X.] Deut. xiii. 18
afiapTias. TO KaXov Koi to apearov ivavTiov
TTocelv

7. eXerj/xov k.t.X.] A very frequent Kvplov TOV Qeov aov comp. i3. vi. 18, :

combination of epithets in the LXX. xii. 25, 28, xxi. 9.

10. Ka^apicroi/] This is perhaps the 15. eV(0ai/oi/] Ps. Ixvi (Ixvii). I

simplest emendation of KaSape'is, the eTri(})dvai to Trpoaanrov avTov efp' i^fias :

zd. XXX (xxxi). 18, Ixxix (Ixxx).

reading of the MS, which cannot comp.
stand KudapLo-ov having been written
; 3, 7, 19, cxviii (cxix). 135. So also
Kaddpeiaov, and the two last letters LitJirg. D. Marc. p. 179, Apost. Const.
having dropped out. Otherwise we viii. 18, 37.

might read Kaddprjs. Bryennios, Hil- 16. eh dya6a\ See Jer. xxi. TO

genfeld, and Gebhardt tacitly retain e(TTr]piKa to rrpocrcoTrov fiov eVt rifv

Kadapels. For the expression comp. it6Xlv..,ov< els dyadd; comp. Amos
Num. xiv. 18 Kadapiapa ov Kadapie't ix. 4, Jer. xxiv. 6. For els dyaOa see
TOV evoxov, quoted by Bryennios. also Gen. 1. 20, Deut. xxx. 9, etc.
11. Trjs dXrjdeias]
afjs See John Comp. Litu7-g. D. Jacob, p. 44
xvii. 17 dyiaaov avTovs ev Tij dXr]6eia jjLvqadrjTi. .TrdvTav els ayadov.
.

K.T.X.; comp. XV. 3. aKe7raa6fivai\ For this connexion of

KUTflidwov K.T.X.] Ps. XXxix (xl). 3 (TKerrd^eiv Comp. Is. li. 16 vno rfjv
KaTfvdvve TO. dut^rifiaTa (jlov, cxviii (TKUiv TTJs x^tpos fJiov
aKenaau) ae
(cxix).133 ra hiajirjp.aTd fiov KUTevdv- (comp. Wisd. v. 17, xix. 8), Deut.
vov Kara to Xoyiov aov. The phrase xxxiii. 27 CTKfTratrei a-e...v7ro la-^vv
KaTvdvviv TCI hia^r)p.uTa OCCUrs also j-ipaxiovuiv devdttiv : and for the anti-

CLEM. II. 12
178 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [lx

Xeipi COY TH KpATAiA Kai pv(rdr\vai diro Trao'tjs dfiap-

Tm? TO) BpAxioNi COY TO) ythAo)" Kui pvcTai rjfJLci^

aTTO Tiav fJLKTOVVTtav rifJid^ dBiKU)^. ^o? Ofiovoiav Kai

elprivriv riiMV tc Kai Trdciv tol^ KaroLKOvcriv Tr}v yfji^,

Kadu)^ d(i)Ka<s toI? TraTpao'iv tJiutoVf eniKAAoYMeN<jor4 (re 5

avTcov Scioj^ e.N nicxei kai AAH9eiA, [ft)0"T6 crco^ecruai J7/ia?j

vnriKOOu^ yivo/uLevov^ tw TravTOKpaTopi Kai Travaperio

6 6<7iws] S ; This use of the adverb is characteristic of Clement ; other-
om. C.
wise I sliould have hesitated to introduce it on such authority. coo-re aib^eadai

Tj/iias] om. CS ; see below. S renders ei in veritate oboedientes fuerunt nomini tuo

etc., thus connecting ev aKrjOda with the following clause. 7 iravro-

KpcLTopL Kai Travap^Tifi] The words are transposed in S, but this does not imply

thetical x^'P' Kparaia, ^paxt-ovi ii\f/r]\a, (yen. Lit. Jan. 13, 1877) would insert
Exod. vi. I, Deut. iv. 34, v. 15, vii. eTnKaKovfj.evae pvcrai roiis before ev
19, ix. 26, xi. 2, xxvi. 8, Jer. xxxix Trio-rei K.r.X.

(xxxii). 21, Ezek. xx. 33, 34. TravTOKparopi] So Hermas Vis. iii. 3
3. Tav iiicrovvTcdu K.r.X.] Comp. rm prjpari tov TravTOKpdropos koi ev-

Justin. Apol. i.
14 (p. 61) rov^ ddUcos bo^ov dvoparos. At first it had oc-
fiicrovPTas ivfiOeiv Treipdnevoi, quoted curred to me to read iravTOKparopiK^,
by Harnack. as it occurred to Gebhardt, and as
5. eiriKoKovnevciv K.r.X.] Ps. cxliv Hilgenfeld actually reads; comp. 8
(cxlv). 8 TrScri rois iuLKoKovfifvoLs avrov rw TravroKparopiKw ^ovXijpaTi avToii.
ev aXijdeia. For eV -nlarTei Kai akrjdela The expression navroKpaTopiKov Svopa
comp. I Tim. ii. 7. occurs in Macar. Magn. Apocr. iv. 30
7. vTTTjKoovs K.r.X.] This might (p. 225). The omission of -kw before
be a loose accusative, referring to Koi would be explained, es-
easily
the datives ^/xlv rt kui nacriv K.r.X. ; pecially as archetypal MS is
the
comp. Ephes. i.
17, 18 Scot; Vfjilv shown to have been mutilated in this
nvevfia (Tocfiias Tre^wTKr/xerouy neighbourhood. But the parallel pas-
Tovs o(f)6aXij.ovs K.r.X., Acts xxvi. 3 sage from Hermas quite justifies the
eVi <roii fxeXkcov (rrjfKpov dwoXoyeladai, reading of the MS. In the Lxx navro-
IxakLCTTa yvcoaTTjv ovra (re K.r.\., and Kpdrcop seems to be always applied
see Winer xxxiii. p. 290, Ixiii.
directly toGod either as an epithet
pp. 709 sq, 716, Kiihner il. p. 667 sq. of Qeos or Kvpios, or
independently;
But a double transition, Trarpda-iv, and so in Clement himself, inscr., 2,
(iriKokovp.fi'cov, y(vop.vovs, would be 32. But the sense of to opofia, as
very harsh ;
and for reasons which almost an equivalent to 6 eels (see
are stated in the introduction (l. p. [Clem. Rom.] ii. 13, and the note
145 sq), cannot doubt that some
I on Ign. Ephes. 3), explains the ex-
words have dropped out, such as I and in Hermas.
ceptional usage here
have inserted. Bryennios supplies navapera For this expression
k.t.X.]
Ka\ (Twaov rjiids ;
Gebhardt reads comp. 45, and for the word navdpe-
vnrjKoois yevop.evois ; and Hilgenfeld ros the note on i.

alters the whole sentence. Lipsius 8. Toty re apxov(TLV The

K.r.X.]
 LXl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 179

opo/uLari crov, roi^ re apxov(riv kui tryovfj-evois tj^iov

10 LXI. Cv, deo-TroTUf edcoKas Tr\v e^ovo-iav Tf]9 /3a-

(TiXeias avToh hia tov fieyaXoirpeTrov^ Kal dveK^iniyri-
Tov Kpdrov^ (TOV, eU ro yivuxTKOVTa^ rifj.d^ Tr]v viro

a-ov avToT^ dedojuevrji/ ho^av Koi Tifiriv vTroTaarcreG-dai

avToi^, iut]dev evavTiovfxevovi tm OeXyjfxari crov ok 09,

any dififerent Greek text : see above, I.

p. 137. Also ivavapiTt^ is translated as if

evTifjL<{), N")p''0 (see 3). But a single letter would make the difference, NIIT'O

excdlenti. Elsewhere 733 in^O is the translation of Tracdperos (see i, 2, 45,

57); and the translator might here consider himself excused from the repetition of
Kav- which occurs in both words. See also on wavayiip above, 58. 8 rots

re] C ; /cat tois S. 10 IScoKa?] add. illzs S. 14 Sos] precanmr ut des S.

punctuation, which I have adopted, Thy favour. O Thou, who alone

was suggested to me by Hort. It art able to do this and far more
accords with the preceding words than this, we praise Thee through
evapeaTa ivanviov (jov Kai fvcomov twv our High-priest Jesus Christ, through
apxavToip -qiiav it disposes of the
;
whom be glory unto Thee for ever'.
^

superfluous avroh (see however 21, 10. TTJs ^aa-iXeias] 0/ the sove-
note) ;
and it throws 2i; into its reignty\ i.e. 'of the secular power'.

proper position of prominence e.g. ;

For the genitive comp. Dan. xi. 20
60 2w TTjv aivaov k.tX. and 61 7rpaa(T<ov 86^av ^aaiXdas,
ib. 21 eSco-

just below, Su yap, Sea-Trora k.t.\. Kiv in avTov 86^av ^acriKeias. The
See Athenag. Sttppl. I evae^earara ^aaiXfla is the secular as contrasted
8iaK{ifxei/ovs Koi SttcmoTaTa TTpos re to with the spiritual power; and, as
6(lov Kai rffv vfifrepav ^acriKeiav ; such, it is frequently opposed to
comp. Theoph. ad Aiitol. i. 11, who Ifpcoa-vvq, e.g. Apost. Const, ii. 34 ocrw
quotes Prov. xxiv. 21 T//xa, vte, Qeov "^vyj] crafiaros Kpeirrav, toctovto) Up(o-
Kai ^aaiXea k.t.X. The previous edi- avvT] ^ao-tXet'as (comp. vi. 2), Test.
tors have all connected the words Duod. Pair. Jud. 21.
rois re apxovaiv k.t.X. with the follow- 13. vTioTcKTfTicrQat avToTf k. r.
X.]
ing sentence, as apparently does C. See I Pet. ii. 13, 15 i^Trorayj^Tf irlurrf
LXI. 'To our earthly rulers, O dvdpaTTivrj KTiCTfi 8ia tov Kvpiov...oTi
Lord, Thou hast given the power, ovToos earrlv to deXrjjxa tov Qeov ;
that we may render them due obe- comp. Rom. xiii. 2 6 dvTiTaaaopevos
dience in entire submission to Thy TTJ f^ovcria ttj tov Qeov 8iaTayfj av-
will. Therefore grant them health, 6e(TTr]Kev.
peace, stability. For Thou, O 14. 80s K.T.X.] In accordance with
Sovereign of heaven and King of the Apostolic injunctions, Rom. xiii.

Eternity, givest honour and authority I

sq. Tit. iii. i, i Pet. ii. 13 sq :

to the sons of men upon earth. So comp. Wisd. vi. i sq. See also Polyc.
guide their counsels, that they may Phil. 12. For other passages in
administer well the power thus en- early Christian writers relating to
trusted to them, and may obtain prayers for temporal rulers, see

12 2
i8o THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [lxi

Kvpie, vyieiaVf eiptjmjv, ojuovoiav, eixTTadeiaVy ek to

^i67reiv avTOv^ Trjv vtto (Tov ^e^OfxevtiP auroT^ y^yefioviav

d7rpocrK07r(i)<s
. (rv
yap, ZecnroTa eirovpavLe^ iSacriXev
Twv aliovoyVi ^/ft)9 toT^ vldl^ tcov
dudpcoTrcov dopav Kai
TLfjiriv e^ovcTiav rwv eiri Ti]<s yi]^ VTrap^ovTwu' crv^
Kai 5

Kvpi6j cievdvvov Trjv (iovXriv avTcoi/ kuto. to kuXov kui

evapecrrou eviainov (tov, ottws ^leTrouTe^ ev eiprivr) Kai
TrpavTtjTi vcrj3oi Tt]v VTTO (TOV avToT^^ hehofxevtjv epov-
(Tiav Weto orov Tvy^avwariv. 6 julovo^ dwaro's Troifjaai
TavTa Kai 7repi(T(T0Tepa dyadd jueO' yiumv, aoi e^OfJLO- 10

9 I'Xeti ffov TUYxdcwcrtv] tranquille co?npotes fiant auxilii quod {est) a te S, ob-
viously a paraphrase. 13 7e!'eai'] C ; Yeceds S. 16 Kai] S ; cm. C.
The clause is translated in S ei de Us (rebtis) scilicet (JT'D) quae in ea {religione),
'

qticte maxime utiles sunt illis qui volunt diiigere vitam {conversationem) excellentiae
et pietatis et juste, as if the translator had read rCbv ci^eXt/iwrdrw!' 5^ (?) iv avTr\

ivdpeTov. .SLev6vPiv.
. At all events he must have had a text which a corrector
had emended by striking out or altering els, so as to govern ^iov by 8lv9vviv :

Bingham Anl. xiii. 10. 5, Harnack Gfoff Tciv alu>vu)v. Here the Eternal
Christl. Ge7neindegottesd. p. 218 sq King is tacitly contrasted with the
(Justin Martyr), p. 378 sq (Tertullian). temporary kings, the (BaaiXevs rmv
The Apologists naturally lay stress alavcov with the ^acrikels tov almvos
on the practice, as an answer to the TovTov (comp. Ign. J^of/i. 6).

charge of sedition. 6. Siev^vwi/] As above 20. Other-

I.
iv<jTaQeiav\ ^stabiHty,
'
tran- wise it is not a common word, and
qnillity\ comp. 65. The word may does not apparently occur at all in
mean either 'firmness, steadiness' the LXX or N.T.
as a moral quality, or stability' as a '
10. fied' T]pLoiv] As Luke i. 72
material result. The latter seems to TToiTJa-ai, eXfos fieTa rav TvaripcDV T^/iui/,
be intended here :
comp. 2 Mace, ib. X. 37, and so probably Acts xiv. 27,
xiv. 6 ovK eaji/rej fr^v ^aaiXfiav evara- xv. 4 ; comp. Ps. cxviii (cxix). 65
6elas rvxe'iv, Wisd. vi. 26 ^acriXevs XpTjCTToTriTa enoirjaas fiera tov 8ovXov
(ppovifios evaradeia 8i]nov. a-ov. It is the Hebraism DV ^E^'J?.

3. aTrpoa-KOTrms]
''

withotit sttini- 11. dpxifpeas k.t.X.] See the note

bling\^ without Miy jar or collisiott^ ;
on 36.
as 20 rrfv \(iTovpyiav avrav dnpoa- 12. 77 86^a K.T.X.] See the note on
Koncos eniTfXovcriv. 20. It is a favourite form of dox-
/3ao-iXfiJ rav alcovcov] The phrase ology in Clement.
occurs only i Tim. i. 17 in the N.T., 13- (Is yepeav yevfwv] i.e. 'the
and as a v. 1. in Rev. xv. 3 ; but it is generation which comprises all the
found in the LXX, Tobit xiii. 6, 10 ; generations' as Ps. ci (cii). 24 ev
;

see also Litiirg. D. Jac. p. 40. yevea yeveav to. stt] (tov comp. Ephes. :

Comp. 35 nar^p rav aloivcov, 55 ill. 21 TOV alcoves Totv aiatvav. This is
 LXIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. l8l

XoyovjueBa did tou dp-)(^iep60)^

Kal Trpoa-rarov tcov
'

yfrv^cov rj/dwu h]O'0v Xpio'TOU, di ou col t] do^a kul

ri fj-eyaXcaa-uvt) Kal vvv Kal eU yeveav yeveoov Kai ets

Tom alcovas tcov alcopwv. djutjv.

15
LXII. riepl fJLev twv dvtjKovrOJv r^ OpriarKeia rj^toi',

Kal Tcov (aCpeXijULcurdrcoi' ek evdperov f^loi/ toT<s OeXovcTLv

Jo"e/3w? Kal hiKaico^ hievdui'eiv [t^i/ Tropeiav ai/Twi/J,

iKavias eTreo'TeiXajUieu vjuuVy di/dpes adeXcpoi. wepi yap
TTiCTTeco^ Kal fxeTavoia^ Kai yi/rjcria's dyaTTt]^ Kai ey-

see above, i.
pp. 144, 145. In the Syriac we should probably read fll'T'St^l for

niT'QK'l, i.e. in pietate (

= ei)o-e^ws) for et pietatis. 17 rr\v iropeiav avTwv]
om. CS : see below. 19 iyKparelas] NnVljy ?]} super continentia (as if

iiTrep iyKpareias:) S, for another preposition (7L3D de) has been used before for

irepi. Perhaps however the insertion of a different preposition is a mere rhetorical

device of the translator; or /V may be an accidental repetition of the first syllable
of the following word, as the Syriac forms of the letters would suggest. We cannot
safely infer a different Greek text.

a raremode of expression, the com- note there.

moner forms being els yevfas yeveav TTf 6pT]crKfLa i]pi.cov] Comp. ^ 45 ''^'^

or els yei'eai' Km yeveav, which are 6pr)(TKfv6vT<av TTjv neyaXoTTpfTTrj Kol

quite different in meaning. evbo^ov dpr)(TKeiav roii vyl/iarov. This

LXII. 'Enough has been said passage explains the force of the
that befit men who
'

by us however concerning the things words here :

pertaining to our religion and neces- serve the one true God'.
sary for a virtuous life. For we have 16. evaperov] See the note on Ign.
left no point untouched concerning Philad. I.

faith and repentance and the like, 17. hi.iv6\)veiv\ The MS is ob-

reminding you that ye ought in all viously defective here ;

and we must
righteousness to pay your thanks- supply some such words as nji/
giving to God, living in harmony TTOpeiapavTmv (see 48), or ra 8iaf3ri-
and peace and love like as our ; fxara ( 60), or perhaps with Bryen-
fathers behaved with all humility nios TTjv ^ovXfjv avTciv ( 61). See
towards God and towards all men. the introduction, I.
p. 145 sq.
And we have done this with the 18. iKuvcos eVeoTeiXajuei^]
Bryennios
more pleasure, because we knew that has called attention to the similarity
we were speaking to faithful men, of language used by Irenteus, when
who had made a diligent study of describing this epistle, iii. 3. 3 eVi
God's oracles'. TovTov ovu Tov KXrJjuei'ro?, crracrews

15. Twi/ dvr]KnvT<ov] With a dative ovK oXiyrjS to7s eV Kopifdo) yfvop.eur]s
as in 35 ;
see the note on Ign. a8eX(j>ols,fTTfa-TfiXev i] iv 'Pw/lij; eK-
Philad. I. It has a different con- iiXr)(Tia iKavo)Ta.TT]P ypcKprjv vols Ko-
struction, avr]Kf.i.v eiy, 45. See the pivdiois.
l82 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [lxii

Kpareia^ kul (ra)(ppo(ruvr]^

Kal VTrofxoufj^ TravTu tottov

e^}]Xa(pf)a-afj.ev, vnofJUfJivricrKOVTe^ Zelv vfj.a's ev diKaio-

o'vvr] Kal dXfjOeia Kai fiaKpodvfJiLa tw iravTOKpaTopi

Oew oorlw^ evapecTTeiv, 6fJ.ovoovvTa<s dfivfjo'iKaKui's ev

dydirr] Kai elprjvr] fxeTa eKrevov^ 7rLiK6iaSy Kadu)^ Kai 5

ol 7rpod6dt]\(t)iu6voi TraTepes tijUMv evr]pe<TTf](rav

TaTreivo-

(bpovovvTe^ Ta irpo^ tov Trarepa

Kai Qeov Kat ktlct-

I TOTTOJ'] add. scripturae S. 4 eua/)ea-re?j'] S ; euxapurreZi' C see the :

same confusion above, 41. The reading of S was anticipated by Hilg. and Gebh.
5 Ka^wj Kai\ Kadois (om. Kal) S. 7 Qebv Kal KTiffTrjv] tmiversi creatorem
dettin (9ebv TrayKTia-rrjv?) S ; comp. 19. S; om. C. The authority
8 Trpbs]
of S in such a case is valueless in itself (see l. but the preposition seems to
p. 137),
be required here. 9 ijSiov] rj 5t' uv S, which translates the clause, ei haec
tanto sint {erunt) per ea qiiae mortnimus. The translator has had a corrupt text and
has translated it word for word, regardless of sense. eweidT^ aacpus ydeifiev

I. navTa tottov k.t.X.]

^
we have schisms, v/ho are bidden to harbour
handled every topic'' \ Bryennios adds no grudge.
by way of explanation, /lidXto-ra Se rQ>v 5. /iera eVrei^oOs k.t.A..] See the
o'yia)!/ thus taking navra to-
ypacjimp, note on 58, where the same ex-
ttov to mean 'every passage'; and pression occurs.
so it is rendered in the Syriac Ver- 6. 01 TTpof)8T]X<j}fXeVOl K.T.X.l^ SCC
sion, 'place of Scripture'. In this 17, 18, 19; comp. also 30 e866rj
sense tottos occurs above in the ex- [7) paprvpia] Toly TTUTpdcrtv -qpcov to7s
pression iv erepo) TOTrw, g 8, 29, 46. diKaiois, and 31 avaTv\i^(x>p,ev ra
But this meaning does not seem at aTT ap)(Tis yevopeva' tLvos X'^P"' ^^~
allnatural here, where the word is Xoyijdr) 6 TTOTqp rjpaiv 'A^padp; k.t.X.
'
used absolutely. For tottos a topic, For this use of TruTepes in speaking

argument', comp. e.g. Epict. Diss. of Jewish worthies, see the note on
i. 7- 4 eTTiaKeyp-iv Tiva TTOiijTeov Ta>v 4.
^
TOTTCOV TOVTaV, U. ly 3^ OTUV TOVTOV
. 10. eXXoyipatraTOis] See the note
i KTTovri<Tp . . .TOV TOTTOV, Siud sec othcr on 58 eXXoyipos-
references in Schweigheeuser's index eyKfKv(})6o-iv'\ Comp. ^ 53 KaXas
to Epictetus, s. v. For ^rjXa(f>av eTTicTTaadf ras lepas ypa(f)as, dyanrjroi,

comp. e.g. Polyb. viii. i8. 4 Traaav Koi eyKfKv(f)aTe els tci Xoyia tov Qeov,
eTTivoiav (^rjXaCJia. with the note. For the word eyKVTT-
4. evapea-relv] Doubtless the cor- Teiv see thenote on 40.
rect reading, as it explains the sub- LXIII. 'We ought therefore to
sequent ivrfpia-Trjo-av. For another regard so many great examples, and
example of the confusion of evapea-- to bow the neck in submission; that
rdv, evx^apia-reiv, in the authorities, laying aside all strife we may reach
see 41. our destined goal. Ye will make
dfivTjO'iK.a.KCL)!] See 2 a.fjiVT)<TLKaKOi us happy indeed, if ye obey and
(with the note). This word involves cease from your dissensions in ac-
an appeal to the sufferers from the cordance with our exhortation to
 LXlIl] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 183

Tt]v Kai TTpO's TvavTas du6p(i}7rov<i. Kat Tavra toctoutio

r]Biov V7rejj.vt](rajj.6v, eweidrj aacpcJo^ i]heLfJiev 'ypacpeiu

10 rj/xa?
dv^pao'LV TrKTroTs Kai eWoyijucoTaTOi^ kul iyKe-
KV(p6(nv ei^ t Xoyia Trj^ Trai^ela^ tov Oeov.

LXIII. QefjLLTOv ovv ecrrLV Toh tolovtols kul

TocovTOi^ vTToheLyfJLao'Lv iTpo(Te\6ovTa<s vTroQeivai tov
Tpa^t^Xoi' Kai TOV Trj^ VTraKofjs tottov ava7r\t}pot)(ravTa^
ypd<f>Lv] quia scilicet matiifeste est lis; oporttut enim (/j^v) ut scriberennis S, i.e.

tireihT) (ja<pQs fj' Again a corrupt reading, or

Set (or ?Set) fieu yap ypdrpeiu k.t.X.
rather a false division of the words, has been translated almost verbatim. For the
facility with which ykp might be omitted or inserted before ypdcfiw, see Ign. Roiii^. 7.
10 eX\o7t/xwTdTots] doctis S. 13 vwoOdvai rhv Tpdx''iXov'\ inclineimis colluin
ttosti'um et stibjiciamus nos S. 14 d.va-K\r\pii(!avTa%...riixC:v\ iniplentcs in-
clincmur illis qui sunt duces aniniarum nostrarum S ; dva-n-X'/jpQa-aL C, omitting
all the other words see the lower note.
:

peace. And we have sent to you faith- Ecclus. vi. 26 6 npocreXduv avrrj (i.e.
ful men who have lived among us Tjj (Tocf)ia) Trpoaepxeo-dai (f)6j3(0 Kvpiov
;

'

unblameably from youth to old age, to give heed to the fear of the Lord',
to be witnesses between us and you. LXX Ecclus. i.
30 ; Trpoaepx^o^dai- p^-
This we have done, to show yoti bev\ Tav Philo de Gig. 9 (l.
elprjpevcov
how great is our anxiety that peace p. 267) Trpoa-fpxfO'dai tm Xoyw, Orig.
;

may be speedily restored among c. Cels. iii. 48. These senses are
you '. derived ultimately from the idea of
12. The use of this word
ee/xtroi/] 'approaching a person as a disci-
seems be extremely rare, except
to ple'; e.g. Xen. Mem. i. 2. 47 tuvTrep
with a negative, oil Bey-iTov (e.g. Tobit eveKfi/ Kai ^ayKparet. npoarfKdov.
ii. 13) or ddifiiTov (see below). vnoOelvaL tov rpa;^jXoj/] ^submit
' '

Tois ToiovTois K.r.X.] 4.6 Toiovrois your neck ',

i. e. to the yoke ;

ovv vTToSeiyiiacriv KoXkrjdrjvai koi jj/xos comp. Ecclus. li. 26 tov Tpaxr]Kov
Sei K.T.X. For TOIOVTOIS KOI ToaovTOis vpSiv vn66eT vtto ^vyov (comp. ib. vi.

comp. ig. 24, 25), Epictet. Diss. iv. i. 77

*
13. Trpoo-eX^oi/ras] ]iav big acceded irape8a>iias cravTov 8ov\ov, vnidrjKas
to, attended to, assented to, studied\ TOV TpdxrjXov. So too Acts XV. 10
as in v^ 33 ; comp. i Tim. vi. 3 et tTTidelvai ^vyov eVt tov Tpdx>]Xov. The
Ttj eVepoStSao-KuXei Koi \Lr\ Trpocrepxerai expression is used in a different
vyialvovcTiv Xoyoiy. So we find irpoa- sense in Rom. xvi. 4 inrep rfjs v/^ux^s
ipxfa-6ai dpeTjj 'to apply oneself to pov TOV eavTcHv Tpdx^^ov vTredrjKav,
virtue', Philo dc Migr. Abr. 16 where it means 'laid their neck on
(l. p. 449) ) irpoa-epxea-dai rois vopois the block', not 'pledged their lives',
'to Study the laws', Diod. i.
95; as Wetstein and others take it.
'

TTpocrepxfO'dai rfj aoc^ia, rrj cjiikocrocfyia, 14. TOTTOV dvanXrjpcaaavTas^ to OC-

' '
to become a follower of wisdom, of cicpy the place ', ^fulfil the function ;
philosophy', Philostr. Vi't. Ap. i. 2 comp. I Cor. xiv. 16 o dvajik^pav
(p. 2), iii. 18 (p. 50), comp. LXX TOV Tonov TOV l8i(oTov, where the
t84 the epistle of S. clement [lxiii

7rpO(TK\i6t]i'ai Toh vTrdp^ovo'LV dp-)(r]'yoX'S

twv y^rvx^Mv
67ri tov
r}}jL(Zv,
b7ra)<s
jjcru^acravTe'S r^? /jLUTaLa^ cTTacrews

irpoKeifJievov rjfMv ev d\r]6eia

(tkottou SfX TravTO^ fJL(afj.ov

KaTavTV]a(afjiev. ^apav "/ap kul dyaWiacLV i^fjuv irape-

^6T6, eav v7rr]K00i yei/ojuevoi toT^ vcp' r'jjULoov yeypa/uLiuLevoi^ 5

dia TOV dylov Trvev juaTO's eKKoyjytjre Trju dSefJUTOv rov

^f^Xovs vfJLwv opyrv Kara rrjv evreu^iv i]u eTVOLncrafxeda

Trepl elpf^vtj'S
Kai ojuovoia^ ev Trjde Trj iTTKrToXrj .
'Gtvejul-

2 ^cri^xatrai'res] quiesce7itcs et tranquilli S. 3 ^iw/xoi;] add. et scandalo S.

4 ajyaKKi'X(jw'\ add. magnajji S. 5 yeypafi/JLevoLs] add. vo6is S. 7 iprev^iv]

choice of this elaborate expression Syriac is

JinTlW'n ]):rh pIDJ
is probably a studied paradox to ^^JIllD.
;nE^'23"l
For pin: I cannot
bring out the honourable character think of any word so probable as
of a private station; tottos denoting Trpoa-KKidfjvai, since p"| is a common
officialposition or dignity (see above, translation of KXipetp, and in 21
40, and the note on Ign. Polyc. i), Trpoo-AcXi'cretj isrendered ^5DX"I Nni:3''D"l;
while ld(.a>TT]s implies the opposite of though TrpocTKKiveadai, T:p6aK.\taris, are
this. So too here the object may rendered otherwise, but variously, in
be to enhance the mx^ox\.'s.xv\. function 47, 50, Acts V. 36, I Tim. v. 21. On
of obedience. See Cle7n. Hovi. in. the other hand XJ"l2"10 'ductores'
60 TOV ip.ov avanXripovvTa tottov, and might be variously rendered. It most
comp. Joseph. B. y. v. 2. 5 arpaTuo- commonly represents 6 ijyovpevosC^^ i,

Tov ra^ip anoTrXrjpoiivTa. 32, ^7 in a double rendering, 55, Heb.

I. npoaKkidfjvai k.t.X.] These xiii. 7, 17, 24); but elsewhere riyepcov,

words are wanting in the Greek KadrjyrjTtjs, odrjyoi, etc., even ^ovXevTijs.

MS, and I have restored them by I have given dpxrjyos, because it

retranslation from the Syriac see :
brings out the contrast which Cle-
the critical note. partisan- The \.xm.q ment seems to have had in his mind.
ship is here tacitly contrasted with In 14, 51, however, dpxrjyos is ren-
the false; the rightful leaders with dered otherwise, Nt^'n, XJK'n, and so
the wrongful. The language is ex- commonly.
plained by what has gone before; 2. a-Taa-ecos] Comp. C/eni. Honi.
14 p-vaepov ^^Xovs apx^yols e^a- 1.4 TtS" TOLOVTdiP \oyi(rpu)P rjavxa^eiv.
KoKovdilv, ^ 5 ^ iKeivoi o'lrives dpxrjyol This construction follows the analogy
Trjs (Traaecos Koi Bixoaraaias iyevrjOr]- of verbs denoting cessation, etc.

crap, 47 8ia to Kai ToTe irpoa-KKiaeis (see Kiihner 11. p.

341 sq). It is un-
vp.ds TrenoifjcrBai ... TrpoaeKkidi'jTe yap necessary therefore to read 7'j(Tvxa(Td-

K.T.X., 50 '"''^ ^^ dyarrr] evpfdcopev Si'x" arjs, as Gebhardt suggests.

TTpoaKkia-fois dp6pOL>77ivr]S ap(op,ot (comp. 3. crKOTTup] Comp. 6 eVl top t^s

21 /xJj Kara TrpocTKKiaeis:). The com- TTiaTews ^e^oLov dpopov KaTaPT^aapep,
mand to choose the right partisan- and 19 f7rava8papa)pfp fTrl top i^ dpx^i
ships here has a parallel in g 45 napadedopepop rjplv Tt]i eiptjprjs (tkottop,

<f>iK6p(iKot e(TTe...7repl twv dprjKOPTau which explains the idea in the wri-
els (ToiTrjpiup (see the note). The ter's mind here. The expression
 LXIV] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 185

Kal avhpa^ ttlottovs kui (raxppova^j diro veo-

\jyaiuL6i/
he

10 Tt]TO^
dvao'TpacpevTa^ ews yrjpou^ a/xe/UTrrws eV tjiuui/,
o'ltii/6^ Kal juaprvpe's kcrovraL jueTa^v vjulcov kul tjjucov.

TOVTO ^6 eTroLYiCTafjiev \va el^rjre oti irda'a rifjuv

(ppovTis Kal 'yeyovev kul ecTiv 6l<s to ev Ta^ei vfxds

6lpriv6U(rai.
15 LXIV. AoiTTOV 6 TraVTeTTOTTTf]^ QeO'S Kal ^eCTTTOTf)^
Tcdv TTvevfxaTiav Kal KvpLO'i Tracrt]^ crapKO^, 6 eKXepd-

stipplicationeni et exhortationem S- 9 5e Kttt] S ; 5e (om. koX) C. i i o'L-

rivf:% /cat] S ;
omj/es (om. koX) C. 15 Aot7r6;'] C; ..iwov A; Xonrbv 5^ S,

itself is perhaps suggested by Heb. 10. yijpovs] So Luke i.

36 ytjpei
xii. I
Tpe^cofifv Tov TrpoKeifievop rifJ.1v (the correct reading), and in several

ayS>va. For o-kotto;' comp. Phil. iii. 14. passages in the LXX, e.g. Ps. xci (xcii).
^

/Ltffl/xov] fault, defect: see the 14 y^pei, I Kings xiv. 4 yijpovs,

note on iicoixoa-KOTTrjdev 41. In the Ecclus. viii. 6, etc., with more or less
Old Testament it is always a trans- agreement in the principal MSS; so
lation of D1?D '3. blemish'. also C/e;/i. Honi. iii. 43, On this

x^ptw /c.r.X.] As in Luke i. 14

4. form see Winer Gramm. ix. p. T^ sq,
(comp. Matt. v. 12, Rev. xix. 7); see Steph. Thes. s. v., ed. Hase. Our MS
also Mart. Polyc. 18. This combi- has alsoy^pet above in 10, where A
nation of words xapa koli dyaXKlaais reads yrjpa.
'

does not occur in the LXX. LXIV. '

Finally, may theGod of

6. dia TOV dyiov nveviJiaTos] See all spirits and all ilesh, who hath
the note on 59 rots vtt avrov di chosen us in Christ Jesus, grant us

Tfixuiv (Iprjfiivois. Harnack takes these all graces through Christ, our High-
words with iKKo-^r^re, but this does priest, through whom be glory and
not seem so natural. honour to Him. Amen.'
d6epiTov\ Acts X. 28, I Pet. iv. 3; 15. Aonrov\ For Xoirrov or to Xoi-
and so too 2 Mace. vi. 5, vii. i, x. 34. TTov,with which S. Paul frequently
7. ^77'Xovr] See the note on 4. ushers in the close of his epistles,
'ivrev^iv] This should probably be see Philippians iii. i. The happy
explained of the 'appeal' to the Cor- conjecture of Vansittart which I
inthians themselves see the note on ; adopted in my first edition is con-
[Clem. Rom.] ii. 19. It might how- firmed by our new authorities.
ever refer to the foregoing 'prayer' TraireTroTTTT^s] See the note on 55.
to God for concord comp. e.g. i Tim. e6os'...rt5j/ TTVivp.aTviv Num.
;
/c.r.X.]
ii.
I, iv. 5, Herm. Maud. x. 2. XX vii. 16 Ku/jto? o Seoy tQ>v npevfiaToov
9. avhpai\ Claudius Ephebus and Koi Trdarjs aapKos (comp. xvi. 22) see :

Valerius Bito, whose names are given also Heb. 9 rw naTpi toov TrpfVfid-
xii.

below, -5 65. For the light which Toiv, Rev. xxii. 6 Kvpios 6 0eoy tcHu
this notice throws on the early history TTVevp.aT(x)v Tuv TrpocprjTwv.
of the Roman Church see the in- 16. o e'/cXe^fi/Liei/oy] See Luke ix. 35
troduction, 27 sq I.
p, ;
and for its o vlds fiov 6 fKXfXfypeuos (the Correct

bearing on the date, see I.

p. 349. reading, though there arc vv. 11,
i86 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT [lxiv

Tov Kvpiov 'Iria-ouv XpicTTOV Kal t'ljua^ hi aurou

fjievo^

eh Kaov 7repL0U(TL0Vi ^wtj Trda-yj ^^vxrj eiriKeKXrifJievt] to

HieyaXoTTpeTre^ Kal ayiov ouojua avTOu iricTTiv, (po^ov,
eiprjuriUf V7rofJLOvr]v, juLaKpodujULiaVj eyKpuTeiav, dyveiav
Kal crco(ppoa'vvr]i/,
ek euapecTTrjo'ii' tw ovofxaTL avrov 5

I Tjixas] AS ; 17/aets C.
3 ixeyaXoTrperres Kai 07101'] ; sa7ictum el deceits AC
(in) magnitudine et gloriosum S; see above, I. p. 137. ipb^ov, elpi^vrjv, vtto-
/jLov-^v] ; AC
e( timorein et concordiam et amoretn et
patientiam S. 4 jxaKpoOv-
fdav] A /cat ; fAaKpodv/xiav CS. iyKpareiav, d7;'iai'] AC (but ayviav A) ; Kal

iyKpareiav Kal ayveiav S. 5 Kal crucppoaC'viji'] AS ; ffu>(ppoa6vriv (om. koX) C.

oj'O/aaTi] AC; add. sancto S. 6 dpx'ep^ws] AC; add. magni S. 7 hli^a\

IkK^ktos and aym!r]To%). So too Luke English New Testament p. 195 sq

xxiii. 35 o Xpttrros 6 tov GfoC Ik- (ed. 2).
XfKTos :
comp. i Pet. ii. 4 sq. Harnack eniKeKXijp.ei'ri']
'
wkicA hath in-
refers to Hermes Sim. v. 2 e/cXe^a- voked his naine' ; comp. Acts ii. 21,
ixfvos SoiiXov TLva iriaTov koI evapecrrov ix. 14, 21, xxii. 16, etc. So it is trans-
evTLjxov, where the servant entrusted lated actively in the Syriac. Or is it
with the vineyard represents Christ. rather, as the perfect tense suggests,
It is clear from Enoch xl. 5, xlv. 3, 4, ''which is called by his name^'i This
li.
3, liii. 6, Ixii. i, that 6 inXeKTos was latter makes better sense, especially
a recognized designation of the in connexion with Xaos nepiova-ios ;

Messiah. but with this meaning the common

1. rjjias 81 avrov] Ephes. i.
4 Kad- constructions in bibHcal Greek would
as i^eki^aro t]fMa.i iv aJrtS (i.e. ev be e(^' fjv (or e'0' 7}) fTnKKXi]Tai to
XptOTw). ovofia avToii (e.g. Acts XV. 17, James
2. eiy \aoi> TvepLova-iov] Deut. xiv, ii.
7, and freq. in the LXX), or rrj eVt-

4 <cue^fXe^aro Kvptos 6 Qeos crov

o"e K.iKXr]p.vrj rw 6v6p.aTL avTov (Is. xliii. j).
yeveadai ae Xaov avra nepiovcnov ; 4- ayveiav Kol <Ta>(f>po(rvvr]v] So too
comp. t'd. vii. 6, xxvi. 18, Exod. xix. 5, /^n. Ephes. 10; comp. Tit. ii.
5
Ps. cxxxiv. 4, Tit. ii. 14 Kadapla-rf (j-axppovas, dyvds.
eavToi Xaov Trepiovcnov. In the LXX 5. evapearrjo-iv] The word occurs
Xaos irepiovaios is a translation of Test, xii Patr. Is. 4.
nSjD Dy, the expression doubtless 6. dp)(iepecos Kal TrpocrTaTov] See
present to S. Peter's mind when he the note on 36 above, where the
spoke of Xaos els Tvepmoliqa-iv (l Pet. expression is expanded.
ii.
9). In Mai. iii. 17 n?JD is trans- 7. 86^a Ka\ peyaXcoa-vvT]^ See the
lated ds irfpLTTolrjcnv in the LXX, and note on 20, where also these two
Trepiovaios by Aquila. As n^JD is words occur together in a doxology :

'
'peculium', 'opes', ("pJO acquisivit'), comp. also 59, where nearly the
would seem to mean ac-
Trepiovcrios
'
same combination of words as here
quired over and above', and hence is repeated. In Rev. v. 13 we have
'specially acquired' with a meaning 7; Tifir] Ka\ 1] 86^a Ka\ to Kpdros els Toiis

similar to the classical e^alperos. It aimvas twv alcovcov.

was rendered at once literally and LXV. '

We have sent Claudius
effectively in the Latin Bible by Ephebus and Valerius Bito to you.
'
peculiaris'. See my Revision of the Let them return to us quickly accom-
 LXV] TO THE CORINTHIANS. 187

^id Tov dpy^iep6C09 Kai TrpocrraTOv tjjuwu 'lr](rou XpicTTOu'

^i ou avTM ho^a Kai fji.eya\u)(rvvr], KpaTO^, Tijurjf kuI
vvv Kai ek TravTa^ tovs aiiava^ twu aLcoi/cov. d/uLrjv.

LXY. Tov ^6 dTrecTTaXjULet/ov^

dcp' rifjicov KXav^LOV
10' G(br]l3ov Kai OuaXepiov BiTcova (Tvv Kai ^opTOVvaria ev
AC; 56^a S, which omits the following words koL /xeya\w(T6v7], Kpdros,
7ra(ra ri/x-q,

Kai fuv Kai. /cat] om. C. nfjiri] A; KalrifMri 8 Travras] C AC ;

cm. S. 10 /cat OvaXiptov] AC; Valeruun (om. /cat) or et Alcrium S; but this

is doubtless owing to the accidental omission of a 1 before D)'*"1X?X1

by a Syrian
scribe. BtVwya] AC ; S. The
punctuation of both C and S is faulty
om.
here, in separating names which belong to the same person. abv /cat] AC ;
(jiiv
(om. KoX) S. ^opTovvari:f\ A ; ^ovpTOXsvarii) C ; Frtitunato S.

panied by Fortunatus, and bear glad this allied names see above, i.
and
tidings of harmony and peace re- In Muratori, 1367 no. 12, it
p. 28.
stored among you. The grace of occurs as a woman's name,LONGiNVS.
our Lord Jesus Christ be with you BITONI. VXORI. AMENTO.
and with all. Through Him be glory 10. (TVV Ka\ ^oprovvaTcf] For the
to God for ever.' position of /cat comp. Phil. iv. 3 nera
9. KKavhiov /c.r.X.] These two Ka\ KArJjLtei^Toj (quoted by Laurent
names, Claudius and Valerius, sug- p. 425). Hilgenfeld adds 'from the
gest some connexion with the im-
^

Assumption of Moses Clem. Alex.

perial household as the fifth Caesar
;
Strom, vi. 15 (p. 806) crvv Ka\ tm
with his two predecessors belonged XaXe^. The clever emendation of
to the Claudian gens and his empress Davies avv Tata ^oprovvdra is there-
Messalina to the Valerian. Hence fore unnecessary and moreover the
;

it happens that during and after the

testimony of A is now reinforced by
reign of Claudius we not unfre- one other Greek MS. The form of
quently find the names Claudius expression seems to separate Fortu-
(Claudia) and Valerius (Valeria) in natus from Ephebus and Bito and, :

conjunction, referring to slaves or if so, he was

perhaps not a Roman
retainers of the Cajsars. It is not who accompanied the letter, but a
impossible therefore that these two Corinthian from whom Clement was
delegates of the Roman Church were expecting a visit. In this case there
among the members of Caesar's
'
is no improbabihty in identifying
'
household mentioned in Phil. iv. 22, him with the Fortunatus of i Cor.
and fairly probable that they are in xvi. 17 for Fortunatus seems to be
;

some way connected with the palace; mentioned by S. Paul (a. D. 57) as
see the dissertation in Philippicuis p. a younger member of the household
169 sq. On this subject see also the of Stephanas, and might well be alive
introduction, I.
p. 27 sq. Of the two less than forty years after, when
cognomina Ephebus is not so un- Clement wrote. It must be remem-
common. On the other hand Bito bered however, that Fortunatus is a
is rare in Latin, though commoner very common name. See above, I.
in Greek (comp. Pape-Benseler p. 29, note 3, p. 62, note i.
Wbrterb. d. Gricch. Eigentiameii s.v. iv elp^vji /C.T.X.] I Cor. xvi. i i
npn-
BiTwv). For instances in Latin of nip^aTf 8e uvtov iv flp-qvjj.
i88 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT. [lxv

6if}t]i/r] juera )(^apa<s

eV Ta-)(^eL dvaTrefi^aTe rrpo^ f]fj.a^,

OTTWs OaTTOV Tt]v evKTULav Kal e7ri7ro6r]Tr}v i]juuv elprjvtjv

Kat ofjiovoLav dTrayyeWcocrLV' eU to tu-^iov kul t) fid's

^apfjvai TTEpl Trj^ evcTTadeia^ vfj-tov.

'H x^P'-^ '^^^ Kvplou rifJLiov ^lr]<TOv XpicTTOv jued' ly/xwi^ 5

Kai fxera TravTiav TravTa-x/l tcov KCKXt] juevcop vtto tov
Oeov KOI hi avTOv' ^l ou avrio do^a, Kpdros Kal Ti/jLt],

lieyaXuiorvvr], Qpovo^ aicovLOS, diro Tiav alwpcov eU roi/s

aitova^ Twv aLcovvov. d/urii/.
I
dvawefj.\l/aTe] aveireixxpare A. 2 ewnro6-^T7]v] A ; ein.-Kb9r)Tov C. elp-fjvrjv

Kal 6iJ.6voiai>'] AC; o/mvomv Kal eipijvrjv S. 3 dTrayYeXXwirtJ'] A (the first \ being
supplied above the line but prima viami) ; dirayyeiXwaiv C. rdx'oj'] raxeto A.
4 evcrradeias] evvTaOiaa A. avrov (om. Kal) C.
7 Kat 5t' avTOv]rt/ttr; AS ;
5t'

...dwb Tuiu aiwuuv] AC om. S. As the general tendency of S is rather to add than
;

to omit, the omissions in this neighbourhood (more

especially in the proper names)
suggest that the translator's copy of the Greek was blurred or mutilated in this part.
Itmust be observed however that the omissions of S, here and above 64, reduce
the doxology to Clement's normal type; comp. e.g. 32, 38, 43, 45, 50. 8 e]
AS ; Kat ets C.
For the subscriptions in our authorities see above, I.
pp. 117, 122, 131.
2.
daTTov} This form is doubly Lobeck Paral. p. 455 sq, especially
strange here, as it does not occur in P- 473 sq.
the New Testament, and Clement 4. eva-raBelas] ''tranquillity'' ; comp.
uses the usual ra-)(iov two lines be- Wisd. vi. 26, 2 Mace. xiv. 6. On cu-
low. QcLTTov however is found in (TxaBfiv see the notes to Ign. Polyc. 4.
Mart. Ign. 3, 5, Mart. Polyc. 13, in 6. Kai nera Tvavrtov k.t.X.] For a
which latter passage Qarrov and ra- benediction similarly extended see
X^ov occur in consecutive sentences I Cor. i. 2 aw TTacTL Tois fTnKoXoviJLevois
as here. Both our MSS agree in TO bvojxa K.T.X.
reading Bottov here, and raxiov just 8. Opwos aicovios^ This doxology
below. is imitated in Mart. Polyc. 21 'ir^o-oO

evKrai'ai/] The word does not oc- y^pivrov a 1] do^a, Tifiij, fifyaXaxriivrj,
cur in the LXX or New Testament, 6p6vosaicovios, ano yeveas fis yeveau.
though common in classical Greek. Here 6p6voi alcovios seems to be
ii;moQr]Tr)v\ As an adjective of thrown in as an after thought, the
three terminations ; comp. Barnab. ascription having ended with /cat
I
77 eniTTodrJTr] where
oyJMS vyidv, fieyaXcocrvvrj ;
and the idea of aldvios
Hilgenfeld unnecessarily reads inmo- is prolonged by the thrice repeated
6r]Tos. The feminine does not occur aicdvcov, aiavas, alaii'cov.

in the LXX or New Testament. For For the obligations of the begin-
similar instances of adjectives of ning and end of this same document
three terminations in the New Tes- to the Epistle of Clement see Igiuit.
tament see A. Buttmann p. 22 sq ;
and Polyc. I.
p. 610 sq, ed. i
(p. 626
and on the whole subject refer to sq, ed. 2).
 THE SO-CALLED

SECOND EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT

TO

THE CORINTHIANS.
 AN ANCIENT HOMILY.

WE
the First.
have seen that the table of contents prefixed to our leading
MS (A) ascribes to Clement the Second Epistle equally with
On the other hand it ought to be noticed that there is no
heading npoc KopiN0ioYC b, as the corresponding title of the First would
lead us to expect. If we could feel sure that this phenomenon was
not due to the mutilation of the ms (see above, i. p. 117), the fact
would be significant. Though the scribe held the Second Epistle to
be not only a of Clement, but also (as we may perhaps infer)
letter

a letter to yet the absence of such a title might

the Corinthians;
have been transmitted from an earlier copy, where the work was
anonymous and not intended to be ascribed to this father. But the
alternative supposition that the title has disappeared by mutilation is

at least not improbable (see below, p. 199). In the later Greek ms (C)
the second Epistle is entitled
'
Of Clement to the Corinthians ', like the
first (see above, i.
p. 122).
On the other hand the Syriac Version makes a distinction between
the two (see i.
p. 131 sq). The First Epistle is described as 'The
Cathohc Epistle of Clement the disciple of Peter the Apostle to the
Church of the Corinthians'; where not only is the epistle not numbered,
but a distinguishing epithet is prefixed. In the case of the Second
however, though the scribe makes no difference in the authorship and
designation of the two, the title is given more simply Of the same '

(Clement) the Second Epistle to the Corinthians.' This distinction

may be accidental ; but a probable explanation is, that in some Greek

MS, from which the Syriac Version was ultimately derived, the First
Epistle stood alone, the Second not having yet been attached to it.

While the First Epistle is universally attributed to Clement, the

balance of external testimony is strongly opposed to his being regarded
192 THE EPISTLES OF S CLEMENT.
as the author of the Second. It is first mentioned by Eusebius, who
throws serious doubts on genuineness [JI.E. in. 37). After describing
its

the First he adds, I should mention also that there is said to be a

'

Second Epistle of Clement (lo-riov S" ws koI Seurepa ns cTvat Xeyerat Tov
KXijfjLevTo^ iTna-ToXrj) but we do not know that this is recognised like the
:

former (ou fxi^v i.6' o/i.otws ttJ Trporepa kol Tavrrjv yvwpLfxov cTrtora/xe^a) ; for
we do not find the older writers making any use of it (oVt fi-qSk kol tous
apxaiovs avrfj KXpy]iJ^^ov<i
icrfxev).
Then after summarily rejecting other
pretended Clementine writings, because they are never once mentioned
'

'

by the ancients and 'do not preserve the stamp of Apostolic orthodoxy
intact', he concludes by referring again to the First Epistle, which he
calls 'the acknowledged writing of Clement (>; tou KXt^/acvto? ojxoXoyov-
fjiivr] ypa(f)7J).' And in other passages, where he has occasion to
'

speak of he uses similar expressions,

it, ^/le Epistle of Clement', 'the
acknoivledged Epistle of Clement' {H. E. iii. 16, iv. 22, 23, vi. 13). The
statement of Eusebius more than borne out by facts. Not only
is is a
Second Epistle of Clement not mentioned by early writers but it ;
is a
reasonable inference from the language of Hegesippus and Dionysius of
Corinth' (as reported by Eusebius), and of Irenseus and Clement of
Alexandria (as read in their extant writings), that they cannot have known
or at least accepted any such epistle ^ Rufinus and Jerome use still
more decisive language. The former professedly translates Eusebius,
*
Dicitur esse et alia dementis epistola ciijus nos notitiam non accepi-
7}ius' ; the latter tacitly paraphrases him, 'Fertur et secunda ejus nomine
epistola quae a veteribus reprobattir^ (de Vir. III.
15). These writers are
not independent witnesses, but the strength, which they consciously or
unconsciously add to the language of the Greek original, has at least a
negative value ;
for they could not have so written, if any Second Epistle
^
Hegesippus, H. E. iii. 16, iv, 22 : was written by Clement. Thus he seems
Dionysius, H. E. iv. 23. The words of to knowof only one letter of Clement to
the latter are tV <Tr)iJ.epov ovv KvpiuKrjv the Corinthians. The passage however
aylav Tfiiipav Sirjydyo/JLev, iv rj dviyvufiev has been strangely misinterpreted, as
v/xwv ry)v iiricrToXrjp, rjv 'i^ofiev del irore though tt]v irporipav meant former
//le

dvayivo:(TKovTe% vovOerela-dai, ws Kai ti}v of Clement'' s hvo epistles a meaning

TrpoTipav 7]fuv did KXTj/xevros ypa^eiaav. which the context does not at all favour
He writing in the name of the Corin-
is and which the grammar excludes, for then
thians to the Romans, acknowledging a we should require ttjv n-poripa.v tQv 5id
letter which they had received from the 'KKrjp.evTO's ypa(pi.(xwv.
^
brethren in Rome
written apparently by fjjg passages from these, and later
their bishop Soter ; and he declares that fathers, to whom I shall have occasion
his Church will preserve and read from to refer, are given in full above, i. p.
time to time this second letter from the 153 sq.
Romans, as they do the former which
 AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 1
93
of Clement which might be accepted as genuine had fallen within the

range of their knowledge.

Early in the 9th century Georgius Syncellus still speaks of 'the one
gemiine letter to the Corinthians' {Chro?tog. a.d. 78, i. p. 651, ed. Dind.);
and later in the same century Photius {BibL 113) writes, 'The so-called
Second Epistle (of Clement) to the same persons (the Corinthians) is

rejected as spurious (ws vo'^os aTroSoKi/xa^erat).'

Meanwhile however this epistle had been gradually gaining recog-
nition as a genuine work of Clement. The first distinct mention of it
as such is in the MS A, which belongs probably to the fifth century; but
the notice of Eusebiusimplies that even in his day some persons
were disposed to accept At a later period its language and teaching
it.

made it especially welcome to the Monophysites and from the close

of the 5th century it is frequently quoted as genuine. Thus citations
are found in Timotheus of Alexandria (i. p. 180 sq) in the middle
of the 5th century and in Severus of Antioch (i. p. 182 sq) during
the early decades of the 6th, besides certain anonymous Syriac
collections (i. p.183 sq), which may date from this latter period or
subsequently. The doubtful reference in the Pseudo-Justin has been
discussed above (i. p. 178 sq).
To the 6th century also may perhaps
be ascribed the Apostolical Canons, where (can. 85) 'Two Episdes
of Clement are included among the books of the New Testament (see
'

above, i.
p. 187). About the opening of the 7th century again it

is quoted by Dorotheus Archimandrite the (see i.

p. 190); in the
8th century by Joannes Damascenus (see i. p. 193), if indeed the
passage has not been interpolated'; and in the nth by Nicon of
Rh^ethus (see the notes, 3).
If in the Stichometria attached to the

Chronography of Nicephorus (tA.D. 828) it is placed with the First

Epistle among the apocrypha, this classification does not question its

genuineness but merely denies its canonicity.

But what is the external authority for considering it an Epistle to the

Corinthians ? We have seen that it is called an Epistle from the first ;
but the designation to the Corinthians is neither so early nor so
universal. It was not so designated by Eusebius or Jerome or
Timotheus. But in Severus of Antioch (c.
a.d. 520) for the first
time a quotation is
distinctly given as
'
from the Second Epistle to
the Corinthians '. The Syriac ms itself which contains the extract from
Severus can hardly,' in Cureton's opinion, 'have been transcribed later
'

than the commencement of the 8th century and might have been

^
See the investigation above, i.
p. 373 sq.
CLEM. II. 13
194 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
written about the end of the 6th.' In other Syriac extracts also which
perhaps belong to the 6th century, it is quoted in this way. In the

copy used by Photius again it appears to have been so entitled {Bibl.

126 ySi^AtSaptov v (L
KAT^/Aei/Tos hvi<no\ax tt/oos Koptv^ious /3' iv<f>ipovTO,

compared with ld/. 113 77 Xcyoyacv?; Sevrepa Trpos tovs

aiJTOv?) 3
and John Damascene twice cites it as
'
the Second Epistle to the
Corinthians '.

Passing from the external to the internal evidence, we have to seek

an answer to these several questions; (i) Is it truly designated an
Epistle? (2) Was it addressed to the Corinthians? (3) What indi-

cations of date does it give? (4) Who was the author, Clement or
another ?

Having considered the external testimony, we are now in a position

to interrogate the internal evidence.

questions suggested by the common attribute,

The The Second '

Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians,' are threefold; (i) Was it an

epistle? If not, what is the nature of the document? (2) Was it
addressed to the Corinthians or to some other Church ?
(3) Was it

written by Clement or by some one else ? In order to answer this

last question we have to enquire what indications we find of date and
authorship ?

(i)
The answer to our first question is ready to hand. If the First

Epistle of Clement is the earliest foreshadowing of a Christian liturgy,

the so-called Second Epistle is the first example of a Christian hotnily.
The newly recovered ending has point at rest for ever.
set this

The work is plainly not a letter, but a homily, a sermon'. The speaker
addresses his hearers more than once towards the close as 'brothers
and sisters' ( 19, 20). Elsewhere he appeals to them in language
which is quite explicit on the point at issue. 'Let us not think,' he

says, 'to give heed and believe now only, while we are being admonished

^
Grabe {Spic. Pair. i.
p. 268, 300) in Clement's name. The event has
supposed it to be a homily forged in shown conjecture to be right as to
his

Clement's name. He referred to Anas- the character of the document. In all

who quotes from the
tasius [Qiiaest. 96), other respects he is in error. The Cle-
sacred and apostolic doctor Clement in ment of Anastasius is not the Roman,
his first discourse {'kbyLp) concerning but the Alexandrian; and our homily
'

providence and righteous judgment,' as bears no traces of a forgery or of pre-

showing that such homilies were forged tending to be Clement's.

 AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 195

by the presbyters; but likewise when we have departed home, let us

remember the commandments of the Lord, etc' ( 17). And again a
little he speaks still more definitely; 'After
later the God of truth,
I read to you an exhortation to the end that ye may give heed to the

things which are written (i.e. to the scriptures which have just been
read), so that ye may save both yourselves and him that readeth in the
midst of you' ( 19). These words remind us of the language in
which Justin, who wrote within a few years of the probable date of this
homily, describes the simple services of the Christians in his time.
'On the day called Sunday,' he says, 'all remaining in their several cities
and districts, they come together in one place, and the memoirs of the
e. the Gospels, as he explains himself
Apostles [i. elsewhere] or the
writings of the Prophets are read, as long as time admits. Then, when
the reader has ceased, the president (o Trpoeo-rw's) in a discourse (Sid

Xo'you) gives instruction and

invites (his hearers) to the imitation of these

good things. Then we all rise in a body and offer up our prayers'

{Apoi. quoted
i.
67, in the notes on 19). Here then is one of these
exhortations, which is delivered after the
'
God of truth
'
has been first

heard in the scriptures^; and, the preacher was doubtless,

this being so,
as Justin describes him, 6 Trpoeo-rw?, the leading minister of the Church,
i. e. the bishop or one of the presbyters, as the case might be. A
different view indeed has been taken by Harnack.
supposes that He
the homily was delivered by a layman", drawing his inference from the
mention of the presbyters (in 17 just quoted) as persons whom the
preacher and his hearers alike were bound to listen to. But this
language can only be regarded, I think, as an example of a very
common rhetorical figure, by which the speaker places himself on a
level with his audience, and of which several instances are furnished by
the genuine Epistle of Clement, who again and again identifies himself
with the factious brethren at Corinth (see the note on 17). On very rare
occasions indeed we read of laymen preaching in the early Church ; but
such concessions were only made to persons who had an exceptionally
brilliant reputation, like Origen^. As a rule, this function belonged to
^
Exception has been taken to this troduces an evangelical quotation with
expression /uerd top Qehv t^s dXrjOeias- \iyei 6 Geo's, 13; see the note on the
Zahn {Gi>U. Gel. Anz. p. 1418) and passage. We
do not even know whether
Donaldson [T/icol. Rev. January, 1877, the lesson to which he here refers was

p. 46) propose X670J' for Qebv, while taken from the Old or the New Testa-
Gebhardt suggests toVwv or tovov (TONfiN nient.
'
or TONOYfor TON0N). But it is difficult See p. Ixxii, note ir, p. 138 (ed. 2).

to seewhy our preacher should not have So also Hilgenfeld, p. 106 (cd. 2).

used this phrase, when he elsewhere in-

''
The objections raised in his case

132
196 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
the chief ecclesiastical officer in the congregation. A presbyter did
not preach when the bishop was present; a deacon was for the most
part regarded as incompetent to preach on any occasion'.
The question therefore respecting the class of writings to which this
document belongs is settled beyond dispute. The homiletic character
of the work was suggested long ago by Grabe and others ; and in my
own edition I had regarded the opinion that it was a sermon or treatise
rather than a letter as prima facie probable, though so long as the end
was wanting this view could not be regarded as certain". On the other
hand the theory propounded by Hilgenfeld, that we had here the letter
of Soter bishop of Rome to the Corinthians, mentioned by Dionysius of
Corinth about a.d. 170, was eagerly accepted by subsequent critics and
editors. In a courteous review of my edition which appeared in the
Academy (July 9, 1870) Lipsius espoused this theory as probable. And
still later, on the very eve of the discovery of Bryennios, Harnack in
the excellent edition of the Patres Apostolici of which he is coeditor
'
had confidently adopted Hilgenfeld's opinion ; Nullus dubito quin

Hilgenfeldius verum invenerit,' 'mireris...neminem ante Hilgenfeldium

verum invenisse' (prol. pp. xci, xcii, ed. i). This view was highly

show that the practice was rare. Alex- strongly with Hilgenfeld that the docu-
ander of Jerusalem and Theoctistus of ment is really a letter, not a homily.'
Ca?sarea (Euseb. H. E. vi. 19), writing to So far from holding this view strongly,

Demetrius of Alexandria, defend them- I have stated that we find in the docu-
ment nothing which would lead to this
'
selves for according this privilege to

Origen, as follows :
Trpoai67]Ke 8e roh inference,' and again that it
'
bears 710

ypajxixacnv, Stl tovto ov8^ Trore rjKovcrdri traces of the epistolary form, though it
'
oiiSkvvv yeyivTiTaL, to irapovTiov iwiffKOTrcov may possibly have been a letter ; but
XaiKovi 6fii\7v, oiiK old' ottws irpocpOLvGis ovk I did not consider that in the existing
aXriOr/ Xijiov. ovov yovv evpicTKOVTai ol condition of the work certainty on this

imrrideioi irpos to ih(pe\e1v tov% ddeXcpovs, point was attainable, and I therefore
Kal wapaKoKovvTai. t^ \aip wpoaoiuKetv suspended judgment. When my able
reviewer goes on to say of me He also
'
vwb tQv ayiuv e-maKoiriov, Cocrwep iv Aapdv-
801.S EueXiTiS vrrb N^w^s Kal ev 'iKoviqi agrees with Hilgenfeld in the opinion,
TlavXivos iiirb KeXcou /cat ev 2vvvd8ois that the epistle was composed during the
Qeodupos 'Attlkov tuv fiaKapluv dSeX-
virb persecution under Marcus Aurelius,' he
<pwv eiKos dk Kal ev aXXots tottois tovto imputes to me a view directly opposed to
ylvecOai, ijixas Si fxr] eldivai. that whichI have expressed (p. 177, ed. i),
1
See Bingham Antiq. xiv. 4. 2, 4, I think also that tlie reader would

Augusti Christl. Archdol. vi. p. 315 sq, gather from the manner in which I am
Probst Lehre u. Gebet pp. 18 sq, 222. mentioned by Harnack (p. Ixvi, note 2,
' '

refuting Grabe, that I had

2
See esp.pp. 177, 178. I call at- p. Ixxv) as
tention to this, because my view has been maintained the document to be an epistle

misrepresented. Thus Lipsius {Academy, and not a homily; though probably this

July 9, 1S70) wrote of me, 'He holds was not intended.

 AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 197

plausible and it was open to one objection which I

attractive ;
but
pointed out as did not satisfy the primary conditions of
fatal to it. It

the letter mentioned by Dionysius of Corinth, which was written in the

name of the whole Roman Church, whereas our author speaks in the
singular throughout '.

(ii) As regards the audience addressed by the preacher Corinth

has highest claims. If the homily were delivered in that city, we have
an explanation of two facts which are not so easily explained on any
other hypothesis.
First. The allusion to the athletic games, and presumably to the
Isthmian festival, is couched in language which is quite natural if

addressed to Corinthians, but not so if spoken elsewhere. When the

preacher refers to the crowds that 'land' to take part in the games
(eis Toi)s (jiOapTovs aywras KaraTrXiova-iv, 7) without any mention of the
port,we are naturally led to suppose that the homily was delivered in
the neighbourhood of the place where these combatants landed. Other-
wise we should expect eis rdv 'Ia0fj.6v, or ets KopLvOov, or some explana-

tory addition of the kind^.

Second/}'. This hypothesis alone satisfactorily explains the dissemi-
nation and reputed authorship of the document. It was early attached

to the Epistle of Clement in the mss and came ultimately to be attri-

buted to the same author. How did this happen ? The First Epistle
was read from time to time in the Church of Corinth, as we know.
This homily was first preached, if my view be correct, to these same
Corinthians ; it was not an extempore address, but was delivered from
a manuscript^; it was considered of sufficient value to be carefully pre-

^
Wocher {der Brief des Clemens etc. possible however, that the homily was
p. suggested that the author was
204) originally delivered extetnpore and taken
Dionysius himself. This theory had the down by short-hand writers (raxvypoKpoi,
advantage of connecting it with Clement's notarii), and that the references to the
genuine letter (though not very directly) ; reader were introduced afterwards when
and it
explained the local colouring. But it was read in the Church as a homily.
it has nothing else to commend it. The employment of short-hand writers
^
Thus in Plat. Eiithyfd. 297 C vewarl, was frequent. We read of discourses of
fioi 8oKiv, KaTaireTrXevKOTi, where the word Origen taken down in this way (Euseb.
is used absolutely, we naturally under- /^.E. vi. 36) : and Origen himself on one
stand the place in which ;he speaker is occasion {Connn. in loann. vi. praef. IV. ,

at the time. lOi) excuses himself for not having

p.
^
19 fiera. top Qebv Ttjs akyjOeias ava- gone on with his work by the fact that

yip d IT Ku vfuv ivTev^LV

'
eis t6 Trpoa^x^'-" the 'customary short-hand writers were
Tois yeypcL/uLixivois, iva Kal iavro-us <Tu>a7]Te not there, k<x\ ol crvvridsis 5^ Taxvypaipot.
Kai Tov av ay IV <j)a KovTo. ev vfuii. It is fXTj wapovTes tov ^xecr^at tQv virayopeiKTewu
198 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

served; and (as we may venture to suppose) it was read publicly to the
Christian congregation at Corinth from time to time, like the genuine

Epistle of Clement. The fact that these Corinthians took for public
reading not only the Epistle of Clement, which might be thought to
have acquired a peculiar sanctity by its venerable age, but also the
much later letter of the Romans under bishop Soter, shows the practice
of this church in reference to uncanonical documents. In this way it

would be bound up with the Epistle of Clement for convenience. In

such a volume as is here supposed, the Epistle of Clement would be
numbered and entitled thus :

KAHMeNTOC npoc KopiNBioyc

with or without the addition eniCToAH ; while the homily which stood
next in the volume might have had the heading

npoc KopiNGioYC
with or without the addition Aoroc or omiAia, just as Orations of Dion

Chrysostom bear the titles npoc AAelANApeic, npoc An&Meic; the author
of the sermon however not being named. In the course of transcription
the enumeration a, B, would easily be displaced, so that the two works

would seem to be of the same kind and by the same author \ As a

matter of fact, indications are not wanting in our existing authorities,
that after this homily had been attached to S. Clement's Epistle it re-

mained anonymous in the common document which contained both

works. In the Alexandrian MS there is no heading at all to the so-
called Second Epistle (see above, i.
p. 117). This fact however cannot

Ku\vov; comp. Photius Bid/. 121. At alternative is suggested by Harnack

a later date this became a common mode Zeitschr.f. Kirchengesch. i. p. 268. The
of preserving pulpit oratory : see Bing- hypothesis would at all events have the
ham An^. xiv. 4. II. It was not un- merit of explaining the incoherence and
common for sermons and lectures to be looseness of expression which we find in
taken down surreptitiously: see Gaudent. this work ; but in the absence of evi-

Praef. p. 220 (Patrol. Lat. XX. p. 831 dence it is safer to assume that the ser-

Migne)
'
notariis, ut comperi, latenter ap- mon was committed to writing by the
positis
'

(with the note). On stenography preacher himself.

^
among the ancients see Ducange Glos- This opinion was arrived at indepen-
sarium IV. p. 642 sq (ed. Henschel) s. v. dently of the remarks of Zahn {Gott. Gel.
Nota, together with the references col- Anz. Nov. 8, 1876, p. 1430 sq), and I am
lected in Mayor's Bibl. Clue to Lat. Lit. the more glad to find that he accounts for

p. 175 sq. See also Cotitemporary Re- the common heading of this sermon in a
view October 1875, p. 841 note. This similar way. See also i.
p. 371, note i.
 AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 199

be pressed, for it seems not unlikely that the title has been cut off'.
But in the case of the Syriac version the testimony is free from suspicion.
Here the genuine letter is called in the heading not The First Epistle '

of Clement' but 'The Catholic Epistle of Clement,' as if it were the

only known letter written by this father (see above, p. 191). In both
cases however the scribes themselves have in some other part of their
respective mss designated our work the Second Epistle of Clement ;
and this fact renders the survival of the older form only the more signi-
ficant.

For these reasons I adhere to Corinth as the place of writing. On

the other hand Harnack has with much ability maintained the Roman
origin of this document^; and it is due to his arguments to consider
them.
The external evidence seems to him to point in this direction. He
remarks on the fact that this writing appears to have been very little

known in the East during the earliest ages. It is first mentioned by

Eusebius, and Eusebius himself, as Harnack argues from his language,

only knew it from hearsay ^ It is very far from certain however, that

this is the correct inference from the historian's words, to-reov 8' cJs kox

oVTepa Tis etvai Xeyerat tov K-Xyj/JievTOs iirLaToXij' ov fxrjv iff OfjiOLws ttj

Trporepa Kat ravrrjv yvwptfxov imcTTafJieOa, on /xijSe toi)s dp-^atovs avrq

Kf.xprjp.ivov<; ta-jjiev {H. E. iii.
38). The hearsay implied in Xeyerai
may refer equally well to the authorship as to the contents of the
^
This possibility was overlooked by that the space left between the top of
me in my first edition pp. 22, 174. My the leaf and the text varies from ^ to f of
was directed
attention to it by a remark an inch. Thus the space is quite con-
of Harnack {Z. f. A'. I.
p. 275, note i), sistent with the supposition that the title
who however incorrectly states that in A has been cut away. Moreover there is
the First Epistle has page-headings over'
a single spot at the top of the page,
the columns.' There is only one such which may have been the end of an
page-heading, which stands over the first ornamental flourish under the title, though
column as the title to the work. Having this is doubtful.
omitted to inspect the MS myself vi'ith this The photograph for the most part
view, I requested Mr E. M. Thompson represents these facts fairly well,
"
of the British Museum to look at it and In two careful and valuable articles
to give me his opinion. His report is to in the Zeitschrift f. Kii-chcngeschichte i.
p.
this effect: 264 329 sq, as well as in the prole-
sq, p.
The title to the First Epistle has small gomena to the 2nd ed. of the Patres
ornamental flourishes beneath. Between Apostolici Ft. i, p. Ixiv sq. He stated
the bottom of these and the text there this view first in a review of the edition
is a space of \ of an inch. Over the o{V>xy&ximo'i\VL\}!\^TheologischeLiteratur-
first column of the Second Epistle (where zeitungY^. 19, 1876.
the title should he, if there were any) '
Z. f. K. I.
p. 269 sq ; Prol. p. Ixiv,
the top of the leaf is cut obliquely so note 2.
200 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
book. In other words, Eusebius does not throw any doubt on the
existence of such a work, but on its genuineness; and the language
which follows suggests that the historian was himself acquainted with it.
If the testimony of Eusebius be set aside, the earliest reference to its

contents is found in the Qiiaest. d Resp. ad Orthodoxos 74, falsely

ascribed to Justin Martyr'. This work is supposed to have been
written at the end of the fourth or beginning of the
fifth century, and,

as Harnack says, unless

appearances are deceptive, to have emanated
all

from the Syro-Antiochene Church". Our next direct witness in point

of date is probably the Alexandrian MS, about the middle of the fifth

century. From that time forward the testimonies are neither few nor
indistinct^
This evidence is somewhat slight but it cannot be alleged against ;

the Eastern origin of the work. Such as it is, it all emanates from the
East. Neither early nor late do we hear a single voice from the West
testifying to the existence of this Clementine writing, except such as are
mere echoes of some Greek witness. External testimony therefore,
though it
may not be worth much, is
directlyopposed to Harnack's
theory.
From the internal character of the work again Harnack draws the
same inference. He remarks on the close resemblances to the

Shepherd of Hermas, and thence infers that it must have emanated

'
ex eadem communione ac societate^.' Thus he makes it a product
of the Church of Rome.
If these resemblances had referred to any peculiarities of the Roman
Church generally, or of the Shepherd of Hermas in particular, the
argument would have been strong. But this is not the case. The
most striking perhaps is the doctrine of the heavenly Church ( 14).
But the passage, which is quoted in my notes, from Anastasius shows
that this distinction of the celestial and the terrestrial Church, so far

from being peculiar, was a common characteristic of the earliest

Christian writers. And the statement of Anastasius is borne out by

extant remains, as will appear from parallel passages also cited there.

Again the pre-incarnate Son is spoken of in both documents as 'Spirit';

but here also, though such language was repugnant to the dogmatic
precision of a later age, the writers of the second century and of the

^
^
See I.
p. 178 sq, and the notes on The references in my notes seem to
16. show that it was known to a very early
^
See the article by Gass in Illgen's writer, the author of Apost. Const, i vi.
^
Zeitschr.f.d. hist. Theol. 1842, iv. p. 143 Prol. p. Ixx sq: comp. Z. f. K. i.

sq, quoted by Harnack Z.f. K. i.

p. 274. pp. 340, 344 sq, 363.
 AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 20i

earlier part of the third constantly use it without misgiving (see the
'
note on 9). Again both writings speak of baptism as the seal,' and
the exhortation to purity of hfe takes the form of an injunction to 'guard
the seal.' But in we have an image which is common
this case likewise
in Christian writers of the second century (see the note on 7). Nor
are other coincidences wanting, though less striking than these.
On the other hand the two writings present marked contrasts on
points of special prominence. There is a wide divergence for instance
between the rigid, almost Encratite, view of the relations between the
sexes which our Clementine author enunciates \ and the reasonable
position of Hermas, which led the fierce Tertullian to denounce him as
pastor moechorum^.' And again the difference of language regarding
the relations of the two covenants is equally great. I cannot indeed

regard the author of the Shepherd as a Judaizer, any more than I

could regard our Clementine writer as a Marcionite but the tendency :

of the one is to see in the Church a development of the Synagogue,

whereas the other delights to set them in sharp contrast. And alto-
gether it may be said that the points of difference in the two documents
are more fundamental than the points of coincidence.

(iii) The third question, relating to the date and authorship, receives
some illustration from the newly discovered ending, though not so much
as might have been hoped. Generally speaking the notices in this
portion confirm the view which was indicated in my first edition, that
itbelongs to the first half of the second century, nor do they contain
anything that is adverse to this view. Harnack, as the result of a
^
12 toOto Xe^et 'iva, d5e\(f)bs k.t.X. rrj /xe\\oij(rr] aov ddeXcp-^, as showing
On the other hand Hennas (Aland, iv. i) that Hermas looked upon the single life

writes 'Evr^Wofjiai aot, ^vXaaaeLv

(prjai, as the ideal state,and he concludes that
T7JJ' dyveiav Kal fxi) dva^aiviru aov eiri neither writer 'thought of stopping mar-

Ti]p Kapdlav irepl yvfaiKos dWorpias rj riage among Christians for the present.'

irepl TTopvelas tivos 97 wepl towvtuv tcvwu It is not clear what the words in Vis. ii. 2

6/jLoiundTUi> wovtjpCbv TovTo yap iroiQiv may mean nor again is it certain that
;

dfiapriav p.eyd\rjv epyd^yj- ttjs 5e crrji our Clementine preacher intended to en-
fivrifjLoi'e^wv wdvTore yvvaiKos ovdi- force an absolute rule or to do more than
wore dp.apT-qaeis. In this same sec- give counsels of perfection. But the fact
tion the husband is enjoined to take back remains that the direct language of the
into his society the wife who has been one is in favour of latitude, of the other

unfaithful, and just below ( 4) second in favour of restraint,

"
marriages are permitted to Christians, TertuU. de Pudic. 10 'scriptura Pas-

though the greater honour is assigned toris quae sola moechos amat...adultera et
to those who remain in widowhood. On ipsa et inde patrona sociorum,' ib. 20 'illo

the other hand Harnack (Z. /. K. i.

apocrypho Pastore moechorum.'
p. 348) quotes Vis. ii. 2 rj; avp-^ii^ aov
202 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

thorough examination of the whole epistle, sets the limits of date as

A.D. 130 160; and, emanated from Rome (as he supposes to
if it

have been the case), he thinks that it must have been written within
the first two decades of i.e. within a.d. 130
this period,
150^
This view is were necessary to mention any limits
reasonable. If it

of date, where so much uncertainty exists, I should name a.d. 120 140;
but, as there is nothing in the work which militates against a still
earlier date, so again it is impossible to affirm confidently that it

might not have been written a few years later. The two main points
in which the recently recovered portion strengthens the existing data
for determining the age of the document are these.
First. We are furnished with additional information respecting
the relations of the author to the Canon of the New Testament. He
distinguishes between the Old and New Testament : the former he
' ' '

styles the Books,' the Bible (ra /Si/SXlo), while the latter (or a part
of designated 'the Apostles' ( 14).
it)
is This distinction separates
him by a broad line from the age of the Muratorian writer, of Irenseus,
and of Clement of Alexandria, i.e. from the last quarter of the second
century. The fact also that he uses at least one apocryphal Gospel,
which we can hardly be wrong in identifying with the Gospel of the
Egyptians (see the notes on 12), apparently as an authoritative
document, points in the same direction. The writers just mentioned
are the acceptance of our four Canonical Gospels alone,
all explicit in

as the traditional inheritance of the Church. This argument would be

very strong in favour of an early date, if we could be quite sure that our
homily was written by a member of the Catholic Church, and not by
some sectarian or half-sectarian writer. On this point there is perhaps
room for misgiving, though the former seems the more probable
supposition. The general acceptance of this homily and its attribution
to Clement certainly point to a Catholic origin ;
and in its Christology

also it is Catholic as opposed to Gnostic or Ebionite, but its Encratite

tendencies (not to mention other phenomena) might suggest the

opposite conclusion.
'

On the other hand our preacher quotes as scripture ( 6) a saying '

which appears in our Canonical Gospels. But this same passage is

quoted in the same way in the Epistle of Barnabas, which can hardly
have been written many years after a.d. 120 at the very latest, and may
have been written much earlier; and even Polycarp ( 12), if the Latin
text may be trusted, cites Ephes. iv. 26 as 'scripture.' Stronger in the same
^
Z. f. K. I.
p. 363 ; comp. Prol. to be of Roman origin, he places it not

p. Ixxiii sq (ed. 2), where, supposing it later than a.d. 135140 (145).
 AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 203
direction is the fact that in the newly recovered portion our anonymous
author introduces a saying of our Lord in the Gospels with the words
'
God saith ( 13), having immediately before referred to 'the Oracles of
'

God '
in this same connexion, and that he elsewhere describes the
reading of the Scriptures as the voice of the God of truth speaking to
' '

the congregation ( 19). As regards this latter passage however we do

not know whether the scriptural lessons which had preceded the delivery
of this homily were taken from the Old or from the New Testament.

Secondly. The relations of the preacher to Gnosticism furnish an

indication of date though not very precise. He attacks a certain type
of this heresy, but it is still in an incipient form. The doctrinal point on
which he especially dwells is the denial of the resurrection of the body,
or (as he states it) the 'resurrection of this flesh' ( 8, 9, 14, 16). As
the practical consequence of this denial, the false teachers (10 KaKoSi-
Sao-KaXowres) were led to antinomian inferences. They inculcated an
indifference (aSta<^opta) with regard to fleshly lusts, and they permitted
their disciples to deny their faith in times of persecution. This anti-
nomian teaching denounced by the preacher. But his polemic against
is

Gnosticism does not go beyond this. There is no attack, direct or

indirect, on the peculiar tenets of Valentinus and the Valentinians, of
Marcion, or even of Basilides. And not only so, but he even uses
language with regard to the heavenly Church which closely resembles
the teaching of Valentinus respecting the son Ecclesia (see the note
on 14), and which he would almost certainly have avoided, if he had
written after this heresiarch began to promulgate his doctrine ^ In like
manner the language in which he sets the Church against the Synagogue
would probably have been more guarded, if it had been uttered after
Marcion had published his Antitheses in which the direct antagonism
of the Mosaic and Christian dispensations was maintained. As it is a
reasonable inference from the near approaches to Valentinian language
in the Ignatian Epistles that they were written in the pre- Valentinian

epoch ^, seeing that the writer is a determined opponent of Gnosticism,

and would not have compromised himself by such language after it had
been abused, so also the same inference may be drawn here.
These considerations seem to point to a date not later than a.d. 140:
and altogether the topics in this
homily suggest a very primitive, though
not apostolic, age of the Church. Whether we regard the exposition of
doctrine or the polemic against false teachers or the state of the Christian

Z.f. K. i. pp. 359, 360.

^
This argument drawn from the rela-
^
tion of the writer to Gnosticism is justly See Ignat. and Polyc. i.
p. 374, ed. i
;

insisted upon by Harnack Prol. p. Ixxii, p. 385, ed. 2.

204 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
society or the relation to the Scriptural Canon, we cannot but feel that
we are confronted with a state of things separated by a
wide interval
from the epoch of Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria. At the same
time other arguments have been alleged in favour of an early date, which
will not bear the stress that has been laid upon them. Thus it is said
that the preacher betrays no knowledge of the writings of S. John, or pos-

sibly even of S. Paul'. As regards S. John, I have called attention to an

indication that our author was not unacquainted with the Fourth Gospel

(see the note on 17), though the inference is not certain. As regards
S. Paul, I cannot see any probable explanation of his appeal to 'the Apo-

stles' as supporting his doctrine respecting the heavenly Church, except

that which supposes him to be referring to S. Paul, and more especially
to the Epistle to the Ephesians not to mention echoes of this Apostle's

language elsewhere in this homily I But even if it be granted that he

shows no knowledge of the writings of either Apostle, does it follow
that he had none ? What numbers of sermons and tracts, published in
the name of authors living in this nineteenth century, must on these

grounds be relegated to the first or second And again, if he says !

nothing about episcopacy does it follow that he knew nothing about

"*,

it, and therefore must have written before this institution existed ?
This argument again would, I imagine, remove to a remote antiquity

a large portion, probably not less than half, of the theological literature
of our own age.

But, while criticism suggests probable or approximate results

with regard to the locality and the date, it leaves us altogether in the
dark as respects the authorship; for the opinions maintained by the
three editors who have discussed this question since the recent dis-

covery of the lost ending, must, I venture to think, be discarded. All

three aHke agree in the retention of Clement as the author, but under-
stand different persons bearing this name.

(i) In the first place Bryennios (p. pv&) maintains that the homily
is the work of none other than the famous Clement whose name it
bears, the bishop of Rome". This view however has nothing to recom-

^
Harnack Prol. p. Ixxiii, Z. f. K. i. taken from the Old Testament) are ano-
p. 361 sq. He regards it as vmcertain, nymous, this fact can hardly surprise us.
^
though probable, that our author had See the notes on 14.
^
read S. Paul's Epistles. At the same Harnack Prol. p. Ixxii, Z. f. K. i.
p.
time he considers it
strange that S. 359.
^
Paul's name is not mentioned. As most This had been the view of Cotelier,
of our author's quotations (even when Bull, Galland, Lumper, and others; who
 AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 205

mend and has found no favour with others. Indeed all the arguments
it,

which, even when we possessed it only in a mutilated form, were suf-

ficient to deter us from ascribing it to the author of the genuine epistle

or indeed to any contemporary, are considerably strengthened, now that

we have it
complete.
(i) The waiter delights to identify himself and his hearers with
Gentile Christianity. He speaks of a time when he and they worshipped
stocks and stones, gold and silver and bronze ( i). He and they are
prefigured by the prophet's image of the barren woman who bore many
more children than she that had the husband, or, as he explains it,
than the Jewish people who seem to have God ( 2). On the other
' '

hand the genuine Clement never uses such language. On the contrary
he looks upon himself as a descendant of the patriarchs, as an heir of
the glories of the Israelite race and (what is more important) he is
;

thoroughly imbued with the feelings of an Israelite, has an intimate

knowledge of the Old Testament Scriptures (though not in the original
tongue), and is even conversant with the apocryphal literature of the
race and with the traditional legends and interpretations. In short
his language and tone of thought proclaim him a Jew, though a
(ii) On the difference
Hellenist, in style I do not lay great stress ;

because, where there is much play for fancy, there is much room
also for self-deception, and criticism is apt to become hypercritical.
Yet I think it will be felt by all that the language of this Second

Epistle more Hellenic and less Judaic, though at the same time more
is

awkward and less natural, than the First, (iii) The argument from the
theology is stronger than the argument from the style, but not very
strong. There is a more decided dogmatic tone in the Second
Epistle
than in the First. More especially the pre-existence and divinity of
Christ are stated with a distinctness ( i, 9) which is wanting in the

First, and in a form which perhaps the writer of the First would have
hesitated to adopt, (iv) The position of the writer with respect to the
Scriptures is changed. In the First Epistle Clement draws his
admonitions and his examples chiefly from the Old Testament. The
direct references to the evangelical history are very few in comparison.
On the other hand in the Second Epistle the allusions to and quotations
from gospel narratives (whether canonical or apocryphal) very decidedly
preponderate. This seems to indicate a somewhat later date, when
gospel narratives were more generally circulated and when appeal could

wrote without the light which the dis- the question, and still regarded it as an

covery of the lost ending has thrown on epistle.

2o6 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

safely be made to a ^uritten Christian literature. This last argument

more especially has received a large accession of strength by the re-
covery of the lost ending, and would be conclusive in itself The gulf
which separates our preacher from the genuine Clement in their respective
relations to the New Testament Scriptures (see above, p. 202) has been
widened by the additional evidence.

(2) On the other hand Hilgenfeld (p. xlix, ed. 2) surmises that the
author was not the Roman Clement but the Alexandrian. He argues
that our preacher was not a presbyter, but a catechist'. He points to
the passage { 19) in which (as he reads it) the duty of studying

'philosophy' is inculcated^ And, as Dodwell had done before him^,

he imagines that he sees resemblances in this sermon to the style and
thought of the Alexandrian Clement. He therefore suggests that this
was an early production of the Alexandrian father.
The inference however with regard to the preacher's office is

highly precarious, as we have seen already (p. 195) nor does ;

it

materially affectthe question. The mention of philosophy again ' '

disappears, when the passage is correctly read. The Syriac Version

shows clearly that ^tXoTrovetv is the true reading, and that cjaXoaocjieLv,
as a much commoner word, was written down first from mere inadvert-
ence by the scribe of C and
afterwards corrected by him*. Nor again
is it possible to see any closer resemblance to the Alexandrian Clement

in the diction and thoughts, than will often appear between one early

Christian writer and another ;

while on the other hand the difference
is most marked. The wide
learning, the extensive vocabulary, the
speculative power, the vigorous and epigrammatic expression, of the
Alexandrian Clement are all wanting to this sermon, which is con-
fused in thought and slipshod in expression, and is only redeemed from

common-place by its moral earnestness and by some peculiarities

of doctrinal exposition. Where there is want of arrangement in the
Alexandrian Clement, it is due to his wealth of learning and of thought.

^
See pp. xlix, 106. He explains 14. In both cases the scribe has cor-
17 ei 7dp ej'roXas ^X0A'''---t^''"6 TW et5c6- rected the word which he first wrote
\wv airocnrav /cat KaTTjxeiv as referring down, and in both the correction is
sup-
to the official position of the preacher ; ported by the Syriac Version. Hilgen-
but compare e.g. i Cor. xiv. 19, Gal. feld has consistently adopted the scribe's
vi. 6. first writing in both cases. On p. 84 he
^
See pp. xlix, 84, 106. has incorrectly given (ftiKoiroieiv as the
=*
Dissert, in Iren. i. xxix p. 53. correction in C. It should be <pC\oiro-
*
Compare the note on this word veiv.

(piKoTTOvelv 19 with that on /xeTaKrjtpeTai

 AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 207
In our author on the other hand the confusion is the result of in-
tellectual poverty. Nor again is the difference between the two writers
less wide as regards their relation to the Canon of the New Testament.
It is true that both alike quote the Gospel of the Egyptians, and (as
it so happens) the same passage from this Gospel. But this very fact
enables us to realize the gulf which separates the two. Our author
uses this apocryphal work as authoritative, and apparently as his chief

evangelical narrative ; Clement on the other hand depreciates its value

on the ground that it is not one of the four traditionally received by
the Church. Our author interprets the passage in question as favouring
ascetic views respecting the relation of the sexes : Clement on the other
hand refutes this interpretation, and explains it in a mystical sense'.

(3) Lastly; Harnack

is disposed to assign this homily neither to

the Roman
bishop nor to the Alexandrian father, but to a third person

bearing the name of Clement, intermediate in date between the two.

In the Shepherd of Hermas ( Vis. ii. 4) the writer relates how he
was directed in a vision to send a copy of his book to Clement,' and '

it is added, 'Clement shall send it to the cities abroad, for he is charged

'
with this business (Trefxxj/eL
ovv KXijfxr)'; ts TO.'; e$(D TTO/Vcis* eKetvo) yap
cTriTerpaTTTai). As Hermas is stated to have written this work during
the episcopate of his brother Pius (c. a.d. 140 155), it is urged that
the Clement here mentioned cannot have been the same with the illus-
Rome (see above, i. p- 359 sq). Thus the notice in the
trious bishop of

Shepherd gives us another Roman Clement, who flourished about the

time when our homily must have been written. Here, argues Harnack,
we have an explanation of the phenomena of the so-called Second Epistle
of Clement. If we suppose that towards the end of the third century a

homily known to have emanated from the early Church of Rome and

bearing the name of Clement was carried to the East, it would not

unnaturally be attributed to the famous bishop, and thus, being attached

^
Stro7n. iii,
13, p. 553 (quoted below, The discovery of the conclusion of the
p. 236 Julius Cassianus, like our
sq). passage however decides in favour of the
preacher, had interpreted the passage as former.

discountenancing marriage ; and Clement It is in reference to this very passage

of Alexandria controverts him, substitut- from the Gospel of the Egyptians, that
ing another interpretation. While the Clement of Alexandria urges in answer
passage was still mutilated, the opinion to Cassianus, kv rot% TrapaOedo/jL^voLS tq/mv

was tenable that was doubtful whether

it Tirrapdiv evayyekloi^ ovk ^xoMf '''^
prjTov,
our author's explanation was more closely dX\' if r(f KUT AlyvTrriovs. Thus he is
allied to the interpretation of Cassianus diametrically opposed to our preacher on
or to that of Clement of Alexandria, the one i)oint where we are able to com-

though I inclined to the latter supposition. pare their opinions.

208 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
to his genuine epistle, might easily before the close of the fourth cen-

tury be furnished with the incorrect title KXTJfxevTo<; vrpos Koptv^iovs

This view has much more to recommend it, than the two which
have been considered already. But the foundation on which it rests is

inadequate. The existence of this second Roman Clement is un-

supported; and as I have shown above (i. p. 359 sq), the reference in
Hermas must be explained in another way'.
As all these hypotheses fail us, we must be content to remain still

in ignorance of the author ;

nor is it likely now that the veil will ever
be withdrawn. The homily itself, as a literary work, is almost worth-
less. As theexample of its kind however, and as the product
earliest
of an important age of which we possess only the scantiest remains,
it has the highest value. Nor will its intellectual poverty blind us
to its true grandeur, as an example of the lofty moral earnestness and
the triumphant faith which subdued a reluctant world and laid it pros-
trate at the foot of the Cross.

The following is an analysis of the fragment :

'
My brethren, we must look on Christ as God. We must not think
mean things of Him who has been so merciful to us, who has given us
life and all things ( i). In us is fulfilled the saying that the barren
woman hath many children. The Gentile Church was once unfruitful,
but now
has a numerous offspring. We are those sinners whom Christ
came especially to save ( 2). Therefore we owe all recompense to
Him. And the return which He asks is that we should confess Him in
our deeds. The worship, not of the lips only, but of the heart, must be
yielded to Him ( 3). He has denounced those who, while they obey
Him not, yet call Him Lord. He has declared that, though they be
gathered into His bosom, He will reject them ( 4). Let us therefore
remember we
are sojourners here, and let us not fear to quit this
that
world. us call to mind His warning, and fear not those who
Rather let

kill the body, but Him who can destroy body and soul together. All

^
Hagemann (Ueber den ztueiten Brief the fiction, being the letter of recom-
des Clemens, etc. in the Theolog. Qiiaiial- mendation written in the name of the
schr. XLiii. p. 509 sq, 1861) supposed great Roman Clement. So far he antici-
that this is the letter mentioned by Hermas pated the theory of Harnack.
(
J^is. ii.
4). He regarded it as part of
 AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 209

things earthly we must hold foreign to us ( 5). On this there must be

no wavering. We cannot serve two masters. This world and the
other are deadly foes. It must be our choice to do Christ's will.

Even Noah, Job, and Daniel, could not have rescued their own children
from destruction. How shall we then, if we keep not the baptismal
seal intact, present ourselves in God's kingdom? ( 6). The lists are
open ;
the struggle approaches. Let us crowd thither to take our
part. Let us fight to win the immortal chaplet. But, so doing, we
must observe the laws of the we would escape chastisement.
contest, if
A horrible fate awaits those who break the seal ( 7). Now is the
time for repentance. Now we can be moulded like clay in the hands
of the potter. After death it will be too late. If we keep not small

things, how shall we be trusted with great? If we guard not the seal

intact, how shall we inherit eternal life ? ( 8).'

Deny not, that men shall rise in their bodies. As Christ came in
'

the flesh, so also shall we be judged in the flesh. Let us give ourselves
to God betimes. He reads our very inmost thoughts. To those who
do His will Christ has given the name of brothers ( 9). This will let
us ever obey. If we fear men and choose present comfort, we shall

purchase brief pleasure at the price of eternal joy. They who lead
others astray herein are doubly guilty ( 10). We must not falter. The
it foretells how the
prophetic word denounces the double-minded ;

course of things is maturing to its consummation, as the vine grows

and ripens. God is faithful ; and, as He has promised, so will He give
joys unspeakable to the righteous ( 11). The signs, which shall herald
the approach of His kingdom, Christ has foretold. The hvo shall be
one in universal peace. The outside shall be as the inside in strict sin-

cerity. The male shall be as the female in the cessation of all sexual

longings ( 12).'
Let us repent forthwith, that we may be forgiven, and God's name
'

may not be blasphemed by our inconsistency. When God's oracles

say one thing and we do another, they regard them as an idle tale
when God's precepts us to love our enemies and we hate one
tell

another ( 13). Fulfilling God's command, we shall be members of the

eternal, spiritual Church, which is Christ's body. This is the meaning
of the words Male and female created He them. The Church, like Christ,
was spiritual, and became flesh. This flesh we must keep pure, that we
may attain to the spiritual, the immortal ( 14).'
'Whosoever obeys thisprecept of chastity saves both himself and
the preacher. This is the only return which speaker and hearer alike
can make to their Creator. God promises an immediate answer. We
CLEM. II.
14
2IO THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
must close with it and
escape condemnation ( 15). Therefore let us
repent, while there is time, and obtain the mercy of Jesus. The Day
Cometh as a heated furnace. Heaven and earth shall melt away.
Almsgiving and love are best ; for they cover a multitude of sins ( 16).
We are commanded to convert others ;
how much more to save our
own souls. Let us not forget the preacher's lesson, when we go to our
homes. Let us meet more frequently together. The Lord will come

and gather all nations, rewarding them after their works. The worm
of the unbeliever shall never die, but the righteous shall give glory to

Him, seeing His judgments on the wicked and His faithfulness to His
servants ( 17). Let us be found among His thankful servants. In the
midst of temptations, I strive after righteousness ( 18). Give heed to
these exhortations from the Scriptures. Set an example to the young

by your obedience. Be not offended by exhortation ;

nor deterred by
present suffering. It is the price of future glory ( 19). This life is
only the arena the crown
;
shall be awarded hereafter. Else, it were a
matter of mere traffic'
'
To the one invisible God, who manifested truth and life to us

through the Saviour, be glory for ever { 20).'

 [nPOC KOPIN0IOYC B.]

I.
'A^6\(poi, ovTco^ deT rifjia^ (ppoveTv Trepi 'Irjcrov
cos Oeouj ws KpiTOv Kai ^mvtmv
Xpi(TTOu, rrepi Trepi

vEKpiav. Kai ov ZeT tjjuas fjuKpa (ppoveTv 7Tep\ Trjs orwrri-

The authorities for this title will be found on i.

pp.
[npoc KOpiN9iOYC B.]
117, 122, 131 sq.
I 7}nas\ S ; ijias C. 3 rjixas] S ; ^/uSs C.

I. 'My brethren, we must think of it with the First as respects its

Christ as God, as judge of all men. Christology, x] 8e bevrepa koX avrri vov-
It is no light crime to have mean Qeaiav koi irapalveaiv Kpeirrovos eicrayei
views of Him by whom we were ^iov Koi iv apxf) Qeov rov Xpiarov
called and who suffered for us. What KTjpvaaei see the notes on
:
2, 36,

worthy recompense can we pay to 58, of the First Epistle, and the re-
Him, who has given us light and marks in I.
p. 398 sq.
life, who has rescued us from the 2.
KpiTov K.T.X.] The expression
worship of stocks and stones, has occurs in Acts x. 42 (in a speech of
scattered the dark cloud that hung S. Peter) comp. 2 Tim. iv. i, i Pet.
:

over us, has brought back our stray- iv. 5. See also Barnab. 7, Polyc.
ing footsteps, and thus has called us F/n/. 2.

into being?
'

3. fiiKpa (jypove'iv']
^
to have mean
I.
'A8eX4>oL K.T.X.] The opening of views.'' The Ebionites, whom the
the epistle, as far as nadelp evfKa writer of this epistle attacks, were
is quoted
i^ixuv, by Timotheus of said to have earned the title of 'poor'
Alexandria (a.D. 457) as from the
'

by their mean and beggarly concep-

beginning of the Third Epistle,' tion of the Person of Christ see ;

'
immediately after a quotation from esp. Origen de Princ. iv. 22 (l. p. 183)
the First Epistle on Virginity' (see 01 TVT(i)\oi TTj 8iavoia E^icovalni t^s
above, i. p. 181); and by Severus of nraxfl-ns Trjs 8iavoias inavvpiOi, e^icov
Antioch (c. A.D. 513 518) as 'from []V^ii] ynp (')
TTTCoxos TTapa 'E(SpaLOis
the Second Epistle to the Corinthians' ovnudCerai, C. Cels. \\. I (l. p. 385), ill

(see I.
p. 183). It is also found in Matth. t. xvi. ^ 12 (ill. p. 734) rw
more than one anonymous Syriac 'E^ioivaim Koi TTToiXf^ovTi Vfpl rrjv els
collection of excerpts (see i.
p. 185). 'lr}(Tovv TTiariv, and again in Gen. Hi
Photius {Bibl. 1
26) remarks on the Horn. 5 (II. p. 68); Euscb. H.E.
opening of this epistle, contrasting iii. 27 'E/3ta)i'ai'ot;? ravrovi oiKfiw? eVf-

14 2
212 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [I

pla^ i^luLcov'
ev rip yap (ppoveTv nfjia's fXiKpa irepl avrov,
Kai XafSeTv. Kai ol aKovovre^ w?
fjLLKpa eXTTL^OfJiev

Trepi fiLKpwv \afjiapTavov(TLVj

Kai r^/ieis] dfiaprdvofievj ouk
eidores ttoOev eK\t]6t]l^v Kai vtto tivo^ Kai eU 6v tottov,
Kai oa-a vTrefJieivev 'lri<rov^ Xpia-ro^ TraOeiv eveKa riiiwv. 5

Tiva ovv iTjueT'S

auTW SwVo^ei/ avTifiia-diav ; i] riva

apiov ov rnjuv avTO^i ehwKev ; Trocra 3e avrw

Kapirov
2 XajSeTc] A; dTro\aj3e7v C. The reading of S is uncertain, for 7lp (the word
used here) occurs elsewhere indifferently as a rendering of both Xajx^aveiv and awo-
\afipdveiv, e.g. below 8, 9, ii. ws Trepi] CS Sever Timoth; wawep A.

3 dixapTdvovaLU, Kai ^/^ers] S ; om. AC see the lower note.

: 7 Kapwov] AC ;

add. offeremus illi S. This however does not perhaps imply any additional words

(pTjIii^ov
01 TvpaiToi TTTax^s i^ai TaTreivws ward and misplaced. Young sug-
Tct Trepi Tov XpicTTov 8o^d^ovTaSi Red. gested KaiToc which others have
Theol. i. 14 ot TrpatTOK^pvKei 'E^icavaiovs adopted, but this is not the particle
oovofxu^ov ''E^pdiKT] (jicovfj 7rTa))(ovs rrjv required. The Syriac quotations of
didvoiav aTTOKakovvTes tovs eva fxev Qeov Timotheus and Severus have ^ and
Xeyovras elSevai Koi tov (Tcorfjpos to when we hear^as though the article

crafia fifi apvovp-ivovs ttjv 8e tov vlov were absent from their text ; but,
BeoTTjTa eldoTus,
fxri
with Other pas- allowance being made for the license

sages Schliemann C/e-

collected in of translation, no stress can be laid
ment. p. 471 sq. Origen's language on this fact. Photius {Bibl. 126)
perhaps does not necessarily imply remarks on the looseness and in-
that he gives this as a serious account consequence of expression in this
of the term, but only that they were Second Epistle (or rather in the two
fitly called 'poor.' Eusebius how- epistles, but he must be referring
ever, mistaking his drift, supposes especially to the Second), to. ev
this name to have been a term of avTois voTjfiaTa ippip-fiivn ttcos Kai ov

reproach imposed upon these here- a-vvexfj TTJV aKoXovdiaf VTvrjpxe (fivXaT-
tics by the orthodox instead of ;
TovTa. Several instances of this will
being, as doubtless it was and as be noted below, and this passage,
perhaps Origen knew to be, self-as- it ifthe Greek text be correct, furnishes
sumed in allusion to their voluntary another illustration but the Syriac ;

poverty. The idea of a heresiarch comes to the rescue by inserting the

named Ebion, which is found first in words which I have placed in brackets
Tertullian {de Praescr. 33, and else- and removes the difficulty.
where), is now generally allowed to 6. dvTifiia-diav] The word occurs
be a mistake. Rom. i.
27, 2 Cor. 13, Theoph. ad
vi.

2. ol oKovoi/re?]
'
we who Jiear^ Aidol. \\. g. Though apparently not
according to the text of the Greek common, it is a favourite word with

MSS. For the article compare Clem. our author see just below and
; 9,
Rom. 6 at duQiVfli ro) (r<op.aTi, and 1 1. The sentiment is taken from Ps.
see below ig nrj ayavaKTV)p,ev ol Cxvi. 12 TL avTanobcoaw rw Kvpia k.t.\.;
'

a(To(f)oi.; but the expression is awk- 8. oaia] mercies, kindnesses^ as it

 I]
AN ANCIENT HOMILY, 213

ocpeiXofdev ocria; to (pws yap rifjuv e')(^apLcraTO,

ws 7raTt)p
vlou^ r\lj.a^ 7rpo(Tt]yopev(r6v, ctTroWviuevovs T^/ua^ ecrcoo'ei/.

10 TTOLOv ovv aivov avTco hwcriiofiev rj idiarSov dvTi/uio'dia^ cov

eXa(^OfJiev'^ Trrjpoi
bvTe^ Trj diavola, Trpoo'KVVouvTe^ \Wov
Kai pv\a KUi '^pvcTOU Kai apyvpov Kai -^oKkov, epya
dvOpcoTTUiV Kai 6 /3io^ fj/uLwv 6A0? aWo ov^eu tjv el jjnq

davaro^. didavpuicnv ovv wepiKeijuevoi

Kai TOiavTt]^

in the Greek text. 5e] A ; yap S om. C. ;

8 ocpeiXofj.ev'] o<pi\o/ji,ev A.
10 TToTov ou;'] C; TTOLOvv A; TTOiov S: see above, l.
p. 144. avrc^ Suicrufiev'}

A; 8u(T0/j.i' avrqi C. 11 Trijpol] A; caeciS; irovrjpol C. 12 Kai xp'J'^ov]

A; xp^'^o" (om. /cat) CS. ^pyo.] AC; ^pyov S. 13 dWo ovdiv] A;

ovdii' dWo C ;
and so apparently S. 14 dfiaipuxrip] AC ;
tantam obscu-
ritatevi S.

isused in the LXX Is. Iv. 3 (quoted in 10. dci(ra>p.ev]' can we give?' The
Acts xiii. 34 Scocro) \i[uv TCI oaia AaveiS reading of C disposes of the gram-
TO. TTiaTo.) see Wolf O^r.
for Dnon : matical difficulty presented by a
P/n7o/. In a parallel passage
Tp.
1 197. future conjunctive, Scoaafxev ;
see
2 Chron. vi. 42 the LXX has to. eXe?;. Winer Gramm. xiii. p. 89 and is
In this case oe^et'Xo/iei/ will have a perhaps correct. Of all such future

pregnant sense, we have recchied conjunctives however

'
Swo-co is perhaps
and should repay^ Perhaps how- the best supported ;
see id. xiv.
ever simpler to take oo-m as
it is p. 95.
' '

religions duties (e.g. Eur. Suppl. 11. nrjpol opTfs K.r.X.] Arist. E/h.
368 00-ta TTf^l Qiovi^. The distinction A^ic. i. 10 rot J pr) TTeTrrjpdapevoLS irpos dpe-
between ovia what is due to God PtolemcEUS ad Flor. (in Epiphan.
' '

Ti]v,
and diKuia what is due to men
' '
is as Hacr. xxxiii. 3, p. 217) pr] povov to Trjs
old as Plato {Gorg. p. 507 b) and '^vx^s oppa aWa Kai to tov crapaTos
runs through Greek literature comp. :
TTfTrrjpapevov. In the New Testament
Trench N. T. Syn. 2nd ser. xxxviii, TTrjpovv, occur occasionally
niipaxTLs,
and Steph. TJies. s. vv. biKaios and as various readings for irapovv, iraipco-
oo-tos-. See also below, 5, 6. ais, but are not well supported see :

a5s TTUTTip K.r.X.] The reference Fritzsche liofn. ll. p. 451 sq.
is perhaps to Hosea ii. i kul tarat Trpo(TKvvovvTes K.r.X.] The writer
iv TO) roTTO) oil
eppedrj avTo2s Ov Xaos of this epistle therefore is plainly
fxov vfie7,s, eKel KXrjdtjaovTai viol Qfov a Gentile Christian comp. 2 ?; :

CcovTos, more especially as applied eKKkijaia rjp^v, and the introduction

by S. Paul Rom. ix. 26. See also p. 205.
^
the quotation in 2 Cor. vi. 18 koI 13. Their /Si'os was not fm^
o /3toy]

eaofjLai, vp-lv fh rrarepa Koi vfiels eaeade but QuvaTos: see the note on Ign. Rom.
p,oi etf v'lovi KCLi 6vyaTpas (a combina- 7. Comp. I Tim, v. 6 ^uxra TtdvrjKfv.
tion of 2 Sam. vii. 14 and Is. xliii. 6), See also the passage of S. Augustine
and I
J oh. iii.
noTmvrjv dydnrju r I'Sere quoted by Harnack, Co7if. i. 6 'in is-
8eda)Kev ^pdv 6 TraTTjp iva TiKva Qeoi tam dico vitam mortalem an mortem
K\rj6u>p,iV. vitalem nescio.'
214 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [I

d^Xuo^ 'yefjLOVTe<s eV r// opaaeL, dve^Xe^afjiev dTroBefxevoL

6K6LVO 6 TrepLKeifjieda vecpo-s Ttj avTOv deXnorei. tjXetjo'ev

yap rifjid^ Kal cnrXayx^^^^^^^ ea-wcrev, deacrafj.evo^ ev

rifMV iroXXriv 7rXdvr]v Kal dTrcoXeiav, Kal /urjdefjiiav iXTrioa

exovra's ccoTr^pia's, el fjiri tyiv Trap avTOv. eKaXeaev 5

yap tjiud^ ovK bvTas Kal tjOeXtjcrei' e'fc

jur]
ovtos eivai

rjjud^.

II. Ey^PANBHTI, CTeipA H of TIKTOYCA" pfi^ON KAI

BOHCON, H OYK OjAlNOyCA, OTI HOAAA TA TEKNA THC epHMOY

maAAon h THC exoycHc ton ANApA. 6 eiirev efc^pANGHTi 10

2 T^ avTOv 6e\r)(TeL\ A ; ry, de\ri<rei avrod C ;

volimtate nostra S, as if avrdv.

4 iroKKriv 7rXd;'7;i'] oinnem [=:fantui. = To<xa.{nriv) errorem mult am S.

AC; Jmnc
eXTTida ^x^"'''"-^] C eXiriSavexovTea A. S evidently read as C, though it trans-
;

lates by a finite verb, et quod ne una quidem spes saltitis sit nobis. 6 ya,p\
AC; Se S. e/c ^ij] A; iK tov /mt] C. 8 evcppa.vdriTt.'] AC; add.

I. dve^Xe'^ajiev] Comp. 9. TOV firj ovTOs eis to eivai Ta iravra,

cmoBeixfvoi K.T.\.^ The language Clem. Horn, iii.
32 tw to. p.r\ ovTa els to

here, though not the thought, is elvai (TVCTTTjcrafjLeva).

coloured by Heb. xii. i too-ovtov II. 'For what is the meaning of
exovres irepiKeijievov t^jjuv ve(^os the scripture, Rejoice thou barren
fjLaprvpcov, oyKov aTrodefifvoi Travra that bearest not? It has been ful-
K.T.X. For the construction TrfpiKelaOai filled in us the Gentile Church,
Ti ''to be enveloped in or surrounded which is even now more numerous
by a tiling^ see Acts xxviii. 20, Heb. than the Jewish. In like manner also
V. 2. it iswritten elsewhere, / came not to
5. 'ixovra^ SC. jjjitas.
If this read- call just me7t but sinners. Such
ing be correct it is perhaps go- sinners were we.'
verned by ^eao-a/xei/oy rather than 8. Ev(f)pdv6T]Ti K.T.X.] From the
by 'icraa-e, ''and this thous'h we LXX Is. liv. I, word for word. See
had no hope.' But exovres may be the notes on Galatians iv. 27. The
the right reading after all in which : same application is also made in
case a word or words may have fallen Justin Apol. i.
53, p. 88 C. Philo also
out from the text or this may be one
; allegorizes this text {qtiod Omn. Prob.
of the awkward expressions to which lib. 2, II. p. 449), but in a wholly dif-

allusion has been already made (on ferent way.

oi aKovovres). II. fj eKKX-qcria jJ/lkui/]
i.e. the Gen-
eKoXeaev yap k.t.X.] Rom. iv. 17 tile Church, called 6 Xaos ijfjiav below.
'I
KoXovvTos TO. p.rj ovra (os ovra. Philo Our seems so
author's application
de Great. Princ. 7 (11. p. 367) ra yap far to differ from S. Paul's, that he
ovra eKoXeaev els to eivai makes the contrast between Gentile
p.r) :
COmp.
Hermas Vis. I. i nrla-as e/c tov juj)
and Judaic Christendom, whereas in
6W0S Ta ovra, Mand. I
TToiridas eK the Apostle it is between the new and
 "] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 215

cTeipA H oy TiKTOYCA, f//xa? eiTrev crreTpa yap 7]v tj

iKK\t](rla tov dodfjvai avTrj reKva.

rtfitav irpo
6 de eiirev
BoHcoN oy'k oiAiNoycA, TOVTO
H XeyEL' Ta^ Trpoaev^a^
tijucoi' aVAws dvacpepeiv irpo^ tov Qeov jut], W9 al
15 lahivovo'ai, eyKaKM/ULev. 6 he eiirev on hoAAa ta tekna
THC epHMOY maAAon h thc exoycHC ton ANApA, eireL
eptj/uio^

edoKEi eivuL oltto tov Oeov 6 Aaos t^^cou, vvvl he ttlct-

Tev(ravTe<s 7r\eL0ve<s eyevofieSa tmv hoKOvvTwv e^eiv

Qeov. Kal ETepa he ypacpr) Xeyei otl Oyk hAGon ka-
ydp, X^ei, S. PV^ov] AC; Kal prj^ov S. 12 ijfiQv] AC; om. S.

13 ras vpoaevxas] AC; to. irpbs ras irpoaevxO'i (or to. irphi eiJxas, as suggested
by Bensly) S. See above, i.
p. 141. 14 ai ihSlvovaai] AC; 17
u5ipovaa S.

15 eyKaKw/j.ei'] A; iKKaKU/Mev C. 17 toO] A; om. C. 19 de] AS;

om. C.

the old dispensation. Justin uses the Tovs i^ fdvau juiv dirh 'lovdaiav koI
text in the same way as our Pseudo- ^afxapecov 'S-piariavovs eldores.
Clement. Tcov BoKovvrav e)(fif Sew] Hil-
14. 1J.1],
cos K.T.X.] If the order of genfeld quotes from the Pracdicatio
the words be correct they can only Petri in Clem. Alex. Strom, vi. 5
mean 'let us not grow weary, as women (p. 760) /LiT^Se
Kara 'lovdaiovs cre^eaOe '

m travail
grow weary' ; but it is KOI yap eKeivoi, fiovoi, olop-evoi tov
strange that the writer should have Qeov yivcocTKeiv, ovk eTriaTavTai
confused his application of the text (comp. Orig. zu Joann. xiii. 17, iv.
by this fanciful account of jj ovk ddl- p. 226).
vovcra, of which the natural explana- 19. eVepa 8e ypa<\)r]\ Thus the
tion is For eyKaKuipiev
so obvious. Gospel, treated as a written docu-
Cotelier and other editors would sub- ment, is regarded as Scripture like
stitute eKKaKwpifV, but this is a mis- the Old Testament. Comp. Barnab.
take, as authority is against enica- 4, and possibly i Tim. v. 18. See
Kelv and for eyKUKfiv : see the note on above, the introduction p. 202.
Galatians vi. 9. OVK ^kdov .r.X.] The quota-
17. OTTO TOV eeoC] For the pre- tion agrees exactly with S. Mark ii.

position after eprjfios comp. Jer. xxxiii 17, but might also be taken from S.
(xl). 10 (otto dvdpconav Kal KTtjvav), Matthew ix. 13 ov yap ^Kdov k.t.X.
xxxiv (xli). 22 (dyro tcou KaToiKovvrcop), On the other hand in S. Luke (v. 32)
xliv (li). 2 (aTTo ivoUcjiv). The word the form is different, ovk tXrjXvda Ka-
involves a secondary idea of J'^'z/^rrt<:e, Xeaai diKaiovs aXXa dfxupTcoXovs fls

and so takes diro. fieTavoiav. Comp. also Barnab. 5 ovk

18. Tv\doves\ Writing about this r]X6ev KaXeaai, diKaiovs dXXu dfiapTOi-
same time, Justin Martyr gives a si- Xovs (where the words els p.eTdvoiav,
milar account of the greater numbers added in the late MSS, are wanting in
of the Gentile Christians: Apol.x. 53 {<), and Justin Apol. i.
p. 62 C ovk r]A-

(p. 88 B) Trkilovas
re kolX dXrjtieaTtpovs Qov K. d, a. dp,, els peTUvoiav.
2l6 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [n

AecAi AiKAi'oyc, aAAa amaptooAoyc. tovto Xeyei, oti Set

TOi)? aTToWvfJievov^ crui^eLV'

eKeivo <yap ecTTiv fj.e'ya Kal

SavfJiaarTOV, ov Ta ecTcoTa (TTrjpL^eiv

dWa ra ttitt-

TOVTa. o'vTMS Kal 6 Xpio'TO^ t]6e\tT(ri/ (rtoaai tu

dTToWu/uLeva, Kal ecruxrev ttoXXov^, i\6cov Kal KaXeaa^ 5

iljULas i]^r] dTroWvfJLevovi.

III. TocTOVTOv ovv eA.60? 7roir](TavTO<5 avTOv eU
rifj.d<s' TrpcoTOv fiev, oti i^juleT^
ol
^aivTes toT<s
v6Kpoh
6eo7s ov Ovojuev Kai ov irpoo'KVvovfjiev avToT^j dWa
eyvcojuev di avrov tov TraTspa Tfjs dXrideia^' tis rj 10

yvwci^ t] TTjOOS avTOV, r] to fxr] dpveio'dai di ov eyvcofJLev

avTOV'^ Xeyei he Kat avTO^' Ton d/woAorHCANiA Me [eNoa-

4 oi/Tws] ovrco C. Xpiarbs] AS ; Ki^ptos C. 7 ovv] AC ; om. S.

Aeos] eXatotr A. 9 Kal ov irpocrKvvovfiev aurots] AS om. C. dXXa] ;

AC S translates as if it laad read ^Tretra 5e 6'rt see above, i. p. 142.

;
10 tIs]
;

AC; Ti's 5^ S. II yvuffis] yvwaeia- A. i] irpbs avTov] AS; t^s dXrj-

dela's C see above, I. p. 127.

:
^] AC cm. S. apveladai.'] add. avrbv C.
;

The testimony of S cannot be alleged in such a case. 12 avTov] AS; om. C.

evuTTiov Tuv dvdpdnruv] AC ;
om. S. 13 auTov] AC. S adds etiaiii

4. o-wo-ai K.r.X.] Luke xix. lo r(K6^v Second Epistle^ koI 6 Kvpios Xe'-yei
o vios TOV avdpcoTTov ^rjTfjaai Kal crtoo-ai Tov opioXoy^aavTa. .TOV iraTpos .
/xou' iv
TO dnoXcoXos (compare the interpola- Tivt, 8e...Tciv ivToXwv. Cotelier (on
tion in Matt, xviii. 11), i Tim. i. 15 Clem. Rom. 14) mentions the fact,
I. X. rjkOev els tov Koarpiov dpiapTatKovs but does not give the quotation in
craxrai,. full.

in. 'Seeing then that He has been Ilov 6pLoXoyr)cravTa /c.r.X.] A free
so merciful and has brought us to quotation of Matt. x. 32 (comp. Luke
know God, wherein does this know- xii. 8).

ledge consist but in not denying Him evcoTTiov K.r.X.] The omission in S
by whom we were brought? If we isprobably correct, the words having
confess Him, He will confess us be- been inserted by scribes from a well-
fore the Father. This we must do, known evangelical passage, Luke
not with lips only but in our lives.' xii. 9. For a similar instance, where
8. ToTs veKpols deols] Wisd. xv. 1 7 S preserves the true reading, see
dvTjTos 8e cSf veKpov epyd^eTai x^P^'-^ Clem. Rom. 46. Our preacher is in
dvopLOLs' KpeiTTCovydp ecrri Tav af^acr- the habit of dropping out words in
pLUTuv avTov, a>v avTos /xef e^rjaev eKeiva his quotations, and presenting them
8e ovdeTTOTe. in skeleton.

Xeyei 8e Kat avTos /c.r.X.] Nicon

'
12. 14. f'av ovv] zy after all, if only.^
(see above on the First Epistle 14, For similar instances of the use of ovv
15) quotes this passage from the see Hartung Partikcl. ll. 11.
 IV] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 217
niON TOON ANGpOOnCONl], OMOAorHCOi) AyTON eNobniON TOY HATpdc

Moy. ovTO^ ovv icTTiv 6 juicrOo^ rj/utov, eau ovv o/ulo-

15 \oyt](T(v/uu di ov ecrcodtjimev. ev tlvl ^e avrov ofj-oXo-

you/ueu', ev tw TroieTv a Aeyet kul irapaKOveiv aurov

fjir)

Tiav evToXwv, kul /ut] /uiovov xeiAeciN ayton timan clWa

el oAhc KApAiAc KAi 62 oAhc thc Aianoiac. \eyeL ^6 Kal
ev Tuj 'Ha'aLa' '0 Aaoc oytoc to?c xeiAeciN /we tima, h Ae
20 KApAiA AYTooN noppoo AnecTiN An' eMoy.
IV. Mi] fjiovov ovv avTov KaXcHjuev Kvpiov, ou

yap TOUTO cwarei rlfjici^, \eyeL yap' Oy ttac 6 AerooN

MOi, Kypie, Kypie, C(jo0hc6Tai, aAA' 6 noic2)N thn AiKAiocyNHN.

wcTTe ouVf dhe\(poi, ev rots epyoi's avTov ofJLoXoywfxeVf

ego {Kayuj) as in Matt. x. 32. 14 fiov\ AC; om. S. 6 fuaObs rjfiQv]

AC; Dierccs magna S. ouy] A; om. CvS. 17 omtov ri.ixd,v\ AC; dcbe-
mus invocare {vocare) cum S, as if d<pei\ofj.v axirbv iTriKaXeladai {KoXeiv). 18 rrjs]

A; om. C. dLavoias] AC ; dwd/ieui; S. 5e] yap AS; om. C. 19 6]

o (i.e. ov) A. 20 avTwv] AS ;
oJroO C. direaTiv] A; aireaTii' (or eariv)

S; direaTTji' C. 21 ovv] AS (?) ; om. C. 22 adocrei] AC; au^ei S.

24 avTov} avTOJv A. 6/ioXo7W/xej'] A ; d/xoXoyqcrufxev C.

18. e'l uXt]s K.T.X.] A reference lessness. We

must not fear men
ultimately to Deut. vi. 5 ;
but as both but God. For Christ Himself has
words 8iavoias and KupSlas do not warned us that, though we be His
seem to occur in tiiat passage in any most familiar friends, yet if we do
one text of the lxx, we must suppose not His commandments. He will re-
that the writer had in his mind the ject us.'
saying rather as it is quoted in the 22. Oi; nas 6 Xeymv k.t.X.] From
Gospels, esp. Mark xii. 30 e^ oXrjs Matt. vii. 21 oO nas 6 Xeyav fxoi, Ku-
TrjS Kapdlas aov koI i^ oXrjs Trjs \j/'vxv^ pie, Kv'pte, etueXevcrerat els rfju ^aai-
crov Kai e^ oXt]s rrjs diavoias aov Koi e^ Xfiav Twv ovpavav, dXX' 6 noiav ru
oXtjs TTJs laxvos aov (comp. Matt. xxii. 6eXT]fia Tov TTOTpos p.ov rov ev vols
S7, Luke X. 27). ovpavois (comp. Luke vi. 46 quoted
19. 'O Xaos ovTos K.r.X.] From Is. below). Justin {Apol. i. 16, p. 64 a)
xxix. modified by the form in
13, gives the exact words of S. Matthew
which it is quoted in the Gospels ; (except ovxi for ov). Clem. Horn. viii.

see the note on the genuine Epistle 7 has ri p,e Xeyeis Kvpie, Kvpie, koi ov
of Clement 15, where again it is TToiels a Xe'-yw ;
which closely resembles
quoted in almost exactly the same Luke vi. 8e p.f (caXfire, Kvpie,
46 ri
form as here. Kvpie, Koi ov TTOielre a Xeyio; COmp.
IV. not enough to call Him
'It is Clem. Horn. viii. 5 ovhe iv rc5 iviareveiv
Lord. We
must confess Him by our 8i8acrKaXois Kiii Kvpiovs avTOVs Xeyeiii
works, by love and purity and guile- 1] aoiTn^pia yiverai.
2l8 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [iv

eV TM dyairav eavTOvSj eV tm fit] /uLoixacrdaL jULri^e

KUTaXaXeiv aWriXoiv jmride ^tjXovv,

dXX' iyKparel^
eii/ai, eXer]fiova, ctyaOov^' kul avfjLTraa'^eLV dXXtjXois

ocpeiXofjiev,
kul (piXapyvpeTv.
jiit]
iv tovtol^ toT^ epyoi^

ojuoXoycojuev ovtov kul jur] ev toTs euavrioi^' Kal ov 5

del i^juds
(pof^eiardaL
tov<s dv6pcu7rou<s judXXop, dXXa rov
Qeov. hia TOVTO, ravTa vfJLtav Trpacro'ovTVdv, einev 6

KvpLO^' 'Ean HTe weT eMOY cyNHrMeNoi en tco KoAnto Moy

K<\"i MH noiHTe TAC gntoAac Moy, AnoBAAo) YMAC ka) epc2)
I a/yairav AC ;
add. toi>s TrXrialov Tjfxuv S
(lis : see above. 4 6(pl\opi.ev]
o<f>i.\o/iev A. 7 Vfji.u3i>] A; rjfiuv CS. 8 Kipios] AC; Irjaovs S.
eV T(^ KoXirq) /xov] AC; m uno sinu S. 9 Trot^re] A; TrotijcrijTe C. 12 Trap-

I. iir]hi. KaTokakfiv K.r.X.] James Aeyo) vfjiiv, ovk oida [wjnas] TTodev iare'
iv. II fJ-r)
KaraXaXelre dXXr]\ci)i'. See aTr6<TTT}Te an e/xoO Trdvres ipyarai a8i-
also Hermas Afand. 2 npatTov jikv Kias. This is much closer than Matt,
fxrjdevos KaraXaXei, with the whole vii. 23. The denunciation is taken
section. from Ps. vi. 9 OTrooTjyre an ifiov ndv-
3. dyadovs]
''

kmdly, bencficcntil Tes oi ipya^ofxevoi ttjv dvofiiav. Com-

as Tit. ii.
5, i Pet. ii. 18; and so pro- pare the quotations in Justin Apol.
bably I Thess. iii. 6. i. 16 64 b) (p. KCLi Tore ipa> avTols'

5. ov hii i]fjias K.T.X.] Comp. Acts 'Ano^^apeLTe dn ijxov, ipydrai rfjs avo-
iv. 19, V. 29. p.ias, Dial. 76 (p. 301 d) /cat ip5> avToii-
8. 'Eav rJTe k.t.X.] Not found in 'Avaxiopelre an ijj.ov. See WestCOtt
the canonical Gospels, and perhaps Canon p. 125 sq (2nd ed.).
taken from the Gospel of the Egyp- V.
'
We must break loose from
tians, which is quoted below ; see The Lord has
the ties of this world.
5,8,12. The image and expressions warned us, that here we shall be as
are derived from Is. xl. 11 tw ^paxlovi lambs among wolves; that we have
avTovavva ^ei apvas Kai iv tm KoXiroi cause to fear the perdition of our souls
avTov ^aarda-fi. The latter clause, rather than the murder of our bo-
though absent in BSA, is found in dies. Our life here is brief and
several Mss (see Holmes and Par- transitory ; our life in heaven is eter-
sons), in other Greek Versions, and nal rest. Therefore should we look
in the original and must be sup- ; upon ourselves as aliens to the
posed to have been known to the world.'
'
writer of the Gospel in question. For 12. napomiav] Tr]v07(r sojourn-
'
the expression awdyetv iv KoXna, /<? ing 'our dalliance with': see
in,'' i.e.

gather in the lap^ see Lxx Prov. the note on napoiKovvres in the open-
XXX. 4 (xxiv. 27). The image is car- ing of the First Epistle.
ried out in the language of the next 15. "Eaeade k.t.X.] This is a close
chapter, ea-eade los dpvia k.t.X. parallel to Luke x. 3 dnoa-TeXXo) vfids
10.
vTrdyere k.t.X.] The parallel CCS apvas iv Xvkwv (comp. Matt.
p,i(rco

passage in S. Luke xiii. 27 runs koI ipd, X. 16). As however Peter is not men-
 V] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 219

ioY'w?N" YTTArere An' eMoy, oyK oiAa ymac noGeN ecre, eppATAi
ANOMIAC.
V. 'Odev, dhe\(poi, KaraXel^avTe^ Tr]v wap-
OlKiaV TOV KOCTfJ-OV TOVTOV TTOLfJO'CdfXev TO deXrjfJia TOV

KaXeaavTO^ nfJLci^,e^eXBeiv e'/c rov

Kai jur) (pof^rjOcojixev

i^ KOCTjULOV TOVTOV. XeyEi yap 6 Kvpio<s "EcecQe <hc ApNiA eN

Mecco AyKooN' aTTOKpiQeh he 6 flsTpo's uvtm Xeyer 'Ean
'

OYN AlACnApAf OOCiN 01 AyKOI TA ApNIA; eLTTeV 6 IrjCOV^ TOO

rieTpa)' Mh (})oBeicecjocAN ta apni'a Toyc AyKoyc meta to

Ano0ANe?N AYTA. KAI YMeic M h'
0oBe?c9e Toyc AnoKreNNON-

oi/c/a?'] AC ; Trapoi/xlav S. 19 (poel<Tde\ (po^eiadai. A. airoKrivvovTai]

A; airoKTivTas C.

tioned in the context, and as the con- TL TTOiTJaai' VTTodei^o} 8e viiiv Tiva
cpo^r]-
tinuation of the quotation is not 6rJTe. (f)oj3j]6r]Te top fj.eTa to dnoKTflvai
found in the canonical Gospels, the e^ovTU i^ovar'iav efi^aXeiv eh Tr]v yiev-
whole passage was probably taken vav vai, Xeyco Vfjuv, tovtov ipojSijdriTe.

from some apocryphal source, per- The saying is quoted also in C/em.
haps the Gospel of the Egyptians :
Horn. xvii. 4 (jioj^rjdfjTe dnb tov
juij

see the note on 4, 8, 12. As the anoKTevvovTos to crco/xa tt] de ^v^f/ p^rj

same metaphor of the lambs occurs dwap-evov Ti noifjaai' (f)o(iir]6riTe8e tov

in the apocryphal quotation just above 8vvap.evov koL aSpa koi yjrvxrjv els ttjv

( 4), they were probably taken from yeevvav tov nvpos jBaXelv, and in Justin
the same context. Photius {Bibl. Aj>o/. i.
19 (p. 66 B) p,rj cf)oliiela6e tovs
remarks on the number of apo- dvaipovvTas iip,ds koi peTci tuvtu prj
126)
bvvapivovs Ti
cryphal quotations in this Second noiijaai, eine, (^ojirjO^re

Epistle, 7rXi7i' on p-qra rtva ms airo rfjs

8i TOV peTa TO dnodaveiv dvvapevov Kai
deias ypacpfis ^evi^ovra napeicrayei, av y\rv\r]v /cat crco/na els yeevvav epfiaXe'iv.

ovS' 1] TTpcoTT] (nrrjXkaKTO TravreXais.

The points of coincidence in the
(For apocryphal quotations in the quotations of the Clementine Homi-
First, which however are chiefly from and Justin with our pseudo-Cle-
lies

the Old Testament and therefore not ment are worthy of notice, but they
so prominent, see the notes 8, 13,
seem to be accidental. The expres-
sion els TTjv yeevvav Toi) Tvvpos (in the
17, 23, 29, 46.)
Koi vnfls The apocry- quotation of
Homilies) might the
19. K.T.X.]
have come from Matt, xviii. 9 (inter-
phal citation again runs parallel to
the canonical Gospels, Matt. x. 28 polated in the parallel passage Mark
KM ix. 47). For the amount of variation
firj (po^elcrdf cnro ru>v (nroKTevvovraiv
TO which may arise accidentally, see a
(Tcofia, TTjv 8e ylfvxT]!' fir) dvvap.evQ}v
parallel instance given by Westcott
'
aTTOKTelvaL (Pof^rjdrjTf fie
fxaWnv rov
8vvaiu.evov [koI] y^rvxh'" 'f"' a-u>p.a airoXe-
Canon p. 116; and it is instructive
crai iv ytivvrj, Luke XII. 4) 5 M'7 4^o(irj-
to observe the variations in two quo-
dfjTe cmo Toiv anoKTevvovrMV to (tui/jlu
tations of this very saying in Clem.
KOi lX(Ta TllVTU fxrj eXOVTMV n(pi<T<TUT(p6v Alex. Exc. Thcod. p. 972 4>o^tj6r]T
220 THE EPISTI.es OF S. CLEMENT. [V

TAc YMAC KAi mhAen y^'\u AyNAMeNOYC noielN, aAAa (|)oBe?c6e

TON MeXA TO AnoeANeiN YMAC eyONTA eloyCIAN YTXlf^C KAI

ccloMAToc, TOY BAAe?N eic reeNNAN nYpoc. Kai yii/(joa'K6Te,

ddeXcboi, OTL ri 67ri^t]iuila r] ev rw Kocr/mcp

tovtm tt]^

TavTt]^ fjUKpa eorTiv Kai r] oe 5

crapKO^ oXiyo-x^povio^'

eirayyeXia tov XpicTTOv fieydXt] Kai davjuacrrri ecriv,

Kai dvcnravcTL's Trj^ jueXXovct]^ fia(nXeias Kai ^Mrj^
alcoviov. TL ovv earlv 7roir](ravTa<s e7riTV)(eiv avrHov,
el jULrj
TO ocr/ws Kai dvao'Tpecpeadaij Kai
diKalco^ ra
KOor/JLiKa ravTa ws dXXorpia r]'yei<j6ai Kai fjit] e7ndvfJ.eLV lo

I ^ojSelo-^e] (po^eiadai A. 3 irvpos] AC ; om. S. 6 e7ra77e\ta]

e7ra77eXeta A. XpiaTOu] C ; Kvplov S. iffTiv] ACom. (apparently)

;

S. 7 dvaTrava-is'] A; ij dvdiravais C. 8 TL..iin.TVxeit>] AC; quid

igitur est id quod facit ut attingatis S. The translator seems to have had irotrja-av
for iroiTjcravTas in his text, and to have wrested the grammar to make sense of
it. II yap T(fJ] A; ry yap C. eTrt^D^etj'] eindvixei. A. raOra] AS;
avTO. C. 13 X^7et 5e] AC; \^7et yap Kai S. 14 edv] C; add. ovv

yovv, Xe'yei, tov fxeTci davarov hwajxevov possible for us to do that we may ob-
Koi i^v\rjv /cat aafxa els yeevvav jSaKe'iv, tain them, but to walk holily and
and 981 o (ToiTrjp Xeyet (jio^elcrdai,
p. righteously.^ Thus rS, which some
Sell/ Tuv ^vvcijxevov ravTTjv Trjv "^vx^^^ would substitute for ro, interferes with
Kol TovTo TO aafxa to yp'vxtKov iv yeivvrj the construction. For oo-iwyKat hiKalas,
diToXea-ai: comp. also Iren. iii. 18. 5 implying duties to God and to man
respectively, see the note on ocria
'
Nolite timere eos qui occidunt cor-
pus, animam autem non possunt I
comp. 6 e^ovTes o<na Koi diKuia.
:

occidere timete autem magis eum

;
VI. 'Our Lord has told us that
qui habet potestatem et corpus et no man can serve two masters. There
animam mittere in gehennam.' is a direct antagonism between the

dnoKTevvovTas] The passages quot- world present and the world to come.
ed in the last note show that the We cannot keep the friendship of
substitution of diroKTelvovTas quite is both. Let us then, if we would de-
unnecessary. For the form dnoKTev- liver ourselves from eternal misery,
veiv see Winer xv. p. 95 (note), A. obey the command of Christ and
Buttmann p. 54. follow after the heavenly life. Even
'

Noah, Job, and Daniel, it is written,

'

4. 7/ eVtSiy/xia] sojourn :
comp.
Heb. xi. 1 3, I Pet. i. I,
napeTTibrjfjLOi could not by their righteous deeds
ii. See the note on rrapoiKLav
II. rescue their own children. How then
above, which contains the same idea. shall we enter the kingdom of God,
7. Koi dvdnav(Tis] ''namely, rest.^ if we keep not our baptismal vows.?'

For this use of Km see the notes on 13. OuSeiy k.tX] Luke xvi. 1
3
Galatians vi. 16. ovdels olKeTTjs dvvuTai dvai Kvpiois
8. Ti ovv K.T.X.] '
What then is it 8ovXV(iv...ov Svvacrde Qea dovXfveiv
 VI] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 221

avTooV, iv yap tw eTriBviJieLv i^jua^ KTtjO'aa'dai ravra

dTTOTrLTTTOiueu rr]^ ohov Ttj^ diKaias.
VI. Aeyei de 6 Kvpio^' OyAeic oiKeTHc Aynatai Arci
KYpi'oic AoyAeyeiN. eciv rifjiei^ deXwfJiev Kai Oecp dovX-

15 6V61V Kai jaajULOiva, dorvfJiCpopov rifxiv ecrriv. ti r^p to

oc{)eAoc, eAN tic kocmon oAon KepAncH thn Ae s^yX^^'^
ton
ZHMIOO0H; ecTTLV ^e oi)to9 6 alwv Kai 6 imeWcov ^vo

e^dpol' 0VT09 Xeyei idLOi^xeLav Kai (pOopav Kai (piXap-

yvpiav Kai d7ra.Tr]v, CKeTvo^ de tovtois aTroraarcreTai.
20 ov hwdfjeda ovv Tcdv ^vo (piXoi eivar ^ei he f]fj.d^ tovtw
aTTOTapafjievov^ eKeivio ^pdcrdai. olujiaeBa oti (3eXTiov

S. 16 t6v Kocr/JLOV 6\ov] rov KhcTfiov (om. oXop) C 07nncm hunc mundtim S, ;

but the insertion of htmc probably does not imply any different reading from A :

see above, i.
p. 141, and comp. below 19. 17 ^tjiUiw^^] AC; pcrdat
(perhaps dTroX^o-jj) S. 18 koX <pdopav] AC; om. S. 19 To&rots] AC;
TOis Toiovroi.^ S. See conversely below on p. 222 1. 8. 21 xpS(T<?at] A;

XPV<^6ai- C. oiiifieda] old/Meda ACS. S also adds 5^ ddeXcpol,

KOL fiaficovq. The words are the same fioixeia here points to this latter sense;
in Matt. vi. 24, excepting the omis- comp. Barnab. 10 ov imtj yivr) fiolxos
sion of olKiTTjS. ovde (pdopfvs, Philo de Spec. Les;. 1 1

15. tI yap TO ocjifXos K.r.X.] See (11. p. 310 M) d8e\(f)ov /xeV /cat
avyyeves
Matt. xvi. 26, Mark viii. 36, Luke ix. d8iKT]na fioixfias (jidopa, Epictet. Diss.
25. The
quotation here may have ii. 22. 28 (iKparety Kai jioixovs Koi
been derived from either S. Matthew (pdopfls, Iren. I/aer. i. 28. i, Clem.
or S. Mark, though it differs slightly Horn. iv. 16, 24.
from both. The divergence from S. 20. roiiro) d-noTa^ap.kvov{\ ''btddl7tg

Luke is greater. The saying is quoted farewell to this.'' Act. Paid, et Thecl.
also by Justin Apo/. i.
15; but Jus- 5 oi dTTOTa^d/xevoi tm KocrfJia) tovtco, Ign.
tin'squotation, while combining dif- Pliilad. 1 1
dT7ora^d\}.ivoi tm ^tw. The
ferent features of the three canonical word is fairly common in the New
Gospels, does not reproduce the Testament see Lobeck Phryfi.
; p. 23.
consort with as a friend,'
''

special peculiarity {ti to ot/jeXos-;) of Xpa.cr6ai\

our pseudo- Clement. according to a common sense of the
17. ((TTiv ovTOs 6 alav k.t.X.] word. The editors have substituted
See the notes on Galatiaiis i. 4. Com- XP^vQo-L for the reading of the older
pare also Clem. Horn. viii. 21, xx. 2. MS; but there is sufficient authority
18. <^6opav\ Either (i) corrupt- for xpna-dai in later writers : see Lo-

7iess, prq/li^acy generally, as in 2 Pet. beck Phryn. p. 61, Buttmann Ansf.

i.4, ii. 12, 19; or (2) in a more special Sprachl. 105 (l. p. 487), Veitch Ir-
sense, as Plut. Crass, i
ttjv alriav ttjs regular Verbs s. v. xp(^fi^'^n^..
For the
(pdofms (iTroXuo-a/xevos-, 89 B
Afor. p. form in a comp. (Tvyxpnadai Ign. A fagn.
Kj)ifif]vni (/)<9(Y)(if.
The connexion with 3, TTapaxp'UT6ai A post. Const, vi. 10.
222 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [VI

icTTiv Tcx evOa^e fxicrfja'ai, otl fJiiKpa Kai 6\i'yo)(povia Kai

(bdapTa' eKELva Ze d<ya7rrj(rai, to. dyada Kai aCbdapTa,

7roiovPTe yap to OeXi^fJia tov Xpiarov evprjcroiuev dva-
Travciv el de lUfj'ye, ovBev rifjid^ pvcrcTai e/c Ttjs alcoviov

KoXd(re(i)9, eav TrapaKOvcrwfjiev twv evToXwv avTov. 5

'

Xeyei ^e Kai ri
<ypa(pt]
ev tm le^eKiriX, on 'Ean anacth
Nooe KAI 'lobB ka) Aanih'A, of pycontai ta tskna aytojn ev

TYJ al-)(^fJiaXM(TLa.
el de Kai ol toiovtoi hiKatoi ov

2 ayadcL Kai] ayada toi AC ; om. S. Here probably the reading of C is to be

preferred: for (i) It is more forcible in itself: (2) It explains the omission in S.

3 yap] AS om. C. ; avdiravcnv] AC ;

add. tjuae illic S, as if it had read ry\v
sKel, but this may be only a translator's gloss. 4 r//xas] AC om. S.
;

6 5^] AC ; yap S. iv ry] AC ; rod S. 8 alxfJ-aXucrig.] C ; atxM'^^wcrta

A. ol TOLovTOi] AC ;
odroi S : see conversely above on p. 221 1.
19. diKaioi]

AC; om. S. ov d^vavrai.] here, A; after 5t/cato(ri5;'ats in C; but S has appa-

4. alaviov KoXdaems] The ex- as in Test, xii Patr. Jud. 17, 22, 23,

pression occurs Matt. xxv. 46. Orac. Sib. iii. 159, Gaius (Hippoly-
6. v Tw 'l6^eKtr;X] Abridged from tus.'') in Euseb. H. E. iii. 28, Hip-
Ezek. xiv. 14 20, being taken es- pol. Fragm. 59, 103, 105 (pp. 162,
pecially from ver. 14 eav waiv ol rpels 181, 182, Lagarde), Euseb. H.E. viii.
avdpes ovtoi iv (xeVo) avTr]S Ncoe Kai 17, Epiphan. Haer. li. 9 (p. 432).
AavirjX Ka) 'ico^, and ver. 18 ov fif/ pv- Thus there is ample authority for
aovrai vlovs Koi dvyarepas. The W^ords this sense of (BaaiKfiov. Galland,
ev Tj] alxnakaxTia are the writer's own desirous of retaining the more usual
addition and should not be treated meaning 'a palace,' supposes the
as part of the quotation. It is worth writer to refer to the parable of the
noticing also that the order of the marriage feast given by the king,
three names, which has given rise to Matt. xxii. 11, 12. If so, we might
so much speculation among modern suppose that he explained the wed-
critics, is changed by the pseudo- ding garment of baptism, which is
Clement, and a chronological se- mentioned just before. But the refer-
quence is produced. The same order ence seems improbable. This more
of the names appears in Apost. Const. usual meaning of jSaa-ikeiov would
ii. Chrysostom also makes the
14. have a parallel in S. Anselm Otr
same change in two passages quoted Deus homo ii. 16 'ut nuUus palatium
by Cotelier, Horn, xliii in Gen. (iv. ejus ingrediatur.'
p. 436) and Exp. in Ps. xlviii (v. p. 12. TtapaKk^To^ ''advocate^ as it

210). should always be translated in the

9. hiKaio(TvvaLs\ The plural, as New Testament. This is one coin-
in Deut. ix. 4 (v. 1.), 6, i Sam. xxvi. cidence of language in our pseudo-
23, Ezek. iii. 20, xxxiii. 13, Ecclus. Clement with S. John see esp. i :

xliv. 10. J oh. ii. I

TvapaKkryrov %yop.iv -npos rov
II. TO ^aaiKeiov]
^
the kingdo?n,' naripa. So above 3 tov narepa Trjs
 VIl] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 223

ovvavTai rals eauTwv ^iKaiocrvvai^ pvcracrdai to. tekvu

10 avTwv i^juei'Sf eav jurj Tr]ptj(r(jo/uLev to f^aTTTKTiuLa dyvov
Kal dfjiiavTOv, Troia 7r67roi6r]aei eKreXevcrojueOa ek to
(iaaiXeiov tov Oeov ; t] r/s tjfxwv 7rapdK\i]T09 ecTTui,
eav fxf] evpeQoifJiev epya 6;^oi/Te9 ocia Kal diKaia ;

VIL '

Mo'Te ovVf
d^eXcpol juoVy dyitiVKrwfj.eOa^
15 et^ore? otl ev )(ep(riv 6 dyiiv, kui oti ek tows (pdap-
TOi/s dy(Jova<i KaraTrXeovo'LV ttoWo/, a'W ov Troti/res

rently the same order as A. 9 pvcracrOai rh. r^Kva] to. riKva piaacrdai C. A ;

10 avrCju] A; om. CS. /3a7rT(T/ia] AC

add. quod accepimus S.
; 14 ou;']
A; om. CS. /xou] A; om. C. As S always adds the possessive pronoun
where the vocative d8e\(poi stands alone in the Greek, its testimony is of no value
here: see above 16 KaraTrXiovcTLv] AC; ccrtajtt ^
6. or^bivi^ovTaC) S, but
it
probably does not represent a different reading in the Greek. Lower down
S translates KaTairXevcrufiev descendamus in certamen.

a\T}deLas, and see on this subject 22 ovK eXaTTOva t^? eV x^P*^' dvcrrvxiai^,
Westcott Canon p. 157 sq. Vit. Brut. 36 iv x^P^'-v '^x'^^ '''"^ vnep

13. o(TLa Kal dlKaia] See the notes rav okav TTpa^eis, etc. :
compare vtto
on I, 5- X^^pa, Hermas Vis. iii. 10 (with the
VII. 'Therefore let us prepare for note).
the struggle. In the Isthmian games on fls Toi's (pdaproiis K.r.X.] An
many enter the lists, but not many echo of I Cor. ix. 24, 25 Travres ^ev
are crowned. In this our immortal Tpfxovcnv, els 8e Xa/x^avfi to ^pa^el-
race we should all strive to win. In ov and iKeivoi fiev ovv iva (f)6apTov
the earthly contests he who breaks <TTe(f)ai'ov \d^co(Tiv, ijfiels Se acjidapTov.
the rules is scourged. What then Comp. Lucian Anachars. 13 fine fioi,
shall befall those who in their heaven- napTes avra \ap.^avo\jcnv 01 dyoovKTrai ;

ly course swerve from the right path? 2. ovdafxais aWa fis e^ ciTravrcov o Kpn-
Their worm, it is written, dieth not, avrav (a passage of which the
Trjcras
and their fire is not quenched.' context presents several coincidences
15. ff x^po""' o aywi']
'
T/ic contest with S. Paul see Clark's Pelopoji-
;

is at Jiand^ as Xen. Cyr. ii. 3. 2 "hv- nesus p. 50), Seneca Ep. Ixxviii. 16
'

8pfi (pi\oi, o fiiv ayav iyyvs rjfJ-'i-v

comp. Clem. Rom. 7 6 avrhs rj^iiv
ayav eVtKeirai. The reading AfcoN
for AicoN is doubtless correct, and
this is not the only instance of the
confusion of the two words see Hase
and Dindorf Steph. Thes. p. 593 s.v.
dywi/, and to the references there
given add yEsch. Again. 495, and
see 4 Mace. ix. 23, xi. 19. For V
'.
Athletae quantum plagarum ore,
quantum toto corpore excipiunt ?
tamen omne tormentum glori-
ferunt
ae cupiditate; nee tantum, quia pug-
nant, ista patiuntur, sed ut pugncnt...
: nos quoque evincamus omnia, quorum
praemium non corona nee palma est
etc'
16. KaTmrKlovcriv] ''resort'; comp.
Plut. Mor. p. 81 E Kma-nKe'iv yap ((firj

Xfpo-iv,
'
at hand,' see Plut. Vit. Cleoni. Tovi noXXdvs erri rrxo^rfv Adtjva^f.
224 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. t
VII

(TTecpavovvTai, el jut]
ol TroWa Kowiaa'ai/Te^ Kai Ka-
\a) dyoiVLaajULevoi. i^juieTs ovv dywvLO'uifj.eQa, \va iravre^

a'T6(pavco6(djULei/.
wo'Te decojULev tyjv ohov Tt]V evde^av,

ctycova rov dcpdapTOv, Kai ttoWoi ek avrov KaraTrXeu-

criafjiev Kai dycouicrwiueda, \va Kai (TTe(j)ava)6(i)iuL6v'
Kai 5

I el ixT)] AC A) add. solum S.

; [Oc/Jir] 3 Oiufiev] conj. (so too S distinctly
curramus); 0Q/Ji,ev AC. See the lower note, 4 els avrbv] AC ;
m certamen
S. 5 Kai pri.] AC; om. S. d7Wj'((ru)yU.e^o] AS ; ayvLaihfi.eda. C.

Compounds of nXelv are sometimes see the notes on Ign. Polyc. 6 and
used metaphorically, as eWXeTy (He- Philippians li. 16. For the connexion
rod, 155 i^eTrXcocras raiv (fypevav),
iii. here comp. i Tim. iv. 10 koi Kowiapev
(Aristoph. Fr. II. p. 907 Mei-
aTTOTrXeii/ Kai dya)i/L^oiJ.fda (the correct reading).
neke dnoTrKeva-Te ovv eVt rov vvfx(f>iov), 3. deoifjLev] For the accusative
dianXelp (Plato Phaed. 85 D hianXiv- after this verb see Lobeck Para/.
crai Tov ^lov). But KaraTtKeiv can p. 511: comp. also Cic. O^. iii. 10
hardly be so explained here; and we
'
stadium currit (from Chrysippus).
'

must therefore suppose that the allu- The reading of the Greek MSS,
sion is to the akiepKr]s 'icrOfiov deipas 6mp.ev, can hardly stand. It is

(Pind. Isthtn. i.
10), which would na- explained as referring to the dya>-
turally be approached by sea. Livy vodea-ia but;
in this case the
(xxxiii. 32) describes the Isthmian dymvoOiTrjs should be God Him.self
games as 'propter opportunitatem (see Tertull. ad Mart. 3) and ;

loci,per duo diversa maria omnium moreover daijiev riji/ 686v is in itself
rerum usus ministrantis, humano an awkward expression. Gebhardt,
generi concilium.' In these later having read Becofiev in first edition,

days of Greece they seem to have has returned to 6cop.ev in his second,

surpassed even the Olympian in im- being apparently persuaded byBryen-

portance, or at least in popularity : nios. But the argument of Bryennios

comp. Aristid. Isthm. p. 45 eV rr) koK- appears to me to be based on a mis-

\i(TTr] T(ov TravTjyvpecov rrj^e
Kol ovo/xacr- conception. He urges that we can-
TOTaTT) K.T.X. (see Krause He/Zen. ll. 2. not read 6ea>p,ev on account of the
If this homily was ad- words immediately kol
p. 205 sq). following,
dressed to the Corinthians (see TToXAot els avTov KaranXevawnev, and

above, p. 197), there would be singular he argues 6 8e apn dya>VL(6p.vos XP^^dv

propriety in this image, as in S. Paul's OVK exft els rov dya)va KareXdelv, as if
contrast of the perishable and im- the reading 6ecop.ev involved a hys-
perishable crown likewise addressed teron-proteron. But in fact this
to them, or again in the lessons which clause introduces an entirely new
Diogenes the Cynic is reported to proposition, of which the stress lies
have taught in this city during the on noWoi ; 'let us not only take part in
Isthmian games, maintaining the this race {6e(>>fiev ttjv 686v), but let us

superiority of a moral over an athletic go there z;t great numbers and con-
victory (Dion Chrysost. Orai. viii, tend {ttoKKoX Ka7an\ev(T<i)p.ev kcli dycovi-
ix). (Tuip.eda).'' On the Other
it has hand
I. Koniaa-avrfs] A word used not been shown that Oelvai rfjv 686v
especially of training for the contest : or TOV dywva can be said of the com-
 VIl] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 225
1
^t] cvvajueda ttuvts^ a'Te(pavo)6i]uai, Kav eyyv^
Tov o-TCCpapov yepw/uLeda. eihepai tj/ua^ ^e?, on 6 top
(pdapTOP dycopa dycDPi^ojuepo^f idp eupedfj (pQe'ipuiP,

^acTTiycodel's a'lperai kul e^co jSdWeTai tov crTaBiou.

10 Ti 00KeiT6 ;
6 top Trj^ dcpOapcr'ia^ dyuipa (pOeipa's,
t'l

7 d5hai] A; add. 5^ CS. 6] here A; before aywvi^bnevo%, C. lO SoKeire]

doKeirai A. (pdetpas] A; (pOeipuv C, so apparently S.

batants themselves. Bryennios in- start or cutting off a corner or trip-

deed explains it dcofxev tavTo'is tj ping up an adversary or taking any
Trpo^coVf^a, but this explanation stands underhand advantage comp. Epi- :

self-condemned by the necessity of phan. Haer. Ixi. 7 7rapa(p0f[pas dymua

using either the reflexive pronoun 6 ddXrjTTjs /iocrT(.;(^6is eKjSaXXerai tov
(iavTo^s) or the middle voice {vpo- dyavos (quoted Cotelier). The
by
to bring out the sense.
6(i>fj.f6a) The word is specially chosen here for the
construction which we have here sake of the neighbouring (fidapTov
occurs from time to time with 6eeLv, d(f)6apa-ias. See Chrysippus in Cic.
but is more common with rpix^iv, O^. iii. 10 'Qui stadium currit, eniti
because the verb itself is more com- et contendere debet, quam maxinie
mon ; e.g. Heb. xii. i
Tpfxap.ep tov possit, ut vincat ; supplantare eum
TTpoKfififvov rjfiiv aya>va (see Bleek's quicum certet aut manu depellere
note). Polybius (i. 87. i, xviii. 35. nullo modo debet : sic in vita etc.',
6) has the proverb rpix^iv rf^v fo-xdrrjv. Lucian Cat. iion tern. cred. 12 o /xeV
5. Ka\ el prj dvvdfMeda k.t.X.] This dyados 8poiJivs...T(a n\r)crLov ov8ev
seems some public recog-
to point to
KaKovpyel. ..6 8e kokos eKelvos Koi ava6\os
nition of those who came nextafterthe dvTayoovKTTfjs. .eVl ttjv KOKOTexvLuv fTpa-
.

victor. In the Olympian chariot races TTSTO K.T.X. The turn given to the
there were second, third, and fourth image in (pdelpav was perhaps sug-
prizes; but in the foot racesthenotices gested by 2 Tim. ii. 5 01! aTe(pavoiiTai
of any inferior prize or honourable eav ixTj vop,ip.cos dOXrjcrrj (comp. Epictet.
mention are vague and uncertain : Diss. iii. 10. 8 86s fioi dTr68(i^cv el

see Krause Hellen. 11. i. p. 170 sq. voyiip.(iiS rjdXrjcras).

This passage is quoted loosely by Do- 9. p.acrTiyu)6eis] i.e. by the pa^8ov-
rotheus Doctr. xxiii coy Xtyet /cni o ayios xoi or, as they are sometimes called
KXr;^7yr, Kaj/ /xi) aTe(j)ava>Tai res, dWa (e. g. Lucian Herntot. 40), paariyo-
(nrov8aaei /j,i) p.aKpa.u evpeOfjvai rap are- 4>6poi. Pollux (iii. 153) furnishes also
(pavovfievdiv. a third name, fjLa<TTiyov6p,oi. Compare
6. Kav f'yyvi k.t.X.] See Joseph. Herod, viii. 59 eV roio-t a'ycoo-t ol npoe^-
B.J, 1. 21. 8 a&Ka fieyicTTa Trpo6f\s ev avKTTapevoi pani^ovTai, Thucyd. v. 50
019 Oil fjiovov ol viKavrei dWa Kai 01 /xer' eV TW dydvi vtto tojv pa^8ovxu>v nXrjyas
avTOvs Kai ol rpiToi tov j3ao"iXtKoO eXajBfv, Lucian adv. Indoct. 9, Piscat.
TrXoiJrov p.eTe\dp.j3avov. Comp. Apost. 33. On these police see Krause Hel-
Const, ii. 14. len. II. I. pp. 112 sq, 139, 142, 144, II.
'
8. (^^eipwi/] vitiating.'' The word 2. p. 46 sq. See Schweighaeuser
is used of violating the conditions of on Epictet. Diss. iii.
15. 5 (p. 689).
'
the contest, e.g. by making a false al'perat] is removed.''

CLEM. II. 15

I
226 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [vii

rrraOeiTai ;
twv yap jur] Tt]pr](ravTcov, (prja-iv, rrjv acppa-
yToa 6 ckcoAhI aytoon oy reAeyTHcei kai to nyp aytoon
oy cBecGHceTAi, kai ecoNTAi eic opAciN nACH CApKi.
VIII. 'OJs o\Jv ecTfJiev eiri yri's, /.i6Tavori(rii)iuLv'

TT^Aos yap eafiev ek Tr]v X^^P^ '^^^ Texvirov. bv 5

TpoTTOV yap 6 Kepafiev^, eav mroirj (TKevo's Kai eV rals

X^p(ytv avTOv dia(rTpa<pfj t] cvpTpif^fj, TraXiv avTO

di/aTrXdcrcreL' eav ^e 7rpo(p6da't]
ets Triv KajjiLvov tov

TTvpo'i
avTO ^aXeTVf ovketl (3or]6r](rei auTM' ovtco^ kul
iljULeJ^f ews ecTfJiev eV tovtm tw KoaiuLa}, ev Trj crapKi
10

I Tra^etrat] A; C.
ireiaeTai 2 rb irvp auTwc] AS to vvp (om. avrCiv) C. ;

6 TToi.-^'l
A ; C, but the present tense is wanted here see below.
TTOLrjcrrj kclI] ;

here, A ;
before diacTrparpTJ, CS thus altering the sense. iv] ; om. C ; S is A
doubtful. 7 ^] AS ;
om. C. 8 ai/aTrXdcrcret] A ; dvavXaffet. C.
TOV TTvpbs] AC ;
om. S, but see the next note. 9 j3a\e'Lv'] AC ;
add. ei com-
burat id et pereat (perdahir) S. It is not probable however that any corresponding

I. rrjv o-^paytSa] By a compari- John (Rev. ix. 4 Oeov

Tfjv a(l>payl8a Toii
son with 6 eav pLTj TTiprjcrcoiJLfv to /3a7r- eVt Twv peTaTTOiv) used the image with
Tiafia, it appears that baptism is here any direct reference to baptism.
meant by the seal. So again 8 rq- 2, 6 aKcoXrj^ K.T.X.] An accurate quo-
prjcrare rfjv cr^paylSa acrniKov. Comp. tation from the Lxx of the last verse
Hermas Sitn. viii. 6 elXrjcjioTfs rrjv of Isaiah (Ixvi. 24) o yap aKuXr]^ avTMP
crfppayida Koi redXaKOTes aiWrjv Kol pr] K.T.X. The denunciation is uttered
TTjp-qa-avTei vyirj k.t.X-, Sim. ix. 1 6 or- against rwf av6pcc7Ta>v Tav irapa^e^rj-
av Se Xa/3?; ttjv (T<^pay1ba...r) acfipayls KOTcov, and the context does not con-
ovv TO vBcop iaTiv k.t.X., also Sim. tain any reference to the broken seal.
viii. 2, ix. 17, 31, C/ef/i. Ho7n. xvi. 19 VIII. 'We are as clay in the
TO (Tcopa cr(j)payl.8t peyia-Tt] SiarervTrco- hands of the potter. At present, if we
pfvov (with the context), Aci. Paul. are crushed or broken, He can mould
et Thecl. 25 povov 86s poi Tfjv ev Xpicr- us again but when we have been once
;

Tw Hippol. Antichr. A,l

a-(f)paylda, thrown into the furnace, nothing will
(p. 119, Lagarde), Cureton's Ancient avail us. Therefore let us repent in
Syriac Documents p. 44. So of Aber- time. After death repentance is too
cius it is said {Ign. andPolyc. I.
p. 496) late. Let us keep the flesh pure now,
\apiTpav (TCppayeldav Suicer e)(OVTa. that we may inherit eternal life here-
s.v. quotes Clem. Alex. Qidsdiv. salv. after. This isour Lord's meaning,
39 (P- 957), Stro/n. ii. 3 (p. 434), and when He says, // _ye kept not that
later writers. Barnabas 9 speaks which is small, who shall give yojt
of circumcision as a o-^payly after S. that which is great f^
Paul, Rom. iv. 1 1 But it may be ques-
'
.
4. 'Q.S ovv] While then.' For this
tioned whether S. Paul {a-cppayia-dpevos sense of c<5s see 9 $ exopev Kaipov,
2 Cor. i.
22, comp. Ephes. iv. 30) or S. with the note.
 VIIl] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 227

a eirpapajjiev 7rovr]pa fueravorja'Miuiei/ i^ b\t] Trj'i Kap-

hia<5, 'iva crcodcojULev vtto tov Kvpiov, eco9 e^ojuev kul-

pov iJLeTavoia<s' fjtera 'yap to e^eXdelv rifjid<i e/c tov

Koa/uov, 0VK6TL ZwaixeOa eKei e^oiuoXoyricracrdai i] fde-
15 Tavoelv (ETL. cocTTe, ddeXcpol, 7roir](TavTe^ to 6e\r]juia
TOV 7raTpo<s Kai tyiv arapKa dyv^v Tript](TavTe<i
kul tws
evToXa^ TOV Kvpiov (pvXa^auTe's Xri\}yoiue6a ^(i)t]v
aicu-

VLOv. Xeyei 'yap Kvpiov ev

6 tw evayyeXiM' Ei to

MIKpON OYK eTHpHCATe, TO MefA TIC YMIN AOOC6I; AefOO

words stood in the Greek text. /SoTj^^tret] A; 07)6el CS. oOVajs] A;

0VT03 C. II a] C; si quid S. t^s] A; om. C. 12 ?ws] A;
diitn S ; ws iri. C. ixP-^^ Kaiphv^ A; Kaipbv ^x^Mf C. 13 /ierai/ofaj]
AS; om. C. tov k6uixov\ AC; Trjs aapKos S. 14 i^oixo\oyriffa<T9aC\
AC; add. super nostris peccatis S. 15 7rotT70'acTes] AC; add. 0?;' (?) S.
16 crdp/ca] C aapKav A; add. rifj.Cjv S.
;

5. TTJjXos yap f(Tfj.fV (c.r.X.] The He has once cast it into the fiery
image of Jeremiah xviii. 4 6, adopt- ftirtiace, He will no tnore come to its
ed by S. Paul Rom. ix. 21. The pre- rescue? 7rpo(l)daveiv occurs Matt. xvii.
sent passage is suggested rather by 25 and several times in the LXX.
the prophet than by the Apostle. 16. Trjv aapKa ayvrjv ac.t.X.] Act.
The image is drawn out in Test xii Paul, et Thecl. 5 fiaKapioi ol ayvrjv rrjv
Pair. Nepht. 2, and in Athenag. actpKa TTjpi^cravTes, 12 ttjv aapKa firj

Stippl. 15. p-oKvvriTe aXXd TTjpTjarjre ayvqv.

6. TToiT) (TKevos Koi K.r.X.] There 18. Et TO piKpov K.T.X.] Probably
can be no doubt that the more a quotation fused from Luke xvi. 10

graphic reading of A is correct. 6 TTKTTos fP eXaxt'crro) koi ev ttoXXw mcr-

The very point of the comparison is Tos ecTTiv, Koi 6 ev eXa^'CTTa) ciSlkos koL
that the breakage happens zji the ev 7roXXo5 d'StKoy eaTiv' el ovv ev rca

making {ttoitj), happens under tlie papLcova Tricrroi ovk eyeveade, to

dSt'/co)

hands of the potter (eV rai% ^tpaXv a\r]6iv6v TLs vpiv TTKTTevaei ; and Matt.
avTov 8ia(TTpacf)^), and not afterwards, XXV. 21, 23, eVl oXiya rjs ttkttos, en).
as T!Oiriarj...Ta'ls ^fpcr"' avrov kcli 8iaa- TToXXwi' ere KaTaarTijao). Irenosus (ii. 34-
'

Tpa(f)fj would imply. 3) cites somewhat similarly, Si in

it

7. avvTpi^^] Rev. ii. 27 coy to, modico fideles non fuistis, quod mag-
(TKCVT] TO KepajiiKa crvvrpifieTai. num est quis dabit vobis.-" The quo-
ndXiv avTo Hilgen-
di/aTrXdo-crei] tation of our Clementine writer may
feld refers to Theoph. ad Autol. perhaps be taken from an apocryphal
ii. 26
Kadanep a-Kfvos ti, enav nXaadfu gospel (see the notes on 4, 5, 12) ;

alriav rivn o-^,^, ava)(a>vev(Tai. t)

ava- but the passage of Iren;eus, who can
TrXdcrcTfTat eifto yeveadai Kaivhv koi hardly have borrowed from an apo-
oKoKkr^pov ;
see the references there cryphal source, shows how great di-
given by Otto. vergences are possible in quotations
8. (av be jTpQ<^6a(TT) k.t.X.]
'
IVhen from memory, and lessens the pro-

152
228 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [viii

6'ti d nicTOc eN IAaxictco kai eN noAAw ni-

CTOC eCTIN apa ovv TOVTO Xeyer Tr]pr]craT Tr]v

(rdpKa dyvnv kul Trjv (TCppaylZa dcnriXov, \va Tr]V

\cuuiVLOv\ ^(orjv dTroXaf^cojULev.

I 7roX\y]AC; iroXXots S. 4 diroXciSw/xe;'] A; aTroXa^yjre CS ; see the
lower note.

bability of this solution. Hilgenfeld's The licence in the change of per-

inference (p. xxxix),
'
Irenaeus hac sons {rrip-qa-are, dnoXd^cdiiev) has of-
epistula quamvis nondum Clementi fended the transcribers here, though
Romano adscripta usus esse videtur,' occasionally indulged in even by
seems me quite unwarranted by
to the best writers in all languages,
the coincidence. have in fact a We e.g. Jeremy Taylor Works vi. p.
'
similar coincidence in Hippol. Haer. 364 they were all zealous for
If
X. 33 (p. 336) Iva eVi TW [xiKpa iriaros the doctrines of righteousness, and
fvpedflsKoi TO fieya TricrTevdfjvai, dvvrjd^s- impatient of sin, in yourselves and
2. apa ovv] A favourite colloca- in the people, it is not to be im-
tion of particles in S. Paul : see Fritz- agined what a happy nation we
sche on Rom. v. 18. The accentua- should be.' See also e.g. Rom. vii.
tion apa ovv is erroneous. 4 (6avaT(odT]T, Kap7ro(f)opi](r(t)Hv, viii.

TOVTO Xe'yei] 'He means this'': as 15 i\a(3fTe, Kpa^opfv, and frequently

in 2 (twice), 12. See the note in S. Paul.
on Galatians iii. 1 7. The words there- IX. '
Do not deny the resurrection
forewhichfollowought not to be treat- of the body. As we were called in
ed as an apocryphal quotation, as they the flesh, so also shall we be judged
are by several editors and others. in the flesh. As Christ being spirit
3- acnvCkov] For Trjpelv acrniXov became flesh for us, so shall we in

comp. I Tim. vi. 14, James 27. i. the flesh receive our recompense.

4. alcivLov] The omission in the Let us love one another; let us make
Syriac is probably correct ; comp. a return to God for His goodness.
14 ToaavTTjv Bvvarai 7; crap avTT] What must this return be? Sincere
fiCTaXa^elv ^corjv k.t.X., I
7 a-vvriyp.evoi repentance and unceasing praise
ap,ev eir\ ttjv ^(oi]v. The epithet may the praise not of our lips only, but of
havebcen inserted from the expression our hearts and of our actions.'
just above, XTjyj^op.eda ^cofjv aldviov. 5. Kat pfj XeyeTO) Tis k.t.X.] This
Similarly in John xx. 31 alcoviov is passage, as far as dnoXTj-^ofieda top
added after (a>^v by XCD etc., and fiiaOov, is quoted in several collections
in I Tim.
19 ttjs alcoviov ^(ofjs
vi. of Syriac fragments, immediately after
(from ver. 12) is substituted for the the opening sentence of this epistle :

less usual Trjs ovrcos fwiys by several see the note on the beginning of i,
authorities. In Luke x. 25 Marcion and comp. I.
p. 185. The sentence
read without alaviov (see Tertull.
(afjv fis Xpicrros...7//ias eKaXeaev is also
c. Marc. iv. 25), and so one Latin copy. quoted by Timotheus of Alexandria ;

anoKafiaip.iv'] ''secure! The pre- see I.

p. 180.

position implies that it is already avTT] r; (Tap^ k.t.X.] Difficulties

potentially our own, so that we are on this point were very early felt and
only recovering a right: see Gala- met by S. Paul, i Cor. xv. 12 sq. A
tians iv. 5 with the note. little later the precursors of Gnosti-
 ixj AN ANCIENT HOMILY 229

5 IX. Kai jurj Xeyeru) ti^ vfjitdv^ oti avTt] r]

crap^
ov KpiveruL ovhe dvicTTaTai. yvwre' ev tlvi e(rwdr]Te,
ev TLVi dve(i\e^aTe, el firi
ev Trj aapKi TuvTrj ovres ;

5 Tis] AC ;
S translates, as if it had read /xijSet's. 6 ovd^] A; oUre C.

cism boldly maintained that the only TTjv Kaphlav crov ttjv adpKa aov rav-
resurrection was a spiritual resurrec- elvai Ka\ napaxpricrr]
Trjv (ftdapTTjV
tion (2 Tim. ii. 18). It afterwards avTTJ iv fiiacrpS tivi k.t.X. So too
became a settled tenet of the Gnostic Ps.-Ign. Tars. 2 eTepoi 8e [Xeyovo-n/]
sects to deny the resurrection of the OTi 1] aap^ avTT} ovk fyeiperaL, koL 8f2
body : see Polyc. P/ti7. 7 os av fiedo- d7roXav(TTiKov ^iov ^fjv Kai p,eTL4vai.

SfVT] ra Xoyia rov Kvpiov Tvpos Tas I8ias See also Orig. e. Cels. v. 22. This
f7ri6vfiias koI Xe'yj; firjre afacrracnv iirjTe practical consequence our writer
Kplaiv elvai, Justin Dial. 80 (p. 306 d) seems to have distinctly in view 8j
et
yap Koi crvve^aXeTe u/xeTs rtcrt Xeyo- 9. (2) That it is legitimate to decline
p.ivois Xp(,(rTiavols...oi koL Xeyovcrt p-fj martyrdom and to avoid persecution
fivai veKpav dvaaraaiv dXX' afia ra by a denial of Christ with a mental
anodvrj<TK.eiv ras yj/vx^s avrav avakap,- reservation. Rightly or wrongly this
^aveadai, els tov ovpavov, VTroXa^rjTe p.r] charge is constantly brought against
avToiis Xpi(TTi.avovs k.t.X., Iren. ii. 31. them by their antagonists. Thus
2 TocrovTOV de aTTo^eovcri tov veKpov Agrippa Castor, writing against Basi-
iyeipai.Mt ne quidem credant hoc in lides (Euseb. H.E. iv. 7), represented
totum posse fieri esse autem resur- ; him as teaching d8ia(f>ope2v etScoXo^u-
rectionem a mortuis agnitionem ejus, TOiv dnoyevopivovs nai e^op,vvpevovs
quae ab eis dicitur, veritatis' (comp. dTrapa(f)vXdKTcos ttjv tt'kttlv Kara Toiis
V. 31. I, 2), Act. Paul, et Thecl. 14 Tav 8i(oypa)v Kaipovi Haer. : and Iren.
T]piis ere 8t8a^opfv, fjv Xe'yei ovros dva- iii. 18. 5 'Ad tantam
temeritatem pro-
(TTaaiv yfvecrdai, on r]8r] yeyovfv (<j) ois gressi sunt quidam ut etiam martyres
fXop.ev TeKvoii, Koi dviarapuQa Qtov eVf- spernant et vituperent eos qui prop-
yvaKOTfs aKrjBfj, Tertull. de Res. Cam. ter Domini confessionem occiduntur
'

19 Nacti quidam sollemnissimam etc' (comp. i. 24. 6). This is a con-

formam, allegorici
eloquii prophetici stant charge in Tertullian. See on
non tamen semper, resur-
et figurati, this subject Ritschl Altkath.Kirche
rectionem quoque mortuorum mani- p. 495 sq. This view again seems to
festo annuntiatam in imaginariam be combated by our writer, 4, 5,
significationem distorquent etc.,' with 7, 10.
the following chapters. Schwegler Nachap. Zeitalt. I. p.
From this doctrine the antinomian 453 sq maintained that the expres-
Gnostics deduced two consequences; sion in our text is directed against
(i)That the defilement of the flesh is docetic Ebionism. He is well re-
a matter of indifference, provided futed by Hilgenfeld Apost. Vat.
that the spirit has grasped the truth. p. 115 sq.
' '
Against this error is directed the 7. ev Tivi] in ivhat^ not in
warning Hermas Sim. v. 7 rrjv crdpKa whotn' as the following el prj iv tt}
(TOV Tavrrjv (pvXaaae Kadapav koi dpiav- anpKi shows.
Tov, Iva TO nvevfia to KUTtvoiKovv iv recovered your
dj/e/3Xe-v//are] 'ye
avTTJ pLapTvpija-r] avTrj koI biKuiuiBfi sight^ ; comp. ^5
I
roiavTrjs dxXvos
(TOV eVi
T] (rdp^- ^XtTTf p.T]TroTf dvajifi yep.ovTei iv Trj opd(rei dve^Xei\rap.ev k.t.X.
230 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [IX

^e? ovv rijULas ws vaov Oeov (puXacceiv Tt]v crapKu'

bv TpoTTOV yap ev rfj (rapKi eK\t]dr]T, Kal ev Trj

crapKL eXevaeade. el
XpLCTO^ 6 Kvpio^, 6 cwcras

rifia^, wv fjLev to irputTOv TrvevjULa, eyeveTO crap^ Kai

ouTws rifJLa^ eKaXeaev, ovtco^ kul t^jULeT^ ev Tavrrj Trj 5

(TapKL d7ro\r]^6iJLe6a tov fiLcrdov. dyaTraJjuev ovv d\-

\^\ov^, OTTO)? eXOio/uLev TravTes ek ttiv ^ao-iXeiav tov

Oeov. (t}
e'y^ojuiev Kaipov tov laSfjvai, eTrfSw/iei/ iav-

2 Kal ev Trj ffapKl...b cwaas] AC; et in carne venit christiis dominiis {nosier),
ttnus existens, qui salvavit S. This may be explained by the obliteration of some
is

letters, so that eXeiyo-eo-^e was read e\...6e, and translated as if ^X^e. 3 eXeii-
aecrde] eXevcreadai A. el] Fragm Syr ; eh ACS Timoth : see the lower
note. 4 Trvevfj-a] AS ; X670S C see above, I. p. 125, for the motive of this
:

change. iyivero] AC ;
add. 5^ S Timoth Fragm-Syr. cap?] ;
in AC
carne S Timoth Fragm-Syr. koX oCrws] A
koI oxjtus Kal C.
; 5 iKd-

I. toy vaov Qeov k.t.X.] See Ign. the Logos, is here presented in a
Philad. 7 7171' crapKa vfiSv cos vaov Qeov somewhat unusual form; comp. how-
TrjpeiTe: comp. I Cor. ill.
16, 17, vi. ever Hernias Sifn. v. 6 to wvevp.a to
19, 2 Cor. vi. 16, and see Ign. Ephes. ayiov, to wpoov, to KTLcrav naaav ttjv
9. 15 (with the notes). KTia-iv, KaTMKKrev 6 Qebs els aapKa rjv

3. eKev(Te(T6e\ Not, I think, et? i^oxikeTO, ix. I eKelvo yap to -rrvevpa

jr^v^aaikeiav tov Qeov, as Harnack 6 vios tov Qeov eaTiv, Theoph. ad Au-
takes it, but els ttjv kp'ktlv. to/, ii. 10 ovTos ovv (ov Tvvevp.a Qeov koI
el XpioTTos K.r.X.] The reading et apx^l Kot aocfiLa Koi 8vi>afiis w//'icrTou
for eiff, now supported by ample KaTrip)(eTo els tovs 7rpo(J3r^Tas Kol St

authority, is evidently required by avTav TertuU. adv. Marc.

e'XaXei /c.r.X.,

the context. Mill and others would iii. 16 'spiritus Creatoris qui est
have read as, which gives the same Christus,' Hippol. c. Noei. 4 (p. 47
sense. Editors quote as a parallel Lagarde) Xoyos arap^ i^v, Trvevpia rjv,

Ign. Magn. 7 els Icttiv 'irjaovs Xpicrros, See especially Dor-

bvvap.is ^v K.T.X.
but ety is quite out of place here, ner Lehre von der Person Christi I.
though appropriate there where the p. 205 sq.
writer is dwelling on unity. It is 8, ths exojxev Koipov]
^
while we
possible that the reading of A have opportunity'' :
comp. Gal. vi. 10
eiC arose out of IIC i.e. et 'I;;o-o0ff, (with the note), ws Ign. Srnyrn. 9
or 6I0IC i.e. et o \r]fTovs. The confu- en Kaipov exofiev. Another instance
sion would be easier, as the preceding of coy, 'white,' occurs above, ^ 8.
word ends in G. 10. Justin Apol. i. 44
7rpoyp{o<TTT]s]

4. $>v \j.ev\ As though the sentence (p. 82 Tatian adGraec. 19, Theoph.
b),
were intended to be continued in a ad Autol. ii. 15.
participial form yev6p.evos be. 11. Ta ev fcapSia] 2 Chron. xxxii. 31
TO TTpwTov nvevp.a] The doctrine elhevai to. ev ttj Kapbia avTov, Deut.
of the pre-existence of the Son, as viii. 2 biayvctXTdrj ra iv ttj Kapbia aov.
 ix] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 23 1

Tovs TM depajreuovTi Oew, di^Ti/uicdiai/ uvtm ^iSoVres*

10 TToiav
;
TO jueTavofjcraL ep elXiKpivov^ Kapdia<s' Trpo-
'yvwo'Tri'i yap ecmv tcov iravTUiv kul elBcos t]iu(Jou to.

v
Kaphia. hcdjjiev ovv avTM aivov alcovLOv, jurj drro

CTOjuaro^ fjLOVOV dWa Kal diro Kaphia^, 'iva rifjid^

Trpocrhe^tjTai W9 vlov'S. Kal yap eiirev 6 Kvpios'

15 'AAeAc})oi Moy oyTOi eiciN 01 noioyNTec to OeAHMA Toy
nATpdc Moy.
Xeaev] AC
; add. exisieus in came (wV kv rfj aapKl) S, but this may be only a gloss
of oiVws and probably does not represent any additional words in the Greek text.
ovtcjjs sec] A
ovtu C, ;
6 dTro\7]ip6/jLeda] aTro\T]\po/J.ai9a A. ovv] AS ;

om. C. 9 T(^ depaTrevovTi.] AC ;

add. uos S. lo eiXiKpi.i'ovs]

CkLKpivovcr A. 1 1 TO. ev Kaphia] raevKapdia A ;

ra eyKapSia C ;
ea quae in
corde nostrtuii S. 12 axvov aiihviov\ mwviov (om. mvov) A; atuov (om. aluviov)
CS. 13 iifias] AC; Kal i]/xds S. 15 iroiovvres^ irovvTea A,

I Sam. ix.
19, etc. Hilgenfeld reads ixrjrrjp fiov Koi a8e\(j}oi p,ov ovtol elcriv,
Ta ivKapbia, saying of ^evKdp8ia (s. A ol TOV Xoyov Toi) Qeov uKovovTes koi
eyKapdia) c. Cod., Jun., ev KopBia ceteri TToioiivTes. Epiphanius, Haer. xxx. 14
edd.' But, inasmuch as an iota sub- (p. 139), gives the saying Qvto'l elaiv
script or adscript never appears in ol d8eX(f)oi [iov koi t; ii^ttjp, ol iroiovvTes
MSS of this date, the transcriber could Ta deXrjpaTa Toi) TfciTpos fiov, as it is

not have written eV KapS/a otherwise assumed, from an Ebionite gospel

than he has done. Moreover, since ev (Westcott Canon p. 160, Hilgenfeld
Kap8ia and ev number-
rfj Kap8ia occur Apost. Vat. p. 122) but I do not think
;

less times in the LXX, whereas the his language implies more than that

adjective eyKap8ios is not once found the Ebionites allowed the saying to
there, this reading seems to me im- stand in their recension of the Gos-
probable. In Clem. Alex. Facd.i. 3 (p. pel, and he may be quoting loosely
103) I should be disposed conversely from the canonical Evangelists. A
to read diopav to. ev Kapdia (for still wider divergence from the ca-
eymp-
bia) Xo'yoy. The word eyKap8ios how- nonical passages is in Clem. Alex.
ever is legitimate in itself. Ed. Proph. 20 (p. 994) dyei ovv els
12. alvov alcovLov] This is doubtless eXevdeplav ttjv tov narpus crvyKXrjpovo-
the right reading ;
see above, i.
p. fiovs vlovs KOI (fiiXovs' A8eX(poi pov
120 and the note on evpe'tv below yap, (prjcTLv
6 Kvpios, Ka\ crvyKXrjpovopot.

10. Comp. Apost. Const, iii. i tov ol rroLouvres to deXrjfia tov iraTpos
aloivtov enaivov. fjLov,
where the context shows that
15. 'A8eX(j)oi fiov K.T.X.] Matt. xii. avyKXr^povopLoi is deliberately given as
49 'Sou j; f^']''"'lP Mf"^ '^f"' o' d8eX<poi part of the quotation. Omitting Kal
fiQv' ooTts yap av Trot^cr/y to deXrjpa tov orvyKXrjpovopoi and inserting ovtoL elcriv^
naTpos p.ov tov ev ovpavols, avTos fiov it will be seen that this form of the

d8eX(f>6s Koi d8eX(jiri kol pj^Tijp e'crrtV saying agrees exactly with our pseudo-
(comp. Mark iii.
35) ;
Luke viii. 21 Clement's quotation.
232 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [X

X. ''OOa-re, dde\<pOL julou, iroLncruyiuei/ to 6e\r]^a

Tov Trarpo^ tov KaXearavro^ i^indsj 'iva kul
^rjcriofiev,

rnv dperriv, rnv Ze KUKiav Kara-

liui^oifjiev fjidXKov
ws twi> kui
Xei^co/uiev TrpoodoLTropoi/ d^apTiwv ^i/xwi/,

1 dde\(poL fiov] A
dSeX^iot (om. fxov) C
; dSeX^ot Kal d5eX0at ; l/xov] S. On the

uncertainty respecting the pronoun in S in such cases see below, 13. 4 'rpo-

X. 'Let us therefore fulfil the will to read ..^r\v^ ^qui trauseunt,'

of our Father. Let us flee from vice,
thus more closely representing irapa-
lest evil overtake us. Let us do good,
however it mistranslates?
yovo-i, which
that peace may pursue us. They who
Previous editors have supposed the
teach the fear of men rather than the
error to lie in avOpanov, written ANON
fear of God, are duly punished. And,
in the MS. Accordingly ANeN (i.e.
if they themselves alone suffered, it

were tolerable. But now they shall av Qiov) has been suggested by Wot-
have a double condemnation, for they ton ;
OYNON (i.e. ovpavov) by Davies ;

lead others besides themselves into and AINON {alvov) by Hilgenfeld.

ruin.' But in the first correction the av is
2. Iva frfo-oj/xci'] To be connected grammatically inexplicable and the ;

not with roil KoXea-avTos 7/i5s, but with second and third give unnatural ex-
pressions. I believe the mistake is
'

4.TrpooSotVopoi/] a forerunner'' ; in eVPeiN, and should suggest

for KaKla is the evil disposition, while eiPHNHNGYPeiN or GIPHNGYeiN,
afxapria is the actual sin. KUKia On or still better eYHMePIN. If
see Trench N. T. Syn. ist ser. xi, evTjfiepflv
be adopted,
^
to prosper'
where he quotes the definition of the writer seems to have in mind
Calvin (on Ephes. iv. 32)
'
Animi Ps. xxxiv. 9 sq cfio^TjdrjTe tov Ku-
pravitas quae human itati et aequitati
piov iTavTfi...ovK eariv v(rrfprjp,a rois
est opposita et malignitas vulgo nun- avTov... 4)0^01' Ku-
(})ol3ovfJLevois
cupata.' The
substantive -npoohomo-
plov SiSfi^a) u/xaj. ri'f i<TTi.v av6pa>7TOS
pos seems to be very rare, though the 6 6eX(ov C<B7/i', dyanw!/ ^fiepas Ibelv
verb Trpoodonropelv occurs occasion- dyadds ',
.skkXivov (ztto naiiov Koi

ally. TToirjaov dyadov, ^rjTrjO-op flprjvrjv

6. dyadoTToielv] See the note on Koi hia^ov avTijv, where the coinci
the First Epistle 2 ayadonouav. dences are striking. The contrast
'
7. fevpe'ivf] sc. lpT]vr]v ;
J^or this between they^^r of men and the fear
reason a man cannot find peace.'' If of God., which underlies this passage,
we take the reading of the Greek MSS, would naturally suggest to our author
no other meaning seems possible ; the words in which the Psalmist em-
but can hardly be correct. Yet
it
phatically preaches the fear of the
this must have been the reading of Lord. For evr]p,epflv, evrjp.fpia, COmp.
'
S, which translates noti est
homini 2 Mace. V. 6, viii. 8, x. 28, xii. 11, xiii.
{cuiquam) inve7iire homines illos qui
16, xiv. 14. For the manner in which
faciunt timoreni humanicm,' as if the the transcriber of our principal MS
construction were ovk ta-riv av6pa>irov drops letters (more especially where
evpflv (eKeivovs) otrives
k.t.X. ;
but for there is a proximity of similar forms)
. >
T%N^ '^ 'gui/aciunt,' ought we not COmp. 9 atuviov for aivov aldviov,
 X] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 233

5 (puycoiuev Ttjv dcre^eiaVy fjLt] ^{Jid^ KaTa\a(3t] kuku. eat/

yap crTTOvdaa-cojuev dyadoTroielv, ^ico^eTai rifjid^ elprivt].

Aia TavTtjv yap Tr]v aiTiau ovk kcTTiv ^eupeTvf dv-

odoiiropov'] AC ; proditorem (as if irpodorriv) S This rendering again may be due to
the obliteration of some letters in the word. afMipTiuv} A; a/J.apTrj/jjiTWv C,
6 yap] AS ;
8e C.

TTovvTfcr for rroioiifres, 1 1 aaovK for hardly consistent with other facts.
as ovs OVK. See also in the First It is highly improbable that a long

Epistle II Tfpoyv(opiO(T, ^ 25 re- passage which had disappeared thus

Xeim/Korocr, j2 rjnepacr (for Tj/xerepay), early should have been preserved in
etc., and (if my conjecture be correct) any MS accessible to the Pseudo-
40 the omission of empLeXas before Damascene, or even to the Pseudo-
eVtreXeZo-^ai. Lipsius {Academy July Justin. Moreover the enumeration
9, 1870:
comp. Jen. Lit.., 13 Jan. of verses in the Stichometria of Ni-
1877) would read ovk ea-nv dprjvT] cephorus seems to have been made
dvOpdnois olTives k.t.X. when the epistle was of its present
Hilgenfeld (ed. 2, pp. xlviii, jj) size, and is not adapted to a more

supposes that there is a great lacuna lengthy document. In the colophon

at this point ovk ecrnv evpflv avdpa- at the end of the Second Epistle (see
TTOf oiTLVfS
I Trapayovaiv (pofSovs av- above, I.
p. 122) C gives o-n'xot Xi

6p(x>invovs K.T.X. In this lacuna he prjTo. Ke. As Nicephorus (see I. p.

finds a place not only for this quota- 196) gives the numbers of o-tixol in
tion in the so-called John of Da- the two Clementine Epistles as ,/3x',
mascus (see above, I. p. 194 sq), but Bryennios supposes that x here is
also for the reference to the Sibyl in an error for ,/3;c',the ,/3 having dropped
Pseudo-Justin which I have discussed out. But, as Hilgenfeld himself has
already (l. p. 178 sq). This theory pointed out, as the pr^ra, or scriptural
however seems highly improbable for quotations, are given as 25, this must
the following reasons. refer to the Second Epistle alone.

(i) Though there is good reason When counted up, they do in fact
for assuming that the existing text amount to 25, one or two more or less,
is faulty at this point, the external for it is difficult in some cases to de-
facts are altogether adverse to the cide whether to reckon the quotations
supposition that a great lacuna exists separately or not. The 600 verses
here, such for instance as would be therefore must refer to the Second
I may add that this
produced by the disappearance of Epistle alone.
one or more leaves in an archetypal agrees with the reckoning of Ni-
MS. Such an archetypal MS must cephorus, which giving 2600 to the
have been of very ancient date, for Two Epistles leaves 2000 for the
all our three extant authorities (see First. Thus the proportion of the
above, I.
p. 145) have the same text First Epistle to the Second is roughly
here. not indeed impossible
It is as 2000 600, or as 10 3.
: In :
my
that this archetypal MS should have translation the two Epistles take up
been defective, seeing that the com- respectively 34^ and lOj pages, these
mon progenitor of ACS certainly had numbers being almost exactly as
minor corruptions. But though pos- 10 :
3.
sible in itself, this supposition is (2) Again ; though the two frag-
234 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [X

Bpuiirov, OLTive^ Trapayouo-L (po/Sov^ dvOpcoTrij/ov^, Trpot]-

fdciWov Tr}v ii/dade ctTToXavcriv i] rr]v jueWov-

ptifievoL
<rav eTrayyeXiap. dyvoovcTLV yap t]\iKt]V e^ei (^aaavov
ri evdade aTroXavcris, Kai o\av Tpv(pr]v e^^ci y\ jueWovcra
eTrayyeXla. Kal el fjiev avTOi julovoi tuvtu eTrpacrcrov, 5

dvEKTov r]v' vvv Ze eirLfievovo'Lv KaKodidaaKaXovvTe^

T9 dvaLTLOV^ ^v)(^a<s, ovK eldore^ oti Zlcct^v epovaiv
Trjv Kplariv, avToi re Kai ol a/coJoj/res avTwv,
XL 'Hjueh ovv ev KaOapa Kapdia ^ofAefCto/xei/
I Trporjprjfj.hoi] wpoaipov/Meda AC. S ti^anslates, as if it had read irpocupovfievoi,
which was also conjectured by Bryennios. 2 a.wbXavai.v'] AS ;
dvawavaLP C.
3 eTrayyeXiavl eirayyeXeiav A. rfKiKTiv'] 7]\tjK7jv A. 4 d7r6Xau(7ts] AS;
dvairavais C. 5 e;ra77eXta] eirayyeXeca A. 6 dveKTov ^v] AC; S
translates erai its fortasse respiratio, but this probably does not represent any

merits which Hilgenfeld would assign
to this lacuna are not incongruous in
subject, yet the sentiments in the
extant context on either side of the
supposed lacuna are singularly appro-
priate to one another,
juxtaposition seem to
suggested by the language of Ps.
lexicons will show that Hilgenfeld's
correction Trapeiadyovai for Trapayovai
is unnecessary. He rightly explains
the words {Apost. Vat. p. 11 8) to refer
to those Gnostics who taught that
and in this outward conformity to heathen rites
have been was indifferent and that persecution
might thus be rightly escaped comp. :

xxxiv. 9 sq quoted in note. my KUKo'bihafTKaKovvTe'i below, and see the

(3) The style of the fragment quoted note above on 9 avrr] f\ adp^ k.t.X.
by the Pseudo-Damascene betrays a 3. enayyeXlav] i. e. the subject,
different hand from our author's. Its the fulfilment, of the promise, as e.g.
vocabulary is more philosophical Acts i.
4, Gal. iii. 14,Heb. vi. 15.
((ca^oXou, TO. (f)VKTa, vnoBecris Kal v^rj, 6. dveKTov 7?f] For the imperfect
TO. d(T7ra(7Ta, kut evx'>]v), and altogether see Winer ^ xlii. p. 321.
it shows more literary skill. KaKo8i8aaKaXovpTesJ Ign. Philad. 2
The probable account of the quo- KaKohibadKoKLas. So KaXoSiSacrKaXov?,
tations in the Pseudo-Justin and in Tit. ii. 3.
the Pseudo-Damascene is given above 7. Biacrfip K.T.X.] For the form
(I. p. sq, 194 sq). of the sentence comp. Gen. xliii. 11
17^8
I. otrives]
''

?nen who^ the antece- Kal TO dpyvpiov dicrcrov Xd^ere. Comp.

dent being the singular (ivdpunrov. Apost. Const. V. 6 koI irepois alnoi
This grammatical irregularity is not dnaiiXfias yevrjo'op.eda Kal dnrXoTepav
uncommon : see Jelf's Gratmn. 819. vTroiaopLep rrjv ricnv.
2. a. XI. '
Let us therefore serve God
irapayova-i K.r.X.]
'
ifltrodiice (instil) and believe His promise. If we wa-
fears of men' :
comp. 4 ou bfl ver, we are lost. Remember how the
Tiiias (po^elcrdai tovs dvdpcoTTOvs fiaXXou word of prophecy denounces the dis-
oKKa Tov Qeov. The passages in the trustful, how it compares the fulfil-
 xi] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 235

10 Tft) OecOf Kal icTOiueda dlKaiOL' iav de /urj dovXevcroj--

fjiev ^La Tou fir] incrTeveiv t]}j.a<i Trj eTrayyeXia tov

Oeou, TaXaiTTcopoL ecofJieda. Xeyei yap kul 6 Trpo-

Xoyo^'
(pr]TiKO<s TfXAAinoopoi eiciN 01 AiVyxo'/ O' Aicta-
ZONTeC TH KApAlA, 01 AefONTeC' TaYTA nANTA HKOyCAMeN
15 KAI eni TOON HATepCON HMOON, HMgTc AE HMepAN ki HMepAC
npocAexoMGNOi oyAeN toytcon eoopAKAMeN. 'Anohtoi, cym-
BAAexe eAYTOYC I\h({i, AABere AMneAoN' npooTON mgn (\)yK-
Aopoe?, 6ITA BAactoc riNeTAi, mcta tayta om^aS, gita

different Greek. 7 dvaiTiovs] averiova A. 10 sq dovXeva-u/xev dia tou

fir) Tncrreveiv /c.t.X.] A; Sov\ev(ro}/j.v 5ta t6 /jlt] Tricrreveiv k.t.X. C; TnffTevawfiev, 5ia
TO 8eip iriffTeveiv k.t.X. S. 12 TaXaiTrupoi] AC; vere {dX7]dQs or Sfrws) miseri
S. 14 TratraJA; irdXai CS. i)Kov(raixev'\ A; riKoijo/xev CS. 15 /cat]

AC; om. S. evrt] AC; d-n-d S. 17 fjLev] AC; om. S. (pvXXopoei]

A; (pvXXoppoei C 18 /ierd raCro] AS ;
elra C.

ment of God's purpose to the gradual First. At the same time the coinci-

ripening of the fruit on the vine, how dence of two remarkable quotations
it
promises blessings at the last to in this very chapter (see below on ovs
His people. God is faithful and He ovK ^Kovaev k.t.X.), which occur also
will perform. Let us therefore work in the First Epistle, besides other
patiently, and we shall inherit such resemblances (e. g. 3), seems to

good things as pass man's under- prove that our writer was acquainted
standing.' with and borrowed from the genuine
9. Kadapa KopSta] I Tim. i. 5, 2 Clement.
Tim. ii.22 (comp. Matt. v. 8), Her- The additions which some editors
mas Vis. iii. 9. introduce into the text here {vlo\
12. o 7rpo(})r]TiKbs Ao-yoy] See 2 Pet. after Se, and eVt
^p.dsafter ecopa-
i. From some apocryphal
19. source, KUfjiev) due to a mistake. The
are
perhaps Eldad and Modad : see the traces, which they have wrongly so
notes on the First Epistle 23, where read in A, are the reversed impres-
also the passage is quoted. The va- sions of letters on the opposite leaf
riations from the quotation in the (now lost). The photograph shows
First Epistle are these: (i) t^ Kapbla] this clearly.
^
rfiv yl^vxrjv (2) Traira] om. (3) j;/ieir 15. rip.pav i^ r)p.ipai\ day after
Se...ea)pa/ca/x.f j/J Koi i8ov yeyrjpdKafJiev day' Num. xxx. 15, 2 Pet. ii. 8. This
:

Koi ov8ev Tjp.'iv TOVTwv avv0^r]Kev (4) additional coincidence of the passage
dvorjToi] (o dvoTjToi. (5) "ytVerat] add. quoted with the language of 2 Peter
eira (j)vX\ov, ei'ra avdos Koi. (6) ov- (see the notes on the First Epistle,
TtDj KOI K.T.X.] this close of the quota- 23) is worthy of notice. It seems
tion not given. These variations are hardly possible that the two can be
sufficient to show that the writer of wholly independent, though we have
the Second Epistle cannot have de- no means of determining their rela-
rived the passage solely from the tion.
236 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [XI

CTA(J)Y^H HApeCTHKYlA' OyTOJyC KAI 6 AAOC MOY AKATACTAC AC I

'

KAi eAiyeic 6C)(eN" eneixA AnoAHyexAi ta ataSa. Wo'Te,

dhe\(poi lULOV, fir] diyl/-vx(J0iuieUf

dWa eXTricravTe'i vtto-

fxeLVMiJiev, 'Iva kul tov fJnaSov KOjULKTcofJieOa. nicxoc tar

ecTiN 6 enArreiAAMGNOc Ta? dvTLjULaOla^ dTTodidovai ena- S

crTii) TCdv epywi/ avrov. eav ovv 7roir}<TO}fJiev Tr]v ciKai-

oa'vvt]v evavTLOV tov Oeouy 6Lcrt]^oiu6v ek Tt]i/ ^acriXeiav

I ora^i/X?}] AS; ^Xaarbs C. 6 Xa6s /xov] AC; add. TrpuTov S. 2 ^Tretro]

eirira A. 3 dXXa] dXX' C. 4 'iva] AC; om. S. 8 oCs

ovK iJKovcrev ovde d<f>dd\fxbs eldev] AC (but A acrovK for acrovaovK) ; ociilus tion

vidit et auris non aiidivit (transposing the clauses) S. This latter is the order in

I Cor. iii.
9, and in Clem. Rom. 34. 9 elSei'] i^^v A. 12 eiretSr;]

3. ^17 SiA/^vx^Mf] See the note on monly translated here 'in horas',
the First Epistle 11. ^from hour to hour '.

4. nifTTos yap /c.r.X.]

Heb. x. 23 13. fTn(j)avias] This word, as a
KKTTOS yap 6 inayyeiKdp.vos. synonyme for the Trapova-ia, occurs in
5. aTTobidovai fKa(rT<o ac.t.X.] Matt. the New Testament only in the Pas-
xvi. 27, Rom. ii. 6, Rev. xxii. 12. See toral Epistles, I Tim. 2 Tim.
vi. 14,

also the quotation given in the First i. 10, iv. I, 8, Tit. ii.
13 ; compare the
Epistle, 34. indirect use in 2 Thess. ii. 8 rfj t'rrt^a-

7. dcT'q^oiJ.ev]
'
Voceni elcnjKeiv non peia. Ttjs TTapovtrias avrov.
agnoscunt lexica', Jacobson. It oc- 14. vno rivoi] By Salome. This
curs early as vEschylus, and
as incident was reported in the Gospel
several instances of it are given in of the Egyptians, as we learn from
Steph. Thes. Clem. Alex. Strom, iii. 13, p. 553 (in
8. ovs K.T.X.] See the note on the a passage quoted from Julius Cassi-
First Epistle 34, where the same anus), where the narrative is given
passage occurs. The as should not thus: TrvvdavofiivTjs Tfjs SaXco/x/;?, Trore
be treated as part of the quotation. yvoicrOrjCTiTaL ra nepi cop rjpfTo, e(f)r) o
XII. 'Let us then patiently wait Kvpios, "Orap to ttjs alcr\vpr]s vbvp.a
for the kingdom of God. The time 7raTi](Tr]Te, Ka\ orap yeprjTai, ra dvo ev,
of its coming is uncertain. Our Lord's Ka\ TO appep p,eTa ttjs drjXeias ovTe
answer to Salome says that it shall appep ovTe dfjKv. To this Clement
be delayed till f/te two shall be one, adds iv Tols TrapaSeSo/xeVots ^h'i-p "rer-
and the outward as the inward, and Tapcriv evayyeXioLS ovk e)(^ofiev to prjTOP
the male with the female, neither aXX' P Tco Kar' AlyvTTTiovs. Similar
male nor female. By this saying He passages from this gospel and ap-
means that mutual harmony must parently from the same context are
first prevail, that there be perfect quoted by Clement previously, Strom.
sincerity, and that no sensual pas- iii. 6 (p. 532) TT] ^aXcofiji 6 Kvpios
sion be harboured.' Trvvdavofxepi] fiexpi^ Tvore BavaTos lcr)(v-
II. Ka& &pav\ '<5i?^m^5-,' 'tempes- (ret...Me;^pis av, eiVev, vfie7s al yvvalKes
tive,' according to its usual meaning ; TLKTfTe, and Strom, iii.
9 (p. 539 sq)
e.g. Job V. 26, Zech. x. i. It is com- KaKe'ipa Xeyoucrt to irpos 'SaXcoixrjv et-
 XIl] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 237

avTOv Kal Xtjyf/^Ojueda ra-s eTrayyeXia'S, ccs oyc oy'k hkoy-

ceN oyAe d(t)OAAMdc eiAeN, oyAe eni KApAiAN ANepconoy
10 ancBh.

XII. 'GKhe-^wfxeGa ovv KaO' iapav Tr]v (^aciXeiav

Tov Oeov ev dyaTrr] Kal diKaiocrvvr], eTreidt] ovk 01-

^afjLev Trjv rifjiepav Tf]<s eTrKpai/eia^

tou Oeov. iTrepco-
TYjOeh yap aura's 6 Kv jOiOS VTTO TLVO^, TTOTE r]^eL
A; eirel C, or so probably S. 13 eiri.(l>avdas] TrL<paviacr A. tov Oeov]
AC ; avTOv S. eirep(0T7j6els] A; ipuTTjOels C. 14 inro tivos] AC ;
add.
Twv cLiroffToKwv S. The addition unfortunate, for the questioner was Salome; see
is

the lower note. Tj^et] AC; venii (a present) S.

prjfitva, cov Trporepov efjLVijadrjfiev {Str07n. of our Lord's utterances as reported in

"
iii. 6, just quoted) (f)fpTai 8e, olpai, the authentic Gospels, though entirely
fv TO) Kar AiyvTTTiovs evayyeXlco' (pacrl in keeping with the tone of Grseco-

yap OTi avros ftTTfi/ o acorrjp, H\6ov Egyptian speculation. Epiphanius

KaTaXiicrai ra epya rfjs 6rjKeias...odfv thus describes this apocryphal gospel
eiKoTcos TTfpl crvvreXeias jxr^vvaavTos tov {^Haer. Ixii. 2, p. 514) TroXXa TOtavTa as
Aoyou, T] 'SaXapr] (prjcri' Me^^pi rivoi 01 iv Ttapa^vaTU) pva-TT]pico8as eK Trpocranrov

avOpcuTToi anodavovvTai ;. . .
TrapareTTjprj- TOV atoTfjpos dva(f)epTai. (2) The only
pevcos aTTOKpiveraL 6 Kvpios, Me)(pis external fact which can be tested
av TLKTcocriv al yvvatKes...Ti Se; ov;^i ical the reference to Salome as childless
TCI e^fji Tcov npos ^aXcoprjv flp-qpevaiv is in direct contradiction to the cano-

eT7i(f>epova-LV ol navTa paWov rj

TTjv dX^deiav fvayyeXiKa aToi)(i](TavTs
Kavovi; (papevT]i yap avTfjs, KaXms ovv
fTrolrjcra pfj TKOvaa...ape'i^Tai
6 Kvpios, Tlaaav (f)aye ^OTavrjv,
TTiKpiav i'xova-av pfj <pdyr]s.
sayings in the last passage is
ferred to in j5'-i-6-. Theod. 67,
p. 985, oTav
o a(OTT]p irpos ^aXcoprjv Xeyrj fiexpt t6t
eivai BdvaTov a^pis av ai yvvalKes tiktco-
(Tiv. There is nothing in these pas-
sages to suggest that Clement himself
had read this gospel (unless indeed,
as has occurred to me, we should
read t'l 8e ou;^i k.t.X. for tl 8e ovxi
K.T.X. in Stro})i. iii. 9), and the ex-
pressions Xiyovai, oipai, (fiaal, seem
to imply the contrary; though it is
generally assumed that he was ac-
quainted with it. Of the
rw Kara nical narratives. This contradiction
however might be removed by an
easy change of reading, kqXcos ovv av
Xeycoii T70ir]aa for KaXms ovv iirolrjaa. The
ttjv Se Egyptian Gospel was highly esteem-
One of the ed by certain Gnostic sects as the
again re- Ophites (Hippol. Haer. v. 7, p. 99),
by the Encratites (Clem. Alex. Strom.
11.
cc), and by the Sabellians Epi-
phan. Haer. I.e.). The Encratites
especially valued it, alleging the pas-
sages above quoted as discounte-
nancing marriage and thus favouring
their own ascetic views. This was
; ; possibly the tendency of the Egyp-
tian Gospel, as is maintained by
Schneckenburger {Ueber das Evang.
dcr u-Egypt. Bern 1834, p. 5 sq) and
Nicolas {Evatigiles Apooyphes p.
historical 119 sq) but the inference is at least
;

value of this narrative we mayremark: doubtful. Clement of Alexandria

(i) The mystical colouring of these refuses to accept the interpretations
sayings is quite alien to the character of the Encratites and though his own
;
238 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [xii

avTOv Y] (SacriXeia, elTrev "Otan gctai ta Ayo fn, kai to

e2oo dic TO ecoo, kai to ApceN mcta thc GHAeiAC, oyTe
ApcGN oyTe 0hAy. Ta Ayo oe en ecTTiv, OTav XaKw-
fjiev eavToT's d\r]6eLav, Kai ev dvci a'cojJLacnv dvuTroKpi-
TOJS eif] fjLLa yjjrv^f).
kui to ilod (he to ecw, tovto 5

I sq TO i^(j) ws TO iaui\ AS ;
to, ^^w tis to. iau C. 2 SijXetas] driKiaffA.
3 5i;o 5^] A ;
5^ 5i5o C. 4 eai/rots] C ;
avTOtcr A ;
MOi^zV S, which represents

are sometimes fanciful, still all the the MSS be correct, it must be aspi-
passages quoted may reasonably be rated avTols, and this form is perhaps
explained otherwise than in an En- less unlikely than in the earlier and
cratite sense. genuine epistle (see the notes there
This quotation has a special inter- on 9, 12, 14, etc.). The expression
est as indicating something of the occurs in Ephes. iv. 25 XaXeirf dX?f-
unknown author of our Second Epi- dfiav eKacrros iiera tov likTjcriov avTov.
stle. As of his quotations
several 5. TO e^co as to eVco] Perhaps
cannot be referred to the canonical meaning originally 'w/ien the outside
Gospels (see 4, 5, 8), it seems not corresponds with the inside, when men
unnatural to assign them to the apo- appear as they are, when there is no
cryphal source which in this one in- hypocrisy or deception.' The pseudo-
stance he is known to have used. Clement's interpretation is slightly
This suspicion is borne out by a fact but not essentially different. This
to which I have called attention clause is omitted in the quotation of
above. One of our Lord's sayings Julius Cassianus {Strojn. iii. 13, p.
quoted by him ( 9) bears a close 553, quoted above), who thus appears
resemblance to the words as given in to have connected to. dm ev closely
the Excerpta Theodotij and we have with TO appev fxeTo. Trjs drjXelas and in-
just seen that the Gospel of the terpreted the expression similarly.
Egyptians was quoted in this collec- See Hippol. Haer. v. 18 (p. 173 sq)

tion. Thus our pseudo-Clement /cat euTtv dpaevodrjXvs dvvapis nal inl-
would seem to have employed this voia, odev dWrjXois avTi(TToi)(ov(nv...ev

apocryphal gospel as a principal ovTes...earTiv ovv ovtcos koi to cf)avev dn

authority for the sayings of our Lord. avTav, ev ov, 8110 evpicrKecrdai, dpaevoQrj-
3. Ta hvo 8e ev] i.e. when peace \vs ex<^v TTjv BrjkeLav ev eavra, a pas-
and harmony shall reign. So the sage quoted by this father from the
opposite is thus expressed in Seneca Great Announcetnent of the Simo-
de Ira iii. 8 'Non tulit Caelius adsen- nians. We
may perhaps infer from
tientem et exclamavit, Die aliquid a comparison of Cassianus' quotation
contra, ut duo simus'' comp. Plato ;
with our pseudo-Clement's, that Cas-
Synip. 191 D 6 fpcos-'-eTn-Xfipav noiTJaai. sianus strung together detached sen-
ev fK 8vo2v KOL Idcraadai ttjv (^v<jiv t^v tences, omitting all that could not be
av6pa>TTivr]v (quoted by Lagarde J?el. interpreted to bear on his Encratite
Jur. Eccl. p. 75). views. Compare pseudo-Linus de
4. ea^rois] ''to one aiiother^ as Pass. Petr. Apost. (Bigne's Magn.
e.g. Ephes. iv. 32, Col. iii. 13, 16, Bibl. Patr. i.
p. 72 e) Unde Domi- '

I Pet. iv. 8, 10. If the reading of nus in mysterio dixerat Si non fece- :
XIl] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 239

Xeyer Tt]v yl^vyriv Xeyei to eaco, to Be e^io to crw-

fj.a Xeyei. 6v TpoTrov ovv (TOv to a'ayjua (paiveTai, ou-
Tcos Kai r\ "^vxri (tov ^f]\o^ kcTia ev Toh kuXoT's epyoL^.
Kai TO ApceN MeTA THC BhAeiAc, oyxe ApceN ofxe 0hAy,
eavToh. Sv(tI'\ A; Zvo C. 5 to i^ui\ ws to e'trco AC ;
ro ?(rw ws rh ?fw S.
6 TO ^(TU3, TO 5^ ^|w] AS ; t6 ?^w rd 5e &-w C. 7 oiJtws] ovtu C. 8 S^Xos]
A ; StjXtj C. 9 ^ijXetas] Oi/jXiaff A.

ritis dextram sicut sinistram et sinis- was more closely allied to that of
tram sicut dextram, et quae sursum Cassianus than to that of Clement.
sicut deorsum et quae ante sicut At the same time I have shown above
retro, non cognoscetis regnum Dei,' (i. p. 408) that the statements of
which 'appears to contain another Epiphanius and Jerome, who speak
version of this saying' (Westcott of Clement as teaching virginity, do
Introd. to Gospels p. 427). not refer to this epistle, as many sup-
8, StJXos] The lexicons give only- pose. And the references elsewhere
one instance of this feminine, Eurip. in the epistle to the duty of keeping
A'led. 1 197 S^Xoy riv Karaa-raa-is. Com- the flesh pure (g 6, 8, 9, 14, 15) are
pare TeXfiov in Ign. Philad. i. as applicable to continency in wedded
9. Ka\ TO (ipa-fv K.r.X.] This sup- as in celibate life. Comp. e.g. Ckm.
posed saying of our Lord was inter- Horn. iii. 26
yap.ov vop.iTevi...els ay-
preted by Julius Cassianus, as for- veiav iravTas ayei.

bidding marriage. Whether this was This saying of the Egyptian Gos-
its true bearing, we cannot judge, as it had any historical basis at
pel, if
the whole context and the character all (which may be doubted), was

of this gospel are not sufficiently perhaps founded on some utterance

known. It might have signified no of our Lord similar in meaning to
more than that 'in the kingdom of S. Paul's ovK eui apcrev Kai Brfkv, Gal.
heaven there is neither marrying nor iii.28. It is worth observing that

giving in marriage (Matt. xxii. 30),' Clement of Alexandria, in explaining

or that the distinctive moral excellen- the saying of the Egyptian Gospel,
ces of each sex shall belong to both words of S. Paul and
refers to these

equally. Clement of Alexandria, an- explains them similarly of the 6vp.os

swering Julius Cassianus, gives thefol- and (nidvfiia. See also the views of
lowing interpretation of the passage : the Ophites on the dpaevodrj'Kvs (Hip-
The male represents 6v[j,6s, the female pol. Haer. v. 6, 7), whence it
appears
iiTiBvixia, according to the well-known that they also perverted S. Paul's lan-
Platonic distinction; these veil and guage to their purposes. The name
hinder the operations of the reason ;
and idea of dpcrevodrjXvs had their
they produce shame and repentance ; origin in the cosmical speculations
they must be stripped off, before the embodied in heathen mythology ;

reason can assume its supremacy ;

see C/em. Horn. vi. 5, 12, Clem. Re-
then at length dnotnaaa Tov8e tov cogn. i.
69, Athenag. Siippl. 21, Hip-
(Jxr]iJ.aTos CO biaKpiveTai to apptu koi to pol. Haer. v. 14 (p. 128).
6PjXv, v//'VX'7 pfTaTidfTai els epcoa-iv, ov6e- It is equally questionable whether

Tepov ovcra. It appears from the con- the other sayings attributed to our
text that our preacher's interpretation Lord in this conte.\t of the Egyptian
240 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [xii

TOVTO Xeyei, iva d^eXipo^ idcov d^e\(pr}V fov^euf (ppovrj

wepi avTrj'i drjXvKOV, fxrjde (ppovfj
tl Trepi avTOv dpcreviKOv.
Tavra vpiuJv ttoiouvtwv, (pricriVf
eXevcreraL t) (SacriXeia
Tov Trarpos juov.
XIII. 'AdeXcpoi fovvi n^n ttote fjLeTavoyiariofJiev' 5

VYi^uifJiev 7ri TO dyadov iu6(rT0i <yap ecrfjiev TroXXfjs

dvoia Kal TTOurjplas. e^aXelyfrco/uei/ d<p' rtjjiwv

ra irpo-
1
TovTo\ After this word A is mutilated, and the remainder of the so-called

epistle is wanting; see l.

p. 117. ovOfv (ppov^'l ovdev (ppovel C. 2 M'?^^]
add. quuin soror videbit fratrem S. 5 'A5e\0ot ovv\ 'Ade\(poi [/J.ov] S,

omitting ovu. As S commonly renders ddeXcpoL alone by TIS fratres mei, it is

Gospel have any bearing on Encra- Winer Iv. p. 599 sq. The sentence
tite views. The words so long as '
is elliptical, and words must be
women bear children' seem to mean understood in the second clause,
nothing more than 'so long as the ^rjbe Ihovcra dSeX^of] (^povfj
[aSeX(^))
human race shall be propagated,' K.T.\. Similar words, it will be seen,
and I came to abolish the works of
'
are supplied in the Syriac but I ;

the female' may have the same sense. attribute this to the exigencies of
The clinching utterance, iracrav ^aye translation, rather than to any differ-
^ordvrjv, rrjv ^e niKpiav e'xovcrav fxr]
ence in the Greek text which the
which has been alleged as
4>ayijs, translator had. Gebhardt ingeni-
showing decisively the Encratite ten- ously reads p.r]b' rjde but rj8e...avrov
;

dencies of the gospel, appears to does not seem a natural combination

me to admit of a very different inter- of pronouns here.
pretation. It would seem to mean 3. (prjcriv]
It does not follow that
very much the same as S. Paul's the preacher is quoting the exact
navTa fioi f^eo'Tiu a\X ov iravra trvfi- words of the Gospel according to
(fifpei, and to accord with the Apos- the Egyptians ;
for (^r^criV may mean
tle's injunctions respecting marriage. nothing more than 'he says in effect,'
I.
ov8ev] The previous editors, 'he signifies.' See e.g. Barnab. 7
while substituting 4>povrj for (^povel, ovVo), (^rjcriv, ol diXovres fxe Idelv k.t.X.,
have passed over ovbiv in silence. a passage which has been wrongly
But with <i>povfi we should certainly understood as preserving a saying
expect fjajdep. The reading nvBfv of Christ elsewhere unrecorded, but
can only be explained by treating in which the writer
is really giving

ov8eu SrfkvKov as a separate idea, only an explanation of what has

'
should entertain thoughts which gone before. This use of ^r\<Tlv
have no regard to her sex,' so as occurs many times elsewhere in
to isolate ovbiv from the influence of Barnab. 6, 10, 11, 12, where the
Xva ; but the order makes this ex- is
meaning indisputable.
planation very difficult. The gram- XIII. 'Let us therefore repent
mars do not give any example of and be vigilant: for now we are full
the use of ov {ovbev) which is ana- of wickedness. Let us wipe out our
logous ;
see Kiihner 1 1
p. 747 sq, former sins and not be men-pleasers.
;
 XIIl] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 241

Tepa djuaprtjimaTa, Kal jueTavorja'avTes e'/c

^v)(f}<s o-wdw-

fJLev. Kal fit] yivcoimeda dvOpioTrapecKOi' jULri^e deXcojuev

10 fjiovov eavToT^ dpecKeiv, dWa Kai T0T9 e^co di/dpcoTroi^
eirl Tf) ^LKaioo'vvr], 'Iva to ovo/ma hi tjnids jut] (3\acr(pt]-
jJLriTaL. Aeyei yap Kai 6 Kvpio^ Aia hantoc to onoma moy

3AAC(t)HMe?TAI eN HACIN ToTc eGNGCIN' Kai TToKlV OyAI Al' ON

uncertain whether the translator has /uou in his text. 11 rh &voixa\ add.
dominiS.- -^/iSj] S ; iixai C 12 /cat] S ; om. C.
"

13 ^Xaacprj-
/j.iTat] add. 5i' ii/j.S,$ S. TcLffip] om. S. irdXiv Oval 81' dv] S ; dib C. See
the lower note.

Yet we must approve ourselves by 'our fellow-Christians,' as rightly

our righteousness to the heathen, explained here by Harnack; comp.
lest God's Name be. blasphemed, as 4 ^v Tw dyandv eavrovs, 12 XaXc5/u.fv
the Scriptures warn us. And how eavTo7s dXi^dfiav, but not 1
5.
is it
blasphemed? When the Ora- Tols e^o) dvdpcinois] ^/le heathen.
'

cles of God command one thing, For the expression o\ e^a see the
and we do another : for then they note Colossians iv. 5.
treat the Scriptures as a lying fable. 11. TO ovop.a\ ''the Nmne'' so ;

When for instance God's Word tells Tertull. Idol. 14

'
ne nomen blas-
us to love those that hate us, and phemetur.' For other instances of
they find that, so far from doing this absolute use, and for the man-
this, we hate those that love us,
ner in which (as here) translators
they laugh us to scorn, and they and transcribers supply the imagined
blaspheme the holy Name.' defect, see the note on Ign. Ephes. 3.
5. ovv] This particle cannot stand 12.Ata navTos K.r.X.] From the
after the vocative, and indeed is LXX Is.
Iii.
5 TaSf Xeyft 6 Kvpiost Ai'
omitted in the Syriac. Perhaps ovv vfias 8ia navros to ovofid fiov j3Xa-
is a corruption of /xov, as a8eX<poi (Tcfyrjp.e'iTai
iv rols edveaiv. The Syriac
occurs several times,
fjiov 9, 10, 1 1 ;
translator inserts fit'
vp.as, and omits
or the scribe has here tampered with nda-iv ;
but these are obvious altera-
the connecting particles, as he has tions to conform to the familiar LXX
done elsewhere ( 7 aa-re ovv, dSeXcpol of Isaiah.
and in this case has blundered.
IMov), 13. Km TTaXiv Ovai k.t.X.] I have
6. v^yJAoofiev eVt k.t.X.] 2 Tim. ii. 26 adopted the reading of the Syriac
dvavi]\j/(t)aiv...fls to eKeivov deXrifia, here, because the Greek text is
I Pet. iv. 7 vij-^aTf (Is Trpoafvxds, obviously due to the accidental o-
Polyc. Phil. 7 v^4>opTs npos ras ev)(ds.
mission of some letters (perhaps
7. e^aXel-^cofiev] Harnack quotes owing homoeoteleuton), a common
to
Acts iii.
19 fieravoijaaTt ovv Kal phenomenon in our MS. On the
fwicTTpiy^aTe fis to e ^aXe L(f)6Jivai other hand it is hardly conceivable
vfiav ras dfiapTias- thatany scribe or translator could
9. avOpaiTrdptaicoi] Ephes. vi. 6, have invented the longer reading
Col. iii. 22. See also the note on of the Syriac out of the shorter
dv6p<i)iTapf<TKe'i.v Ign. Rom. 2. reading of the Greek. The Syriac
ID. eavroiy] one anoth er, I.e. reading however is not without its
CLEM. II. 16
242 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [xiii

BAAC(t)HMeTT<M TO ONOMA MOy' if TLVL ^Xa(T(pr]IJieLTaL \

ev Tw lULt)
TTOietv vfjia<i a /SouXo/uLai. Ta eOvr] yap,
cLKOvovTa eK Tou (TrojULaro^ ij/ULwi' ra Xoyia tov Oeov,
w? KaXa Kai fJceyaXa dav/md^ei' eTreiTa, KaTa/uaOovra
TO. epya rjfiwv otl ovk eo'Tiu a^ia twv prjjuaTwv tov 5

Xeyojuevy evOev ets

^Xaa-cprTfilav TperrovTaL, XeyovTe^
eTvai fjLvQov Tiva Kal 7rXavf]v, brav yap dKOV(ro)(nv

Trap' rifJLtav
oti Xeyei 6 Oeo^ Oy X^P'*^ ym?n ei AfAnATe
Toyc ArAncoNTAC YMAC, aAAa X^'^P"^ ym?n ei AfAnAxe Toyc
I ev rlvi.] add. Si S :
comp. 3. 2 v/jlSLs & j3oi;Xo/xat] rjfias Sl
X^yo/xev] S.

3 -qfiuv] S; vfiQv C. 4 ^Tretra] add. 5^ S. 7 fjLu96v riva] add. delirii

S, the word being doubtless added to bring out the force of ixvdov. 9 dXXd]
add. Tbre S. 10 ex^poi/s] add. u/xwi' S. The addition of pronouns is very

difficulty. If the first quotation Aia 3. Tct

Xoyta TOV Qeov] A synonyme
navTos taken from Is. Hi.
K.T.X. is for the Scriptures comp. Rom. iii. ;

5, whence comes the second Oval 2, Heb. V. 12; Clem. Rom. 19, 53,
K.T.X.? The
explanation seems to 62, etc. The point to be observed
be, that 5 itself was very
Is. lii. is that the expression here refers to

frequently quoted in the early ages an evmigelical record see the next :

Oval 81 ov (or Si' ov) k.t.X. (see note below. Thus it may be com-
instances collected in the note to pared with the language of Papias,
Ign. Trail. 8), though there is no Euseb. H. E. iii. 39 '^aT6aios...(yvve-
authority for it either in the LXX or ypcv^aToTCI Xoyta, which must have

in the Hebrew. Our preacher there- been nearly contemporaneous see ;

fore seems to have cited the same Essays on Supernatural Religion p.

passage in two different forms the 170 sq. Similarly our author above
first from the LXX, the second from I5
2 quotes a gospel as ypacfuj.
the familiar language of quotation 4. eireiTa k.t.X.'\ Apost. Const, ii. 8
supposing that he was giving two o TOiovros...^Xa(T(])r]fiiav npocriTpiy^e ra
distinct passages. Koiva Trjs eKKXrjcrias Koi ttj BiBaaKaXia,
I. This is no longer
iv Tivi K.T.X.] cos fir]
TTOiovvTOiv eKe'iva a X(yofJ.ev elvai

any part of the quotation, but belongs KaXa K.T.X.

to the preacher's explanation. He has God sait/i.' The

'
8. Xeyei 6 Gf ds]
however put the words into the mouth passage quoted therefore is regarded
of God Himself, after his wont e.g. : as one of ra Xoyta Toii Qeov. As the
12 ravTa vficiv ttoiovvtcov K.r.\., 14 words of our Lord follow, it might
rrjp-qa-aTe rrjv aapKa k.t.X. The read- perhaps be thought that the expres-
ing of the Syriac, fifj ttou'lp rji^as a sion Xe-yet d Qeos refers not to the
is obviously a correction Divine inspiration of the Gospel,
Xeyofifv,
to overcome this difficulty. For other but to the Divine personality of
examples where thispreacher begins Christ, of whom the writer says i

his explanations with ev tivi see ovTus Set i]p.as (ppovelv irepX 'irjcrov

3, 9. XpiaToii <os TTepl Qeov. But, not to

 xiv] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 243

loexOpoyc kai Toyc micoyntac yMdic TauTa OTav (xkov-

G-wa-iv, 6aviua^ov(nv tyiv \j7rep^oXf]V Ttj^ d<ya6oTt]TO'

orav ^6 'l^uicriv otl ou jjlovov tovs fjucTOvvra^ ouk dya-
TTcojueu, dW on ovde roi)? dyaTrcovTa'i, KaTa<ye\co(TLV

rif-itiov, Kai ^Xaa-cpi^fJieLTai to bvojua.

15 XIV. ''Ma-re, ddeX(poi, 7roiovvTe<s to 6e\rjfj.a tov

7raTp6<s rifjiwv Oeou ecrofxeda ck t^s 6KK\r](Tia^ ty^ Trpw-

Tr}, Trj^ TTvevfJiaTLKf]^, t^s Trpo riXiov Kai a-eXrjvrjs cktict-

common in S ; and I have not thought it necessary to record several instances

which occur below. 13 on] om. S, perhaps owing to the exigencies of
translation. 14 Kai] om. S. \a(X(pr]fie7Tai] add. ovv S. rb dvofxa]
add. TOV XpiffTOv S.

mention that such a mode of speak- partake of the spiritual archetype,

ing would be without a parallel in we must preserve the fleshly copy
the early ages of Christianity, the in its purity. This flesh is capable
preceding to. \6yia toO Qeov deter- of life and immortality, if it be united
mines the sense here. to the Spirit, that is to Christ. And
Ou xap'f K.T.X.] A loose quotation the blessings which await His elect
from Luke vi. 32, 35 el dyaij-are roiis are greater than tongue can tell.'

nyaTTuvTas v^as, uola Vfx'iv X'^P'-^ ia-riv ; 16. rfjs TTpcoTTjs (c.T.X.] This doc-
...irXfjv ayanare rovs exBpovs vfiav... trine ofan eternal Church seems to
Ka\ ecrrai 6 ixiadbs vfxuiv ttoXvs. For the be a development of the Apostolic
use of xfipts comp. i Pet. ii.
19, 20. teaching which insists on the fore-
II. dyadoTTjTos]
^

goodiiess'' m Xht ordained purpose of God as having

sense of
'

kindness,' beneficence,'
'
elected a body of men to serve Him
as ayadonoulv in the context of St from all eternity; see esp. Ephes.
Luke (vv. 33, 35). This substantive i.
Sq o v\oy^(Tas ijfias ev Trda-rj
3
does not occur in the N. T., and only fuXoyi'aTTvevfiariK^ iv rots iirov-
rarely (Wisd. vii. 26, xii. 22, Ecclus. paviots iv Xpiarco, Kadds e^eXe^aro
xlv. 23) in the LXX ;
the form com- iv avra rrpo KarajBoXr) s Koap-ov
i]fias

monly used being ayadaxrvvq. ...Trpoopicras rjpas fls vlodeaiav k.t.X.,

XIV. 'If we do God's will, we a passage aptly quoted by Bryennios.
shall be members of the eternal, The language of our preacher stands
spiritual Church; if not, we shall midway in point of development,
belong to that house which is a den and perhaps also about midway in
of thieves. The living Church is point of chronology, between this
Christ's body. God made male and teaching of S. Paul and the doctrine
female, saith the Scripture. The male of the Valentinians, who believed in
is Christ, the female the Church. an eternal teon Ecclesia,' thus car-
'

The Bible and the Apostles teach rying the Platonism of our pseudo-
us that the Church existed from Clement a step in advance.
This expres-
eternity. Just as Jesus was mani- 17. irpo ^Xiov K.T.X.]
fested in the flesh, so also was the sion is probably taken from Ps.
Church. If therefore we desire to Ixxi (Ixxii). 5 (TvpTTapapevfl
rw ijXia
16 2
244 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [xiv

lULevrjs' iav de fjiri iroiria'iJdfjLev to 6e\f]jj.a Kvpiov, e<rofj.e6a

/c TY]^ ypacbf]^ Trj^ Xeyovcn^s 'EreNHGH d oTkoc iwoy

chhAaion Ahctwn. wcrre ovv alpericroyiueda cltto Ttj^

KK\y]cria<s Tfjs eivai, \va arcodwfiev. ovk oio/iiai

^0)^9
2 K Trj9 ypa(pT]S rrji 'Keyo^a-qi] ex lis de qiiibus scriptum esi S. 3 wcrre

ovv] C; uKxre, adeXcpoi [fiov] S, omitting ovp. See above, p. 240.

Koi TTpb Trjs (T\T]vr]s yeveas yeveaiv aTToppolas (KKXijcrias eTTiyeiov which
and id. ver. ly Trpo tov rjXlov Sta/ixei/ei Celsus had attributed among other
TO ovop.a avTov; for though in these absurdities to the Christians, he
passages, as the Hebrew shows, rrpo writes, TO-xn f\i](f)6rj cltto tov vtzo tivchv
has or ought to have a different Xeyfcrdai (KKXTjaias Tivbs eTTOVpaviov
meaning (Aquila ets Trpoa-conov ttjs Koi Kpe'iTTOvos alavos anoppoiav eivai

(TfXjyvjjy, Symmachus efitrpoadev rfj^ Trjv eVi yrjs iKKXijaiav. And see the
yet it was commonly so
(Tf'Kr]vr}s), passages quoted in the notes on
interpreted, as appears from Justin Ta ^ijBXia k.t.X. and avTiTVTtov. Hil-
Dial. 64 (p. 288) aTrohe'iKvvTai...oTi genfeld quotes Clem. Alex. Strom.
ovTos (i.e. o XpioToy) KOI Trpo tov iv. 8 (p. 593) ftKWf Sc Tr\s ovpaviov
proof of which statement
7/Xiov ^v, in eKKXrjorias fTTiydos (this father
?)
has
he cites the passages just quoted ;
just before cited Ephes. v. 21 sq,
comp. id. 45 (p. 264) OS Koi Trpo Col. iii. 18 sq), id. vi. 13 (p. 793)
fa)(T(f)6pov Koi (TeXr]vr]9 -qv, 34 (p. 252), al ivTavBn KaTO. ttjv f.KKX-qcriav TTpOKOTrai

76 (p. 302); and so Athanasius c. ...fiifi-ijlxaTa, oipai, ayyeXiKrjs do^qs

Arian. i. 41 (i. p. 351) ft be kuI, cos KOLKelvqs TTjs oiKovop.ias Tvyxo-vovcriv
yp^aXXei Aavlb iv rm ij38onrjKoaTa> Trpcoro) qv avap.Viv (fiaalv ai ypacjiai tovs kot
>//'aX/i&), Upo Toil qXiov diap-evet. to 'iX^OS K.T.X.
ovop.a avTov, koX Trpo ttjs a-eXqvrjs fls 2. fK TTfs ypacjiqs K.r.X.] A loose
yeveas yeveav, Trwy iXafj,j3aviv o flx^i^ expression, meaning 'of those persons
del K.r.X. Similarly too in his Expos, described in the Scripture '. The
in Psalm. Ixxi 897) he explains
(l. p. Syriac translator has
paraphrased
the two expressions, vv. 5, 17, Trpo accordingly. The passage is Jer. vii.
alcipciv and Trpo KaTa^oXfjs Kocrp-ov 1 1
jUJ^ (TTrqXaiov XrjcrTwv o oIkos fiov, ov
respectively. Meanwhile Eusebius eTTiKiKXqTai to ovop,d p.ov eV ai;r<5

Comm. in Psalm, ad loc. {Op. v. p. K.T.X., to which also our Lord alludes
800 ed. Migne) had mentioned and (Matt. xxi. 13, Mark xi. 17, Luke
rejected this meaning ; ov yap Trpo xix. 46). For the application here
Trjs creXrivr]s, tovt((TTI Tvp\v yfvecrdai comp. Apost. Const, ii. 17.

TTjv crekrjvqv, aXX evcomov axTTrep Kai 3. tiiUTi ovv'\ A pleonasm which
p,Trpo(TdV qyOVflfVOi TTJs (TfXrjvrjs. our author repeats elsewhere ; 4, 7.
For the idea see esp. Hermas Vis. aiperto-cD/^ie^a]
'
choose ', ''prefer
'

ii. 4 Tt's ovv ioTiv; (prjui. 'H 'EKKkrjaia, a common word in the Lxx. In
cjir](riv.
cIttov ovv avTO), Aia rt ovv the N.T.
it is found only Matt. xii.

TTpea^VTspa ; 'Ort, (prjciv, TravTcovTrpcoTT] 18, a quotation from Is. xlii. i,

in

eKTicrdr]
'
8ia tovto Trpea^vTepa, (cat 8ia where however it does not occur in
TavT-qv 6 Koa-fJios KaTTjpTiadq, quoted by the LXX. See Sturz Dial. Mac. 144.
Bryennios. Comp. also Orig. c. Cels. 4. Tqs fw^y] Harnack writes 'lu-
vi. 35, where speaking of the phrase daeorum synagoga est ecclesia mor-
 xivj AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 245

5 Be vjuas dyvoeiv 'on 6KK\r](ria ^w(ra cooma gctin

XpicTOY" XeyeL yap n ypa(pr] 'EnoiHceN d Oedc ton

ANOpoonoN ApceN KAi eflAY' TO upcTev ecTTiv 6 XpiCTTO^,

TO 6f]\u ri eKK\r](Tla' Kal otl Ta ^if^Xla Kal 01 dirocrTO-

8 t6 6^\v] C ; Kal t6 OrjXv S. Kai 6ti] atque etiam S. Tb. ^i^Xla] add.
prophetarum S.

tis'.The contrast however is not a rough synonyme for the Old and
between the Synagogue and the NewTestaments respectively. Though
Church of Christ, but between mere the Apostolic and Evangelical writ-
external membership in the visible ings are elsewhere in this epistle
body and spiritual communion in the treated as ypaf^ai ( 2) and even as
celestial counterpart. Xoyta TOV Qeoii ( 1 3), being thus co-
5. (j5>\ia ((TTiv Xpio-rou] Ephes. i. ordinated in point of authority with
23 TT) eKKXriaia, r]Tis earlv to (rafia
the Old Testament, yet the term
avTov; id. iv. 12 Ta (ii^Xia, 'the Books', is not yet
comp. 4, sq, 16,
V. 23, 30, Rom. xii. 5, i Cor. x. 17, extended to them. For somewhat
xii. 12 27, Col. i.
18, 24, ii.
19,
similar expressions for the Old and
iii.
15.
New Testaments in early writers, see
6. Gen. i.
27 the note on Ign. Philad. 5. The
'ETToiTjo-d/ K.T.X.]
exact mode of expression is however
eTroLrjatv o avOpuTTOV, kut
060? tov
fiKova Oeov eivoirjaev avTov' apaev Kai unique. The Syriac translator's
'

6fj\v eTToirjaev avTovi. The applica- books of the prophets is the ob-
'

tion seems
be suggested by S.
to vious gloss of a later age.
Paul's treatment of this portion of But what Books of the Old Testa-
the Mosaic account, Ephes. v. 31 sq; ment and what Apostolic writings
where, after representing the Church had the preacher in view.''
as the body and spouse of Christ, (i) As regards the O. T. the an-
and quoting Gen. ii. 24, he says, to swer partly supplied by his own
is

fiV(TTripiov TovTO pija ecrTiv e'yco

Se
'
context. In the first place the history

Xe-yo) els XpiaTov koX [is] ttjv (kkXtj- of creation in Genesis is contem-
a'lav. plated. Such treatment was alto-
8. Kai ort] Some words have gether in accordance with the theo-
evidently dropped out in the MS logical teaching of his age. Anastasius
here: see the introduction, I.
p. 144 of Sinai (Routh's Rel. Sacr. I. p.
15 ;

sq. The lacuna is conveniently sup- comp. Anastas. Op. p. 860, Migne)
plied by \iyov(Tiv drjXov after avadev, says, Ylaniov tov iravv tov 'lepanoXiTov
as I have done. This seems to me TOV iv TW fTTKTTTjdlCO (fiGCTljaaVTOS, Kal
better than the more obvious solution KXTjpevTOi IlavTaivov Trjs 'Wt^ap-
'

of Bryennios, who would attach this dpeoiv ifpfuis, Kal A.p.p,a)viov crocfxcTa-
oTi. to the preceding vp.as dyvoeip, and Tov, Tav ap)(ai(i)v Koi TrpoiTOiv avucodav
understand merely cfyaa-i or diSnaKova-i (Ii
f^rjyrjTciv, XpiaTov kuI ttjv
or the like. The Syriac translator fKKX-qcriav Trdaav ttjv ^at]p.fpov von-
omits the on and inserts a Xeyovcri aavTav. We
might almost suppose
or some similar word. This is that Anastasius was here alludino-
clearly an arbitrary correction. to our pseudo- Clement, if he had
TCI jiifiXia Kui ol dnocTToXoi] This is not in a parallel passage (p. 962
246 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [xiv

\oi Trjv KK\r](riav ov vvv eivai, dWa avoi6ev \\eyov(riv,

^ri\ov\' rjv yap irvevfiarLKY)^ ws Kal 6 'lr](rovs iijULCov, icpa-

vepcodt]
de eir ia-xaTcov twv jj/uLepwi/
'iva i^/uLas crwa-^'

r\ eKKXrjaria he TrvevfJiaTLKn ou(ra icpavepwdrj iv ryj crapKi

I oi vvv'] add. dicunt S. \kyovciv S^Xoc] om. CS see the lower note.
;

2 ws KoX 6 ^l7]<rovs rjixCiv, e^avepuOr) de k.t.X.] et vir eius autem (5^) spiritalis est, is

qui est testis christus dominus noster, manifestatus est autem, etc. S. 3 VM^^

Migne), where he is again enume- a confirmation of his view in iroKei

rating ancient interpreters who ex- Qfov ^cSi/ros 'lepovijaXfjijL inovpavico...
plained the statements respecting navTjyvpfi Ka\ eKKXrjala TrpcoToroKoiv ano-
paradise in Genesis as eis tj]v Xpia-rov yey pafxfiivayv iv ovpavois (xii. 22, 23).
eKKXrialav ava(l)ep6iieva, specified KXt;- Again such words as Apoc. xxi. 9, 10,
/ijys
o 2rpci)/x are vs. writes again He rrjv vvfKpTjv ttjv yvvalKa tov apviov...

(p. 964), 'admirabiles quos diximus rr)v ayiav 'lepovcraXrifji Kara^alvovcrav

interpretes...decreverunt...duosquos- eK TOV ovpavoii cmo tov Geov, would

dam esse paradises... terrestrem et suit his purpose admirably.
caelestem, qui cernitur et qui in- 1. ov vvv K.r.X.j ''not now for the

telligitur, sicut etiam est Christus first time, but from the beginning\
caelestis simul et terrestris, congru- For this sense of avadev see Luke
enter typo duaricm ecclesiarum, ter- i.
3, Acts xxvi. 5 comp. Justin Dial.
;

renae, inquam, et caelestis civitatis 24 (p. 242) (Scrnep avcoBev eKr]pva-(TeT0,

Domini virtutum etc' (a passage it. 63286) ort avadev 6 Qeos...
(p.
which illustrates the language of our yevvciaBai avTov efitWe, where it is an
preacher respecting the Church); explanation of npo e<oa(j)6pov iyivvqaa
and he himself accordingly maintains a-e. Harnack compares Gal. iv. 26,
that whatever is said of Adam and etc.,but the opposition to vvv here
Eve applies to Christ and the Church suggests the temporal rather than
(e.g. pp. 999, 1007, 1027, 1050). But the local meaning of avadev.
besides the Hexaemeron, our preacher 2. 6 ^Itjctovs jJ/iicSi']
SC. TTvevfiaTiKos

may have been thinking of other parts rjv, SO that 6 'Ijyaoi's, not rj sKiiXrja-la,

of the O. T., such as Ps. xliv (xlv), is the nominative of e^ai/epw^r; comp. :

in which 'the queen' was already 9 XpioTor o Kvpios, 6 (rdaas T^fJ^'OS,

interpreted of the Church (Justin &v p,ev TO npiiTov irvevfia, eyivcTo
Dial. 63, p. 2S7). So too he would (Top^ Koi ovToas rjfxa<: eKoXeaev. For
not improbably have the Song of e(pavepcodrj fie k.t.X. COmp. I Pet. i.

Solomon in his mind. 20 XpiCTTOv TTpoeyvcoa-fievov npo

[lev

(2) As regards the 'Apostles' KaTa^oXfjs Koa-fxov, (f)avpa>devTos fie

again his context indicates his chief eV f<T)(^aTov (v.l. e(TxaT(ov) Tav Xpo-
reference. The Epistle to the E- va>v fit' vpLas k.t.X.

phesians seemed to him more es- 3. fTT ((rxoTiov Tav rJ/iiepMi']

'
luhen
pecially to inculcate this doctrine. the days were drawiftg to a close\
But he would find it elsewhere. 'at the end of all things'; a not
There are some indications that he uncommon Lxx expression, Gen.
was acquainted with the Epistle to xHx. I, Deut. iv. 30 (v.l.), Dan. ii.
the Hebrews and, if so, he would see
; 28, x. 14, Hos. iii. 5, Mic. iv. i and ;
 xiv] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 247

5 Xpi(TTOv, Sr]\ou(ra rifjuv oti, eav tl'5 i^juwu

Tr]pr](rr] avrriv
eV TV} capKi Kai jur] (pdeipr]^ dTroXfjyjyeTai avTt]V eV tco

TTvevfJiaTL Tco ciyltp' ri <yap cap^ avrt] dvTLTV7r6<s eomv

Tov TTvevfxaTO^' ovheU ovv to avTiTVirov (pBeipas to

pGiv'] temporzivi S. 7 ovriri/Troj] C ; typus S, and so to wrlrvwov just below;

but this is probably owing to the poverty of the language.

SO 2 Pet. iii. 3, but in Heb. i. 2 the A}'ian. 28 p. 116) irpofKofiKre x^'pa

(l.

correct reading is eV iaxarov rmv 6\6ypa<f)ov avdevTiKrjv, i. e.

'
written
r]fj,pcov.
from first to last by his own hand '.

4. fv rfj aapKi Xpiarov] When Christ The avTtTVTTov is the material, tem-
took a bodily external form, the porary manifestation, the imperfect
Church did the same. Moreover this and blurred transcript oiiYiQ original :

external form might be said to be comp. Synes. Epist. 68 (p. 217) rots
iv rfj (xapKi avrov, since the Church raxyypcK^oLS to. durlrvTra Sovvai tuv
exists by union with Him. TOTf ypa(f)VTcov iirera^a, Epist. in
5. Trfprja-T) avrriv]
^

keep her pure Athan. Apol. c. Arian. 85 (i. p. 158)

and undefiled ',
i. e. so far as con- TO) avTLTvnca tov deiov ypdp.ii.arns. For
cerns his own conduct as one member dvTiTvTrov, thus contrasted with the
of the body. The believer in his own heavenly and true, comp. Heb. ix. 24
special department is required to do avTLTvna rav where the
akr]dt.vu)v,
that which Christ does throughout avTiTvna are defined in the context
the whole, Ephes. v. 27 as Ta i/TTO Set'y/xara tu>v iv To is ovpavols
Trapaa-Trjcrai
ev8o^oi> TTjv eiCKXrjaiav, firj ep^oucrai'
and the akr^divd as avra TO. iwovpavia.
(tttIXov rj pvTiba K.r.X. See also the anonymous Valentinian
6. CLTToXrjy^ffTaL avTrjv] i. e. by being in Epiph. Haer. xxxi. 5 (pp. 168, 169)
avTiTVTTOs TOV TTpoovTos 'AyivvrjTov, dv-
incorporated in the celestial, spiritual
Church. TITVTTOV TTJS TTpoOlKTtJS TeTpa8oS. And
8. TO avTiTviTov] the counterpart,
'
more especially for the pseudo-Cle-
or copy '. The Platonic doctrine of ment's teaching here compare the
ideas underlies these expressions. Valentinian language, Iren. i. 5. 6
The avdevTiKov is the eternal, spiritual b 8r] Koi avTo eKKkrjcriav eivai
\iyovaiv,
archetype, the origmal doctement, as aVTLTVTTOV TTJs civco 'E K kXt] CT la s.
it were, in God's own handwriting :
In such senses avTiTvirov depreciates
comp. Tertull. de Moiwg. 11 'in relatively and with this meaning
;

Graeco authentico', 'the Greek origi- the material elements in the eucha-
nal', before it was corrupted by tran- rist were commonly called by the

body and
'

scription de Praescr. 36 ipsae au-

;
fathers dvTiTvrva of the
thenticae literae eorum', 'the auto- blood of Christ, e.g. Apost. Const, v. 14,
'

graph letters of the Apostles Dig. ;

vi. 30, vii. 25 : see Suicer Thes. s.v.

xxviii. 3. 12 'exemplo quidem aperto On the other hand olvtItv^ov is some-

nondum apertum est testamentum ;
times opposed to Tvnos, as the fin-
quod si authenticum patefactum est ished work to the rough model, the
'

totum, apertum where authenti-

',
realization to the foreshadowing, in
cum' is the original, and 'exemplum' which case it extols relatively; comp.
the copy; Julius in Athan. Apol. c. I Pet. iii. 21.
248 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [xiv

avdevTiKov imeraXriyp-eTai. apa ovv tovto Xeyei, d^eX-

Tf]pY](raTe Ttjv aapKa \va tov Tri/ef/uaros fieTa-
Xdl3r]T6. el Se Xeyofxev eivai tyiv (rdpKa Trjv eKKXtjCLav

Kai TO Trvevjjia Xpia-rov, dpa ovv 6 vfipiaa^ rrju (rapKa

TYiv KKXt](riau, 6 tolouto^ ovv ov jueraXr]- 5
vfipicreu

\l/^erai
tov TrvevfxaTO^, 6 eo'Tiv 6 XpiaTOs. TOoravTf]v

hvvaTai ri crdp^ avTri /jLeTaXa/SeTv ^corjv Kai dQavaaLav,

KoXXr]devTO^ avTrj tov irvevfjiaTO^ tov dylov. ovt
epeLTveiv rts hvvaTai ovt6 XaXfjcrai a HjoiMAceN d

'
Kypioc TOis e/cAe/cTOiS avTOv.
XV. OvK o'lofjiai he otl luiKpdv arvjUL^ovXiav eTTOif]-

(rdfxriv irepi eyKpaTeia^, rjv Troirja-a^ ti<s ov fj.eTavor](Tei,

I ;uTa\77i/'Tat] CS. In C however it was first written awoXrixpeTai, and ixera is

written above by the same hand. See the note on (pi,\oTrov2v below, 19. 46
v^pi(Tas...T7jv iKK\7]ffiav]
is qtn contiiinelia affecit carnetn suam contumelia ajfecit
carnem christi ecclesiam S. This might possibly represent 6 v^pia-as rrjv cdpKa
rod cffipKa.] vjSpKxev, tt]v eKKkyjaiav,
the words in brackets
[rriv Idiav, xP'-<^to^ '''V"

having been omitted in C by homoeoteleuton ; but I am disposed to regard it as

I. apa ovv K.r.X.] This apparently Christ, whereas just above it has re-
refers not to what has immediately presented the relation of the earthly
preceded, but to an application which Church and Christ to the heavenly
the preacher has made of an evan- Church and Christ. The insertion

gelical text several chapters before,

8 in the Syriac does not remove the
apa ovv TOVTO t^v aapKa
Xe'yei Tr^prjo-aTf difficulty. See the criticism of Pho-
almost impossible
It is tius on the inconsequence of this
ayvj^v k.t.\.
however to trace the connexion of writer's sentiments, quoted above on
thought in so loose a writer. i.

3. TT^vas being the body

(Tapica\ 7. p.eTaXa^elv'] With an accusa-
of Christ. This language does not tive, as e.g. Acts xxiv. 25, and com-
occur in 8. Paul, for in Ephes. v. 30 monly in classical writers. On the
cK T^s aapKos avTov is an interpolation. different sense of the two cases with
The relation of Christ to the Church this verb see Kiihner ll. p. 294 sq.
is represented by 8. Paul as that of The propriety of the change here
the head to the body, whereas here it will be obvious. Similarly to avdev-
is that of the spz'n'l to the body, so tikov p.eTaXij'^fTai above,
that
' '

equivalent to flesh '.

body is
'
8. rov Trvevp,aTos tov ayiov] See
Altogether our preacher seems to above, I.
p. 125. The language here
be guilty of much confusion in his is still more unguarded than in 9.

metaphor in this context; for here 9. e^emelv] ^express'; Clem. Rom.

the relation of flesh to spirit repre- 48.
sents the relation of the Church to a riToip.a(Tev] A reference to the
 xvj AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 249

dWa Kai eavTOV o'cocei KUfxe tov (rvjJL(iovXev(TavTa.

(JLicdd^ yap ovK 'e(TTiv
jULKpo^ TrXaucojueurjv \lyV)(^r]v
Kai

15 d7ro\\vfJLevt]V aTrocTTpe^ai ets to (rcodfjvai. TavTrjv yap

)(^oiuLev TYiv dvTijULcrdiau diro^ovvai rw Oew tw KTicravTi

rifj.d<Sy eav 6 Xeywv Kai dKOvcov fiera TnVrews Kai dyairt]^

Kai \eyr] Kai dKOvrj. efjLjjLeLvcofjiev ovv e(p'
oh eTriorrev-

arajjiev diKaioi Kai bcrioi, \va jueTa 7rappt](ria9 aLTWfJiev

20 TOV Qeov TOV XeyovTa "Eti AaAoyntoc coy epoa iAoy iTAp-
eiMi* TOVTO yap to prjfjLa jueyaXyj^ ecTTiv 7rayye\ia9
(Tr]fj.eiov' eTOijuoTepov yap iavTOV Xiyei 6 Kvpi09 ets
TO ClOOVai TOV alTOVVTO<S. TOCaUTt]^ ovv ^prjCTTOTtlTOS
merely a paraphrastic rendering of S. ii eiroir)(TdiJ.7]v] add. vfuv S. 176
\iyuv Kai aKOjjwv] S translates as if it had read re XeYw;/ /cat 6 olkovwi'. fiera
TriffTeus Kai aydirrjs] cum caritate et cum fide S, transposing the words. On the
repetition of the preposition see above, I. p. 137. 22 ets rh dLddvai tov alToCvTos]
in illud lit det petitionem ejus cjui petit ab ipso S, thus supplying a substantive to

govern tov ultoOvtos and mistaking the sense. 23 TO(ravTr]s .iJ.eTa\aixj3dvovTs] . .

quotiiam igittir hac jucunditate et bonitate del jucundamur S.

same passage of which part has been Kai creavTov aaaeis Kai tovs aKovovTUs
already quoted by our preacher at (TOV. See also below, 19. Harnack
the end of 11. See the note on quotes Barnab. i fioKKov a-vyxaipo)
Clem. Rom. 34. ifiavTa eXni^cov <T<i)6r)vai, OTi dXrjdms
XV. 'He, that obeys this exhorta- iSXeTTCi) V Vfiiv eKKxvfievov.,.Trvfvfia.
tion to chastity, will save both him- 14. /jLia-doi K.r.X.] James v. 20 6 eiri-
self and the preacher. It is no small (TTpeyp'as afiapTcoXov eK 7r\ai>T]s odoii
recompense to convert and save a avTov crciiaei yJAvx^v eK OavaTov k.t.X.

perishing soul. Faith and love are 16. dvTiiiia-Oiav] A

favourite word
the only return that speaker and with our author, especially in this
hearer alike can make to God their connexion; see the note on i.

Creator. So therefore let us be true 19. diKaioi Kai oaioi] See on I, 5.

to our behef, forGod promises an 20. "Eti \aXovPTos K.T.X.] Is. Iviii.

immediate response, declaring Him- 9 6 Geo? elaaKovcrfTai (rov, eTi XaXovv-

self more ready to give than we to Tos (TOV fpel Idov Conip.
TvapeifjLi.

ask. We must not grudge ourselves Apost. Const, iii. where, as here, it
7,
these bounties of His goodness for ;
is quoted epco (though with a v.L),
as the rewards of submission are probably (as Lagarde points out)
great, so the punishment of disobedi- from a confusion with Is. Ixv. 24 eVi
ence is great also.' XaKovvTQiv avTav epco, Ti eariv; So too
II. ol'o/Liat]
The word has oc- it is given ''dicam'' in Iren. iv. 17.
3,
curred twice already in this writer but ipii in Justin Dial. 15 (p. 233).
6,14. 23. Tox) airoGiTO?] SC. ety to aireiv
13. Kai kavrliv k.tX.\ I Tim. iv. 16
'
more prompt to give than the asker
250 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [xv

jderaXafji^avovTe^ lurj (pdomicrooiuev iavroh TV')(eLv tocov-

t(jov dyadtov, bcrr]v yap ri^ovriv e^et to. prifJiaTa tuvtu
ToT^ TTOirjcracrii' avTa, TO(rauTt]v KaTaKpiciv Toil's
e;^ei

7rapaK0vo'a<Tiv.
XV I.
'

COcTTe, dhe\(poif d(popiui)]v \aj36uT6s ov 5

fjLLKpav
ei9 TO fxeTavoticrai, Kaipov e^^oj/res eTricrTpeyp-cojULev
eTTL Tov KoXecravTa tijuds Qeov, ews erf ex,oiuiev tov
7rapa^e)(^oiJievov rifjid^. edv yap TaX<s r\hv7ra6eiaL's Tav-
Tai^ drrora^wfjieda Kal tyiv \}yv^r]u t]fxwv yiKriCTcofjiev ev

I TocrovTwvl C; toiovtuv (?) S. 5 d8\(poi] add. dyaTrrjToi S. 8 vapa-

Sexofxevop] Trarepa dex^/J-evov (IIPA for IIAPA) C ; patrem qui accipit S- ii 'I??-

ao\j\ domini nostri iesu christi S. i6 Kpelccruv vrjffTeia irpocrevxv^] C;

is to ask'; as in the Collect 'more a Biblical word. On this word, which

ready to hear than we to pray The '. was highly distasteful to the Stoics,
Syriac translator has misunderstood see Wyttenbach on Plut. Afor. 132
the sense. C. It occurs at least as early as
XVI. '
Therefore let us repent Xenophon, Cyr. vii. 5. 74.

and return to God betimes. If we 9. dwoTa^copLeda] See on 6.

conquer our appetites and desires, II. epxerai k.t.X.] Mai. iv. I iSou
we shall obtain mercy of Jesus. For rjfjifpa epx^rai Kaiopievrj a5s Kki^avos.
be assured, the day of judgment is at 13. Tildes] This is obviously cor-
hand as a heated furnace shall it
; rupt, though both our authorities
be the heavens shall be fused and
;
are agreed. I think that for rives we

the earth shall be as melting lead; should probably read [ai] bvvdp.eis,
and all the deeds of men shall be the expression being taken from Is.
revealed. Almsgiving is a token of xxxiv. 4 Ka\ TaKTjaovTai Traaai al bvvd-
repentance. Fasting is greater than pieis rav ovpavav comp. Apoc. Petr.
;

prayer, and almsgiving than both. in Macar. Magn. iv. 7 (p. 165, Blondel)
Love covereth a multitude of sins, KCLL TaKrjcreTai Traaa 8iivap,is ovpavoii.
and prayer delivereth from death. Where the MS was torn and letters
Blessed he that aboundeth in these
is had dropped out, it might easily be
things. For almsgiving removeth read tingc. Comp. 2 Pet. iii. 7, 10,
the burden of sin.' Orac. Sib. iii.
689sq, Melito^/f/. 12,
5. d(f)oppLf}v Xa^opTfs] So Rom. p.432 (Otto). Though the existing text
vii. 8, II. Conversely d(popiJ.fjv 81- might be explained with Harnack and
86vai, 2 Cor. v. 12, I Tim. v. 14, Ign. Hilgenfeld by the common belief in
Tral/. 8. several heayens (comp. e.g. Orig. c.
6. Kaipov xovTfs\ So 8 eojj Cels. vi. 23), I can hardly think that

exopiev Kaipou pLeravoias, 9 ws exopiev our Clementine writer would have ex-
Kaipov TOV laOfjvai. pressed himself in this way, even if
"]. TOV TrapaSep^o/ifJ'Oj'] It is yet he had believed that some of the
the Kaipos evTrpoadeKTos (2 Cor. vi. 2). heavens would be spared from the
i]8v7va6eiais] See again ^17. Not conflagration; The pseudo-Justin
 xvi] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 251

10 Tw /uLt)
TTOielv Ta^ eTTiBviJiias avTvi's ras 7rovr]pa<s, fiera-

Xrjyjyoiueda tov e\eov<i 'Itjcov. FivuxTKeTe he otl epxeiAi

Yj^ri H HMepA Tt]<S KpiaeOi^ diC KAi'BANOC KAIOMeNOC, KAI

TAKHCONTAl' tTiI/6st TOON OypANOON, KUl TTOLCTa t] <yf\ WS

/uLoXif^o^ eTTi
TTvpl Tr]K6fJLevo<s, Kai Tore (pai/rjcreTai
rd
15 Kpvcbia Kal (havepa epya twv dvdpcoTrcov. KaXov ovv
e\riiuo(rvi/t] ws fxeravoLa djuapna^' KpeLcrcrMV vrjO'Teia
'

Trpocev^fj^, eXet] fiOG-vvr] he djucporepcov atahh Ae ka-

bonum jejunium^ oratio, ; S

but probably |D has dropped out. This insertion
would bring the Syriac into conformity with the Greek. 1 7 iXerjfjLocrvvr)
Se]
add. melior (Kpeidcxuv) S.

Quaes f. ad Orthod. 74 probably refers signs a more important work to

to this passage see I. p. 178 sq.
:
prayer than to almsgiving. These two
14. /ioXt/3oy] This seems to be the facts combined throw doubt on the
correct form in the Lxx generally, integrity of the text. It would seem
Exod. XV. 10, Num. xxxi. 22, Job as thoughsome words had been trans-
xix. 24, etc. Both /xoXt^os and /idXi/3- posed and others perhaps omitted.
8oy are certified by their occurrence 16. coy perdvoia ci/iapri'as] ^as I'Cpent-
in metre. ance from sin good', if the text be
is

15. Kpixpia Koi (pavepci] exhaus- An correct ;

for the sense will hardly
tive expression comp. Wisd. vii. 21
: allow us to translate 'as being re-
ocra re eari Kpvnra Koi ep,(f)avTJ eyvu>v. pentance from sin'. I
suppose that
Kokov ovv K.T.X.] If there is no cor- eXerjpoavvT] here has its restricted
'
ruption in the text of this passage, it sense of almsgiving as in every ',

offers another illustration of the cri- passage where it occurs in the N.T.
ticism of Photius on our pseudo- 17. dp(f)OTp(ov] See Ecclus. xl.
Clement, Bid/. 126, quoted above, 24 vrrep aptporepa eXtrjpocrvvr] pvcre-
I. This however may be doubt- Toi, where however the dpcfjorepa
ful. The preacher seems to be are aSeX^oi kqI ^or/deia els Kaiphv
thinking of Tobit xii. 8, 9 dyadov OXLyj/eoos.

TTpocTfVxh p-iTO. vricTTeias Koi eXerjfxoiJV- Taken from i Pet.

dyaTTr] Se k.t.X.]

vrjs Kal 8tKaio(Tvvr]s ... Kokov Trot^crai iv. 8,where it is doubtless a quota-
i\(r}p.o(TvvrjV rj drjaavplcrai ;^pi;(Tioi'' tion from Prov. x. 12. See the note
iXfrjpocriivi] yap e'/c davarov pverai Koi on Clem. Rom. 49, where also it is
avTT] dwoKadapiel. TTaaav ap,apTiau, where quoted. There can be no doubt that
the first sentence as read in S is in the original context it refers to
dyadov irpoaevxh P-fTa vrjcrrelas Kal passing over without notice, and so
ikerjpocrvvq pern BiKaioavvrjs vnep dp- forgiving, the sins 0/ others ; nor is
^torepa. Here the very same function there any reason for interpreting it
eK davarov pve(r6ai, which our text as- otherwise as adopted by S. Peter or
signs to prayer, is assigned to alms- by the genuine Clement. In James
giving. Moreover our text having V. 20 the expression koXv^h ttX^^oj
stated that almsgiving is greater than dpapTLUiv seems still to be used of the
prayer immediately afterwards as- sins of others, but in the sense of
 252 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [xvi

Aynrei nAfleoc amaptioon' Trpocrevxv de e'/c KaXtj^ cruvei-

Brja-ecos e/c BavaTOv pveTai. juuKcipio^ 7ra? 6 evpeOek
eV TovTOL's 7rXf)pf]^' e\et]jULO(ruvr} yap Koucbicfjia d/map-
Tia^ yiveraL.
XVII. MeTauofja-co/ULev ovu e^ KapBiaSy 'Iva
oXrj's 5

Ti^
{xri ^fjLvov 7rapa7ro\t]Tai. el
<ydp eifToXds k^ojuev,
\va Kai TOVTO TTpacrcrco/ULev, cltto twj/ elhcoXwv diroo'Trdv

7 'iva Koi TOVTO Trpdaffu/Jievl so apparently S ; Kal tovto irpdffaofiev (om. IVa) C.
Similar omissions of 'iva
appear in in AC
48 i^oiJ,6\oyri<rufj.aL (where S is correct),
and in S itself in ii 11 Koixiadifxeda (where AC are correct). 10 Trept] C; ad
(adverstis) S, as if 7r/)6s: but it
perhaps does not represent a different reading.
12 Kpo<six^iv Kal irLCTTeveiv] S ; iriffTeueiv Kai TT/aocr^xeti' C. '14 els oIkov diraX-

*
burying them from the sight of avviBr](Tis ;
see the note Clem. Rom.
God, wiping them out by the con- 41. For nadapa avveidrjcris see Clem.
version and repentance of the sinner'. Rom. 45 with the note.
On the other hand our preacher 2. e'/c davarov
pverai] This is said
seems certainly to take it as mean- of fXfr]pi.o(TVPT] in Tobit iv. 10, xii. 9
(already quoted) and of diKaioa-vvr],
'

ing atones for a multitude of one^s ;

own sins as it is taken by some

',
which also signifies 'almsgiving', in
modern commentators and so too : Prov. X. 2, xi. 4 but not of Trpoo-eux'?.
;

Tertull. Scorp, 6. Clement of Alex- See the note on koKov ovv k.t.X. above.
andria is hardly consistent with him- 3. (v] Comp. Ecclus. 1. 6 aeXT]VTf
self. In Strom, ii. 15 (p. 463) he ex- nXtjprjs iv i^fxepais.
plains it of God's love in Christ eX{T]p,oa-vvr] yap K.r.X.] Prov. xvi. 6
which forgives the sins of men ; (xv. 27) eXerjfjiocrvvais Koi ni<TTe(nv
whereas in Qicis div. salv. 38 (p. dnoKadalpovrai afiapriai, Ecclus. iii.
30
959) he takes it to mean that love, eXerjp.oa'vvT] e^iXacrerai ap.apTl.as '.

Comp.
working in a man, enables him to Dan. iv. 24 ras dp.apTias (tov iv iXerf-

repent and put away his own sins ; poavvais XvTpaxrai (Theod.).
and so apparently in Strom, i. 27 (p. Kov({)iapa apaoTias] i. e.
'
removes
423). Origen In Lev. Horn. ii. 5 (il.
the load of sin', as with Bunyan's
p. 190) refers it to the man's own pilgrims. So 3 Esdr. viii. 83 <tv, Kv-
sins but the turn which he gives to
; pif, o KovCJ)[(Tas TCis dpapTias rjpcav,
the passage shown by his quoting
is comp. Ezr. ix. 13 iKovcf)i.(ras i]p.cov Tas
in juxtaposition Luke vii. 47 dcJiecovraL avop.Las.

avTrjs a'l
ajxapTiai al noXXai, oti TjyaTnj- XVII. 'Let us therefore repent
aev TToXv an explanation which re- lestwe perish. For, if we are com-
moves the doctrinal objection to this manded to convert even the heathen
interpretation, though the exegetical from their idolatry, how unpardon-
argument against it from the connex- able would it be to allow the ruin
ion of the passage in its original con- of a soul which has once known the
text (Prov. X. 12) still remains. true God ! Therefore let us assist
I. KoXijs <7vvfi8r]afcos] Heb. xiii. the weak, that we and they alike
18. A commoner expression is
dyaOrj may be saved. And let us not give
 XVIl] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 253

Kai KaTYi'xeiv, ttocto} fjiaWoi^ yfyuxfiv ^Si; yivwcTKOva'av

Tov Oeov ou ^61 diroWvcrBai ; cvWa^co/uiev ovv eavTOL^
10 Kai Tovs dadevovvTa's dvayeiv to dyaSou, ottw?
rrepi

CTMdcoiuev d7ravT6<i' Kai eTTiG'Tpe^cofj.ev dWrjXovs Kai

vovdeTYjo'wfjiev. Kai jurj fiovov ctpri hoKwiuev irpoo'e'^eiv

Kai 7ri(TT6Uiv eu Tw vovQeTeiordai rjfid<i viro tcov Trpecr-

jSuTepiov, dWd Kai OTav els oIkov dTraWaycoiiev, fivr]-

XayQifxevI C; domiim diniissi fiierinins et cessaverimus ab omnibus S. The variation

might easily be explained by an omission in C owing to homoeoteleuton, but it is

more probably a periphrastic rendering of S to express the full force of aVaXXdr-

reaOai: see above, I.
p. 136 sq.

heed only while we are listening to of the Greek MS, Kai tovto Trpdcrcrofxev
the instructions of our presbyters, but must be taken as parenthetical so
also when we have departedto our far as regards the structure, and we
'

obey this command

'
homes. Let us also meet together so that aVo- ;

more frequently, and thus endeavour anav will then be governed by eV-
to make progress in the command- ToXas f'xofiev,
ments of the Lord. He has declared 9. crvXXa^cop.fp k.t.X.J 'Let US there-
that He will come to gather together fore assist one another, that we may
all nations and languages. Then the elevate the weak also as concerning
unbelievers shall see His glory and that which is good\ This may be the
shall bewail their past obstinacy. meaning, if the text is correct; but
Their worm shall not die and their ;
it would seem as though some verb

sufferings shall be a spectacle to all had fallen out after KaL For kavroi^
men. Meanwhile the righteous, see- see the note on 13 and for avaynv
;

ing their torments, shall give glory comp. Clem. Rom. 49.
to God, because there is hope for 11. Kai fTTi(TTpe\lA(opv] to be con-
His true and zealous servants.' nected with (TvXXctl3wp.ev, and not
5. M{Tavoi](T(Ofiev /c.r.X.] The ex- made dependent on onas, as it is
pression fifravofiv i^ okrjs {jrjs] KopS/aj punctuated by Bryennios.
has occurred already 8, and will 12. pLovov
prj apTi ic.r.X.] This
occur again 19 ; comp. also 9 clearly shows that the work before
/xerai'o^crot e^ elXiKpivovs (capStav. us is a sermon delivered in church ;

6. TrapaTroXrjTai] 'perish by the comp. 19 pfra tov Qeov ttjs dXTjdfias

ivay^ i.e. 'unexpectedly, through care- avayivaaKO) vpTiv evrev^iv k.t.X.

lessness, without sufficient cause'; as 13. TU)v 7Tp6cr(3vTpa)v] 'the pres-

e.g. Lucian Gytnn. 13 opa ovbevhs byters^ who delivered their exhorta-
fxeyoKov eVeKa irapaTToXXvfievas, Nigr. tions after the reading of the Scrip-
13 hihoiKa p-Tj TTapaiToXrjTUi p,eTav tures; see the on note
19 piTo.
Xov6p.evoi, Hermot. 21 nepio-ylffi. jie TOV Qeov K.T.X. This sermon itself
irapaTToKop.evov. was obviously such an exhortation ;

fVTokiK ^xop-fv] It was our Lord's but the preacher, doubtless himself a
command, Matt, xxviii. 19 sq comp. ; 'presbyter', puts himself in the posi-
Mark xvi. 1 5. If we adopt the reading tion of his hearers and uses the
254 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [xvii

fjLOvevtofxev rtov tov Kvpiov ivTaXjULctTcov, Kal /uLrj

dvTL-

TrapeXKw/uLeda (xtto tcov KOcrfJLLKVdv eTridv/uicoi', dWd

TTVKVorepov Trpocrepxoiuevoi TreipwjULeda TrpoKOTTTeiv ev
Toi^ evToXai^ tov Kvpiov, \va 7ravTe<5 to avTo (ppo-
vovvTe<i (TWYiyfJievoL wfxev kiri Tt]v eiirev 6
^cot^i/. yap 5

Kvpiov "EpXOMAI CYNArAre?N nANTA TA e9NH, C})YAaC KAI

rAoaccAC TOVTO ^e
Xeyei Tr]v tjjaepav Tf]<s eirKhaveia^
avTOVj 0T6 eX6wv XvTpwcreTai rifjid^ eKacTTOV kutu t
epya avTOV. kai oyontai thn a62an avTOv Kai to
KpaTOS ol dTTlCTTOl, Kai ^6VL(T6r](TOVTaL 'ihovTE^ TO /3a- lO

C ; Trpo<xevx6fJLPoi S.
3 Trpotrepxi^MfoO 7 ttjv i^fi^pav] super (dc) die S.

9 avTov Kal to Kpdros] gloriam ejus hi robore et potestaie S.

TT/c Zbi,a.v This again
might be explained by an omission in C owing to the repetition of similar begin-
nings of words, TT]v dd^av avrov [Kara tt]v 5vvaiJ.iv (or t7]v iax^v)'] Kal to KpaTos ;

but such an expression in Greek would be very awkward. It is more probable

therefore that robur et potestas is a double rendering of to KpaTos. The preposi-

third person, by a common form of 5. o Kvpios] Perhaps meaning

speech, to avoid egotism: comp. e.g. 'Christ', as Harnack takes it, re-
Clem. Rom. 63 i^a-vxao'avTfs rfjs /xa- ferring to 3, where Is. xxix. 13
ralas (TTaafcos-.-KaravTrjcrciOfjiev. seems to be put into the mouth of
1. avTiTrapeXKoineda] ''be dragged our Lord.
'

off in the opposite direction ; comp. 6. "Epxop.aiK.r.'K.'] From Is. Ixvi. 18

Pers. Sat.v. 154 'duplici in diversum epxopai (Twayayfiv iravra ra edvq Kai
scinderis hamo'. The lexicons do ras yXcocrcras, koI rj^ovcri Koi o\j/ovTai
not give this word. rfjv 86^av p.ov. There is nothing cor-
2. Koa-fiiKciiv fTndvfiiwv^ The ex- responding to <pv\as in either the
pression occm-s Tit. ii. 12. The word Hebrew or the LXX and our preach- ;

ko(tij.ik6s is apparently
not found in er must have got from the familiar it

the LXX, and only once besides (in combination of 'nations and tongues'
a somewhat different sense) in the in Daniel, e.g. iii. 7 Travra ra edvij
N.T., Heb. ix. i. (pvXai Koi yXacTcrai in the LXX.
3. TTVKVorepov Trpoaepxanevot] ''com- 7. rovTO Se Xe'yei] 'd7it by this he
'

ing more frequently\ i.e. 'to this means : see the note on 8.

place of meeting', or perhaps 'to TTiv r\p.ipav K.r.X.] The same ex-
the presence of God' (comp. Heb. pression has occurred 12, where
X. I, 22, Clem. Rom. 23, 29). On see the note on fTTLcfyavelas.
these injunctions to more frequent 8. XvTpcoafTai] It is called -qixepa

services, see the note on Ign. Eph. dnoXvTpoocreas in Ephes. iv. 30. For
13 (TTroiiSa^ere nvKvorepov avvipxecr- other passages, where dTroXvrpaxTis
dai ; comp. ib. Polyc. 4 TrvKvoTepov refers to the final redemption, see

avvayuiyaL yivea-dcoa-av. The Syriac Luke xxi. 28, Rom. viii. 23.
reading however may be correct. iKaarov k.t.X.]^
As only those who
 XVIl] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 255

(TiXeiov Tou Koa-juov ev tw 'lr](Tov Xeyovres, Oval yi^Tv,

OTL av ri<i Kal ovk i^deijuieu
Kal ouk eTTKTTevofieVj Kal
ovK iTretdoiuLeda toI? 7rp6(rfivT6poi^
toi<s dvayyeWovo-iv
Tt]^ CMTtjpia^ rifiMV' kui '0 ckwAhI aytcon oy
rifjuv wept
15 TeAeyTHcei kai to nyp aytoon oy cBecBHceTAi kai ecoNTAi
eic opAciN HACH cApKi. Ttiv Yijjiepav K6ivr]v XeyeL Ttj^

orav oylrovrai toi)s ei^ t]iuuv d(refit]a-avTa<i Kai

Kpicr6a)<s,

TrapaXo'yLcrafjievov's
ras evToXa^ 'lr](Tod XpLcrrov. ol

^6 dUaiOL 6U7rpayt]G-avTe^ kui vTro/ULeLuavTes Ta<s f5a(ra-

tion (in place of the conjunction) may then be accounted for in two ways; (i) The
translator read /card Kpdros for Kal to Kpdros; or (2) Syriac transcriber inadver- A
wrote 2 for V The latter explanation seems to be more probable: see
tently
above, 181. 10 ISdvres] C; eidores (from tSoires) S. 11 tov
p.
KofffJLov] mimdi hiiius S. See the note on 19 h ry Koap-Lf. ec t^ TtjctoO] om.
S. XfYOj/res] et Umc dicent S. 17 ^M'"] S ; vfuv C.

shall be released are contemplated, afiapriais vficiv, lb. ver.

28 run yvd-
this must imply different grades of crecrde on eyoi
elfj-i,
xni. 19 '"a
happiness. I do not see sufficient 7ri(rTev(Trjre...ori iyu) flpn. The
reason for doubting the genuineness preacher seems to be alluding to
of XurpwcTf TOt. this language of our Lord, as re-

g. Ka\ oy\rovTai\ A continuation corded by St John.

of the quotation from Isaiah, the 14. 6 a-KciXrj^ K.T.\.] From Is. Ixvi.

intervening words being a paren- 24, the last verse of the prophet.
thetical explanation. See also Matt. Our preacher has already quoted
xxiv. 30, Rev. i. 7. this passage, 7 ;
see the note there.
10. ^evicrdrjaovTai]
^
shall be a- 17. orav o-^ovTai] ''when vicu shall
mazed\ as i Pet. iv. 4, 12. The see ',
the nominative being sug-
' '
active ^eviCovra, perplexing ', amaz- gested by the preceding ets opao-tf
ing', occurs in Acts xvii. 20. This ttIkjti <Taf)Ki. For the future indica-
sense is found in Polybius and from tive with orav see Winer xlii. p. 388 ;

his time onward. See also the note but no dependence can be placed on
on ^evia-fiou, Ign. Ephes. 19. the MS in such a case.
''

TO jSaa-iXfiou] ''the kingdojn'' or 18. napaXoyiaapLevovs] playedfalse

' '
' '
see the note on 6. with attempted to cheat see
sovereignity ; ', ;

We must understand eV rw 'It]<tov Ign. Alagn. 3 tov nopaTov irapaXoyi-

'in thehands, in the power, of Jesus', ferai (with the note). See 4 Esdr.
as in thecommon idiom eivai e'v rivi : vii. 72 with Bensly's note (p. 63).

see Rost u. Palm Griech. Worterb. 19. fVTrpayri(TavT(i\ If the reading

s. v. iv i. 2. b. be correct, it must mean 'having
been virtuous and not (as else-
'

12. (TV r\si\

''Thou wast He'; see
esp. John viii. 24 ilw \xr] irivTivvrr^ri where) 'having been prosperous';
oTt y < 3^0 r6
aTTot/aviicroe (p tuis comp. diKuionpayflv.

i
256 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [xvii

vov^ Kai fjii<Tf](Tavre<s to.^ ijduTradeia^ Trj^ >p-V)(^fj<s,

orav
BeacrcovTaL tovs dcTO^^aravTa^ kul apprjcajmevovs did
Twv XoyMv r] dia tmv epyuiv tov 'IrjcovVy ottws koXol-

^oi/rai deivah /Sacavoi^ irvpl dcr/SecTTcp, ecrovrai dopaj/

didouTe<i TU) Qew avTwv, XeyovTe'i oti "GcrraL eXirU 5

Tw dehovXevKOTi Gew e^ bXt]s Kapdia^.

XVIII. Kat iijueis ovv <yevu)iJ.e6a eK rwv ev^api-
(TTOVVTIOV, TMV de^OuXeVKOTCOl/ TM OeWf Kal fJLYI
6K T(J0V

Kpivofjievcov dore^cov. Kal yap ai/ros TravOajuapTwXo'S

odv Kai fjLt]7r(t) (pvycov tov TretpacjuoPy dXX' en wV eV 10

2 5ta] fj 8id S. 4 TTvpl] C ;

^/ igne S. ^cTovrai] add. iv ayaWidaei S.
5 StSocrey] S Solves C.
; 7 ouf] add. ad\<f)ol [/uou] S. 10 (pvyibv]
(pevyuv C; S has t3vQ which perhaps represents ^uyw;/. 15 ^vrev^ivl C;

1. jJSuTra^et'aj] See the note on 16. or military engines, or the like.

2. a(TT0)(fi(TavTa9\
''

viissed the The metaphor here is probably

mark\ ''gone astray''; see i Tim. military comp. 2 Mace. xii. 27
;

i. 6, vi. 21, 2 Tim. ii. 18. The word fv6a8e opyavaiv Koi ^(X<ov jroXXai
is not uncommon in Polybius and irapadea-fLs, and see Ephes. vi. 16
later classical authors. TO /3eXj7 TOV TTOvrjpov [ja] TTfnvpap.iva.
4. "Kvpi aa-^k(TT(^ Matt. iii. 12, The preacher finds himself iv aficfjt-
Mark ix. 43, Luke iii. 17. For the re- (SoXo), the enemy having environed
ference of pseudo-Justin to this state- him with his engines of war.
ment see I. p. 178 sq. 12. diKaioavvrjv dicoKeiv] A phrase
XVIII. 'Let us take our place occurring in the Pastoral Epistles,
I Tim. vi.
with those who, having served God, II, 2 Tim, ii. 22 (comp.
will join in this thanksgiving. I Rom. ix. 30).

myself, though I am still surrounded

'
Kav eyyvs} at all events ttear,
by the temptations of the devil, yet if I cannot actually reach it For '.

strive to follow after righteousness, this use of Kav comp. Ign. Ephes. 10
that I may escape the judgment to Kciv eK Tciv epycov, with the note.
come.' XIX. '

Therefore, brothers and

g. Trai'^a/xaprcoXoy] The word is sisters, I have exhorted you to give
not given in the lexicons. Compare heed to the Scriptures, that ye m.ay
Apost. Const. vii. 1 8,
TravdajiapTrfTOS save both me and yourselves. Your
Barnab. 20 (where the MSS agree in hearty repentance and earnest pur-
writing it without an aspirate), TvavTa- suit of salvation is the return which
diKos Philo de Great. Pr. 3(11. p. 362). I ask for my trouble. Your zeal
'
1 1 .
opycfi/ois] the instruments, will thus stimulate all the young

engines^ ; comp. Ign. Rom. 4. The who have any regard for godliness.
word does not occur in the N. T. ;
And let us not be annoyed when we
and in the LXX it seems to be ap- are admonished and turned away
plied only to musical instruments, from sin. Half-heartedness and dis-
 xix] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 257

yuecrofs Toh opyavoL'i rov ^iaf3o\ov, CTTrov^dtco Tr]i/

0LKaLO(Tuvt]v hiMKeiu, OTTcos IcT'xiXTiiy Kccv eyyv^ avrfj^

yevea-Oai, (f)of3ovjuevo<i Trjv Kpiaiu Tt]v jueWovcrai/.

XIX. 'COarre, dde\<poi Kai
d^\(paij jueTo. tov
15 Oeoi/ Tt}^ d\f)6eia^ di/ayivioo'Ka) vfjuv evTevpLv ek to
Trpoae^eii/ Toh yeypajujueuoi^, \va kul eavTov^ cr(jocrt]Te

Kui TOP dvayivuxTKOVTa eV vfjiiv

yap airw v/ud^
fjucrdov
TO jueTai/ofjG'ai e^ 6A^; Kaphia^ (riOTt]piau eavToh kui
^(jorjv
didovTa^. touto yap TroitjcravTe^ aKOirov 7rd<JLV

siipplicatioiieiii, id est, admonitionem S; clearly a gloss. See I. p. 141. S

governs t'^s dXrjdeias by ivrev^Lv. 17 tov dvayivtliaKovTa ev vfuv~\ me qjii lego
vobis verba (or oracula) dei S. 19 tr/coTr^c] S ; ko-kov C. This reading of S
was anticipated by Bensly, Gebhardt, and Hilgenfeld.

and
belief obscure our sense of right KoKav TovTcov nifii^crecos TTOiflrai ; Orig.
wrong and our understandings are
;
C. Ccls. ili.
50 '^ol St avayvcoapuTcov
darkened by our lusts. Let us prac- Kol 810 Ta>v els avTa dirjyi^aecou rrporpe-
tise righteousness. Blessed are they TTovres pev eVt tjji/ els tov Qeov rav
who obey these precepts. They may oXcov evaej^eiav Koi tus avvOpovovs tov-
suffer in this world, but they will TTj dpeTas, cnroTpeTTovTes
8e k.t.X. Apost. ;

reap the fruit of immortality. Let Const, ii.

54 j^tfra Tr]v dvayvcoaiv koI
not the godly man be sorrowful, Trjv ^akpahiav Kai ttjv eVi rms VP"-
ifhe suffer now. An eternal life in (fia'is 8i8aaKaXiav. See also the notes
heaven awaits him, where he shall on ^ ly pfj fiovov apTi K.T.X. and the
live in bliss with the fathers, and introduction, p. 195. For the ex-
where sorrow shall have no place.' pression o Qeos TTJs dXrjdelas see
14. ahiK(^oi KOI dde\(f)ai] Comp. 3 '''o''
iro-Tepa rrfs dXrjdeias (comp.
20. So Barnab. i v'loi /cat 6vya- 20). Its use here as a synonyme
for the Scripture is explained by the
Tepa, Rel. Jiir. Eccl. p. 74 (Lagarde).
[lira TOV Qeov ac.t.X.] i.e. 'After preacher's language above 13, tu
you have heard the voice of God Xoyia TOV Qeov, Xeyei o Qeos.
'
in the Scriptures', as it is rightly 15. evTev^ivl appcaV ''entreaty'';

explained by Bryennios. The ser- as e.g. Justin Apol. i. i

(p. 53),
mon or exhortation followed imme- Joseph. Ant. xvi. 2. 5, Philo Vit.
diately after the reading of the Moys. iii. 32 (l. p. 172), and so most
Scriptures in the weekly gatherings frequently in classical authors. For
of the early Church Justin ApoL : its commoner sense in Christian
i.
67 (TweXevcTis yiverai, Kai ra arrofivrj- writers, 'supplication to God', see
fiovevfjLaTa Tav anocTToXaiv ra avy-
rj
the note on Clem. Rom. 63.
ypdiifj-ara rdv n f)o(j)r]TU)v uvayivcocrKfTut, 16. lvaKa^K.TX^, Comp. Ezek.iii.2i.
(lexpis iy^cDpa' eiru, Travcrd/xeVou roil 18. peTuvofjaat. k.t.X.^ See the notc
nvayivaxTKOVTOi, 6 TvpoecTTcas 8ia \oyov
rfjii vnvdenriav Km TTpoKKiqaiv ri)? T(7iv

CLEM. n. 17
258 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [xix

Toh veoL^ drjoroiixev Toh I3ov\oiul6vol9 Trepi Tr]u 6vG-t(3eiau

Kai TY]v )(^pr](TTOTr]Ta
tov Oeou (piKoiroveiv.
Kai fj-t]

dr]d(ji)<s e;^w/xei/ Kai dyavaKTcojULev ol

d(TO(pOL,
brap rt?

)/jia vovSeTt] Kai 67ri(rTpe(pr]

aVo rf] ctdiKia^ el's Tt]U

hiKaio(Tvvriv. eviore yap womjpa TrpacrcrovTes ov yivco- 5

(TKOfjiev hid Ttjv diyp-v^iav Kai dTricTTiav Tt]V

evov<Tav ev

TOT^ (TTf]66a'LU t]IJ.(jOU, Kai eCKOTl'cMeGA THN AlANOIAN VTTO

TMV eTTidvfjiiwv Tcov juaTaicov. TTpa^co/uLev
ovv Tr]v hi-

KaiocnJvr]i/ 'iva ek reXo^ (raidwfxev. /uaKapioi 01 tovtoi^

viraKOUovTe'i Toh 7rpo(TTayiuaoriu' Kav oXiyov -x^povov
10

2 0tXo7roj'e?;'] manifestent amorem laboris S see Michaelis in Castell. Lex. Syr.

:

p. 656. The scribe of C has first written (piXoaocpelv, but has afterwards corrected
it so as to be read (biXoirovelv. See p. 206. 3 ol dVo^ot] C ; tanquatn illi in-

sipieiites S. 5 hioTi\ S; ivia. C. 11 t(^ /cicr/xy] S; add. tovti^ C. I have

the less hesitation in striking out to{it(^ here because the general tendency of S is
to insert the pronoun, not to omit it, in this connexion e.g. 5, 19, 38, 60, ii. 18. :

addvarov'] S ;
5e ddvaTov C. The
correction was obvious, even before the reading
of S was known ;
and the only question was whether to read tov 5' addvarov or

2. ^iKonove'iv'l Ecclus. Prol. ruiv rjj diavoia ; comp. Clem. Rom. 36 ?)

Kara rrjv epfirjveiav Tr<pi\onovr]nevcov. aavveros Koi eo'KOTCoixevr] 8iavoia tjixuiv.

The word occurs in classical writers 10.
oXiyof ;^poi'oi/ k.t.X.] Comp.
of the best age. 1 Pet.6 okiyov apTi, el 8eov, Xvni]-
i.

3. ^T] dyavaKTCd^fv] Clem. Rom. devres, v. lo oXiyov Tradovras. For

56 naibe'iav e<p fj orSfif 6(f)e!Xi KaKoiradelv see 2 Tim. ii. 9, iv. 5,

dyavaKTe7v. James v. 13 ; comp. avyKUKOTraddv,

ol aao(f)oi] ''fools that ive are\ for 2 Tim. i.
8, ii. 3.
this is the force of the article comp. ;
1 2.
Kapnov Tpvyrj(rov(TLV^ Hos. x. 1 2
I ot aKovovTe^ (with the note). For aneipare eavTols els diKaioarvvrjv, rpv-
aaro(t)o^ comp. Ephes. V. 15. It seems yqaare els Kapnov ^w^s.
not to occur again in the Bible 13- jiaKapLOi avTov /c.r.X.] See Hip-
(except Prov. where there
ix. 8 in A, pol. ite Univ. p. 69 (Lagarde) r^
rSiv
is nothing corresponding in the He- Trarepav 8iK.aL0)v re opcofMevrj oyj/is Tvciv-

brew) and is not very common

; Tore fMeibia avap.ev ovrwv rrjv fxera
elsewhere. TOVTO TO x^^pi-ov avanavcnv Kai alcoviav
6. Sl^/rvxtaJ'] As above 11 /n?) dva^ia)ai,v...aWa koi ovtol \^ol a^LKoi]
StAJ/vxw/ief. See the notes on Clem. TOV Tcov TTUTe pmv x^pov Kai tovs
Rom. 11,23. To the references there diKaiovs opSai, /cat en' avrS tovto)
given add Barnab. ig ov fifj Sf^vxrjo-Tjs KoXa^o fievo I.. .Kai to acop,a...8vvaTos
TTOTfpov earai t]
oil. 6 Qeos avafiiaxras dOavarov noieiv,
7.aK0Ti<Tfi(6a fc.r.X.] From Ephes. and lower down dnocjidey^ovTai
iv. 17, 18, ev fxa.TaioT'qri tov poo's av- (fxovrjv ovTcos XeyovTe i, AiKala trov )

rmv, eViforw/LieVot (V. 1.

eaKOTUTfievoi) Kpia-is, and again to nvp aa-fSea-Tov
 xx] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 259

KaK07ra6f]a'(t)a'iv ev tw Ko<Tfxw, tov dQavarov Tt]^ ava-

(TTacrew^ Kapirov Tpvyrjcrovo'iu. jur] ovv XuTreicrdu) 6 eu-

(refi/j^, eav eTri rdi^ vvv ^(povoi^ TaXanrcoprj' juaKcipio^

avTov dvafxevei ')(pouo9
'
eKelvo^ ctvoi juETaTraTcpcou twu
15 cti/a^ico(ra<i eu(ppav6t]creTaL 6is toi^ d\v7rY]T0v alwva.
XX. '

AWa jULtj^e eKelvo Tf]v ^idvoiav Tapacr-

vjjlwv

(reVfoj, OTi fiXeTTO/uev tou^ dhiKOv^ irXovTOvvra^, Kai

(TTevo^wpovjuevou^ tov^ tov Oeou dovXovs. Tria-Tevcojuev

ovv, ddeXcpoi Kai ddeX(pai Oeou ^covto^ Trelpav ddXov/mei'y '

20 Kai yvjULva^oiueda tw vvv fSico \va tw jueXXovTi

crTecpavo)-

rbv dOdvarov. For another instance of the same error comp. 36 davdrov yvdiaeui
for dOavdrov yvuicreus in S itself. 12 Tpvyricrov(ni''l delectahutttnr...in S, i.e.

Tpv<prj(rovcTLv; for the same word (DD3) and its derivatives are used to translate

Tpvcp-q, 10, and rpvfpri, ivrpvcpau 2 Pet. ii.

13. 14 e/celvos] S attaches this
to xpo^os and pmictuates after TraT^pwv. 16 pLTjdi eKe2vo...Tapa<xaTa}] CS (hut
S has -qfjLQv) /XT] Tapa<x<jT03 ri]v Kapdiav vp-Qiv Rup 783. 18 in(TTevunev~\ S;
wiaTevoixev C. 19 Geou] Srt deoxj S.

8iafi(Vfi...(TKa>\ri^ 8e Tis '4)xnvpos k.t^. be the glory for ever.'

(comp. 17). These resemblances 16. 'AXXfi

ixrj8e (Kf'ivo k.t.X.] This
suggest that our Clementine homily passage is quoted loosely and with
was known to this writer. some omissions in the Sacr. Parall.
15. dva^Lco(Tai\ 2 Macc. vii. 9 cltto- (MS Rupef), which bear the name
davi'ivras rjpias vTvep tcov avrov vofioov of Joannes Damascenus, Op. ll. p. 7S3
els alciviov ava^iaxriv C<^^s J^/xas ava- (Le Quien) see above, I. p. 193 sq.
;

(TTTjcrei. be seen that in the quotation

It will

cikv7:r]Tov\ ^inaccessible to sorrow', the original words are altered, so as

stronger than akvivov ; comp. Clem. to conform to well-known scriptural
Horn. Xi. 17 (TVV rjpuV TOV ClKvTTOV passages ;
e. g. /x?) Tapaaa-erco rfjv
alava Kkrjpovopirjcrai. Kap8iav vfiap is substituted for prj^e
XX. '
Be not dismayed, if you see iKeivo Trjv didvoiav vpatv rapacrcriTQ},
wrong-doers prospering, while the after John xiv. i, 27 ;
and evae^eiav
servants of God are straitened. Be- is substituted for deoa-f^eiav, after
lieve it, this present life is the arena I Tim. vi. 5.

of our conflict ;
the crown will be 19. Tretpai^] For the accusative after
awarded in the future. Our reward ddXe'iv comp. e.g. Plato Le^. viii,

is not instantaneous. If were so,

it p. 830 A, Plut. FzV. Dcmetr. 5 and ;

then the pursuit of it would be a for such accusatives generally see

matter of traffic and not of piety.' Kiihner ll. p. 264. For an elaborate
To the one invisible God of truth,
'

application of the same metaphor

who sent us a Saviour and through see 7.
Him manifested truth and life to us,

'7-
26o THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. [xx

Sw/ULev. ov^ek tcov ^LKalaji/ Ta-^vv Kapirov eXa^ev, dW

EKdex^Tai avTOv. el
yap tov fJLiorQov toov ^iKaicov 6
Qeo^ (TVVTOfioo^ aTrehi^ov^ evdeco^ iiuTropiav y](TKOVfjiev Kai
01) deocre^eiav e^OKOVfiev yap eivai diKaioi, ov to
ei/o-e/Ses dWd to Kep^aXeou diwKOvre^' Kai dia tovto 5

deia KpiG-i^ ef^Xayfyev Trvevpta fjcr

op ^iKaioVj Kai e'/Sa-

pvvev decTjuoT^.
Tm fjiOVM Qeia dopdru), irarpi ri]^ dXrjOeia^, tw
e^aTrocrTeiXauTt rffjuv tov crcoTfjpa Kai dp-^^nyov Tm
dcbdapo'ia^, hi ov Kai icpavepcocrev rjfMV Tr]V dXriQeiav lo

I Tttxi'i'] C Rup ;
celeriter [raxu) S, using the same adverb which renders (tvvto-
/Aws just below. 3 (rvvTofnas dweSiSov, ei)^^ws] CS evdeus diredidov Rup.
;

4 ov deoa^^etav] CS ;
ovk evai^eiav Rup. ov rd] CS ;
ov 5ia to Rup. 5 eu-

o-e/3es] C Rup ; deoae^h S. 7 beaixots] S ; 5e(J-,u6s C. 8 t'^s aXij^ei'as]

add. domini nostri iesu christi (in apposition) S. 9 y}ij2v rbv awTTJpa Kai apxv

4. 6fO(re^Lav] See I Tim. ii. 10. have mistaken the sense. Bryennios
It occurs occasionally in the LXX. says pr] ov diKaiov, TOVTeaTiv, a'StKcoy,
5. 8ia ToiiTo K.r.X.] i. e.
'
on ac- but it is not clear what he means.
count of these sordid motives Divine Hilgenfeld reads Secrpovs, and ex-
judgment overtakes and cripples the plains 'Christiani non omni ex parte
spirit of a man, seeing that it is not up- justi persecutionem gentiliuni patie-
right, and loads it with chains'. The bantur'. Harnack, misled by the
word jiXanrdv is used especially of Di- aorist, says 'auctor diabohtin respi-
vine vengeance surprising its victim, cere videtur,quem tamquam avaritiae
checking and maiming him in his principem et auctorem hie infert (?)...
mid career; e.g. Hom. Od. i.
195 censuit igitur, diabolum. jam hoc tem-
aWa vv TOV ye 6eo\ ^XdirTovcri KeXevdov, pore catenis onustum esse'. He might
ib. xiv. 178 Toxj 8e Tis ddavdrcov ^XdyJAe have cjuoted Wolsey's warning to
'
(j)pevas, Xen. Symp. viii. 43 r)v fifj Cromwell in Henry VIII, By that
Qebs ^Xdnrr], Plut. Vt't Cacs. 45 vivo sin fell the angels'.
Geoii [LokiGTa jiXaTrrofieva) rfjv yvcjfMrjp 8. To) povcxi 0ew dopdT(ii\ Comp.
eoLKws k.tX, Trag. in Lycurg. c. I Tim. i. 17 dopaTca p6vu> Qea.
Leocr. p. 159 orav yap dpyr] hatpovav Trarpi r^s dXrjdeias] As in 3. So
^Xdnrrj TLvd, tovt avro TTparov, e^afl)- also o Qeos Trjs dXrjdeLas 1
9. The
' '

lupelTai (ppevav tov vovv tov ecrffXov Syriac translator takes the Truth
K.T.X., and
frequently. Sordid
so here to denote Christ Himself (John
motives bring their own punishment xiv. 6); comp. Orig. c. Cels. viii. 63
in a judicial blindness (/SXaTrrfi rrvev- vno TOV 0fo{) KCLi Tjjs povoyevovs avTca
pa). The aorist here has its common dXrjdflas. So Papias (Euseb. H. E.
gnomic sense, and is the most ap- iii. 39) speaks of Christ's personal
propriate tense see Kiihner Ti. p.
:
disciples as receiving commandments
136 sq. Previous editors seem to OTT oOr^s Tri<i nXrjdeias.
xx] AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 26 1

> /

T(t)U ULtOVCOV. afJLt]V.

ybv Trjs d(p9ap(Tias] salvatorem et priiicipciii vitae et salntis nostrae S. 1 1

'^mr\v\

C ; ddectationein (XDD13) S ;
which word elsewhere is a rendering of Tpvipy] (see

above, 19) or of aTroXaucis (see i

20). aury y\ 56fa] atque etiam jesu christo
domino nostra cum spiritti sancto gloria et honor et impcrium (i.e. 77 56|a /cat 17 rt/^ij

KoX TO Kparos) S.

9. Tov a-onTTipa K.r.X.] Acts V. 3 1 pias. Comp. Epist. Vienn. 17 (in

apyr\yov Kai (xarfjpa compared with Euseb. H. E. V. i) ap^yov t^s fw^s
iii. 15 Tov
dpxrjyov rfjs fcoi^s see also : tov Qeov.
Heb. ii. 10 tov apxrjyov TTJs craTrj-
 The lacuna in the Alexandrian Manuscript.

Page
264 THE EPISTLES OFF S
S,

Page

49. 12 o [Tpo]ixos .Tol<; Ka[TOl]-

KOIKTLV

1
3 -y6v['>;Tai]

51. 9 aiTo[S]
1 1
8LKaL0(rvv\r]v\
I
52. 8t8a(r/<oj[v]...[o{;]Tcos
2 e\776[^]Te...w[s] TTOtetTC
3 TroLrjO-rjcreTai v[x\2v] ..8ody]-
(TTai [rJ/xtv]

4 cus
Kpt^rycr[cr^ xjPV^'^^''^'
eade.. ;(pr;[crTev^'7]creTai

5 /x,[TperTe]
6 [rawT^ T]]7...7rapayyX[/xa-
crtv]

7 eau[TOt)S ei]s
8 [6Vra]s...au[To{) rJaTreivo-

cf)pOVOVVTi<;

53- 9 [<^770-t]v yap . .

[e7rt]^Xei//o)
10 [>70-]v;(tov
1 1
[St]/<atov

55- 15 [xjai TTCtXtV

1
56. Trj yXwcrcriy av[T]a)v

2 [a]wT(3v

63- 13 KaT>yy[opct A.eya)v]...a7r6 pu-

7r[oi;
0^8' a;']

64. 1
avro[{5]
. . . v oXw [tw
2 oiKO)] avrov...[i57r->yp](rtas

3 A[t'yu7rTov]...[atKi]cr/AaTwv
4 KciKepi/os]

5 ... i
ep,[eya] Xopr]p.6vr]aev [tti

riys] (idrov
6 8t8o[/jte]vou
. .
.7r/x,7r[ets]

65. 7 ySp[a]8i;yXwCTCTOs

67. 15 ...ei/
e^aAen^[oi/] /Ao[i]

17 a7ro[pt]i/'J^s...['<atT0 7rVu]p,a
18 avTave[A7js air l^jxov .Trjv . .

ayaX[Atacrti/
1 9 r\ov . . .
(TUiTTjpiOV [r;ye/Ao]-
vikZ
68. I
StSa[^wavd]/A0us...d[CTe/3et]s
 THE ALEXANDRIAN MANUSCRIPT. 265
Page
266 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Page
 THE ALEXANDRIAN MANUSCRIPT. 267
Page Page

157. 16 [ere
ets ej^i'os. ..[Kai ttoXJu 167. 16 i;/A[tv ^Ai;/fts]...y[ap, oTai/

ciTrev 77
17 [koi M]wi;cn7S...Kupie 1] KaXicrqade

168. I
[ovK io-a]Koucro^ai...^T;T[j/-

165. 15 [to o-Trep/Aa tod] Tci Se TCKva o-ouo-tv]

2
...[to irafj-f^o^Tavov up7^[o-oi;o-ti']...[TOv
16 iX^va^T] 8e ev TaJ^w.. .wpt- 3 (^o']/3oi/ 7rpOt'Aa[l/TO

/xo[s
KttTa ovSe\

17 /<ai]jOOi'...t3(T[7r6p ^?/jU.w]i'ta 4 7rpoo-ep([tv/3ouXars].../Aoi;[s

18 (rv\vK0[J.i^(76eiaa
...
ayair-q- fiXfiyi^ovs]

[toi ttoo-os] 5 Tv\_'^ EavTwv] . . .

[xat tt^s
1
9 T[ors TraiSeDjo/xeVots ... Se- 6 lavTtiJv]...7rX->^o"^>jo-ov[Tat...

o-7ro'[Toi; Tra-njp
At this point the ms breaks off
20 yap] aya^os...7rat8c[i;et] ts until

t[o eAe]?7^i7i/ai 185. 15 ...Xo]t7rov...0eos [kol]

2 1 1 6 [7ra]a-r;s
7r[ai]Setas
22
[ti^s] TTctcrews
186. I
^Tojv Kuptov
166. I ... 2
U7roTa[yr;]T 7rat[8ei;]- [et]s Xaov...[t/']i;;(T7

3 /AeyaXo[7r]pe7res. . .
[7r]t'o-Tti'

2 218. 4 o^tXo[p,eF]...T[ovTots]
Ka/xi^ai'[Ts]
4 av^a8[eta]i/ 5 [aVTOv] KOL

5 [ev] T<3 TTot/xvi'a)

6 To[vs] aV^pOJTTOUS
8 Trpor]aofJ.a\^L 7 8[ia] . . .
7rpao-o-ov[Tco I/]

167. 9 v/xr]v...[8e i;/x.a]s

8 e/Ao[{!]...yU,o[{)]
10 e7r[et8r; eKaA.ow]...u7r7^/<oij- 9 /^oL'^l

2 21.
cra[Te Kat e^Tet]voi/ 14 SouXei;e[ri']...8[oi;X]euetv
1 1 ou [7rpo(7et)(T] . . .
e7ro[tetTe 15 a(TV[j.(})o\^p^ov

Tas e/xas] 225. I

o"Te^a[v] w^i^vai
1 2 e)U,[ots Ay;)^ots] . . .
Toiya- 235- II ['^^] eTrayyeXi'a
[poSi/ Kayo)] 12 TaXat7rcop[ot]...7rpo[<^iy]TtKos

13 a7rwXet[a cTrtyeXacroJ/xai . . .
13 eto-[tv]

14 t[i7] Kap8t'a...7ra[vTa]

14 av] ep;(r;Ta6. ..oXe^po[s kol 15 7ra[T]poJv

cos av a]^i'K7^Tat 239. 6 ^[w]

15 ^[o'pv^os t] S]..,K[a7atyt8t 8 ev T[ors] KaXots

Tra]prj 240. I
tout[o...
Here the ms ends.
 THE EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

Corrigenda in the collation of the Constantinopolitan ms [C].

Page
TRANSLATIONS,
 THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT
TO

THE CORINTHIANS.
Church of God which sojourneth in Rome to the
THE
Church of God which sojourneth in Corinth, to them
which are called and sanctified by the will of God through
our Lord Jesus Christ. Grace to you and peace from Al-
mighty God through Jesus Christ be multiplied.
I. By reason of the sudden and repeated calamities and
reverses which are befalling us, brethren, we consider that we
have been somewhat tardy in giving heed to the matters of
dispute that have arisen among you, dearly beloved, and to
the detestable and unholy sedition, so alien and strange to
the elect God, which a few headstrong and self-willed
of

persons have kindled to such a pitch of madness that your

name, once revered and renowned and lovely in the sight of
all men, hath been greatly reviled. For who that had sojourned
among you did not approve your most virtuous and stedfast
faith ? Who did no^ admire your sober and forbearing piety in
Christ ? Who did not publish abroad your magnificent disposi-
tion of hospitality ? Who
did not congratulate you on your

perfect and sound knowledge ? For ye did all things without

respect of persons, and ye walked after the ordinances of God,

submitting yourselves to your rulers and rendering to the older

men among you the honour which is their due. On the
2 72 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
young too ye enjoined modest and seemly thoughts: and
the women ye charged to perform all their duties in a blame-
less and
seemly and pure conscience, cherishing their own
husbands, as is meet and ye taught them to keep in the rule
;

of obedience, and to manage the affairs of their household in

seemliness, with all discretion.

2, And
ye were all lowly in mind and free from arrogance,
yielding rather than claiming submission, more glad to give tJian
to receive, and content with the provisions which God supplieth.

And giving heed unto His words, ye laid them up diligently

in your hearts, and His sufferings were before your eyes.
Thus a profound and rich peace was given to all, and an
insatiable desire of doing good. An abundant outpouring also
of the Holy Spirit fell upon all ; and, being full of holy counsel,
in excellent zeal and with a pious confidence ye stretched out

your hands to Almighty God, supplicating Him to be propi-

tious, if unwillingly ye had committed any sin. Ye had conflict

day and night for all the brotherhood, that the number of His
elect might be saved with fearfulness and intentness of mind.
Ye were sincere and simple and free from malice one towards
another. Every and every schism was abominable to
sedition

you. Ye mourned
over the transgressions of your neighbours :

ye judged their shortcomings to be your own. Ye repented

not of any well-doing, but were ready unto every good work.

Being adorned with a most virtuous and honourable life, ye

performed all your duties in the fear of Him. The command-
ments and the ordinances of the Lord were wintten on tJie

tables of your hearts.

3, All glory and enlargement was given unto you, and

that was fulfilled which is written My beloved ate and drank
;

and zvas enlarged and waxed fat and kicked. Hence come
jealousy and envy, [and] strife and sedition, persecution and
tumult, war and captivity. So men were stirred up, tJie mean
against the honourable, the ill-reputed against the highly-reputed,
the foolish against the wise, tJie young against the elder. For
this cause righteousness and peace stand aloof, while each
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 273

man hath forsaken the fear of God, and become purblind

in the faith of Him, neither walketh in the ordinances of His
commandments nor liveth according to that which becometh
Christ, but each goeth after the lusts of his evil heart, seeing
that they have conceived an unrighteous and ungodly jealousy,

through which also deatJi entered into the world.

4. For so it is written, And it came to pass after certain
days that Cain brought of the fruits of the earth a sacrifice
nnto God, and Abel he also brougJit of the firstlings of the sheep
and of A nd God looked upon A bel and upon his
their fatness.
and unto his sacrifices He gave no /teed.
gifts, but unto Cain
And Cain sorrowed exceedingly, and his coimtenance fell. And
God said nnto Cain, Wherefore art thou very sorroivfidf and
did thy countenance fall ? If thou hast offered aright
zv/terefore
and hast not divided aright, didst thou not sin ? Hold thy peace.
Unto thee shall he turn, and thou, shalt rule over him. And
Cain said unto Abel his brother, Let us go over tmto the plain.
And it came to pass, wJiile they ivere in the plain, that Cain
rose 2ip against Abel his brother and slew him. Ye see, brethren,
jealousy and envy wrought a brother's murder. By reason of
jealousy our father Jacob ran away from the face of Esau his
brother. Jealousy caused Joseph to be persecuted even unto
death, and to come even unto bondage. Jealousy compelled
Moses to flee from the face of Pharaoh king of Egypt, while
it was said to him by his own countryman, Who made thee a
judge or a decider over us ? Wouldest thou slay me, even as
yesterday thou slctvest the Egyptian ? By reason of jealousy
Aaron and Miriam were lodged outside the camp. Jealousy
brought Dathan and Abiram down alive to hades, because they
made sedition against Moses the servant of God. B}- rea.son
of jealousy David was envied not only by aliens, but was

persecuted also by Saul [king of Israel].

5. But, to pass from the examples of ancient days, let us
come to those champions who lived very near to our time. Let
us set before us the noble examples which belong to our
generation. By reason of jealousy and envy the greatest and
CLEM. II. 18
2 74 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
most righteous pillars of the Church were persecuted, and
contended even unto death. Let us set before our eyes the
good Apostles. There was Peter who by reason of unrighteous
jealousy endured not one nor two but many labours, and thus
having borne his testimony went to his appointed place of glory.
By reason of jealousy and strife Paul by his example pointed
out the prize of patient endurance. After that he had been
seven times in bonds, had been driven into exile, had been
stoned, had preached in the East and in the West, he won the
noble renown which was the reward of his faith, having taught
righteousness unto the whole world and having reached the
farthest bounds of the West and when he had borne his
;

testimony before the rulers, so he departed from the world

and went unto the holy place, having been found a notable
pattern of patient endurance.
6. Unto these men of holy lives was gathered a vast multi-
tude of the elect, who through many indignities and tortures,
being the victims of jealousy, set a brave example among
ourselves. By reason of jealousy women being persecuted, after
that they had suffered cruel and unholy insults -fas Danaids and

Dircae-|-, safely reached the goal in the race of faith, and received
a noble reward, feeble though they were in body. Jealousy
hath estranged wives from their husbands, and changed the
saying of our father Adam, TJiis iiozv is bone of my bones and
flesh of my flesh. Jealousy and strife have overthrown great
cities and uprooted great nations.
7. These dearly beloved, we write, not only as
things,

admonishing you, but also as putting ourselves in remembrance.

For we are in the same lists, and the same contest awaiteth us.
Wherefore let us forsake idle and vain thoughts ;
and let us
conform to the glorious and venerable rule which hath been
handed down to us and let us see what is good and what is
;

pleasant and what acceptable in the sight of Him that made

is

us. Let us fix our eyes on the blood of Christ and under-
stand how precious it is unto His Father, because being
shed for our salvation it won for the whole world the grace
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 275
of repentance. Let us review all the generations in turn,
and learn how from generation to generation the Master hath
given a place for repentance unto them that desire to turn
to Him. Noah preached repentance, and they that obeyed
were saved. Jonah preached destruction unto the men of
Nineveh ; but they, repenting of their sins, obtained pardon of
God by their supplications and received salvation, albeit they
were aliens from God.
8. The ministers of the grace of God through the Holy
Spirit spake concerning repentance. Yea and the Master of the
universe Himself spake concerning repentance with an oath ;

Fo7% as I live, saitJi the Lord, I desire not the death of the sinner,
so much as his repentance ; and He added also a merciful judg-
ment: Repent ye, O house of Israel, of yonr iniquity; say unto
the sons of My Though your sins reach from the earth
people.
even unto the heaven, and thoicgh they be redder than scarlet and
blacker than sack-cloth, and ye turn unto Me with your zvhole heart
and say Father, I ivill give ear tmto you as unto an holy people.
And in another place He saith on this wise, Wash, be ye
clean. Put away your iniquities from your souls out of My sight.
Cease from yotcr iniquities ; learn to do good ; seek out judgment ;

defend him that is zuronged : give judgment for the orphan, and
execute righteousness for the ividoiv ; and come and let us reason

together, saith He ; and though your sins be as crimson, I ivill

make them white as snoiu ; and though they be as scarlet, I ivill
make tJiem white as wool. A nd if ye be willing and zvill hearken
unto Me, ye shall eat the good things of the earth ; but if ye be not

willing, neither hearken 2into Me, a sword shall devour you ; for
themouth of the Lord hath spoken these things. Seeing then that
He desireth all His beloved to be partakers of repentance. He
confirmed it by an act of His almighty will.
9. let us be obedient unto His excellent and
Wherefore
glorious and
will presenting ourselves as suppliants of His
;

mercy and goodness, let us fall down before Him and betake
ourselves unto His compassions, forsaking the vain toil and the
strife and the jealousy which leadcth unto death. Let us fix

182
276 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
our eyes on them that ministered perfectly unto His excellent

glory. Let us set before us Enoch, who being- found righteous

in obedience was translated, and his death was not found.
Noah, being found faithful, by his ministration preached regene-
ration unto the world, and through him the Master saved the

living creatures that entered into the ark in concord.

10. Abraham, who was called the 'friend,' was found faithful

in that he rendered obedience unto the words of God. He

through obedience went forth from his land and from his
kindred and from his father's house, that leaving a scanty land
and a feeble kindred and a mean house he might inherit the
promises of God. For He saith unto him Go forth from thy ;

land and from thy kindred and from thy father s ho2ise unto the
land which I shall show thee, and I will make thee into a great
nation^ and I will bless thee and magnify thy name, and tJiou
ivill

shall be blessed. A nd I will bless them that bless thee, and I zvill
curse them that curse thee ; and in thee shall all the tribes of the
earth be blessed. And
again, when he was parted from Lot, God
said unto him Look up with thifie eyes, and behold from the
;

place where thou now art, unto the north and the south and the
sunrise and the sea ; for all the land which thou seest, I will give
it unto thee and to thy seed for ever ; and I will make thy seed as

the dust of the earth. If any man can count the dust of the earth,

then shall thy seed also be counted. And again He saith ;

God Abraham forth a7td said unto him, Look up unto the
led
heaven and count the stars, and see whether thou canst count them.
So shall thy seed be. And Abraham believed God, and it zvas
reckoned unto him for righteousness. For his faith and hospitality
a son was given unto him in old age, and by obedience he
offered him a sacrifice unto God on one of the mountains which
He showed him.
11. For his hospitality and godliness Lot was saved from
Sodom, when all the country round about was judged by fire
and brimstone; the Master having thus foreshown that He
forsaketh not them which set their hope on Him, but appointeth
unto punishment and torment them which swerve aside. For
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 2-]^]

when had gone forth with him, being otherwise-minded

his wife
and not was appointed for a sign hereunto, so
in accord, she

that she became a pillar of salt unto this day, that it might
be known unto all men that they which are double-minded
and they which doubt concerning the power of God are set for

a judgment and for a token unto all the generations.

12. For her faith and hospitality Rahab the harlot was
saved. For when the spies were sent forth unto Jericho by
Joshua the son of Nun, the king of the land perceived that
they were come to spy out his country, and sent forth men to
seize them, that being seized they might be put to death. So
the hospitable Rahab received them and hid them in the upper
chamber under the flax-stalks. And when the messengers
of the king came near and said, TJie spies of our land entered
in nnto thee :
bring them forth, for the king so ordereth : then
she answered, TJie men truly, wJiom ye seek, entered in nnto
me, but they departed fortlizvitJi and arc journeying on the way ;
and she pointed out to them the opposite road. And she
said unto the men, Of a surety I perceive that the Lord your
God delivereth this city unto you; for the fear and the dread of
you is fallen upon the inhabitants thereof. WJmi therefore it shall
come topass that ye take it, save me and the house of my father.
And they said unto her, // shall be even so as thou hast spoken unto
us. Whensoever therefore thou perceives t that we are coming, thou
shall gather all thy folk beneath thy roof and they shall be saved ;
for as inany as shall be found without the house shall perish.
And moreover they gave her a sign, that she should hang out
from her house a scarlet thread, thereby showing beforehand
that through the blood of the Lord there shall be redemption
unto all them that believe and hope on God. Ye see, dearly
beloved, not only faith, but prophecy, is found in the woman.
13. Let us therefore be lowly-minded, brethren, laying
aside all arrogance and conceit and folly and anger, and let

us do that which is written. For the Holy Ghost saith. Let

not the ivise man boast iti his wisdom, nor the strong in his

strength, neither the rich in his riches ; but he that boasteth let
278 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
him boast in the Lord, that he may seek Him out, and do judg-
ment and righteousness ; most of all remembering the words of
the Lord Jesus which He spake, teaching forbearance and long-

suffering : for thus He spake ;

Have mercy, that ye may receive

mercy; forgive that it may be forgiven to you. As ye do, so

shall it be done to you. As ye

give, so shall it be given unto you.
As ye judge, so shall ye be judged. As ye show kindness, so shall
kindness be showed unto you. With ivhat measure ye mete, it
shall be measured withal to you. With this commandment and
these precepts let us confirm ourselves, that we may walk in
obedience to His hallowed words, with lowliness of mind. For
the holy word saith, Upon ivJioin shall I look, save upon him
that is gentle and quiet and feareth Aline oracles f

14. Therefore and proper, brethren, that we

it is right
should be obedient unto God, rather than follow those who
in arrogance and unruliness have set themselves up as leaders

in abominable jealousy. For we shall bring upon us no com-

mon harm, but rather great if we surrender ourselves
peril,

recklessly to the purposes of men who launch out into strife

and seditions, so as to estrange us from that which is right.
Let us be good one towards another according to the com-
passion and sweetness of Him that made us. For it is written :

The good shall be dwellers in the land, and tJie innocent shall be

left on it ; but they that transgress shall be destroyed utterly from

it. And again He saith / saw tJie ungodly lifted up on high
;

and exalted as the cedars of Lebanon. And I passed by, and

behold he was and I sought
not ; ou,t Ids place, and I found it
not. Keep innocence and behold uprightness ; for tJiere is a
remnant for the peaceful man.

15. Therefore let us cleave unto them that practise peace

with godliness, and not unto them that desire peace with dis-
simulation. For He saith in a certain place ;
This people honouj'eth
Me with their lips, but their heart is far from me ; and again,
They blessed with their mouth, but they cursed with their heart.
And again He saith, They loved Him with their mouth, and
with their tongue they lied unto Him ; and their heart zvas not
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 279

itpriglit with Hint, neither were they stedfast in His covenant. For
this cause Let the deceitful lips be made dumb, which speak iniquity

against the righteous. And again ; May the Lord utterly destroy
all tJie deceitfid lips, the tongue that speaketh proud things, even
them that say, Let us magnify our tongue ; our lips are our own ;
who is For the misery of the needy and for the
lord over us ?

groaniibg of the
poor / will now arise, saith the Lord. L will set
him in safety ; I will deal boldly by him.
16. For Christ is with them that are lowly of mind, not
with them that exalt themselves over the flock. The sceptre
[of the majesty] of God, even our Lord Jesus Christ, came not
in the of arrogance or of pride, though He might have
pomp
done so, but in lowliness of mind, according as the Holy Spirit

spake concerning Him. For He saith Lord., who believed our ;

report? and to whotn wasarm of the Lord revealed? We

the

announced Him in His presence. As a child zvas He, as a root in

a thirsty ground. There is no form in Him, neither glory. A nd
we beheld Him, and He had no form nor comeliness, but His form
was mean, lacking more than the form of men. He was a man of
stripes and of toil, atid knowing how to bear infirmity : for His

face is turned away. He ivas disJionoured and held of no account.

He beareth our sins and sufferetJi pain for our sakes : and zve

accounted Him to be iji toil and in stripes and in affliction. And

He for our sins and hath been afflicted for our
tvas zvounded

iniquities. The chastisement of our peace is upon Him. With

His bruises we zvere healed. We all went astray like sheep,
each man went astray in his own path : and the Lord delivered
Him over for our sins. A nd He
His mouth, because
opoieth not
He is afflicted. As a sheep He ; and as a
tvas led to slaughter
lamb before his shearer is dumb, so openeth He not His mouth.
Ln His humiliatio7t His judgment was taken away. His genera-
tion who shall declare? For His life is taken atvay from the
earth. For the iniquities of my people He is come to death.
And I will give the wicked for His burial, and the rich for
His death ; for He wrought no iniquity, neither zvas guile found
in His mouth. And the Lord desireth to cleanse Him from
2 8o S. CLEMENT OF ROME
His stripes. If ye offer for sin, your soul shall see a long-lived
seed. And the Lord desireth to take away from the toil of His
sold, to show Him lightand to mould Him with understand-
ing, to justify a Jtist One that is a good servant unto many.
And He shall bear their sins. Therefore He shall inherit many,

and shall divide the spoils of the strong ; because His soul zuas

delivered unto death,and He was reckoned among transgres- tlie

sors ; and He bare of many, and for their sins was He

the sins

delivered up. And again He Himself saith But I am a zvorm ;

and no man, a reproach of men and an outcast of the people. All

tliey that beheld me mocked at me; they spake with their lips ;

they wagged their heads, saying. He hoped on the Lord ; let

Him deliver him, or let Him save Jiim, for He desireth him.
Ye see, dearly beloved, what is the pattern that hath been

given unto us ; for, if the Lord was thus lowly of mind, what
should we do, who through Him have been brought under the
yoke of His grace ?
17. Let us be imitators also of them which went about in

of Christ.
goatskins and sheepskins, preaching the coming
We mean Elijah and Elisha and likewise Ezekiel, the pro-
phets, and besides them those men also that obtained a good
report. Abraham obtained an exceeding good report and was
called the friend of God and looking stedfastly on the glory
;

of God, he saith in lowliness of mind, But I am dust and ashes.

Moreover concerning Job also it is thus written; And Job

was righteoics and unblameable, one that was true and honoured
God and abstained from all evil. Yet he himself accuseth
himself saying, No man is clean from filth ; no, not tlwugh his

life be but for a day.

Moses was called faitJiful in all His
house, and through his ministration God judged Egypt with
the plagues and the torments which befel them. Howbeit
he also, though greatly glorified, yet spake no proud words, but
said, when an oracle was given to him at the bush, Who am I,
that Thou sendest me ? Nay, I am feeble of speech and slow of

tongue. And again he saith, But I am smoke from the pot.

18. But what must we say of David that obtained a good
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 281

report ? of whom God said, / Jiave found a man after My

heart, David the of Jesse: with eternal merey have I
son
anointed him. Yet he too saith unto God Have merey upon ;

me, O
God, according to Thy great mercy ; and according to
the multitude of Thy compassions, blot out mine iniquity. Wash
me yet more from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my
sin. For I acknozvledge mine and my sin is ever iniquity,

before me. and I wrought evil in

Against Thee only did I sin,

Thy sight ; that Thou mayest be Justified in Thy words, and

mayest conquer in Thy pleading. For behold, in iniquities was
I conceived, and in sins did my mother bear me. For behold
Thou hast loved truth : the dark and hidden things of Thy
ivisdom hast Thou showed unto me. Thou shall sprinkle me with
hyssop, and I shall be made clean. Thou shall wash me, and I
shall become whiter than snozv. Thou shall make me to hear
of Joy and gladness. The bones which have been humbled shall
rejoice. Turn away Thy face from my sins, and blot out all
mine iniquities. Make a clean heart within me, O God, and
renew a right spirit in mine inmost parts. Cast me not awajr
from Thy presence, and take not Thy Holy Spirit from nie.
Restore unto me the Joy of Thy salvation, and strengthen me zuith
a princely spirit. I will teach sinners Thy ways, and godless
men shall be converted unto Thee. Deliver me froin bloodguilti-
ness, O God, the God of my salvation. My tongue shall rejoice
in Thy righteousness. Lord, Thou shalt open my mouth, and
my lips shall declare Thy praise. For, if Thou hadst desired
sacrifice, I zvould have given it : in ivhole burnt-offerings Thou
tvilt have no pleasure. A
sacrifice unto God is a cotitrite spirit ;

a contrite and humbled heart God will not despise,

19. The humility
therefore and the submissiveness of so

many and so great men, who have thus obtained a good report,
hath through obedience made better not only us but also the
generations which were before us, even them that received His
oracles in fear and truth. Seeing then that we have been par-
takers of many great and glorious doings, let us hasten to re-
turn unto the goal of peace which hath been handed down to
282 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
us from the beginning, and let us look stedfastly unto the
Father and Maker of the whole world, and cleave unto His
splendid and excellent gifts of peace and benefits. Let us
behold Him in our mind, and let us look with the eyes of
our soul unto His long-suffering will. Let us note how free
from anger He is towards all His creatures.
20. The heavens are direction and obey Him
moved by His
in peace.Day and night accomplish the course assigned to them
by Him, without hindrance one to another. The sun and the
moon and the dancing stars according to His appointment circle
in harmonywithin the bounds assigned to them, without any

swerving aside. The earth, bearing fruit in fulfilment of His will

at her proper seasons, putteth forth the food that supplieth

abundantly both men and beasts and all living things which
are thereupon, making no dissension, neither altering anything
which He hath decreed.
Moreover, the inscrutable depths of the
abysses and the unutterable statutes of the nether regions are
constrained by the same ordinances. The basin of the boundless
sea,gathered together by His workmanship into its I'eseYvoirs,

passeth not the barriers wherewith it is surrounded ;

but even
as He ordered it, so it doeth. For He said, So far sJialt thou

come, thy waves shall be broken within thee. The ocean which
and
is impassable for men, and the worlds
beyond it, are directed
by the same ordinances of the Master. The seasons of spring
and summer and autumn and winter give way in succession
one to another in peace. The winds in their several quarters

at their proper season fulfil their ministry without disturbance ;

and the everflowing fountains, created for enjoyment and health,

without fail give their breasts which sustain the life of men.
Yea, the smallest of living things come together in concord and
peace. All these things the great Creator and Master of the
universe ordered to be in peace and concord, doing good unto
all things, but far beyond the rest unto us who have taken
refuge in His compassionate mercies through our Lord Jesus
Christ, to whom be the glory and the majesty for ever and ever.
Amen.
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 283
21. Look ye, brethren, lest His benefits, which are many,
turn unto judgment to all of us, if we walk not worthily of
Him, and do those things which are good and well-pleasing in
His sight with concord. For He saith in a certain place, TJie
Spirit of the Lord is a lamp searcJwig the closets of the belly. Let
us see how near He is, and how that nothing escapeth Him of
our thoughts or our devices which we make. It is right there-
fore that we should not be deserters from His will. Let us rather

give offence to foolish and senseless men who exalt themselves

and boast in the arrogance of their words, than to God. Let us
fear the Lord Jesus [Christ], whose blood was given for us. Let
us reverence our rulers ;
let us honour our elders ;
let us instruct
our young men in the lesson of the fear of God. Let us guide
our women toward that which is good let them show forth :

their lovely disposition of purity ;

let them prove their sincere
affection of gentleness them make manifest the moderation
;
let

of their tongue through their silence let them show their love,
;

not in factious preferences, but without partiality towards all

them that fear God, in holiness. Let our children be par-
takers of the instruction which is in Christ : let them learn how
lowliness of mind
prevaileth with God, what power chaste love
hath with God, how the fear of Him is good and great and
saveth all them that walk therein in a pure mind with holiness.

For He is the searcher out of the intents and desires ;

whose
breath is in us, and when He listeth, He shall take it away.

22. Now all these things the faith which is in Christ con-
firmeth : for He Himself through the Holy Spirit thus inviteth

us :
Come, my children, hearken unto me, I will teach yon the
fear of the Lord. What man is he that desireth life and
loveth to see good days ? Make thy tongne to cease from evil,
and thy lips that they speak no guile. Turn aside from evil
and do good. Seek peace and ensue it. The eyes of the Lord
are over the righteotts, and His ears are ttirned to their prayer.
But of the
the face Lord is upon them that do evil, to destroy
their memorial from the The righteous cried
earth. out, and
the Lord heard him, and delivered him from all his troubles.
284 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
Many are the troubles of the righteous, and the Lord shall de-
liver him frotn them all. Then again ; Many are the stripes of
the sinner, but them that set tJieir hope on the Lord mercy shall

compas^. about.
23. The Father, who is pitiful in all things, and ready-
to do good, hath compassion on them that fear Him, and kindly
and lovingly bestoweth His favours on them that draw nigh
unto Him with a single mind. Wherefore let us not be
double-minded, neither let our soul indulge in idle humours
respecting His exceeding and glorious gifts. Let this scrip-
ture be far from us where He saith Wretched are the double-
;

minded, which doubt in their soul, and say, These things we did
hear in tlie days of our fathers also, and beJiold we have grown old,
and none of these things hath befallen us. Ye fools, compare your-
selves unto a tree ; take a vine. First it sheddeth its leaves, then
a shoot Cometh, then a leaf then a
floiver, a and after these
sour berry, then a full ripe grape. Ye see that in a little
time the fruit of the tree attaineth unto mellowness. Of a
truth quickly and suddenly shall His
be accomplished, the
will

scripture also bearing witness to it, saying; He sJtail come quickly

and sJiall not tarry ; and the Lord shall come suddenly into His
temple, even the
Holy One, tvJiom ye expect.
24. Let us understand, dearly beloved, how the Master
continually showeth unto us the resurrection that shall be here-
after ;
whereof He made the Lord Jesus Christ the firstfruit,
when He raised Him from the dead. Let us behold, dearly
beloved, the resurrection which happeneth at its proper season.
Day and night show unto us the resurrection. The night falleth
asleep, and day ariseth ;
the day departeth, and night cometh
on. Let us mark the fruits, how and in what manner the

sowing taketh place. The sower goeth forth and casteth into
the earth each of the seeds and these falling into the earth
;

dry and bare decay : then out of their decay the mightiness of
the Master's providence raiseth them up, and from being one

they increase manifold and bear fruit.

25. Let us consider the marvellous sign which is seen in
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 285
the regions of the east, that is, in the parts about Arabia.
There is a bird, which is named the phoenix. This, being
the only one of its kind, liveth for five hundred years ;
and
when it hath now reached the time of its dissolution that it
r
should die, it maketh for itself a coffin of frankincense and myrrh
and the other spices, into the which in the fulness of time
it entereth, and so it dieth. But, as the flesh rotteth, a certain
worm engendered, which is nurtured from the moisture of
is

the dead creature and putteth forth wings. Then, when it is

grown it taketh up that cofiin where are the bones of its

lusty,

parent, and carrying them journeyeth from the country of

Arabia even unto Egypt, to the place called the City of the
Sun ;
and in the day time in the sight of all, flying to the
altar of the Sun, layeth them thereupon
it and this done, it ;

setteth forth to return. So the priests examine the registers

of the times, and they find that it hath come when the five
hundredth year is
completed.
26. Do we
then think it to be a great and marvellous thing,
if the Creator of the universe shall bring about the resurrection
of them Him with holiness in the assurance
that have served
of a good faith, seeing that He showeth to us even by a bird
the magnificence of His promise For He saith in a certain .''

place; And Thou shalt raiseme up, and I will praise Thee ; and
I went to rest and slept, I was awaked, for Thou art zvith me.
And again Job And Thou shalt raise this my jlesJi which
saith ;

hath endured all these things.

27. With this hope therefore let our souls be bound unto
Him that is faithful in His promises and that is righteous in
His judgments. He that commanded not to lie, much more
shall He Himself not lie for nothing is impossible with God
:

save to lie. Therefore let our faith in Him be kindled within

us, and let us understand that all things are nigh unto Him.
By a word of His majesty He compacted the universe; and
by
a word He
can destroy it. Who shall say Him, What
unto
hast Thou done ? or zvJio shall resist the might of His strength ?
When He listeth, and as He listeth, He will do all things ;
and
 286 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
nothing shall pass away of those things that He hath decreed.
All things are in His sight, and nothing escapeth His counsel,
.
seeing that The heavens declare the glory of God, and the fir-
mament proelaimeth His Jiandiwork. Day icttereth word ttnto

day, and night proelaimeth knowledge nnto night ; and there

are neither words nor speeches, whose voices are not heard.
28. Since therefore all things are seen and heard, let us
fear Him, and forsake the abominable lusts of evil works,
that we may be by His mercy from the coming
shielded

judgments. For where can any of us escape from His strong

hand .-' And what will receive any of them that desert
world
from His service For the holy writing saith in a certain
.'*

place ;
Where shall I go, and where shall I be hidden from Thy
face ? If I ascend into the heaven, Thou art tJiere ; if I depart
into the farthest parts Thy right Jiand ; if
of the earth, there is
I make my bed in the depths, tJiere is Thy Spirit. Whither then
shall one depart, or where shall one flee, from Him that

embraceth the universe .-

29. Let us therefore approach Him in holiness of soul,

lifting up pure and undefiled hands unto Him, with love towards
our gentle and compassionate Father, who made us an elect
portion unto Himself. For thus it is written WJien the Most :

High divided the stations, when He of Adam,

dispersed the softs
He fixed the boimdaries of the nations according to the fiumber
of the angels of God. His people Jacob became the portion
of the Lord, and Israel the measurement of His inheritance.
And in another place He saith Behold, the Lord taketh for ;

Himself a nation out of the midst of the nations, as a man taketJi

the firstfruits of his threshing-floor ; and the holy of holies

shall come forth from that nation.

30.Seeing then that we are the special portion of a Holy

God, let us do all things that pertain unto holiness, forsaking
evil-speakings, abominable and impure embraces, drunkennesses
and tumults and hateful lusts, abominable adultery, hateful
pride ;
For God, He saith, resisteth the proud, but giveth grace
to the lowly. Let us therefore cleave unto those to whom
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 287

erace is o-iven from God. Let us clothe ourselves in con-

cord, being lowly-minded and temperate, holding ourselves aloof

from all backbiting and evil speaking, being justified by works
and not by words. For He saith He that saitJi mucJi shall ;

hear also again. Doth the ready talker tJiink to be righteous?

Blessed is the offspring of zvoma^t that liveth but a short time.

Be not thon abundant in zvords. Let our praise be with God,
and not of ourselves : for God hateth them that praise them-

selves. Let the testimony to our well-doing be given by

others, as was given unto our fathers who were righteous.
it

Boldness and arrogance and daring are for them that are ac-
cursed of God but forbearance and humility and gentleness
;

are with them that are blessed of God.

31.Let us therefore cleave unto His blessing, and let us see

what are the ways of blessing. Let us study the records of the
things that have happened from the beginning. Wherefore was
our father Abraham blessed } Was it not because he wrought
righteousness and truth through faith } Isaac with confidence,
as knowing the future, was led a willing sacrifice. Jacob with
humility departed from his land because of his brother, and went
unto Laban and served and the twelve tribes of Israel were
;

given unto him.

32. If any man will consider them one by one in sin-

cerity, he shall understand the magnificence

of the gifts that are

given by Him. For of Jacob are all the priests and levites who
minister unto the altar of God; of him is the Lord Jesus as
concerning the flesh ;
of him are kings and rulers and governors
in the line of Judah ; yea, and the rest of his tribes are held in

no small honour, seeing that God promised saying, Thy seed

of heaven. They all therefore were glorified
shall be as the stars
and magnified, not through themselves or their own works or
the righteous doing which they wrought, but through His will.
And so we, having been called through His will in Christ Jesus,
are not justified through ourselves or through our own wisdom
or understanding or piety or works which we wrought in holi-
ness of heart, but through faith, whereby the Almighty God
288 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
justified all men that have- been from the beginning ;
to whom
be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.
33. What then must we do, brethren? Must we idly
abstain from doing good, and forsake love .-*
May the Master
never allow this to befal us at least ;
but let us hasten with

instancy and zeal to accomplish every good work. For the

Creator and Master of the universe Himself rejoiceth in His
works. For by His exceeding great might He established the
heavens, and in His incomprehensible wisdom He set them in
order. And the earth He separated from the water that sur-
roundeth it, and He set it firm on the sure foundation of His
own will and the living creatures which walk upon
;
it He com-
manded to exist by His ordinance. Having before created the
sea and the living creatures therein, He enclosed it by His own
power. Above all, as the most excellent and exceeding great
work of His intelligence, with His sacred and faultless hands
He formed man in the impress of His own image. For thus
saith God ;
Let us make man after our image and after our like-
ness. And God made man ; male and female made He them.
So having finished all these things. He praised them and blessed
them and said, Increase and multiply. We have seen that all

the righteous were adorned in good works. Yea, and so the

Lord Himself having adorned Himself with works rejoiced.
Seeing then that we have this pattern, let us conform ourselves
with all diligence to His will let us with all our strength work
;

the work of righteousness.

34. The good workman receiveth the bread of his work with
boldness, but the slothful and careless dareth not look his em-
ployer in the face. It is therefore needful that we should be

zealous unto well-doing, for of Him are all things: since He fore-
warneth us saying, Behold, the Lord, and His reward is before His
face, to recompense each man according to his zvork. He exhort-
eth us therefore to believe on Him with our whole heart, and
to be not idle nor careless unto every good work. Let our boast
and our confidence be in Him let us submit ourselves to
:

His will let us mark the whole host of His angels, how they
;
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 289

stand by and minister unto His will. For the scripture saith,
Ten thousand times ten tJioiisands stood by Him, and tJionsands of
thousands mijiistered unto Him and tJiey
: cried aloud, Holy, holy,

holy is the Lord of Sabaoth ; all creation is full of His glory.

Yea, and let us ourselves then, being gathered together in con-

cord with intentness of heart, cry unto Him as from one mouth

earnestly that we may be made partakers of His great and

glorious promises. For He saith, Eye hath not seen, and ear hath
not heard, and ithath not entered into the heart of man, what

great things He hath prepared for them that patiently await Him.

35. How blessed and marvellous are the gifts of God, dearly
beloved ! Life in immortality, splendour in righteousness, truth in

boldness, faith in confidence, temperance in sanctification! And

all these things fall under our apprehension. What then, think

ye, are the things preparing for them that patiently await Him .?

The Creator and Father of the ages, the All-holy One Himself
knoweth their number and their beauty. Let us therefore con-
tend, that we may be found in the number of those that patiently
await Him, to the end that we may be partakers of His promised

gifts. But how shall this be, dearly beloved

} If our mind be fixed

through faith towards God if we seek out those things which

;

are well pleasing and acceptable unto Him if we accomplish ;

such things as beseem His faultless will, and follow the way of
truth, casting off from ourselves all unrighteousness and ini-
quity, covetousness, strifes, malignities and deceits, whisperings
and backbitings, hatred of God, pride and arrogance, vainglory
and inhospitality. For they that do these things are hateful to
God and not only they that do them, but they also that consent
;

unto them. For the scripture saith But unto the sinner said ;

God, Wherefore dost thou declare Mine ordinances, and takest My

covenant upon thy mouth ? Yet thou didst hate instruction, and
didst cast away My words behind thee. If tJiou sawest a thief, tJiou
didst keep company ivith him, and with the adulterers thou didst
set thy portion. Thy mouth mtdtiplied ivickedness, and thy tongue
wove deceit. Thou sattest and spakest against thy brother, and
against the son of thy mother thou didst lay a stumbling-block.
CLEM. II. 19
290 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
TJiese tilings thou hast done, and I kept silence, Tho7i thonghtest,

unrighteous man, that I should be like unto thee. I will convict

thee, and will set thee face to face with thyself. Now understand
ye these things, ye tJtat forget God, lest at any time He seize you as
a lion, and there be none to deliver. The sacrifice of praise shall
glorify Me, and there is the zvay wherein I will show him the
salvation of God.

36. is the way, dearly beloved, wherein we found our

This
salvation, even Jesus Christ the High-priest of our offerings, the
Guardian and Helper of our weakness. Through Him let us
look stedfastly unto the heights of the heavens; through Him
we behold as in a mirror His faultless and most excellent
visage through Him the eyes of our hearts were opened
; ;

through Him our foolish and darkened mind springeth up

unto [His marvellous] light through Him the Master willed
;

that we should taste of the immortal knowledge Who being ;

the

brightness of His majesty is so much greater tJian angels, as

He hath inherited a more excellent name. For so it is written ;

Who maketh His angels spirits and His ministers a flame of

fire; but of His Son the Master said thus; TJiou art Son, My
I this day have begotten Thee. Ask of Me, and I will give Thee
the Gentiles for Thine inheritance, and the ends of the earth for
Thy possession. And again He saith unto Him ;
Sit Thou on

My right hand, until I make Thine enemies a footstool for Thy

feet. Who then are these enemies ?
They that are wicked and
resist His will.

37. Let us therefore enlist ourselves, brethren, with all earn-

estness in His faultless ordinances. Let us mark the soldiers
that are enlisted under our rulers, how exactly, how readily, how
submissively, they execute the orders given them. All are not

prefects, nor rulers of thousands, nor rulers of hundreds, nor

rulers of fifties, and so forth ;
but each man in his own rank
executeth the orders given by the king and the governors. TJic

great without the small cannot exist, neither the small without
the great. There is a certain mixture in all things, and therein
is utility. Let us take our body as an example. The head
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 291

without the feet is nothing ;

so likewise the feet without the

head are nothing even the smallest limbs of our body are
:

necessary and useful for the whole body but all the members :

conspire and unite in subjection, that the whole body may be

saved.

38. So in our case let the whole body be saved in Christ

Jesus, and let each man be

subject unto his neighbour, ac-
cording as also he was appointed with his special grace. Let
not the strong neglect the weak and let the ;
weak respect the

strong. Let the rich minister aid to the poor the poor ;
and let

give thanks to God, because He hath given him one through

whom his wants may be supplied. Let the wise display his
wisdom, not inwords, but in good works. He that is lowly
in mind, let him not bear testimony to himself, but leave testi-
mony to be borne to him by his neighbour. He that is pure in
the flesh, let him be so, and not boast, knowing that it is Another
who bestoweth his continence upon him. Let us consider,
brethren, of what matter we were made ;
who and what manner
of beings we were, when we came into the world ;
from what a

sepulchre and what darkness He that moulded and created us

brought us into His world, having prepared His benefits afore-
hand ere ever Seeing therefore that we have all
we were born.
these things from Him, we ought in all things to give thanks to

Him, to whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.

39. Senseless and stupid and ignorant men
and foolish

jeer and mock at us, desiring that they themselves should

be
exalted in their imaginations. For what power hath a mortal ?
or what strength hath a child of earth .? For it is written ;
T/iere

was no foi'in before mine eyes ; only I heard a breath and a

voice. What Shall a mortal be elean in the sight of the
then ?

Lord; or shall a man be nnblameable for his works'? seeing

that He is distriistftd against His servants, and notetJi some

perversity against His angels. Nay, the heaven is not clean in

His sight. Azvay then, ye that dzvell in houses of clay, whereof,

even of the same clay, zve ourselves are made. He smote them
like a moth, and from morn to even they are no more. Because

19 2
292 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
they could not succour themselves, they perished. He breathed

upon them and they died, hecatise they had no wisdom. But call

thou, if perchance one shall obey thee, or if thou shalt see one of
the holy angels. For wrath killeth the foolish ma7i, afid envy

slayeth him that is gojte astray. A nd I have seen fools throwing

out roots, but fortJiwitJi their habitation was eaten 2ip. Far be

their sons from safety. May they be mocked at tJie

gates of
inferiors, and there shall be none to deliver them. For the things

which are prepared for them, the I'ighteous shall eat ; but they
themselves shall not be delivered from evils.

40. Forasmuch then as these things are manifest beforehand,

and we have searched into the depths of the Divine knowledge,
we ought to do all things in order, as many as the Master hath
commanded us to perform at their appointed seasons. Now the

offerings and ministrations He commanded to be performed

with care, and not to be done rashly or in disorder, but at fixed
times and seasons. And where and by whom He would have
them performed, He Himself fixed by His supreme will that :

all things being done with piety according to His good pleasure

might be acceptable to His will. They therefore that make

their offerings at the appointed seasons are acceptable and
blessed : for while they follow the institutions of the Master

they cannot go wrong. For unto the high-priest his proper

services have been assigned, and to the priests their proper
office is appointed, and upon the levites their proper minis-
trations are laid. The layman is bound by the layman's
ordinances.

41. Let each of you, brethren, in his own order give thanks
unto God, maintaining a good conscience, and not transgressing
the appointed rule of his service, but acting with all seemliness.
Not in every place, brethren, are the continual daily sacrifices
offered, or the freewill offerings, or the sin offerings and the

trespass offerings, but in Jerusalem alone. And even there the

offering is not made in every place, but before the sanctuary in
the court of the altar and this too through the high-priest and
;

the aforesaid ministers, after that the victim to be offered hath

 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 293

been inspected for blemishes. They therefore who do any thing

contrary to the seemly ordinance of His will receive death as
the penalty. Ye see, brethren, in proportion as greater know-
ledge hath been vouchsafed unto us, so much the more are we

exposed to danger.
42. The Apostles received the Gospel for us from the Lord
Jesus Christ ;Jesus Christ was sent forth from God. So then
Christ is from God, and the Apostles are from Christ. Both
therefore came of the will of God in the appointed order. Having
therefore received a charge, and having been fully assured through
the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and confirmed in the
word of God with assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went
full

forth with the glad tidings that the kingdom of God should
come. So preaching everywhere in country and town, they ap-
pointed when they had proved them by the
their first-fruits,

Spirit, to be bishops and deacons

unto them that should believe.
And this they did in no new fashion for indeed it had been ;

written concerning bishops and

deacons from very ancient
times ;
for thus saith the scripture in a certain place, / zvill

appoint tJieir bishops in righteonsness and their deacons in faith.

43. And what marvel, if they which were entrusted in Christ

with such a work by God appointed the aforesaid persons }

seeing that even the blessed Moses who was a faithful servant
in all His house recordeda sign in the sacred books all
for

things that were enjoined upon him. And him also the rest of
the prophets followed, bearing witness with him unto the laws
that were ordained by him. For he, when jealousy arose con-
cerning the priesthood, and there was dissension among the
tribes which of them was adorned with the glorious name, com-

manded the twelve chiefs of the tribes to bring to him rods

inscribed with the name of each tribe. And he took them and
tied them and sealed them with the signet rings of the chiefs of
the tribes, and put them away in the tabernacle of the testimony
on the table of God. And having shut the tabernacle he sealed
the keys, and likewise also the doors. And he said unto them,
Brethren, the tribe zvhose rod shall bud, this hath God chosen to be
294 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
priests and ministers unto Him. Now when
morning came, he
called together all Israel, even the six hundred thousand men,
and showed the and opened the
seals to the chiefs of the tribes,

tabernacle of the testimony, and drew forth the rods. And the
rod of Aaron was found not only with buds, but also bearing
fruit. What think ye, dearly beloved .-' Did not Moses know
beforehand that this would come to
pass Assuredly he .-'

knew But that disorder might not arise in Israel, he did

it.

thus, to the end that the Name of the true and only God might
be glorified to whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.
:

44. And our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ
that there would be strife over the name of the bishop's office.

For cause therefore, having received complete foreknow-

this

ledge, they appointed the aforesaid persons, and afterwards they

provided a continuance, that if these should fall asleep, other
approved men should succeed to their ministration. Those
who were appointed by them, or afterward by other
therefore
men of repute with the consent of the whole Church, and have
ministered unblameably to the flock of Christ in lowliness of
mind, peacefully and with all modesty, and for long time have
borne a good report with all these men we consider to be un-
justly thrust out from their ministration. For it will be no light
sin for us, if we thrust out those who have offered the gifts of
the bishop's office unblameably and holily. Blessed are those

presbyters who have gone before, seeing that their departure

was fruitful and ripe : for they have no fear lest any one should
remove them from their appointed place. For we see that ye
have displaced certain persons, though they were living honour-
ably, from the ministration which they had -f respected blame- -f-

lessly.

45. Be ye contentious, brethren, and jealous about the

things that pertain unto salvation. Ye have searched the
scriptures, which are true, which were given through the Holy
Ghost and ye know that nothing unrighteous or counterfeit is
;

written in them. Ye will not find that righteous persons have

been thrust out by holy men. Righteous men were persecuted.
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 295
but was by the lawless they were imprisoned, but it was by
it ;

the unholy. They were stoned by transgressors: they were slain

by those who had conceived a detestable and unrighteous jea-
lousy. Suffering these things, they endured nobly. For what
must we say, brethren ? Was Daniel cast into the lions' den by
them that God
Or were Ananias and Azarias and
fear ?

Misael shut up in the furnace of fire by them that professed

the excellent and glorious worship of the Most High ? Far be
this from our thoughts. Who then were they that did these

things .'' Abominable men and full of all wickedness were

stirred up to such a pitch of wrath, as to bring cruel suffering
upon them that served God in a holy and blameless purpose,
not knowing that the Most High is the champion and pro-
tector ofthem that in a pure conscience serve His excellent
Name : whom
be the glory for ever and ever. Amen. But
unto
they that endured patiently in confidence inherited glory and
honour they were exalted, and had their names recorded by
;

God in their memorial for ever and ever. Amen.

46. To such examples as these therefore, brethren, we
also ought to cleave. For it is written ;
Cleave 7into the saints,

for they that eleave unto them shall be sanctified. And again
He saith in another place With the gtdltless man tJiou shalt;

be guiltless, and with the elect thou shalt be elect, and zvith the

crooked thou shalt deal crookedly. Let us therefore cleave to the

guiltless and righteous and these are the elect of God. Where-
:

fore are there strifes and wraths and factions and divisions and
war among you } Have we not one God and one Christ and
one Spirit of grace that was shed upon us } And is there not
one calling in Christ } Wherefore do we tear and rend asunder
the members
of Christ, and stir up factions against our own

body, and reach such a pitch of folly, as to forget that we are

members one of another Remember the words of Jesus our
.<*

Lord : for He said, Woe unto that num. It were good for him
if he Jtad not been born, rather than that he should offend one
of Mine elect. It were better for him that a mill-stone zvere

hanged about him, ami he cast into the sea, than that he should
296 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
pervert one of Mine elect. Your division hath perverted many ;

it hath brought many to despair, many to doubting, and all

of us to sorrow. And your sedition still continueth.

47. Take up the epistle of the blessed Paul the Apostle.

What wrote he first unto you in the beginning of the Gospel ?

Of a truth he charged
you the Spirit concerning himself
in

and Cephas and Apollos, because that even then ye had made
parties. Yet that making of parties brought less sin upon you ;

for ye were partisans of Apostles that were highly reputed,

and of a man approved in their sight. But now mark ye, who
they are that have perverted you and diminished the glory of
your renowned love for the brotherhood. It is shameful, dearly
beloved, yes, utterly shameful, and unworthy of your conduct
in Christ, that it should be reported that the very sted-

fast and ancient Church of the Corinthians, for the sake of

one or two persons, maketh sedition against its presbyters.
And this report hath reached not only us, but them also which
differ from us, so that ye even heap blasphemies on the Name

of the Lord by reason of your folly, and moreover create peril

for yourselves.

48. Let us therefore root this out quickly, and let us

fall down before the Master, and entreat Him with tears, that
He may show Himself propitious, and be reconciled unto us, and
may restore us to the seemly and pure conduct which belongeth
to our love of the brethren. For this is a gate of righteous-
ness opened unto life, as it is written Open me the gates of
;

righteousness, that I may enter in thereby and praise the Lord.

This is the gate of the Lord ; the righteous shall enter in thereby.
Seeing then that many gates are opened, this is that gate which
is in righteousness, even that which is in Christ, whereby all
are blessed, that have entered in and
path in direct their

holiness and righteousness, performing all things without con-

fusion. Let a man be faithful, let him be able to expound
a deep saying, let him be wise in the discernment of words,
let him be strenuous in deeds, let him be pure; for so much

the more ought he to be lowly in mind, in proportion as he

 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 297

seemeth to be the greater and he ought to seek the ;

common
advantage of all, and not his own.
49. Let him that hath love in Christ fulfil the command-
ments of Christ. Who can declare the bond of the love of
God ? Who
is sufficient to tell the majesty of its beauty ?
The height, whereunto love exalteth, is unspeakable. Love
joineth us unto God; /ove covereth a i/mltitude of sins; love
endureth all things, is long-suffering in all things. There is
nothing coarse, nothing arrogant in love. Love hath no di-
visions, love maketh no seditions, love doeth all things in con-
cord. In love were all the elect of God made perfect ;
without
love nothing is well-pleasing to God : in love the Master took
us unto Himself; for the love which He had toward us, Jesus
Christ our Lord hath given His blood for us by the will of God,
and His flesh for our flesh, and His life for our lives.

50. Ye see, dearly beloved, how great and marvellous

a thing is love, and there is no declaring its perfection. Who is

sufficient to be found therein, save those to whom God shall

vouchsafe it .- Let us therefore entreat and ask of His mercy,
that we may be found blameless in love, standing apart from the
factiousness of men. All the generations from unto this day Adam
have passed away but they that by God's grace were perfected in
:

love dwell in the abode of the pious and they shall be made ;

manifest in the visitation of the kingdom of God. For it is

written Enter into the closet for a very little while, until Mine
:

anger and My zvrath shall pass away, and I will remember a good
day, and will raise you from your tombs. Blessed were we, dearly
beloved, if we should be doing the commandments of God in
concord of love, to the end that our sins may through love be
forgiven us. For it is written ;
Blessed are they whose iniquities
are forgiven, and zuhose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to

whom tJie Lord shall impute no sin, neitJicr is guile in his mouth.

This declaration of blessedness was pronounced upon them that

have been elected by God through Jesus Christ our Lord, to
whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.
51. For all our transgressions therefore which we have com-
298 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
mitted through any of the wiles of the adversary, let us entreat
thatwe may obtain forgiveness. Yea and they also, who set them-
selves up as leaders of faction and division, ought to look to the
common ground of hope. For such as walk in fear and love desire

that they themselves should fall into suffering rather than their

neighbours; and they pronounce condemnation against them-

harmony which hath been handed
selves rather than against the
down to us nobly and righteously. For it is good for a man
to make confession of his trespasses rather than to harden his

heart, as the heart of those was hardened who made sedition

against Moses the servant of God whose condemnation was
;

clearly manifest, for they went down to hades alive, and death
shall be tlieir shepherd. Pharaoh and his host and all the rulers
of Egypt, tJieir cJiariots and their horsemen, were overwhelmed
in the depths of the Red Sea, and perished for none other reason

but because their foolish hearts were hardened, after that the
signs and the wonders had been wrought in the land of Egypt
by the hand of Moses the servant of God.
52. The need of nothing at all.
Master, brethren, hath
He desireth not anything of any man, save to confess unto
Him. For the elect David saith / will confess nnto the Lord,
;

and it shall please Him more than a young calf that groiveth
horns and the poor see it, and rejoice.
hoofs. Let And again
He saith ;
God a sacrifice of praise, and pay thy vows
Sacrifice to
to the Most High : and call npon Me in the day of tJiine afflic-

tion, and I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify Me. For
a sacrifice nnto God is a broken spirit.
53. For ye know, and know well, the sacred scriptures,
dearly beloved, and ye have searched into the oracles of God.
We write these things therefore to put you in remembrance.
When Moses went up into the mountain and had spent forty
days and forty nights in fasting and humiliation, God said
unto him Moses, Moses, go down quickly hence, for My people
;

whom from the land of Egypt have wrought

thou leddest forth

iniquity they:have transgressed quickly ou-t of the way which thou

didst command unto them : they have made for tJiemselves molten
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 299

images. And the Lord said unto him

/ have spoken itiito thee
;

once and tzvice, saying, I have seen this people, and behold it is

stiff-necked. Let Me destroy thevi utterly, and I luill blot out

their name from under Jieaven, and I will make of thee a nation

great and wonderful and numerous more than this. And Moses
said ; Nay, not so, Lord. Forgive this people their sin, or blot
me also out of the book of the living. O mighty love ! O un-
surpassable perfection ! The servant is bold with his Master ;

he asketh forgiveness for the multitude, or he demandeth that

himself also be blotted out with them.

54. Who therefore is noble among you ? Who is com-

passionate ? Who is fulfilled with love ? Let him say ;
If by
reason of me there be faction and strife and divisions, I retire,
I
depart, whither ye will, and I do that which is ordered by
the people only let the flock of Christ be at peace with its duly
:

appointed presbyters. He that shall have done this, shall win

for himself great renown in Christ, and every place will receive
him : for the earth is the Lords and the fulness thereof. Thus
have they done and will do, that live as citizens of that kingdom
of God which bringeth no regrets.

55. But, to bring forward examples of Gentiles also; many

kings and rulers, when some season of pestilence pressed upon

them, being taught by oracles have delivered themselves over to

death, that they might rescue their fellow citizens through their
own Many have retired from their own cities, that they
blood.

might have no more seditions. We know that many among our-

selves have delivered themselves to bondage, that they might
ransom others. Many have sold themselves to slavery, and re-
ceiving the price paid for themselves have fed others. Many
women being strengthened through the grace of God have
performed many manly deeds. The
blessed Judith, when the

city was beleaguered, asked of the elders that she might be

suffered to go forth into the camp of the aliens. So she
exposed herself to peril and went forth for love of her country
and of her people which were beleaguered and the Lord de- ;

livered Holophcrnes into the hand of a woman. To no less

300 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
peril did Esther also, who was perfect in faith, expose herself, that
she might deliver the twelve tribes of Israel, when they were on
the point to perish. For through her fasting and her humiliation
she entreated the all-seeing Master, the God of the ages and ;

He, seeing the humility of her soul, delivered the people for
whose sake she encountered the peril.
56. Therefore let us also make intercession for them that
are in any transgression, that forbearance and humility may
be given them, to the end that they may yield not unto us, but
unto the will of God. For so shall the compassionate remem-
brance of them with God and the saints be fruitful unto them,
and perfect. Let us accept chastisement, whereat no man ought
to be vexed, dearly beloved. The admonition which we give one
to another is good and exceeding useful for it joineth us unto the
;

will of God. For thus saith the holy word ;

TJie Lord hath
indeed chastened me, and hath not delivered me over nnto death.
For whom tJie Lord lovetJi He cJiastenetJi, and sconrgeth every
son whom He receiveth. For the righteous, it is said, shall chasten
me in mercy, and shall reprove me; bnt let not the fmercyf of sin-
ners anoint my head. And again He saith ;
Blessed is the man
zvhom the Lord hath reproved, and refnse not thoii the admojiition

of the Almighty. For He canseth pain, and He restoreth again :

He hath smitten, and His hands have healed. Six times shall
He rescue from afflictions : and at the seventh no evil
thee

shall touch thee. In famine He shall deliver thee from death,

and in ivar He shall release thee from the arm of the szvord.
And from the scourge of the tongue shall He hide thee, and thou
shalt not be afraid when evils approach. TJiou sJialt latigh at the

unrighteous and wicked, and of the wild beasts thou shalt not

be afraid. For wild beasts shall be at peace zuith thee. Then

shalt thou know that thy house shall be at peace: and the abode

of thy tabernacle shall not go wrong, and thou, shalt knozv that
thy seed is many, and thy children as the plentcoiis herbage of
the field. A nd thou shalt come to the grave as ripe corn reaped
in due season, or as the heap of the threshing floor gathered
together at the right time. Ye see, dearly beloved, how great
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 301

the Master
protection there is for them that are chastened by
:

for being a kind father He chasteneth us, to the end that we

may obtain mercy through His holy chastisement.

57. Ye therefore that laid the foundation of the sedition,

submit yourselves unto the presbyters, and receive chastisement
unto repentance, bending the knees of your heart. Learn to
submit yourselves, laying aside the arrogant and proud stub-
bornness of your tongue. For it is better for you to be found
little in the flock of Christ and to have your name on God's
roll, than to be had exceeding honour and yet be cast
in

out from the hope of Him. For thus saith the All-virtuous
Wisdom Behold I will pour out for yon a saying of My breath,
;

and I will teach yon My zvord. Because I called and ye obeyed

not, and I held out zvords and ye heeded not, but made My coun-

sels of none effect, and tvere disobedient unto My

reproofs ; there-

fore I also will laugh at your destrtiction, and zvill rejoice

over you

when ruin cometh upon you, and when confusion overtaketh you
suddenly, and your overthrow is at hand like a whirlwind, or
when anguish and beleaguerment come jipon yo?i. For it shall
be, when ye call upon Me, yet will I not
hear you. Evil men shall
seek Me, ajid shall not find Me :
for they hated wisdom, and
chose not the fear of the Lord, neither tvould they give heed unto

My counsels, but mocked at reproofs. My

Therefore they shall
eat the fruits of their own way, a)id shall be filled ivith their

own ungodliness. For because they wronged babes, they shall be

slain, and inquisition shall destroy the ungodly. But he that

heareth Me shall dwell safely trusting in hope, and shall be quiet

from fear of all evil.

Let us therefore be obedient unto His most holy
58.
and glorious Name, thereby escaping the threatenings which
were spoken of old by the mouth of Wisdom against them
which disobey, that we may dwell safely, trusting in the most
holy Name of His majesty. Receive our counsel, and ye
shall have no occasion of regret. For as God liveth, and the
Lord Jesus Christ liveth, and the Holy Spirit, who are the
faith and the hope of the elect, so surely shall he, who with
302 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
lowliness of mind and instant in gentleness hath without regret-
fulness performed the ordinances and commandments that are
given by God, be enrolled and have a name among the number
of them that are saved through Jesus Christ, through whom is
the glory unto Him for ever and ever. Amen.
59. But if certain persons should be disobedient unto the
words spoken by Him
through us, let them understand that
they will entangle themselves in no slight transgression and

danger ;
but we shall be guiltless of this sin. And we will
and supplication, that the Creator
ask, with instancy of prayer
of the universe may guard intact unto the end the number
that hath been numbered of His elect throughout the whole

world, through His beloved Son Jesus Christ, through whom

He called us from darkness to light, from ignorance to the full

knowledge of the glory of His Name.

[Grant unto us, Lord,] that we may set our hope on Thy
Name which is the primal source of all creation, and open the
eyes of our heart, that we may know Thee, who alone abidest
Highest in the high, Holy in the holy ; who layest knv the inso-
lence of the proud ; who scatterest the iinaginings of nations; who

settest the lowly on high, and bringest the lofty low ; who makest

rich and makest poor ; who killest and makest alive ; who alone
art the Benefactor of spirits and the God of all flesh who ;

lookest into the abysses, who scannest the works of man the ;

Succour of them that are in peril, the Savionr of them that are
i7i despair ; the Creator and Overseer of every spirit who mul- ;

upon earth, and hast chosen out from all

tipliest the nations
men those that love Thee through Jesus Christ, Thy beloved
Son, through whom Thou didst instruct us, didst sanctify
us, didst honour us. We beseech Thee, Lord and Master, to
be our Jielp and succour. Save those among us who are in
tribulationhave mercy on the lowly
;
lift up the fallen ; ;

show Thyself unto the needy heal the ungodly convert the ; ;

wanderers of Thy people feed the hungry release our

; ;

prisoners ;
raise up the weak ;
comfort the faint-hearted. Let
all the Gentiles know that Thou art God alone, and Jesus
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. j^j

Christ is Thy Son, and we arc TJiy people and the sheep of Thy
pasture.
60. Thou through Thine operations didst make manifest
the everlasting fabric of the world. Thou, Lord, didst create
the earth. Thou that art faithful throughout all generations,
righteous in Thy judgments, marvellous in strength and ex-
cellence, Thou
that art wise in creating and prudent in esta-

blishing that which Thou hast made, that art good in the
things which are seen and faithful with them that trust on
Thee, pitiful and compassionate, forgive us our iniquities and
our unrighteousnesses and our transgressions and shortcomings.

Lay not to our account every sin of Thy servants and Thine
handmaids, but cleanse us with the cleansing of Thy truth,
and gidde our steps to walk in holiness and righteousness
and singleness of heart, and to do sncli things as are good
and well-pleasing in Thy sight and in the sight of our rulers.
Yea, Lord, viake Thy face to shine tipon us in peace for our
good, that we may be sheltered by Thy mighty Jiand and
delivered from every sin by Thine uplifted arm. And deliver
us from them hate us wrongfully.
that Give concord and
peace to us and to all that dwell on the earth, as Thou gavest
to our fathers, %vhen they called on Thee in faith and tnttJi
with holiness, [that we may be saved,] while we render obedi-
ence to Thine almighty and most excellent Name, and to our
rulers and governors upon the earth.
61. Thou, Lord and Master, hast given them the power
of sovereignty through Thine excellent and unspeakable might,
that we knowing
the glory and honour which Thou hast

given them may submit ourselves unto them, in nothing re-

sisting Thy will. Grant unto them therefore, O Lord, health,

peace, concord, stability, that they may administer the go-
vernment which Thou hast given them without failure. For
Thou, O heavenly Master, King of the ages, givest to the
sons of men glory and honour and power over all things that
are upon the earth. Do Thou, Lord, direct their counsel ac-
to that which is good and well-pleasing in Thy sight,
cording
304 S. CLEMENT OF ROME
that, administering in peace and gentleness with godliness the
power which Thou hast given them, they may obtain Thy
favour. O Thou, who alone art able to do these things, and
things farmore exceeding good than these for us, we praise
Thee through the High-priest and Guardian of our souls, Jesus
Christ, through whom be the glory and the majesty unto
Thee both now and and for ever and ever.
for all generations

Amen.
62. As touching those things which befit our religion and
are most useful for a virtuous life to such as would guide

[their steps] in holiness and righteousness, we have written fully

unto you, brethren. For concerning faith and repentance and
genuine love and temperance and sobriety and patience we
have handled every argument, putting you in remembrance,
that ye ought to please Almighty God in righteousness and
truth and long-suffering with holiness, laying aside malice and

pursuing concord in love and peace, being instant in gentle-

ness ;
whom we spake before, pleased
even as our fathers, of
Him, being lowly-minded towards their Father and God and

Creator and towards all men. And we have put you in mind of
these things the more gladly, since we knew well that we were
writing to men who and highly accounted and have
are faithful

diligently searched into the oracles of the teaching of God.

63. Therefore it is right for us to give heed to so great and
so many examples, and to submit the neck, and occupying the

place of obedience to take our side with them that are the
leaders of our souls, that ceasing from this foolish dissension we

may attain unto the goal which lieth before us in truthfulness,

keeping aloof from every fault. For ye will give us great joy
and gladness, if ye render obedience unto the things written by
us through the Holy Spirit, and root out the unrighteous anger
of your jealousy, according to the entreaty which we have made
for peace and concord in this letter. And we have also sent
faithful and prudent men that have walked among us from
youth unto old age unblameably, who shall also be witnesses
between you and us. And this we have done that ye might
 TO THE CORINTHIANS. 305
know that we have had, and still have, every solicitude that
ye should be speedily at peace.
64. Finally may the All-seeing God and Master of spirits
and Lord of all flesh, whochose the Lord Jesus Christ, and us
through Him for a peculiar people, grant unto every soul that is

called after His excellent and holy Name faith, fear, peace,
patience, long-suflering, temperance, chastity and soberness, that
they may be well-pleasing unto His Name through our High-
priestand Guardian Jesus Christ, through whom unto Him be
glory and majesty, might and honour, both now and for ever

and ever. Amen.

65. Now send ye back speedily unto us our messengers
Claudius Ephebus and Valerius Bito, together with Fortunatus
also, in peace and with joy, to the end that they may the
more quickly report the peace and concord which is prayed
for and earnestly desired by us, that we also may the more

speedily rejoice over your good order.

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you and with all

men in all places who have been called by God and through
Him, through whom is glory and honour, power and greatness
and eternal dominion, unto Him, from the ages past and for
ever and ever. Amen.

CLEM. II. 20
 AN ANCIENT HOMILY.

we ought so to think of Jesus Christ, as

BRETHREN,
of God, as of the Judge of quick and dead. And
we ought not to think mean things of our Salvation for :

when we think mean things of Him, we expect also to receive

mean things. And they that listen as concerning mean things
do wrong and we ourselves do wrong, not knowing whence
;

and by whom and unto what place we were called, and

how many things Jesus Christ endured to suffer for our
sakes. What recompense then shall we give unto Him ?
or what fruit worthy of His own gift to us ? And how
many mercies do we owe to Him For He bestowed the
!

light upon us ;
He spake to us, as a father to his sons ;
He
saved us, when we were perishing. What praise then shall we
what payment of recompense for those things
give to Him.'' or
which we received we who were maimed in our understanding,
.''

and worshipped stocks and stones, gold and silver and bronze,
the works of men ;
and our whole
was nothing else but
life

death. While then we were thus wrapped in darkness and

oppressed with this thick mist in our vision, we recovered our
sight, putting off by His will the cloud wherein we were wrapped.
For He had mercy on us, and in His compassion saved us,
having beheld in us much error and perdition, even when we
 AN ANCIENT HOMILY. 307
had no hope of salvation, save that which came from Him. For
He called us, when we were not, and from not being He willed
us to be.
2.
Rejoice, tJiott barren that bearest not. Break out and cry,
tJioii that travailest not ; for more are the cJiildre7i of the desolate
than of her that hath the hjcsband. In that He said, Rejoice, thon
barren that bearest not, He spake of us : for our Church was
barren, before that children were given unto her. And in that
He said, Cry aloud, tJiou that travailest not. He meaneth this ;

Let us not, like women in travail, grow weary of offering up our

prayers with simplicity to God. Again, in that He said, For
the children of the desolate are more than
of her that hath the
husband, He so spake, because our people seemed desolate and
forsaken of God, whereas now, having believed, we have become
more than those who seemed to have God. Again another
scripture saith, / came not to call the righteous, but sinners. He
meaneth this; that it is right to save them that are perishing.
For this indeed is a great and marvellous work, to establish, not
those things which stand, but those which are falling. So also
Christ willed to save the things which were perishing. And He
saved many, coming and calling us when we were even now
perishing.
3. Seeing then that He bestowed so great mercy on us;
first of all, that we, who are living, do not sacrifice to these dead
gods, neither worship them, but through Him have known the
Father of truth. What else is this knowledge to Himward, but
not to deny Him through whom we have known Him Yea, .''

He Himself saith. Whoso confesseth Me, Him zvillI confess

before the Father. This then is our reward, if verily we shall
confess Him through whom we were saved. But wherein do
we confess Him When we do .-
that which He saith and are not
disobedient unto His commandments, and not only Hint Jiojiour

with our lips, but with our wJiole heart and with our whole mind.
Now He saith also in Isaiah, This people honoureth Me ivith their

lips, but their heart is far from Me.

20 2
3o8 AN ANCIENT HOMILY
4. Let us therefore not only call Him
Lord, for this will not
save us for He saith, Not every one that saith unto Me, Lord,
:

Lord, shall be saved, but he that doeth righteousness. So then,

brethren, let us confess Him
our works, by loving one another,
in

by not committing adultery nor speaking evil one against

another nor envying, but being temperate, merciful, kindly.
And we ought to have fellow-feeling one with another and not
to be covetous. By these works let us confess Him, and not
by the contrary. And we ought not rather to fear men but
God. For this ye do these things, the Lord said.
cause, if

Though ye be gathered together with Me in My bosom, and do not

My commandments, I will cast you away and tvill say tmto you.
Depart from Me, I know yoti not ivhence ye are, ye workers of
iniquity.

5. Wherefore, brethren, let us forsake our sojourn in this

world and do the will of Him that called us, and let us not be
afraid to depart out of this world. For the Lord saith. Ye shall
be as lambs in the midst of wolves. But Peter answered and said
unto Him, What then, if the wolves shoidd tear the lambs? Jesus
said unto Peter, Let not the lambs fear the wolves after they are

dead; and ye also, fear ye not them that kill you and are not able
to do anything to you; but fear him that after ye are dead hath
power over sotd and body, to cast them into the gehenna of fire.
And ye know, brethren, that the sojourn of this flesh in this
world is mean and for a short time, but the promise of Christ is

great and marvellous, even the rest of the kingdom that shall be
and of life eternal. What then can we do to obtain them, but
walk in holiness and righteousness, and consider these worldly
things as alien to us, and not desire them.'' For when we desire
to obtain these things we fall away from the righteous path.
6. But the Lord saith, No servant can serve two masters. If
we God and mammon, it is unprofitable for
desire to serve both
us : For what advantage is it, if a man gain the whole world ajtd
forfeit his soul? Now this age and the future are two enemies.
The one speaketh of adultery and defilement and avarice and
 BY AN UNKNOWN AUTHOR. 309

deceit, but the other biddeth farewell to these. We cannot

therefore be friends of the two, but must bid farewell to the one
and hold companionship with the other. Let us consider that
it is better to hate the
things which are here, because they are
m.ean and for a short time and perishable, and to love the things
which are there, for they are good and imperishable. For, if we
do the will of Christ, we shall find rest ;
but if otherwise, then
nothing shall deliver us from eternal punishment, if we should
disobey His commandments. And the scripture also saith in
Ezekiel, Though Noah and Job and Daniel sJioiild rise up, they

shall not deliver their cJiildren in the captivity. But if even such
righteous men as these cannot by their righteous deeds deliver
their children, with what confidence shall we, if we keep not our
baptism pure and undefiled, enter into the kingdom of God ?
Or who shall be our advocate, unless we be found having holy
and righteous works .''

7. So then, my brethren, let us contend, knowing that the

contest is
nigh at hand, and that, while many resort to the cor-

ruptible contests, yet not all are crowned, but only they that
have toiled hard and contended bravely. Let us then contend
that we all may be crowned. Wherefore let us run in the
straight course, the incorruptible contest. And let us resort to
it inthrongs and contend, that we may also be crowned. And
if we cannot all be crowned, let us at least come near to the
crown. We ought to know that he which contendeth in the
corruptible contest, if he be found dealing corruptly with it, is
first flogged, and then removed and driven out of the race-course.

What think ye t What shall be done to him that hath dealt

corruptly with the contest of incorruption For as concerning .-'

them that have not kept the seal, He saith, Their worm shall not

die, and their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be for a
spectacle unto all flesh.
8. While we are on earth, then, let us repent: for we are

clay under the craftsman's hand. For in like manner as the

if he be making a vessel, and it get twisted or crushed in
potter,
3IO AN ANCIENT HOMILY
his hands, reshapeth it again but if he have once put it into the
;

fiery oven, he shall no longer mend it: so also let us, while we
are in this world, repent with our whole heart of the evil things
which we have done in the flesh, that we may be saved by the

Lord, while we have yet time for repentance. For after that we
have departed out of the world, we can no more make confession
there, or repent any more. Wherefore, brethren, if we shall have
done the will of the Father and kept the flesh pure and guarded
the commandments of the Lord, we shall receive life eternal.

For the Lord saith in the Gospel, If ye kept not that which is

little, who shall give tmto yoit- that zvhicJi is great ? For I say
ujitoyon that he which is faithful in the least, is faitJ^fnl also in
vinch. So then He meaneth this, Keep the flesh pure and the
seal unstained, to the end that we may receive life.

9. And let not any one of you say that this flesh is not
judged neither riseth again. Understand ye. In what were ye
saved .- In what did ye recover your sight } if ye were not in
this flesh. Weought therefore to guard the flesh as a temple of
God : for in like manner as ye were called in the flesh, ye shall
come also in the flesh. If Christ the Lord who saved us, being
first spirit, then became flesh, and so called us, in like manner
also shall we in this flesh receive our reward. Let us therefore
love one another, that we all may come unto the kingdom of
God, While we have time to be healed, let us place ourselves in
the hands of God the physician, giving Him a recompense.
What recompense Repentance from a sincere heart. For He
.-

discerneth all things beforehand and knoweth what is in our

heart. Let us therefore give unto Him eternal praise, not from
our lips only, but also from our heart, that He may receive us as
sons. For the Lord also said. These are My brethren, ivhich do
the will of My Father.
10. Wherefore, my brethren, let us do the will of the Father
which called us, that we may live; and let us the rather pursue
virtue, but forsake vice as the forerunner of our sins, and let us
flee from ungodliness, lest evils overtake us. For if we be dili-
 BY AN UNKNOWN AUTHOR. 311

gent in doing good, peace will pursue us. For for this cause is
a man unable to attain happiness, seeing that they call in the
fears of men, preferring rather the enjoyment which is here than
the promise which is to come. For they know not how great
torment the enjoyment which is here bringeth, and what delight
the promise which is to come bringeth. And if verily they were
doing these things by themselves alone, it had been tolerable:
but now they continue teaching evil to innocent souls, not

knowing that they shall have their condemnation doubled, both

themselves and their hearers,
Let us therefore serve God in a pure heart, and we
11.

shall be righteous; but if we serve Him not, because we believe

not the promise of God, we shall be wretched. For the word of
prophecy also saith Wretched are
: the double-minded, that doubt
VI their heart and say. These things we heard of old in the days

of our fathers also, yet ive have waited day after day and have
seen none of them. Ye fools ! compare yourselves unto a tree ;
take a vine. First it slieddeth its leaves, then a shoot cometh, after
this a sour berry, then a full ripe grape. So likewise My people
had tumidts and afjiictions but afterward they shall receive good
:

things. Wherefore, my brethren, let us not be double-minded

but endure patiently in hope, that we may also obtain our
reward. For faithfid is He that promised to pay to each man
the recompense of his works. If therefore we shall have wrought
righteousness the sight of God, we shall enter into His
in

kingdom and shall receive the promises which ear hath not
heard nor eye seen, neither hath it entered into the heart of man.
12, Let us therefore await the kingdom of God betimes in

love and righteousness, since we know not the day of God's

appearing. For the Lord Himself, being asked by a certain

person when His kingdom would come, said, When the two shall
be one, and the outside as the inside, and the male with the female,
neither male nor female. Now the two are one, when we speak
truth among ourselves, and in two bodies there shall be one
soul without dissimulation. And by tJie outside as the inside He
312 AN ANCIENT HOMILY
meaneth this :
by the inside He meaneth the soul and by the
outside the body. Therefore in like manner as thy body
appeareth, so also letthy soul be manifest in its good works.
And by the male with tJie female, neithe)'- male nor
female. He
meaneth this; that a brother seeing a sister should have no

thought of her as of a female, and that a sister seeing a brother

should not have any thought of him as of a male. These things
if ye do, saith He, the kingdom of my Father shall come.

13. Therefore, brethren, let us repent forthwith. Let us be

sober unto that which is good : for we are full of much folly and
wickedness. Let us wipe away from us our former sins, and let

us repent with our whole soul and be saved. And let us not be
found men-pleasers. Neither us desire to please one another
let

only, but also those men that are without, by our righteousness,
that the Name be not blasphemed by reason of us. For the Lord
saith, Every way My Nameblasphemed among
is all the Gentiles;

and again, Woe tmto him by reason of whom My Name is blas-

pJtemed. Wherein is it blasphemed? In that ye do not the

things which IFor the Gentiles, when they hear from

desire.

our mouth the oracles of God, marvel at them for their beauty
and greatness ; then,when they discover that our works are not

worthy of the words which we speak,

forthwith they betake
themselves to blasphemy, saying that it is an idle story and a
delusion. For when they hear from us that God saith, // is no
thank unto yon, if ye love tJiem tJiat love yon, but this is thank
unto you, if ye love your enemies and them that hate you ; when
they hear these things, I say, they marvel at their exceeding
goodness but when they see that we not only do not love
;

them that hate us, but not even them that love us, they laugh
us to scorn, and the Name
blasphemed. is

14. Wherefore, brethren, if we do the will of God our

Father, we shall be of the first Church, which is spiritual, which
was created before the sun and moon but if we do not the will ;

of the Lord, we be of the scripture that saith. My house was

shall

made a den of robbers. So therefore let us choose rather to be of

 BY AN UNKNOWN AUTHOR. ^n,
3^3
the Church of hfe, that we may be saved. And I do not sup-
pose ye are ignorant that the living Church
body of is the
Christ: for the scripture saith, God made man, male and female.
The male is Christ and the female is the Church. And the Books
and the Apostles plainly declare that the Church existeth not
now for the first tinne, but hath been from the beginning for she :

was spiritual, as our Jesus also was spiritual, but was manifested
in the last days that He might save us. Now the Church,

being spiritual, was manifested

in the flesh of Christ, thereby

showing us any
that, of us ifguard her in the flesh and
defile her not, he shall receive her again in the Holy Spirit:

for this flesh is the counterpart and copy of the spirit. No

man therefore, when he hath defiled the copy, shall receive the

original for his portion. This therefore is what He meaneth,

brethren Guard ye the flesh, that ye may partake of the spirit.
;

But if we say that the flesh is the Church and the spirit is Christ,
then he that hath dealt wantonly with the flesh hath dealt wan-

tonly with the Church. Such an one therefore shall not partake
of the spirit, which is Christ. So excellent is the life and immor-
tality which this flesh can receive as its portion, if the Holy
Spirit be joined to it. No man can declare or tell those things
which the Lord hath prepared for His elect.
15. Now I do not think that I have given any mean counsel
respecting continence, and whosoever performeth it shall not
repent thereof, but shall save both himself and me his coun-
sellor. For it is no mean reward to convert a wandering and
perishing soul, that it
may be saved. For this is the recompense
which we are able to pay to God who created us, if he that
speaketh and heareth both speak and hear with faith and love.
Let us therefore abide the things which we believed, in
in

righteousness and holiness, that we may with boldness ask of

God who saith. Whiles thoii art still speaking, I will say, Be/iold,
I am here. For this word the token of a great promise for
is :

the Lord saith of Himself that He is more ready to give than

he that asketh to ask. Seeing then that we are partakers of so
314 AN ANCIENT HOMILY

great kindness, us not grudge ourselves the obtaining of so

let

many good things. For in proportion as the pleasure is great

which these words bring to them that have performed them, so
also is the condemnation great which they bring to them that
have been disobedient.
1 6. Therefore, brethren, we have found no small
since

opportunity for repentance, seeing that we have time, let us

turn again unto God that called us, while we have still One
that receiveth us. For if we bid farewell to these enjoyments
and conquer our soul in refusing to fulfil its evil lusts, we shall be
partakers of the mercy of Jesus. But ye know that the day of
judgment cometh even now as a burning oven, and the powers of
tJie heavens shall melt, and all the earth as lead melting on the

fire, and then appear the secret and open works of men.
shall

Almsgiving therefore is a good thing, even as repentance from

sin. Fasting is better than prayer, but almsgiving than both.
And a imdtitude of sins, but prayer out of a good
love covereth

conscience delivereth from death. Blessed is every man that

is found full of these. For almsgiving lifteth off the burden
of sin.

17. Let us therefore repent with our whole heart, lest any
of us perish by the way. For if we have received commands,
that we should make this also our business, to tear men away
from idols and to instruct them, how much more is it wrong
that a soul which knoweth God already should perish ! There-
one another, that we may also lead the weak
fore let us assist

upward as touching that which is good, to the end that we all

may be saved and let us convert and admonish one another.
:

And not think to give heed and believe now only, while
let us

we are admonished by the presbyters but likewise when we

;

have departed home, let us remember the commandments of the

Lord, and not suffer ourselves to be dragged off the other way
by our worldly lusts ;
but coming hither more frequently, let us
strive to go forward in the commands of the Lord, that we all
having the same mind may be gathered together unto life. For
 BY AN UNKNOWN AUTHOR. "

315

the Lord said, / co7negather together all the nations, tribes, and
to

languages. Herein He
speaketh of the day of His appearing,
when He shall come and redeem us, each man according to his
works. And the
unbelievers shall see His glory and His might :

and they be amazed when they see the kingdom of the

shall

world given to Jesus, saying, Woe unto us, for Thou wast, and
we knew it not, and believed not and we obeyed not the;

presbyterswhen they told us of our salvation. And TJieir

worm shall not die, and tJieir fire shall not be quenched, and they
shall be for a
spectacle unto all flesJi. He speaketh of that day of
judgment, when men shall see those among us that lived ungodly
lives and dealt falsely with the commandments of Jesus Christ.

But the righteous, having done good and endured torments and
hated the pleasures of the soul, when they shall behold them
that have done amiss and denied Jesus by their words or by
their deeds, how that they are punished with grievous torments
in unquenchable fire, shall give glory to God, saying. There will
be hope for him that hath served God with his whole heart.
18. Therefore let us also be found among those that give
thanks, among those that have served God, and not among the

ungodly that are judged. myself For

being an utter sinner
I too,
and not yet escaped from temptation, but being still amidst the
engines of the devil, do my diligence to follow after righteousness,
that I may prevail so far at least as to come near unto it, while
I fear the judgment to come.

19. Therefore, brothers and sisters, after the God of truth

hath been heard, read to you an exhortation to the end that
I

ye may give heed to the things which are written, so that ye

may save both yourselves and him that readeth in the midst of
you. For I ask of you as a reward that ye repent with your
whole heart, and give salvation and life to yourselves. For
doing this we shall set a goal for all the young who desire to
toil in the study of piety and of the goodness of God. And let

us not be displeased and vexed, fools that we are, whensoever

any one admonisheth us and turneth us aside from unrighteous-

3l6 AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
ness unto righteousness. For sometimes while we do evil things,

we perceive it not by reason of the double-mindedness and un-

belief which is in our breasts, and %ve are darkened in onr under-

standinghy our vain lusts. Let us therefore practise righteousness

that we may be saved unto the end. Blessed are they that obey
these ordinances. Though they may endure affliction for a short
time in the world, they will gather the immortal fruit of the
resurrection. Therefore let not the godly be grieved, if he be
miserable in the times that now are : a blessed time awaiteth
him. He shall live again in heaven with the fathers, and shall

have rejoicing throughout a sorrowless eternity.

20. Neither suffer ye this again to trouble your mind, that
we see the unrighteous possessing v/ealth, and the servants of
God straitened. Let us then have faith, brothers and sisters.
We are contending in the lists of a living God and we are ;

trained by the present life, that we may be crowned with the

future. No righteous man hath reaped fruit quickly, but waiteth

for it. For if God had paid the recompense of the righteous
speedily, then straightway we should have been training ourselves
in merchandise, and not in godliness for we should seem to be
;

righteous, though we were pursuing not that which is godly, but

that which is gainful. And for this cause Divine judgment over-
taketh a spirit that is not just, and loadeth it with chains.
To the only God invisible, the Father of truth, who sent
forth unto us the Saviour and Prince of immortality, through
whom also He made manifest unto us the truth and the heavenly
life, to Him be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.
 II.

HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS.
PERSONALITY and life of Hippolytus are beset with
THE thorny and perplexing questions on all sides. Of what country
was he a native ? Where and how did he spend his early life ? Under
what influences was he brought in his boyhood and adolescence ? Was
he a simple presbyter or a bishop? If the latter, what was his see?
Of the works ascribed or attributed to him, how many are genuine?
What were his relations to the Roman See ? Was he guilty of heresy
or of schism? If the one or the other, what was the nature of the

differences which separated him ? Was this separation temporary or

permanent? Was he a confessor or a martyr, or both or neither?
What was the chronology of his life and works ? More especially, at
what date did he die? Has there, or has there not, been some con-
fusion between two or three persons bearing the same name ? What
explanation shall we give of the architectural and other monumental
records connected with his name ?
These questions started up, like the fabled progeny of the dragon's
teeth a whole army of historical perplexities confronting us suddenly
and demanding a solution when less than forty years ago the work
entitled Philosophumena was discovered and published to the world.
To most of these questions I shall address myself in the dissertation
which follows. The
position and doings of Hippolytus are not uncon-
nected with the main subject of these volumes. In the first place ;
whereas the internal history of the Church of Rome is shrouded in
thick darkness from the end of the first century to the beginning of the

third,from the age of Clement to the age of Hippolytus scarcely a

ray here and there penetrating the dense cloud at this latter moment

the scene is suddenly lit up with a glare albeit a lurid glare of light.
Then again we have some reason for believing that the earliest
;

western list of the Roman bishops may have been drawn up by Hip-
3l8 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

polytus himself, and it is almost absolutely certain that the first con-
tinuator of this list, in whose work the earliest notice of Hippolytus
occurs outside his own writings, was a contemporary (see above, i.

p. 255, p. 259 sq). The questions asked above have not indeed in

very many cases any immediate connexion with the matters with which
we are directly concerned but they hang very closely together one
;

with another, and this seemed a fit opportunity of placing before the
reader the results, however briefly, yet with some sort of completeness,
of the investigations and discoveries which have been stimulated by the

publication of the Philosophuniena.

I.

ANCIENT REFERENCES TO HIPPOLYTUS.

Following the course which I have pursued in other cases, I shall
here gather together the ancient documentary evidence and traditions
relating to Hippolytus, considering that I shall best consult the con-
venience of my readers as well as my own, by so doing. At the head
of these are placed the references from Hippolytus himself to his own
life and writings. In so doing I shall take the liberty of assuming pro-
visionally the Hippolytean authorship of several writings, deferring the
reasons for so assigning them till the proper occasion. The cross-refer-
ences from the one to the other in these writings are the most import-
ant and unsuspicious evidence of authorship. I shall also include some
notices of Gaius the Roman presbyter, a contemporary of Hippolytus ;

because the two are frequently confused in ancient authorities so

much so as to arouse the suspicion that Gaius was only another name
for Hippolytus, and that he had no distinct personality. This question
also I shall discuss presently.
These notices will be cited in the discussions which follow as AR,
with the number and letter, and {where necessary) the page.

I. Hippolytus [c,
a.d. 230],

() Refutatio Haeresium i.
prooem. (p. 2, Miller).

OuSei/a /xvdov twv Trap' "EXXijcri vevofXLcrixivwv TrapaiTrjreov. TrtaTo.

yap
Kol Tct dcrvaTara avTwv Soyjaara rjyr]Tiov 8ta ttjv virep(3d\\ov(Tav tcov alpe-
Tt/c(5i/ /xavLav, ot Bid to crtwTrav aTrOAcpuTrrctv re
ra apprjra cavTwv ixvcTTTjpia

ivojxLa6r](rav ttoXXois edv crefSeiv wv Koi TraXat /xcTptto? ra SoyfjiaTa i^eOe-

jXi-Oa, ov Kara Xctttov e7ri8ct'.^avT?, aXX' dSpofxepws eXey^avre?, fjirjSkv d^LOv

qyrjH'dyL^voL ra dpprjTa auTwv is <^t3s

ayeiv, ottw;
8i'
alviyfidrwv tjfxwv IkB^-
fjivwv Tct Bo^avra aurots alrr^vvOivre^ jUi^TTore Kai ra apprfTa i^enrovreii

ddeov; eTrtSet^w/ACV, TraiJO-covTai [ti] t^s dXoyicrTOv kol ddefiiTov 7rt;^ct-

yv(j}fir]<;
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 319

pjj'crca)?.
aXX' cttci opaJ ixrj 8ucra)7rou/AeVovs avTOv'i rrjv rjfieTepav eTriciKetav
cog fx.aKpoOvfXl vir avrQv ottws
/AT^Se Xoyt^o/AeVors, ws fiXa(r(firjixovixevo<;, r/

atSeo-^evTs fjieTavoyjcrwaLV 7} cTrt/AeivavTes SiKatws Kpi6(2cn, /Jiacr^eis 7rpoifx.i

Set^wv airwv ra p.vcrTrjpia...Tavra 8e eVepos
ovk eXc'y^ci ^ to ei/
diropprjTa
01 aTroo-ToXoi p,T-
iKKXrjcriq. irapahoOlv aytov Trvcvyixa, oii tt;xovt9 Trporepot
Socrav Tots op^ws TreTrto-TCVKo'o-tv wi/ Ty/xeis StaSoxoi ruyxavovres ti^s T
re Kat SiSao-KaXtas Kat ^povpoi
avTT/s vdptTO? p,TexovTes apxicparctas Trj<;

ovk ocjiOaXfJiQ vvcrTa^ofxev ovSk \6yov 6p66v

cKKXT/o-tas XiXoyia-jxevoi

{TUsHTiOfliV K.T.X.

This extract is taken from the text of Diel's Doxographi Graeci (Berolin. 1879);
the remaining extracts, from the edition of Duncker and Schneidewin.

{b) Ref. Haer. vi. 42 (p. 202).

Kat yap Kat o p,aKaptos Trpecr/JuVepos Eipi^vatos TrapprjaiatTepov tw

eXeyxo) 7rpo(rVcx^'5 TOtarra \oi;crp.aTa Kat aTroXrTpwo-cts i^Wero, a'Spo-

rtves avTwi/ rjpvrjVTaL outws
fiKpi(jrpov ciTTwv a Trpdcro-ova-LV, ots cvtv^ovtcs
8to t^povTis
TrapetXT^c^eVat, det dprfxaOai fjiav6dvovTs. 17/*''' yeyevrjraL dKpi-

(SecTTepov iTTLtriTrjaaL Kat aj/cvptv XtTrro/Aepws,

a Kat ev tw Trpwru) Xorrpo)

irapaStSoacrt k.t.X.

((t) i?(?/: i7<7^r. vi. 55 (p. 221 sq).

"^A TrapaTiOivai (jlol

ovk ISo^^cv, ovra cf>Xvapd kol d(TV(nara, r]Sr] tov fiaKa-

'ElprjvaLOv Setvws
Kat -rreTrovrjixevu)? ra 8o'yp,aTa aiJTaiV 8te-
p'lov irpea^vTspov
Xey^avTos, Trap' ov koI aurwv e^eup>/p,aTa [TrapetXT^c^a/xev] eTrtSetKvvvres

avToiis IIv^ayopetoK <j!)tXocro(^tas Kat ao-rpoXoywv Trepicpytas raCra (T(^(.Tpt-

(Ta}x.ivov<; cyKaXetv Xpto-Tw raiJTa TrapaSeSwKcVat.

(^) i?<?/: ZT^^r. ix. 6, 7 (p. 278 sq).

IIoXXot} tolvvv toS Trept 7rao-wv atpeVewv ycvop-eVou i^'p.tv ciycovos fxrjdiv ye
d /i-eyto-Tos aywv, iK^Lrjyrja-aG-Oai
dvciiXiyKTOV KaraXtTroCo-t, TreptXetTreTat vCv
atpeVets, 8t' tof TtV? a/^aPets
KoX SteXe'y^at ras eTravaoraVas Kat
e(/)' >J/xtv

ToXixrjpol Stao-KcSavvvctv l-n-e\f.iprj(rav Trjv cKKXiycrtav, fxiyi(nov Tapa^ov Kara

irdvTa TOV Koupiov iv irdai Tots Trto-rots e/x^aXXovTes. Sokci yap 7rt T7/v

Ttvcs at TauTi;?
JpvT^ydv Twv KaKwv yf.vofx.ivqv yvw/Aijv 6p[x-i](TavTa<; SteXe'y^at,
at cKc^uaScs aur^s diracn yevofxevat KarafjipovrjOuia-L.
apvat, ottos cvyvcoo-TOt
Veyivy]TaL rts oVd/xart Noryro's, tw yeVet S/Avpvatos. outos elo-rjyrjaaTO
Ik tcov 'HpaKXetTou Soypartov ou StctKoi/o? Kat fxaOrjrrjs yivcraL Eittl-
aipecTLV
a a<i a^eov yvwp-rjv. w
yovds Tts Touvo/xa, os tt7 'Pcop-r; iTTLSrjfxrj cTreo-Tretpe tt/v

kol yStw Kat TpoTrw aXXoVptos t^s eKKXTjcrtas, Kpa-

fxaO-qrevcra^ KXeofJiivrjs,
Tvve TO Sdyp-a, Kar' cKCtvo KatpoS Zecjivpcvov SteVetv vop.t^ovTos Tr?v iKKXrjCTLav,

civSpos tStojTOU Kat ato-xpoKtpSous- [os]

tw
KepSet Trpoo-<^pop,eV(j) Tret^dp,vos

o-wcYwpet Tots TTpoo-toDcrt tw KXeop.eVet fji.a6r]TVa6ai, Kat avros VTroavpo-

320 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Ta avrd wp/xrjTO, cv/xjSovXov Kai o"waytuvio"ToS tcoj/ KaKuv
fievos T<3 )(povw cTTi
ovTos auTw KaXXticTTOu, ov Tov ^Lov KoX Trjv ecf)evp$eLa-av aipecnv /xer ov ttoXv

iKBrjarofiai. TovTUiv Kara. 8ia8o;(}^v Sufieive to StSacrKaXetov KpaTWO/xevov

Kttt cTrav^ov 8ia to (TwaLpeaOai avTOts tov Zicfivplvov koI toj/ KaXXto'TOv,
KaiTOL rjjxw ixrj^iiTOT <Tvy)(U)prj(rdvT(iiv,
aXXa 7rAcio"TaKts dvTLKaOecrTwTwv

Trpos avTOvs Kai StcXeyl-avTcoi' koi aKOVTas /?tao"ayu,eva)v tt^v aXrjBuav o//,oXo-
oY Trpos /x.v c3/Dai/ /cat {itto
t^s dXrjOiias
yeiv at8ov/AVOi crvvayo'/ACvoi o5/aoXo'-

yorv, /LACT
oi ttoXi; Se 7ri tov avTov (Sopfiopov dveKvXiOVTO.

(e) Ref. Haer. ix. 8 (p. 280).

AXX ci Ka.1
Trporepov e/cKeiTat v<^' yjjxwv iv TOts ^iXoo'o^ov/xevois 17 So^a
HpaKXetTOu, aXXa ye Sokci TrpocravaTrapa^drjvaL kul vvv, ottojs 8ta tov cyyt-
ovos eXey^ou (^avcpco? SiSai^^aio-ii' 01 toi'tou vo/ai'^ovtc? XpiorToO etvai fiaOrj-

Tas, ov/c ovTa?, aXXo, tov o"kotivov.

(/) J?e/. Haer. ix. ii- 13 (p. 284 sq).

TavTT^v TT^v KaXXio-T09, dvrjp iv KaKia Travovpyos koi

alpecTLV CKpctTvve
TTOtKiXo? Trpos TrXavr^v, 6rjp(OfXvo<s tov t^s iTTLCTKOTrr}'; Opovov. tov Zt^vpu'ov,

avSpa t8iwT?;v Kat dypdp,p.aTOv koX drreipov T(J3v iKKXrjanaa-TLKwv opcov, ov

TTiiOdiv Sofxacn kol dTraLTtjaecTLV dTreip7]ixevaL<; eis o c^ovXcto, oi'Ta 8o)po-
^yev
XrjTTT'qv KoX (f)iXdpyvpov, tTreiO^v det (rrdaw; e/x/JaXctv dvafxicrov Tt3v aSeX^wr,

avTos Ta ap.(f)OTepa fJ^epi] vcrrepov KcpKWTretots Xoyoi? Trpos cavTOv (faXiav

KaTa(TKva^u)V, kol TOts /x.ev dXT/^ctav [Xeycov o/xotal (fipovovai ttotc kut' iStav
TCI 0[X0La <fipovLV [Xeywv] -q-rrdra, -rrdXiv S' av tois Ta 2a/3eXXtov o/x.otws, ov
Ktti avTov SvvdfXvov KaropOovv.
i^ecTTrjcre iv ydp tw v^' rjfxm' irapaLveLaOai

OVK i(TKX7]pvvTO, tjviKa St cvv T<3 KaXXiVTO) ifxova^ev, vtt avTov dveo^etCTo

Trpos TO Soy/xa to KXcoyacvovs piweLV (jid(TKOVTO<; rd ofxoia c^poveiv. d 8e

TOTC )u,ev Ti}v Travovpytav avTOV ovjc evdet, av^is Se eyvw, ws St?/y7^0"o/xai yacT*
ov TroXv. avTOv Se tov Zec^vpivov Trpodycov Brjixoaia eireiOe Xcyetv 'Eyw otSa
va edv Xpto'TOV 'It^o^ovv, Kai TrXT/v avTOv CTcpov ovSeva yevrjTov kol Tradrj-

Tov TTore 8e Xeywv Ov;^ d IlaTiyp aTre^avev, dXXct o Yios* ovtcos aTravo^TOv
TT/v (TTacnv iv tw Xaw 8teTT]pr]aev ov Tci voyp-ara yvdvTcs y]fii<i ov o"vvc;^to-

povp.v, cXey^ovTcs Kat dvTLKa9i<Trdp.e.voi vTrep ttjs dXT/^etas" os ets airovoiav

;(a)pwv Std to TrdvTas
avTOv rjj vtroKpiatL crvvTp6;^tv, 77/Ads Se ov, aTrc/ca'Xet

ly/Acis St^e'ovs, iiifxuiv vrapa ^tav tov ev8o/xv;^ovvTa avTw tov. tovtov tov fiiov
8oKt yj/juv dyairtjTov iKOicrOai, Trct KaTa tov avTov )^p6vov Tjfuv eycyovci,
OTrws Std TOV (}>avrjvai tov tolovtov ttjv avaaTpocfttjv cvcTrtyvwo'TOS /cat
Ta^^a
TOts vovv ^ovo"tv cvrjOrji yivrjTai -q
8ta tovtov iTnKeyf.iprjp.ivq atpeo^is. ovtos

ip.apTvpr]crv CTrt <J>ovo-Ktavov iirdp-^ov ovtos 'Fwfxrjs' o Bk Tpoiros Trjs avTov

/LtapTvptas Totoo^Sc 7]v

OiKCTTjs cTvy^ave KapTro^opov tivos avSpos TruTTOv ovTos k t^s Kai-

o"apos otKtas. tovtw d Kap7ro<^opos, aT 8>; ws TrtoTW, ^prjp.a ovk oXtyov
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 32 1

KaT7rio"TucrV, iTrayyet\dfJievo<; KepSos Trpoaoiaeiv e/c Trpay/Aareia? rpaTre^i-

TtJC^S'OS Xa(3(ii)v TpuTre^av lire)(eipr}(Tv iv rrj Xeyofxevji Trta-KLvfj TrovirkLKr], w
ovK oXtyat TrapaOijKai tw ^p6v(o iwiaTevOyjaav vtto ^-qpwv Koi aSeXffxJUi' ivpo-

(T^rjfxaTi Tov Kapnocfiopov. o 8e i$a(f>avLcra<; ra irdvTa rjirop^i. ov ravra

Trpa^avTO<; ovk eXiTrei' os dirayyeiXr] xw Kap7ro</)op<i)' o Sc c<^i7 aTrairftv

Aoyows Trap avrov. ravra crui'tSojv o KaXXtoros kol tou irapd tou Secnrorov
Kivovvov V(^opwyu,vos, ctTTtSpa rrjv (jmyqv Kara 6d\acr(rav 7rotou/xvos' os

cuptov TrXotov 1/ Tw IIopTa) eroifjiov Trpos ai/aywy)yv, ottov cTTjy^avc ttXcov,

avepy) 7rXTJ(Top.evos. aXX' ovSe ovtws Xa^eu' SeSiTT^Taf ov yap cXtTrev 6s

aTrayyetX?^ tw Kap7ro</)opa) to yeyevr]p.ei'Ov. 6 Se c7rio"Tas Kara tov Xifxiva

iTretparo iirl to TrXoiov opjxdv Kara \ja\ jjie^r]vvp.va' rovro oe t^v cotos ev

fi(7io riS XifievL. TOV 8k 7rop^p.ea>s jSpaSwovTOS i8a)v troppoidev o KaXXitrTos

TOJ/ SecTTTOTy^v, ojv CI' T(3 TrXoi'o) ;<at
yvov<; iavrov avreLXfjcfydai, -q^ei^Tqa-f.
tov

^yjv Kol eo'^^ara Tavxa Xoytcrct/xevos ppnj/ev eavrov eis tt^v ddXaacrav. ol Se

vavTtti KaxaTTr/STyo-avTes cts Ta o-Kd<f)r] aKovra avTov dveiXovro, Ttoi' 8e (xtto

Ti^s y^s /xeyaXa f^oojvTMV Kal ovtws tw Seairorrj TrapaSo^cfs iTrav7]^0rj eis

ttJv 'Pw/xTyi/, 01' d Seo^TTOTTjs ets TTicrrpivov KareOero. )(p6i'ov Se SteX^dvTos, oJs

cv/A^aiVei ycvecrOat,7rpoaeX66vT<; ctSeX^ot TrapcKoXow tov Kap7ro(^opoi/,

OTTOJsiiaydyr] Trj<; KoXacrews tov Spa7rerr]v, cf)d(TKOvre<; avTov d/AoXoyeiv ex^"'

TTapa TLcri )(p7]fia aTroKci/xevov. d 8e KapTroc^dpos, ws cvXa/^T/s, tov p,v iStov

tXeycv at^etbeiv, tcov 8e TrapaOrjKMV (fipovrit,eiv ttoXXoi yap avTw aTrt/cXaiovTO

XeyovTes, oTi T(3 avTov Trpoa-y^rjfxart iTTLO'revcrav tui KaXXtcrTO), d TTeincrrevKei-

<rav KaL TrcicrPets iKeXevcrev e^ayayetv avTov. d 8e /ATjSev et^wv aTroStSdvat,
Kat TraXtv aTroSiSpaaKciv ju.iy Svva/xcvos Sict to cf>povpL<T0aL, ri^Q'rjv Oavdrov
7revo7jo-, Ktti aafi/Sdrco (TKr]\pdixevo<i aTrtcvai ojs eVt ^^pewcrTas, (jjpfJirjcrev
eirl

Ttjv avvayoiyrju twv 'lovSat'wv crvvqyjxeviav, Ka\ o^Tas KaT0"Tao"ta^ev avTwv.

ol Se KaTao-Tao-tao-^cvTes vir avrov, evvySptcravTes avrov Kat TrXyjyas efxf^oprj-
cravTCS ecrvpov eTrt tov 4>ov(JKiavdv tirap-^ov ovra rfjs ttoXcws. aTreKpivavro
oe ToSe* 'Pw/xatot o"vv;!(ojp'70"av tovs TraTpwovs vdp,ovs
'qixlv 8r]fxo(TLa. avayt-
vtDCTKeiv, oi^Tos 6e 7reto"eX^cuv ckwXvc /caTao'Tao-ta^wv yjfxwv, cfiao-KOJV eivat

XptoTTiavos. TOV Se ^ovcTKtavov Trpd firifjLaro<i rvy^vovro<i /cat TOts vtt 'Iov-
oatujv Xcyo/aevots KaTa rov KaXXtcTov
dyava/cTovvTos, ovk eXiTrev d aTray-
yetXas to) K.apTrocj)6pio rd irpacrarofxeva. 6 8e cr7revo"as iTrl ro Prjfxa rov

eTTapxov e/8oa- Aeo/xat, Kvpte 4>ovo"Ktavc, )u,7^

crv avTo) -rrLcrreve, ov yap icrri

XptcTTtavos, dcjiopfi-qv 8k ^rjrii Oavdrov -^prjixard fxov iroXXd a<^avto"as, ojs

aTToSet'tw. Twv Se 'lovSatwv virofioXrjv rovro vofXLcrdvruiv, ws ^v^tovvtos tov

KapTTOc^dpov ravry rfj Trpo<j>d(TL efeXea^ai avTdv, p,aXXov eTrtc^^ovws KaTC-
ySdwv TOV lirdp-)(pv. 6 Se Ktvr/^eis vtt* avTwv,
//.acTTiy coo-as
avTOv eScoKCV ets

jLteTaXXov SapSovias. /xeTa ^pdvov Se Irepoiv eKei dvTwv fxaprvpuyv, OeXijaaaa

7} MapKta epyov Ti
ayaOov ipydo-aaOai, ovcra c^tXd^eos TraXXaK?; Ko/xdSov,
Trpoo-KaXecra/Ae'vTy rov p,aKaptov OvtKTopo, dvTa kivicrKOTrov rrj<; iKKX-qo'ias Kar

CLEM. II. 21
322 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
tKcij/o Kaipov, kinqpuyra, Tivcs etev kv ^apSovta ^aprvpe?. o Se TravTcoT aVa-

Sous Ttt 6v6[xaTa, to tou KaXXtcrrov ovk cScokev, i8w5 to, rcToXp-Tj/Aeva Trap'
avrou Tu^ovCTa ow t^s a|-t(oo"6a)S >; MapKta Trapa tou Ko/aoSou, StSojcrt tijv
aTToXvcrt/AOV e7rtcrToXi)v 'YaKtv^o) Ttvi o-TraSovrt Trpccr/^DTepcj, os Xa^wv Stc-

TrXeucrev cts ti)v SapSovtW, /cat aTroSovs tw xar eKCtvo Kaipov t^s ^copas 7rt-

TpoTTeuovTt a7rXv(r tous /j.dpTvpa'i TrXrjv tot) KaXXtcrrov, o Se

yovuTrcTwr
Kttt SaKpuoJv iKeVcve Kai avros rv^etv aTroXiJcrco)?. SvcwTn^^cts oSv o 'Yokiv-
^09 a^ioi Tov liTLTpoTTOv , <^a(TK(jiv 6pe{j/a<; ctvai Map/cia?, Tacro"Oyu.evos
avT(3 TO OKtvSvvov o Se TreicrOeis an^Xvcre koI tov KaXXtcrTOv. ov Trapaye-

vo/xivov 6 OvtKTtop iravv rj^$TO Itti tw yeyovori, aXX' eTrel V(nrXay^vo<s ^v,

T](TV)(acre' (jjvXacrcrofjievos
Se tov vtto ttoXXwv oveiSov (ov yap ^v fxaKpav rd

VTT avTOv TeToXfxrjixiva), Tt Se Kai tov KapTro^opov avTiiriTTTOVTOS, TrifXTrei

avTov Kara/xiveLV iv Av^eto),opiaa^ avTw firjvtalov ti eKTpocf)'^';. fJieO'

ov

KOLfx.rjO'LV Zec^vptvos a-wapafxevov avTOv a')(0}v Trpos ttjv Karao^Tao'iv to5

kXt/pou, iTLixrjae tw tStco KaK<S, koI tovtov p-eTayaywv aTro toS 'AvOeiov i? to

KOLfxrjTTqpiov KaTe(TTr)(7v. w del crvvwv Kai, Ka^ojs (jiOdaa^ irpouTTOv, vtto-

Kptcret avTov ^epaTreuwv, iirjcjiavLcre p.'JTC Kptvat ra Xcyo'p,eva Swa/xevoi/ /xt^tc

voowTa TTjv ToS KaXXtVTOu iTTcfSovXrjv, Travra avT<2 Trpos d yjSeTO op.tXovvTOs.

owTco /xcTci T1/V TOU Ze(fivpLVOV TeXcvTTjv vo^at^wv TeTv^T^/cevai ov iOrjpaTO, rov

^a/SeXXiov d-Trewcrev aJ9 /at) cf>povovvTa op^ws, SeSoiKcos ep,e xat vofJiit,(x)v
ovtw
Svvao-^ai aTroTpLij/auOai T'qv Trpos Tas KKX->^crt'as Karrfyopiav, ws fiiy aXXoTptws
(f>pov(av. ^v ovv yoj^s Kai Travovpyos Kai ctti
xpovw crvvrjpTracre ttoXXovs.

I^^wv Se Ktti TOV lov yKip.cvov v T7J KopSia, Ktti v^a)s /xrjSev cppovwv, dfia

8e Kai aiSov/xevos Ta dXrjOrj Xeyeiv, 8ia to ZrjjJioaia iqfjuv oveiSi^ovra eiTreiv,

Si6eOL eo'TC, aXXa Kai Sia to vttotov '^afSeXXiov (Tv;^vws Kar'qyope'iaBaL o5s

TrapajSdvra Trjv TvpwTrjv ttlcttlv, ec^evpev aipeo^iv ToiavSe, Xe'ywv tov Aoyov
avTov tvai avTov Kat narepa ovofxaTt fxkv KaXovjxivov, ev Se ov to
viov,

Trvv/jia aSiaipcTov* ovk aXXo civat irarepa, aXXo Se viov, v Se Kai ro avro

V7rapviv Kai Tci TravTa ycyueiv tov Oclov TTvev/^aTos Ta t avco Kai KaTW Kat

eivai TO V rrj TrapOivo) (xapKwOkv irv.vp.a ov;^ CTcpov Trapa tov TraTepa, aXXa
ev Ktti TO avTo. Kai tovto civai to clprjixevov ov ttio-tcvcis oti cyco iv

T<3 TraTpl Kai d irarrjp iv ifxoL; to /xev yap /SXeiro fxevov, OTrep icTTiv

dvOpwTTO'S, TOVTO elvai rov vlov,

to Se iv T(S vtw ^(oprjOkv Trvevfxa tovto eivat

TOV TraTepa- ov yap, (ftrjaLV, ipw Svo 6eov<;, iraTcpa Kai vlov, dXX tva. o yap
iv avTcS yevd/xevos TraTrjp Trpoo-Xa^Sd/xevos tt/v crdpKa iOeoTroirjcrev ivwcra?

eavTto, Kai iTToCrjcrev ev, ws KaXeiaOai TraTepa Kai vlov eva uOv, Kai tovto ev
ov Trpdo'toTrov /a?) Svvao^^ai eivat 8vo, Kai ovtws tov TraTepa crvp-TreTr-ovOevai t(S

vloi- ov yap OeXet Xeyciv tov TraTepa TreTrovOevai Kai ev eivai TrpoaioTTOv
o avorjTOS Kai ttoiklXos, o avw KaTw
CK<^vyetv Trjv els tov TraTepa l3Xaa(f>r]ixiav
CTKeSa^wv j3Xaa(f>rjiJ.La<i,
i'va
fxovov KaTa Trjs dX-qOeias Xeyetv 8ok-^, ttotI fxev
eis TO SajSeXXiov 8dyp.a e/ATriTrTWV, ttotc Se eis to eoSoVov ovk aiSeiTat.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 323
ToiavTa 6 y6r]<; ToXfx-qcra'i crvvea-TijcraTO StSacrKaAetov Kara i^s iKK\r](TLa<;

ouTcos StSa^as, Ktti TTjOWTO? Toi TT/Dos Ttts T^Sovois Tots av^ptuTTOts CTvy^wpeiv
eTrevorjcre, Xeytov -rraaLv vir
avTOv afjiUaOat afj.apTia<;. o yap Trap erepo) tlvl
/cat et ti av ap-aprrj, t^aa-iv, ov Xoyt^erai
(Twayo/Aevos Xeyo/xevos Xpio-riavos
auTw 17 dfiapTia, el Tr/aocrSpa/xot t^ toi) KaXA-tcrToi; o-)(o\f]. ov to) opw apc-

(TKOfievoL TToWol (TvvLSrj(TLV 7re7rX>7yoTS a/xa re Kat utto

ttoXAwv aipecrcwv

dtro/^XrjOevTes, Ttve? 8e Kai 7rt

Karayvwcrei iK(3Xr]T0L rrj's iKKXy}(TLa<; v(f> t^/xcov
yevofcevoi, Trpo(r)(U)py](ravTe<; avrois cTrXi^^wav to SiSaaKaXeiov avTOv. outo?
el Kat Trpos ^avaTov, Setv
iSoy/jLaTLcrev ottws eTriV/coTTOs
el d[xdpTOt tl, /at^

KaTaridecrdaL. ctti totjtou rjp^avTO lirifTKOiroL kcu TrpecrjSvTipoL Kai StaKovoi

Se Kat tis
Stya/xot Kai Tptya/xoi KaOidTaa-dat ets KXijpov^-
et ei'
KAiypw cuv

yaixoiT}, fj.evetv rov tocovtov iv toJ KXrjpw ws /at; iqjj.apTqKOTa' etti tovto)

(f>d(rKOiv clpyjaOaL to utto tou ctTrocToXoi; prjOev (Tv Tts

et o Kptvwv aA-
Ao'Tpiov otKCTT/v; ctAAtt Kat TrapajBoXriv twv ^t^aviW Trpos toCto ecj^y;

Acyecr^af ae^eTC ^i^avta o^vvav^ctv tw ctltw, TovTecTiv iv rrj ck-

Tct

KXyjaia tovs dp-apTavovTa?. aAAa Kat Tr;i/ kijSwtoi' toi) Nwe ets ofJLOLWfxa
iKKXr)(TLa<; e(j>r] yeyovevat, V 17
Kat Kwes Kat AijVot Kat KopaKCS Ka\ iravra ra

Kadapd KoX aKdOapra' ovto) cftacrKUiV Setv etvat iv iKKXrjcTLa op,oto)S" Kat ocra

Trpos toSto SuvaTos ^v crwdyeLV outws T]pp.r]vev(rv, ov 01 aKpoaTat ycrOivre's

TOts 8oy/Aao"t 8ta/jtevoio"ti/ e/XTrat'^oi'Tes lavTots tc kui ttoAAois, wv tw StSacTKa-

Aetw (Tvppiovariv o')(Xoi, 8t6 Kat TrAry^wovTat yavptwfxevoL iiri o;(Aots 8ta Tas

TySovas, as ov crvvex<^pi^o-ev 6 Xptoro's* ov KaTae^poj/iyoravTCS ovSev a/xapTeiv

KwAvoDcri, avrov d<^Uvai Tots euSoKovo-t.

c})d(XK0VTe<;
Kat yap Kat yuvat^ti/

avavSpot etev Kat rjXiKLa ye eKKatotVTO ava^to, 77 eavTwv a^iav fxrj

i-rreTpeij/ei',
et

(3ovXoLVTO KaOacpetv Sta to voixi/jlw; ya[X7]0rjvai, ;>(etv eva ov dv alpyja-iovTai

(TvyKOLTOv, etTC olKTy}v etTe eAew^epov,
Kat tovtov KptVctv avTt avSpos /x,-);

vo/xo) yeyafji.r]iMivr)v. ivOev rjp^avTO CTrt^etpetv incrTai Aeyop,vat aTOKtots ^ap-

lxdKOi<;
Kat TreptSecp-eto-^at Trpos to Tct auAAa/x/3ai/op.eva KarafSaXXeiv, 8ia to

/utT^Te
eK Sov'Aoi; (3ovXe(r0aL e;)(etv
TeVvov /XTyTC e^ ewreAoCs, Sta t?/v o-uyyeVetav
Kat vTrepoyKov ovaiav. opdre ets oo-?jv acrejSeiav i\(x)pr]a-ev o ai'o/xos p-ot^^ctav

Kat (f>6vov iv Tw avT(3 Si8ao"Ka)i/- Kat eTrt TOUTOts TOts roXp.7]fx.a(iLv eavTovs ot

dirrjpv6pLaap.V0L KaOoXLKrjv iKKXyjaiav

oTroKaAetv eTrtxetpouo-t, Kat Tives vop,t-

^OVTS V TrpCtTTetV CrWTp;(OUO-tV aVTOtS. CTTI TOUTOU TrpoJTWS TT0Ap,17Tat 0K-

Tcpov aVTOtS fiaTTTKTfXa.
TauTa p,v ovv d ^avp,acriwTaTOS KctAAtcrTOS o-weo-TTycraTO, ou otajucvet to
SiSao-KaAetoj/ cjivXaacrov Tct e^r; Kat t7;v Trapd^oaiv, p.17 StaKpivov Ttcrt Set

Koii/wvctv, Trao"t 8' dKp!.TM<i wpocrcfiepov rrjv Koivwviav a<^ ou Kat ti^v toC ovo-
twj' toiovtwv
p,aTos fxeria-)(ov iTriKXrjaLv KaXcLcrOat Sid tov irpuiToaTaTrjcravTa

c'pywv KaAAto"Tov
KaAAio"Ttavot.
TouTov KaTti TravTtt tov Koafiov SirjX'f]0eLa"r]<; t^s StSacrKaAtas, cj'tSwv tt/j'

Kai aVovo/as 'AAKt^taSiys Tts KaAoup.evos,

Trpay/AaTetav av7)p 8oAtos ye'/xwj/,

21 2
324 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
OLK^ov iv 'ATra/Aeia riys Svpt'as, yopyorepov eavTov Kot ivcjjveompov iv KU|8eiai?

KpiVas Tov KaXXiCTTOV, iTrrjXOe Trj 'Pw/aij (jyepuiv /3i(3\ov Tivd, <j)dcrKwv Tavrrjv
aTTO "^Tjpwv TrapetXr/t^eVai tlvoL dvSpa St'Katov 'HX^ao-a't.
Trj<% HapOta?

(g) Ref. Haer. x. 15 (p. 310).

1. TaSc tv(TTiv iv Trj SeKaTrj tov Kara Trao'cov alpeaewv eXcy^^ov

2. iTTLTOfxr/ iravTwv twv (f)LXoao(f>oiv,

TracroSv
3. iirtTOfjirj [twv] alpecrewv,
4. Kai CTTt Tracrt, Tts o T17? a\7]6eta^ Xoyos.

5. TOV Xajivpivdov Twv aipeVewv ov jSt'a hiapprj^avTe^, aXXa /aovw

Xcy;(() dXrjOe[a<; Swa'/xet StaXwavTCS, irpocrifxev enX ttjv rfj<; dXrj6La<; arro-

Sei^iv K.T.X.

{/i) Ref. Haer. x. 6 (p. 311).

Sv/A7rpiXa/3ovTe? TOt'vvv Ta iravroiv twv Trap EXXryo't (ro<f)wv ooyixara eu

reacrapcTL (BilSXioL^, rd 8c T015 aipecriapx^i? ev TrevTC, vvv tov Trcpt aXrjOcia^

Xoyov ev a eTTtSei^o/xev, dvaKe<^aXaLovfxevoi irpioTOV Tct Tracrt ScSoKrjfjieva.

(i) Ref. Haer. x. 30 (p. 331).

'Hcrav 8e ovtoi 6/3 I^vt;, <Sv Kai Ta ovo'^aTa eKTeOeifieOa iv cTepats ^t/3Xoi?.

^^. Zra<fr. X. 32 (p. 334).

(/^)

Et <f)LXoixa6rjcrov(rL Koi Tas tovtojv ovo"tas Kat Ta? aiTtas tt^s KOTa TravTa

Sr)fj.iovpyM<; iint,T]Ty]aovcnv, ctcrovTai cvtut^ovtcs rjixwv /3t/3Xco Trepif^ovcrr;

Ilept TT^s Tou TravTOs ouo-taq* to Se vvv iKavov eivat iKOeaOai Ta? at-
Tta?, as ov yvovTs 'EXXyyves KOfJixf/ijo t<3 Xoyu) Ta (Jf-ipf] t^s KTitreo)? cSo^acav
TOV KTLcravTa ayvorjcravTe?.

(/) >?^. Haer. x. 34 (p. 338).

'

TotovTOS o Trepi to ^etov dXr]6r]^ Xoyos, w av^pwTroi EXXt^vcs t xai /?ap-

(iapoL, XaXSatot' T /cai

'Ao"crvptoi, AtyvTTTioi Te Kai AtjSvcs, 'IvSoi T Kat

AWlottci;, KeXTOt te Kat ot

cTTpaTryyovvTes AaTtvot, TravTCS t ot tt^v EvpwTnjv
'Acriav tc Kat AtySviyv KaTotKOvvTes, ots o'v//./3ovXos eyw ytvo/xat, cf>LXav6pw7rov

Xoyov virap-^wv p,a^7yTi;s Kat c^tXav^pcoTros, ottws TrpocrSpa/xovTCs StSa^^^i^TC

Trap' tJ/awv, Tts o ovtws eos.

2. Chair of Hippolytus [c. a.d. 236 ?].

The date of the statue of Hippolytus will be discussed hereafter.

It is sufficient to say here that it must have been erected within a few

years of his death. He is seated on a chair, of which the base is

inscribed on the back and two sides. The inscription on the back,
which is curved, is here marked A. It stands on the right-hand side
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 325
of this curved back to one facing the same way as the statue, and is
mutilated. The left-hand side of the back was without any inscription.
The inscriptions on the right and left sides (the spectator still
facing
the same way), which are straight, are here marked B, C, respectively.
The positions of the inscriptions may be seen from the engravings of
the chair in Fabricius i. p. 36 sq. For the inscriptions themselves see
also Boeckh-Kirchhofif Corp. Inscr. Graec. 8613 (iv. p. 280).

[npoc Toyc ioyAaJioyc

[nepi oikongmJiac
[ic Toyc y]aAmoyc
[eiC THN er]rACTplMY0ON
5 Y^ep TOY KATA 100
ANHN
eYArreAioY KAi Ano
KAAYH'6<JiiC

nepi XApiCMATooM
10 AnOCTOAiKH HApAAO
CIC

XpONIKCON
npoc cAAhnac
KAI npoc HATOONA
15 H KAI nepi TOY HANTOC

npoTpenTiKoc npoc ce
BnpeiNAN
AnoAei2ic xpoNOON

TOY nAC)(A
20 KATA CN TOJ niNAKI
OoAAI IC nACAC TAC fpA
4)AC

nepi By KAI CApKOC

ANACTACeOOC

25 nepi TAfAeuY KAI

noOCN TO KAKON

In 1.
remaining letters niighl be pari of -/xas or -/xtas or -j/tas. In 1. 14
1 the

vaTwva obviously an error for irXaTwva.

is In 1. 20 Kara is apparently an error for
Kara ra and not for Kada (as taken by Kirchhoff). In 1. 21 if tlie first word is cor-

rectly read wdai, the second is is an itacism for ets.

326 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
B.

eroyc a BaciAgiac AAeiANApoy AYxoKpATopoc ere

Nero H Ai TOY nAC)(A eiAoic AnpeiAiAic caBBato> cm
BoAiMoy MHNoc reNOMeNoy ecTAi toic e2HC ereciN ka9
ooc ynoxeTAKTAi eN too hinaki ereNero Ae eN toic nApoa
XHKOCIN KAGOOC CeCHMeiCOTAI AnONHCTIZecGAI Ae
Aei oy AN eNnecH KypiAKH
After this follow the tables for the calculation of the Passover ac-

cording to a cycle of sixteen years. The times of the celebrations of

the Passover mentioned in the Old Testament are noted by the side
of the respective days from the eloAoc down to the nAOoc xpicxoy.
Seven cycles are given so as to exhibit the relations of the days of the
week to the days of the month.
C.

eTei AAelANApoy KAiCApoc

TOO A ApXH

AI KyplAKAl TOy
nAC)(A KATA GTOC
AI Ae nApAKeNTHceic AHAoyci thn Aicnpoe?.

Then follows a table in which the days of the month on which

Easter Day falls are given for 112 (i.e. 16x7) years, i.e. from a.d. 222
to A.D. ^;^^, calculated in accordance with the above cycle. The Sis

TTpo c| is the bissextum, and the

('marks in the margin')
irapaKevTrja-ei^
here promised are omitted by the carelessness of the stone-cutter,
though the leap-years are marked in the previous table of cycles
bySS.
3. EUSEBIUS [c. A.D. 325].

(a) Histor. Eccles. ii.

25,
Oi'Scv 8' rjTTOv KOI iKK\r](TLacrTiKo<; dvrjp, VaLo<; ovofxart, Kara Zecf>vp2vov

PwyLtaiwv yeyovw<; Ittlctkottov 6s ir] TIpoKAo) tt^s Kara <I>pvyas Trpo'icTTafjievm

yviofxri^ 8iaX;(^ls
yypac/>cos avra Brj ravTa wepl twv
tottidv, ev6a tcoj/

eip7]ixV(x)v aTTOCTToXcDV Ta lepa (TKrjvwfxaTa Karare^eirai, <^7ycrtv

'Eyci Se Ta rpoiraia twi/ airofTToXdiv e^j^o) Set^at. eav yap ^cXt^ctj^s

(XTrekOuv iirl roy Bart/cavov rj ctti tt^v dSov ttJv 'ficrrtav, evpiycrets rd rpo-
iraia twv ravT-qv iSpvcrafxevwv ttjv iKK\r)crLav.

{b) Hist. Eccl. iii. 28.

Kara tous SeSiyXco/AeVors yjiovovi erepas aLpia(ii<; dp)(r]y6v yevecrdai

K.-)]pLv6ov Kapi.L\y](^ap.v. Patos, ov c^tovas rj^r) Trporepov TTapariOiLfJiai, ev

rfi (f>poixvr] avTov t,y]Trj(rL ravra -nrepl

tov avrov ypa^ef
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 327
'AXAa KOL K.y]ptvOo<i 6 8l aTroKaXvif/(j)v ojs viro airocTToXov fxeyaXov

yeypafXfjiei'wv TeparoAoytas ^^/x.ii' cos dyyeXoiV aurw

Si'
SeSety^u-eVas if/evoo-

fievo<; iireLcrdyei, Xeywv fXiTa Tr]v avaaraaiv eTTLyeiov eivai to /SaaiXeLOV

Tov XptcTTOu, KOL irdXiv iiri$Vfxi.aLS kol T^Soi'ats iv lepoucraXryyu, ttjv aapKa
iroXvTf.vofjLivrjv hovXevuv.
koi i)(Opos virapxiav rais ypa<f>a'i<;
tov fov

dpLOfxov ^iXtovTaeTtas iv ya/xw eopr-^s OiXwv irXavdv /Vcyei yiVecr^ai.

{c) Hist. Eccl. iii.

31.
Kai kv T(2 ratou 8e, ov fjLLKp<2 rrpoaOev ifxvr](rOr]fjiv, SiaXoyo) JJp6kXo<;,
Trpos ov eTTOieiTO T17V ^ijTtjcrLV, irepl t^s ^iXtTTTroi; Kai t<uv Ovyaripaiv avrov

TeXevrrj? crvvdSiov tois CKTC^eto'iv outw cftrjciv

Mera tolItov 8e 7rpo(f>7]TtSe<; TeVo-apes at <l>iXi7r7rou
yeyevrjvTai iv 'lepo-
TToXet Tjj /caret tt^v 'Ao^tav o ratios aurwv eo^Ttv cKet, Kat o tow TraTpos

auTwv.

(^) ZT/i-/. ^<r^/. vi. 20.

HKfia^ov 8e Kara tovto TrXetous Xoytot Kat iKKXrjcriacrTiKOi avopes, tov

Kat iTTtaroXd';, as Trpds oiXXt^Xous 8te;)(apaTT0v, Tt vvv aw^Ofxeuos evpeiv

iVTTOpov. at Kat ts >/p.as ifjivXd-^Orjaav iv rfj Kar AlXiav /StfSXLoOrjKrj Trpos

TOV rrjvLKdSe ttjv avToOi SteVoi/Tos iKKXr]<Tiav 'AXe^avSpov iwiaKevacrOeicrr),

d({> ^s Kat auTOt Tcts vXas t^s p-erd ;^ctpas UTro^ecrews e^rt TauVo o^wa-

yayetv 8e8i;i'//A^a. toxStwi' BiypuXXos cvv 7rt(TToXats Kat <rvyypap.p,aT(av

Sta^opoDs (^tXoKaXtas KaTaXeXotTrei'. 7rto"K07ros 8 oiros '^v Ttov Kara

BocTTpav 'Apa/3wv ojcraijTcos Se Kat IttttoXdtos, erepas ttou Kat awTos Trpo-
eo-TOJS iKKXrjata^. ijXOe Se ets tj/acis
Kat ratou XoytcuTaTor arSpos 8taXoyos

eTTt 'Pw/xTys Kara Z(f>vplvov Trpos IIpoKXov T57S Kara ^puyas atpeVecos VTrep-

fJia^ovvra KCKivrj/xeVos, ev o) TtSv 8t ci'avrtas rryv Trept to crvvTaTTeiv Katvas

ypa^as irpoTriTeidv re Kat roXpiav iiTi(TTop.i^wv twv tov lepov awoaToXov

SeKaTpiwv p.6vwv eTrtcTToXcov p.vr]p.ovevL, Trjv wpo'i E^patous p.'j; (Tvvapi6p,7]aa<;

Tats XotTrats* evret Kat cts 8ei;po irapa Pcoyaatwv rto-tv ou vo/x,t^Tat tot)

a7roo"ToXoTj Tvy;^avtv.

(^) ^/5/. ^(T^/. vi. 2 2.

ToT S^Ttt Kat IttttoXvtos cui/TttTTwv /ACTtt 7rXcto"T(ov aXXwv VTroixvrj[xaT(DV

Kat TO
rrepi toy TTACYA ir^iroir^Tai. avyypaixp.a, iv w twv )(pov(jDV dvaypa-
<fir]v iKOip.f.vo'; Kat Ttva Kavova KKat8eKaTi7pt8os Trepl tov TTa(T\a Trpo^ets 7ri

TO TrpwTov Tos
AXf^avSpov avTOKpaTopo'S tovs ;)(povovs Trtptypae^et. twi/ 8e

XotTTcuv avTOi) avyypap.p.dT(x)v Ta ets >;/xas X6'(VTa cVti TaSe" eic THN

elAHMepON, IC TA MCTA THN elAhMSpON, npOC MApKIOONA,

eic TO ACMA, eic MepH toy lezeKmA, nepi toy nAC)(A, npoc
ATTACAC TAC Aipe'ceiC" TrXeto-Ta T XXa Kat Trapa TToXXots evpots dv
awt,op.va.
328 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
4. LiBERIAN ChRONOGRAPHER [a.D. 354].

(a) Depositio Mariyrwn (see above, i.

p. 251).

Idus Aug. Ypoliti in Tiburtina et Pontiani in Calisti.

There is reason to believe that this notice is not later than a.d. 335

(see 1.
p. 250, 264) and may have been much earher.

{b) Catalogus Episcoporu^n (see above, i.

p. 255).

Eo tempore Pontianus episcopus et YppoUtus presbiter exoles sunt

deportati in Sardinia in insula nociva, Severo et Quintiano cons.

[a.d. 235].

This notice in all probability dates from about a.d. 255 (see i.
p.

263).

5. Epiphanius [c.
a.d. 375].

Haeres. xxxi. 35 (p. 205).

'Hymeis ^\ apKCcr^evTes rots t Trap' ly/Awv \e.ypCiuiv oXtyots ko-i toi? vttq
Twv riys aXiy^eia? (rvyypa<f>ewv tovtu)v XexOucri re koI avvTayOfla-i, koI

d/3covTs OTt aXXot TreTrovrjKacrt, cjirjfju

Se KXt^/at^s kol Eip^^vatos Kai IttttoXvtos

Koi aXXot TrXet'ous, o\ /cat OavfiaaTw^; ttjv Kar aurwv TreTrotijvrat avarpoTrrjv,
oil Travu Tt TO) Ka/Aarw Trpoo-^eivai, ws TrpoetTrov, T^deXTJcrajxev, LKavw6evTs rots
7rpocLpr]fx.evoL<; avSpacrt
k.t.X.

6. Apollinaris? [c.
a.d. 370].

Mai Scrip f. Veter. Nov. Collect, i.

p. 173.

'A7roXtvaptou...Evo"e/3ios o Ila/xt^tXou Kai IttttoXutos o ayiajraros ctti'-

(TKOTTOS 'PcojLirjs aTTciKa^oucn Ti^v 7rpoKifiev7]v Tov ^ajSov^oSovocrop opaaiv rrj

Tov Trpo<fir]Tov AaviT^X oirTaaia.

A comment on Daniel ii. 34 in a Catena; see
Lagarde p. 171. Reasons will be
given below (p. 431 sq) for questioning the ascription to Apollinaris.

7. Damasus [a.d. 366 384].

(a) Inscriptio in Coemeterio Hippolyti.

HIPPOLVTVS FERTVR PREMERENT CVM JVSSA TVRANNI
PRESBYTER IN SCISMA SEMPER MANSISSE NOVATI
TEMPORE QVO GLADIVS SECVIT PIA VISCERA MATRIS
DEVOTVS CHRISTO PETERET CVM REGNA PIORVM
QVAESISSET POPVLVS VBINAM PROCEDERE POSSET
CATHOLICAM DIXISSE FIDEM SEQVERENTVR VT OMNES
SIC NOSTER MERVIT CONFESSVS MARTYR VT ESSET
HAEC AVDITA REFERT DAMASVS PROBAT OMNIA CHRISTVS
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 329
This inscription is preserved in a S. Petersburg MS (formerly of

Corbei, and afterwards of S. Germain des Pres) which contains a

sylloge of inscriptions, and is described in Bull, di Archeol. Crist.
1 88 1, p. 5 sq. The sylloge is printed in De Rossi's Inscr. Christ. Urb.
Rom. II. p. 82, where also (p.72 sq) it is described. A full account of
this particular inscription, which appears on fol. 24 sq, is given in the
same Bull. I.e. p. 26 sq. It is headed Xn sco i^spoltto mavtgrac, and by

an error of the scribe the last line of another inscription, belonging to

'
the martyr Gordianus (see pp. 14, 39), Praesbiter ornavit renovans
vicencius ultro' has been attached to it. In 1425 the reigning Pope
Martin V issued an order that marble and other materials might be
taken from the desolate and ruined suburban churches to construct the
pavement of S. John Lateran and accordingly De Rossi has found;

and deciphered three fragments of this very Damasian inscription from

the cemetery of Hippolytus embedded in the pavement of this distant

basilica.

{b) Inscriptio altera in eodem Coemeterio.

LaETA DEO PLEBS SANCTA CANAT QVOD MOENI.A CRESCVNT

Et renovata domvs martyris [hippJoliti
RNAMENTA OPERIS SVRGv[nT AVCTORE DAMJASO
Natvs qvi antistes sedis a[postolicae]
1 NCLITA PACIFICIS FACTA Es[t HAEC AVLA TRIVMPHIS]
S ERVATVRA DECVS PERPETv[aMQUE FIDEM]
HAEC OMNIA NOVA QUAEQVE VIDIS Le[o PRESBYtJeR H0RN.\T,
where the first six lines give an acrostich Leonis, and quaeque is
contracted into qq in the inscription itself. Damasus is described as
'
'
natus antistes,' because his father had been exceptor, lector, levita,
sacerdos,' as Damasus wrote
another inscription {Bull, di Archeol.
in

Crist. 1 88 1, p. 48); and thus he himself was, as it were, born to his

future high office in the Church.

This inscription is given by De Rossi in the Bull, di Archeol. Crist.
1883, p. 60 sq (comp. ib. 1882, p. 176). It was found in the vestibule

leading to the crypt of S. Hippolytus.

8. HiERONYMUS [a.D. 378 400]

{a) De Vir. Til. 59.

Gains sub Zephyrino, Romanae

urbis episcopo, id est, sub Anto-

nino, Severi disputationem

filio, adversus Proculum, Montani sectato-
rem, valde insignem habuil argucns eum temcritatis super nova pro-
phetia defendcnda, et in eodem volumine epistulas quoque Pauli trede-
330 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
cim tantum enumerans quartam decimam, quae fertur ad Hebraeos,
dicit non eius esse; sed apud Romanos usque hodie quasi Pauli apo-

stoli non habetur.

{b) De Vir. III. 6i.

Hippolytus, cuiusdam ecclesiae episcopus nomen quippe urbis

scirenon potui in ratione paschae et temporwn canone scripsit et usque
ad primum annum Alexandri imperatoris sedecim annorum circulum,
quern Graeci
eKKAiAeKAerHpiAA vocant, repperit, et Eusebio, qui super
eodem pascha decern et novem annorum circulum, id est, eweaKatScKae-
composuit, occasionem dedit.
rrjpiSa Scripsit nonnuUos in scripturas
commentarios, e quibus haec repperi in Ifexaemeron, in Exodum, in:

Canticuni Canticoruin, in Genesitn, in Zachariam, de Fsalmis, in Esaiani,

de Daniele, de Apocalypsi, de Froverbiis, de Ecclesiaste, de Saul et Pythonissa,
de Antichristo, de Resurrectione^ contra Marcionem, de Pascha, adversjis
Onmes Hereses, et Laude Do^nini Salvatoris, in qua
npocoMiAiAN de

praesente Huius aemulatione

Origene se loqui in ecclesia significat.
Ambrosius, quem de Marcionis heresi ad veram fidem correctum dixi-
mus, cohortatus est Origenem in scripturas commentarios scribere,

praebens ei septem et eo amplius notaries eorumque expensas et librari-

orum parem numerum, quodque his mains est, incredibili studio cottidie
ab eo opus exigens. Unde et in quadam epistula ipyoSMKTrjv eum
Origenes vocat.

(c) Epist. xxxvi. 1 6 ad Damasum (i. p. 169, Vallarsi).

Quoniam autem poUiciti sumus et de eo quid significaret in figura

adjungere, Hippolyti martyris verba ponamus, a quo et Victorinus

noster non plurimum discrepat non quod omnia plenius executus sit,
;

sed quod possit occasionem praebere lectori ad intelligentiam latiorem ;

Isaac portat imaginem Dei Patris, Rebecca Spiritus Sancti, etc'

'

After this follows a long quotation from Hippolytus in which the history of Esau
and Jacob is figuratively explained. The letter was written a.d. 384.

(d) Epist. xlviii. 19 ad Pammachium (i. p. 232, Vallarsi).

Scilicet nunc enumerandum mihi qui ecclesiasticorum de impari

numero disputarent, Clemens, Hippolytus, Origenes, Dionysius, Euse-
etc.
bius, Didymus, nostrorumque Tertullianus, Cyprianus,
Jerome is defending himself against a charge of misinterpretation affecting the odd
and even days in the account of the Creation in Genesis. This letter was written A.D.
393-

(e) Epist. Ixx. 4 ad Magnum (i. p. 429, Vallarsi).

Hunc [Clementem] imitatus Origenes decern scripsit Stromateas,
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 331

Christianorum et philosophorum inter se sententias comparans...Scripsit

et Miltiades contra Gentes volumen egregium. Hippolytus quoque et

Apollonius, Romanae urbis senator, propria opuscula condiderunt.
Jerome is defending himself against the charge of desecrating theology by illustra-

tions from secular literature. This letter was written a.d. 397.

(/) Epist. Ixxi. 6 ad Lucinium (i. p. 434, Vallarsi).

De sabbatho quod quaeris, utrum ieiunandum sit \
et de eucha-
ristia, an accipienda quotidie, quod Romana ecclesia et Hispaniae
observare perhibentur, scripsit quidem Hippolytus vir disertissimus ;
et

carptim diversi scriptores e variis auctoribus edidere.

This letter was written in the year following the preceding, A.D. 398.

{g) Epist. Ixxxiv. 7 (I. p. 529).

Nuper sanctus Ambrosius sic Hexaemeron illius [Origenis] conipi-

lavit, ut magis Hippolyti sententias Basiliique sequeretur.

This letter is assigned to a.d. 400.

{]i) Covivi. in Daniel, ix. 24 (v. p. 689).

Hippolytus autem de eisdem hebdomadibus opinatus est ita;

'Septem hebdomadas ante reditum populi etc'

(/) Conim. in Matt. i.

praef. (vii. p. 7).

Legisse me fateor ante annos plurimos in Matthaeum Origenis

vigintiquinque volumina...et Theophili Antiochenae urbis episcopi
commentarios Hippolyti quoque martyris et Theodori Heracleotae,
;

etc.

This commentary was written a.d. 398.

(k) Chronicon 11.

p. 179 (ed. Schone).
Geminus presbyter Antiochenus et Hippolytus et Beryllus episcopus
Arabiae Bostrenus clari scriptores habentur.

A notice under Ann. Abr. 2244, Alexandr. 6.

9. RuFiNUS [tA.D. 410].

Hist. Eccl. vi. 16.

Unde et nos, ut fateamur quod verum est, totius huius operis

nostri et historiae conscribendae materiam sumpsimus. Erat ergo
inter caeteros et Beryllus scriptorum praecipuus, qui et ipse diversa
opuscula dereliquit. Episcopus hie fuit apud Bostram Arabiae urbem
maximam. Erat nihilominus et Hippolytus, qui et ipse aliquanta
scripta dereliquit episcopus.
332 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
This passage corresponds to H. E. vi. ?o of Eusebius (see above, p. 327). The
rest of Rufinus' translationmay be passed over. This extract alone is given here,
because its looseness has apparently been the occasion of much error respecting the
see of Hippolytus.

10. Prudentius [c.

a.d. 407].

Peristephanon ; De Fassione S. Hippolyti {p. 440 sq, ed. Dressel).

Innumeros cineres sanctorum Romula in urbe

Vidimus, O Christi Valeriane sacer.
Incisos tumulis titulos et singula quaeris
Nomina? difificile est ut replicare queam.
5 Tantos iustorum populos furor inpius hausit,
Cum coleret patrios Troia Roma deos.
Plurima litterulis signata sepulcra loquuntur
Martyris aut nomen aut epigramma aliquod.
Sunt et muta tamen tacitas claudentia tumbas

lo Marmora, quae solum significant numerum.

Quanta virum iaceant congestis corpora acervis,
Nosse licet, quorum nomina nulla legas.
Sexaginta illic defossas mole sub una
Relliquias memini me didicisse hominum ;
15 Quorum solus habet comperta vocabula Christus,

Utpote quos propriae iunxit amicitiae.

Haec dum lustro oculis, et sicubi forte latentes

Rerum apices veterum permonumenta sequor;

Invenio Hippolytum, qui quondam schisma Novati
20 Presbyter attigerat, nostra sequenda negans.
Usque ad martyrii provectum insigne tulisse
Lucida sanguinei praemia supplicii.
Nee mirere, senem perversi dogmatis olim
Munere ditatum catholicae fidei.

25 Cum iam vesano victor raperetur ab hoste,

Exsultante anima carnis ad exitium,
Plebis amore suae multis comitantibus ibat;

Consultus, quaenam secta foret melior,

Respondit Fugite, o miseri, exsecranda Novati

:

30 Schismata; catholicis reddite vos populis.

Una fides vigeat, prisco quae condita templo est ;

Quam Paulus retinet, quamque cathedra Petri.

Quae docui, docuisse piget venerabile martyr
:

Cerno, quod a cultu rebar abesse Dei.

 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 333

35 His ubi detorsit laevo de tramite plebem,

Monstravitque sequi, qua via dextra vocat,
Seque ducem recti, spretis anfractibus, idem
Praebuit, erroris qui prius auctor erat :

Sistiturinsano rectori Christicolas tunc

40 Ostia vexanti per Tiberina viros.
lUo namque die Roma secesserat, ipsos
Peste suburbanos ut quateret populos.
Non contentus hunium celsae intra moenia Romae
Tingere iustorum caedibus assiduis.
45 laniculum cum iam madidum, fora, Rostra, Suburram,
Cerneret eluvie sanguinis affluere :

Protulerat rabiem Tyrrheni ad littoris aram,

Quaeque loca aequoreus proxima Portus habet.

Inter carnifices et constipata sedebat

50 Ofificia, exstructo celsior in solio.

Discipulos fidei, detestandique rebelles

Idolii, ardebat dedere perfidiae.
Carcereo crinita situ stare agmina contra
lusserat, horrendis excrucianda modis.

55 Inde catenarum tractus, hinc lorea flagra

Stridere ; virgarum concrepitare fragor.
Ungula fixa cavis costarum cratibus altos
Pandere secessus et lacerare iecur.
Ac iam lassatis iudex tortoribus ibat
60 In furias, cassa cognitione Tremens.
Nullus enim Christi ex famulis per tanta repertus
Supplicia, auderet qui vitiare animam.
Inde furens quaesitor ait Iam, tortor, ab unco
:

Desine si vana est quaestio, morte agito.

:

65 Huic abscide caput ;

crux istum tollat in auras,

Viventesque oculos offerat alitibus;

Has rape praecipites, et vinctos coniice in ignem :

Sit pyra, quae multos devoret una reos.

En Tibi, quos properes rimosae imponere cumbae,
70 Pellere et in medii stagna profunda freti ;

Quos ubi susceptos rabidum male suta per aequor

Vexerit, et tumidis caesa labarit aquis.

Dissociata putrem laxent tabulata carinam,

Conceptumque bibant undique naufragium.

75 Squamea coenoso praestabit ventre sepulcrum
334 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Bellua consumptis cruda cadaveribus.
Haec persultanti celsum subito ante tribunal
Offertur senior nexibus implicitus.

Stipati circum iuvenes clamore ferebant

80 Ipsum Christicolis esse caput populis :

Si foretexstinctum propere caput, omnia vulgi

Pectora Romanis sponte sacranda deis.
Insolitum lethi poscunt genus, et nova poenae
Inventa, exemplo quo trepident alii.
85 Ille supinata residens cervice, Quis, inquit,
Dicitur? afifirmant dicier Hippolytum.

Ergo sit Hippolytus, quatiat, turbetque iugales,

Intereatque feris dilaceratus equis.

Vix haec ille : duo cogunt animalia freni

Ignara, insueto subdere coUa iugo

:

90
Non stabulis blandive manu palpata magistri,
Imperiumque equitis ante subacta pati :

.
Sed campestre vago nuper pecus e grege captum,
Quod pavor indomito corde ferinus agit.
95 lamque reluctantes sociarant vincula bigas,

Oraque discordi foedere nexuerant.

Temonis vice funis inest, qui terga duorum
Dividit, et medius tangit utrumque latus,

Deque iugo in longura se post vestigia retro

100 Protendens trahitur, transit et ima pedum.

Huius ad extremum sequitur qua pulvere summo
Cornipedum refugas orbita trita vias ;
Crura viri innectit laqueus, nodoque tenaci
Astringit plantas, cumque rudente ligat.

105 Postquam composito satis instruxere paratu

Martyris ad poenam verbera, vincla, feras :

Instigant subitis clamoribus atque flagellis,

Iliaque infestis perfodiunt stimulis.

Ultima vox audita senis venerabilis haec est :

no Hi rapiant artus ;
tu rape, Christe, animam.
Prorumpunt alacres, caeco et terrore feruntur,

Qua sonus atque tremor, qua furor exagitant.

Incendit feritas, rapit impetus, et fragor urget :

Nee cursus volucer mobile sentit onus.

115 Per silvas, per saxa ruunt non ripa retardat

:

Fluminis, aut torrens oppositus cohibet.

 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 335

Prosternunt sepes et cuncta obstacula rumpunt :

Prona, fragosa petunt ardua transiliunt.

;

Scissa minutatim labefacto corpore frusta

1 20 Carpit spinigeris stirpibus hirtus ager.
Pars summis pendet scopulis pars sentibus haeret
; ;

Parte rubent frondes ; parte madescit humus.

Exemplar sceleris paries habet illitus, in quo
Multicolor fucus digerit omne nefas.

125 Picta super tumulum species liquidis viget umbris,

Efifigians tracti membra cruenta viri.

Rorantes saxorum apices optime papa,vidi,

Purpureasque notas vepribus impositas.

Docta manus virides imitando efifingere dumos
130 Luserat et minio russeolam saniem.
Cernere erat, ruptis compagibus, ordine nuUo
Membra per incertos sparsa iacere situs.
Addiderat caros gressu lacrymisque sequentes,
Devia quo fractum semita monstrat iter.
135 Moerore attoniti atque oculis rimantibus ibant,
Implebantque sinus visceribus laceris.
lUe caput niveum complectitur, ac reverendam
Canitiem molli confovet in gremio.
Hie humeros truncasque manus et brachia et ulnas

140 Et genua et crurum fragmina nuda legit.

Palliolis etiam bibulae siccantur arenae,
Nequis in infecto pulvere ros maneat.

Siquis et in sudibus recalenti aspergine sanguis

Insidet, hunc omnem spongia pressa rapit.

145 Nee iam densa sacro quidquam de corpore silva

Obtinet, aut plenis fraudat ab exsequiis.

Cumque recensitis constaret partibus ille
Corporis integri qui fuerat numerus,
Nee purgata aliquid deberent avia toto
150 Ex homine, extersis frondibus et scopulis:
Metando eligitur tumulo locus Ostia linquunt ;
:

Roma placet, sanctos

quae teneat cineres.
Haud procul extreme culta ad pomoeria vallo
Mersa latebrosis crypta patet foveis.
155 Huius in occultum gradibus via prona reflexis

Ire per anfractus luce latente docet.

Primas namque fores summo tenus intrat hiatu
336 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

lUustratque dies limina vestibuli.

est
Inde, ubi progressu facili nigrescere visa
1 60 Nox obscura, loci per specus ambiguum,
Occurrunt caesis immissa foramina tectis,
Quae iaciunt claros antra super radios.

Quamlibet ancipites texant hinc inde

recessus

Arcta sub umbrosis atria porticibus :

Attamen excisi subter cava viscera montis

165
Crebra terebrato fornice lux penetrat.
Sic datur absentis per subterranea solis
Cernere fulgorem, luminibusque frui.
Talibus Hippolyti corpus mandatur opertis,
Deo.
170 Propter ubi apposita est ara dicata
Ilia sacramenti donatrix mensa, eademque

Gustos fida sui martyris apposita,

Servat ad aeterni spem vindicis ossa sepulcro,

Pascit item Sanctis Tibricolas dapibus.

175 Mira loci pietas, et prompta precantibus ara

Spes hominum placida prosperitate iuvat.
Hie corruptelis animique et corporis aeger
Oravi quoties stratus opem merui.
Quod laetor reditu, quod te, venerande sacerdos,

180 Complecti licitum est, scribo quod haec eadem,

Hippolyto scio me debere Deus cui Christus
;

Posse dedit, quod quis postulet, annuere.

Ipsa, illas animae
exuvias quae continet intus,
Aedicula argento fulgurat ex solido.
185 Praefixit tabulas dives manus aequore laevi

Candentes, recavum quale nitet speculum.

Nee Pariis contenta aditus obducere saxis,
Addidit ornando clara talenta operi.
Mane salutatum concurritur omnis adorat
:

190 Pubis; eunt, redeunt, solis adusque obitum.

Conglobat in cuneum Latios simul ac peregrines
Permixtim populos relligionis amor.
Oscula perspicuo figunt impressa metallo;
Balsama diffundunt; fletibus ora rigant.
195 lam cum se renovat decursis mensibus annus,
Natalemque diem passio festa refert.

Quanta putas studiis certantibus agmina cogi,

Quaeve celebrando vota coire Deo?

 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 337
Urbs augusta suos vomit effunditque Quirites,
200 Una et patricios ambitione pari.
Confundit plebeia phalanx umbonibus acquis
Discrimen procerum, praecipitante fide.
Nee minus Albanis acies se Candida portis

Explicat, ct longis ducitur ordinibus.

205 Exsultant fremitus variarum hinc inde viarum ;

Indigena et Picens plebs ct Etrusca venit ;

Concurrit Samnitis atrox habitator et altae

Campanus Capuae, iamque Nolanus adest.
Quisque sua laetus cum coniuge, dulcibus et cum
210 Pignoribus, rapidum carpere gestit iter.
Vix capiunt patuli populorum gaudia campi,
Haeret et in magnis densa cohors spatiis.
Angustum tantis illud specus esse catervis
Haud dubiurn ampla fauce licet pateat.
est,

215 Stat sed iuxta aliud quod tanta frequentia templum

Tunc adeat, cultu nobile regifico,
Parietibus celsum sublimibus, atque superba
Maiestate potens, muneribusque opulens.
Ordo columnarum geminus laquearia tecti

220 Sustinet, auratis suppositus trabibus:

Adduntur graciles tecto breviore recessus,
Qui laterum seriem iugiter exsinuent.
At medios aperit tractus via latior alti
Culminis exsurgens editiore apice.
225 Fronte sub adversa gradibus sublime tribunal
Tollitur, antistes praedicat unde Deum.
Plena laborantes aegre domus accipit undas,
Arctaque confertis aestuat in foribus,
Maternum pandens gremium, quo condat alumnos
230 Ac foveat fetos accumulata sinus.
Si bene commemini, colit hunc pulcherrima Roma
Idibus Augusti mensis, ut ipsa vocat
Prisco more diem quern te quoque, sancte magister,
Annua festa inter dinumerare velim.
235 Crede, salutigeros feret hie venerantibus ortus,
Lucis honoratae praemia restituens.
Inter solemnes Cypriani vel Celedoni,

Eulaliaequc dies currat et iste tibi.

CLEM. II. 22
33^ EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Sic te pro populo cuius tibi credita vita est,

240 Orantem Christus audiat omnipotens.

Sic tibi de pleno lupus excludatur ovili,

Agna nee tuum capta gregem minuat.

ulla
Sic me
gramineo remanentem denique campo
Sedulus aegrotam pastor ovem referas.
245 Sic, cum lacteolis caulas compleveris agnis,
Raptus et ipse sacro sis comes Hippolyto.

11. Palladius [c.

a.d. 421].

Hist. Lausiac. 148 {Patrol. Graec. xxxiii. p. 1251, Migne).

Ev aXXci) yStySXiSapt'o) cTTiyeypayu.^ei'a) 'IttttoAtjtou tow yvuipLfJiov

twv
aTroaroXwv evpov hiyjyrjjxa toiovtov.

EuycvecTaTT^ T19 koX wpaiOTaTT] Trap^eVos VTrrjpy^^v iv rfj Kopiv^w k.t.X.

12. Theodoret [a.d. 446].

(a) Dialogiis i
(iv. p. 54 sq, Schulze).

TOY Ari'oy innoAYToy enicKdnoy kai MApTypoc, ck toy

AdfOY TOY eic to Kypioc noiMAiNei mc"

Kttt
KLJ3uiT0<; Se EK $v\o}V K.T.X.

TOY AYTOY eK TOY AoroY toy eic ton cAkanan kai thn
ANNAN.

Aye 817 fioL, (3

%afxovi]X, k.t.X.

TOY AYTOY 6K TOY AdfOY toy eiC THN ApXHN TOY HCAIOY.
AtyUTTTO) fX.V Tor KOCTfXOV OLTT^LKatre K.T.X.

(/^) Dialogus ii
(iv. p. 130 sq).

TOY Afioy innoAyTOY enicKonoY kai MApTypoc, Ik toy

AdroY TOY eic thn toon taAantojn Aianomh'n.
TonTovs Se Koi TOWS CTepoSd^ows (fiija-eiev
av Tts yeiTvtav k.t.A.

TOY AYTOY eK tTc npdc BaciAi'Aa tina eniCToAflc.

A.TTapyyjv ovv tovtov Aeyei tcov KKOLfJir]ixivu)Vj
oltc TxpoiTOTOKOv twv
VeKpWV K.T.A.

TOY AYTOY eK TOY AdroY toy eic ton cAkanan kai eic
THN ANNAN.
KOL 8id tovto Tpets Kaipoi tov iviavTOv irpoeTvirovvTO cis auTov tov

aoiTtjpa K.T.X.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 339

TOY AYTOY eK TOY Ao'roY toy eic thn coAhn THN M6-
TaAhn.
'O ToV aTToXwXoTa Ik y^s TrpwTOTrXacrTOi/ av$pwTrov k.t.X.

TOY AYTOY eK THC epMHNeiAC TOY B' yaAmoy-

OuTOS o TrpoeXdwv ets rov Kocrfxov 0os Kai avdpuiTro<; e(fiavp(^6r] k.t.X.

TOY AYTOY eK TOY AofOY eic ton kt ^^Xmoh.

"'EpXeTai, eVt Tcis ovpavtas TrvXas, ayycXoi

avrw o-vi/oSev'ovcri k.t.X.

(c) Dialogus iii

(iv. p. 232 sq).

TOY AfiOY InnoAYTOY enicKonoY kai MApTYpoc eK thc

npOC BaCIAi'Aa TINA eTTICTOAHC,

'
ovv rowrov tcov KeKOifjirjfx^vwv,
arc TrpwTOTOKOi/ tojv
KiTapyy]v Xeyet
VCKpwV K.T.X.

TOY AYTOY eK TOY AdrOY eic toyc Afo Ahctac.

'AfxtpoTepa irapiax'^ to rov Kuptov (Tw/Aa
tw koct/ao), ai/x.a
to lepov Kai

vowp TO aytov k.t.A.

((/)
Haereticae Falndae ii.
3 (iv. p. 330).
KaTct TovTOv Se [toO KT^piV^ov] ov //.ovov ot Kpoppy]BkvT(.% (Tvviypaif/av,
dXXd (Tvv e/cetvots Kai Taios Kai Aiovucrios d ttjs 'AXc^avSpewv cTrio-KOTro?.

(t')
Haereticae Fabulae ii.
5 (iv. p. 331).
Kai 06o'8otos 8e d Bv^avTios o' o-kvtcvs TavTa towtu) [tw 'ApTe/xwvt]

Tre^povT^Kws Tepas '^yijcraTO ^paTpias. tovtov 8e o Tpicr/AaKapios BiKTcop

d t:7s 'Pwya77s eTrio-KOTros aTreKT^pu^ev, ws Trapa^apd^ai -rretpaOivTa Tr]<; (kkXt]-

o-ias Ta Sdy/xaTtt.
kutci ti7S tovtwv aipeVews 6 CMIKpoC avveypa(j>r]

AaByPIN60C, ov TiVS 'flpiyeVovs vTroXafx^dvova-i -rroLrjfxa, dXX d x^-P'^'^Ti/p

Xcy;(ei toijs XcyovTas. eiT 8e CKeivos eiVe aXXo? (TVVypai(/e, ToidvSe ev

auTw SiTjyeiTai hirjyrjixa.

NaTaXiov ^(^-q Tiva, k.t.X.

if) Haereticae Fabulae iii. i

(iv. p. 340 sq).

KaTci TOVTOJV [twv Ktti d crDveypai//e KXjy/ATys

Kai
NiKoXaiTWv] 7rpoppr)6el<;
Kai jxapTvp.
EiprjvaTos Kat 'I2piyev>;s Kai 'IttttoXutos eVto-KOTros

(g) Haereticae Fabulae iii.

3 (iv. p. 342).
KaTtt 8e XIpoKXov T17S awV^s aipeVcws [t^s KaTci 4>pvya?] TrpocrTaTCV-
cravTos (rvveypaij/i ratos, ov kol Tvpoadev fj.v7]cr6r]fx(v.

{h) Epistolae 145 (iv. p. 1252).

Ktti 01 TouTwv 7rpe(T/3uTcpoi 'lyvaTio? Kai HoXuKapTros Kai Eiprjvaios
Kttl 'loUOTTU'O? Kai 'iTTTToXDrOS, (5l/ ot TtXcIOUS OVK dp)(^Lpe(liV TTpoXaf/.TTOVCTL

p.di/ov, aXXa Kai Tiov [xapTvpwv ^tuKoa-fiovai ;(opov.

22 2
340 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

13. Gelasius [a.d. 492 496].

Bihl. Pair. viii. p. 704 (Lugdun.) : see Lagarde, p. 90 sq.

HIPPOLYTI EPISCOPI ET MARTYRIS ARABUM METROPOLIS IN MEMORIA

HAERESIUM;
Hie procedens
'
in mundum Deus et homo apparuit etc'

14. Andreas of CiESAREA [c.

a.d. 500 ?].

() /;/ Apocalyps. Synops. (Cramer's Catena, p. 176).

Ilept Se Tou ^eoTTVcvcTTov t^s (SlJSXov 6 iv ayiois BacriXetos Kal VprjyopiO?

o ^10? Tov \oyov KOL KvpiXAos Kal IlaTrt'as koI Eipr/vaio? kol Mc^dStos kol
'IttttoXvto?, ol iKKXrjo-LacTTiKOi Trarepcs, i)(^iyyvoL Trio-Tojcraor^ai.

(If)
In Apocalyps. xiii. i.

Tois 8e aytots Me^oSto) kox 'IttttoXvtu) Kai erepots ets axnov tov

dvTL^pLGTOV TO TTttpOV OrjpiOV l^L\.7]1TTai, Ik TI7S TToXvTapdxOV TOV f^LOV

TovTov 6a\6.cT(j'q<; /cat ttoXv/cvjuovos i$px6fjiivov k.t.X.

Hippolytus is also quoted on xiii. i8 and on xvii. lo (comp.

Cramer's Catena, p. 385).

15. Liber Pontificalis [c.

a.d. 530, a.d.?].

On the two recensions of the Liber Pontificalis and their respective

dates see above, i.
p. 303 sq.

A. Relating to S. Hippolytus.

(a) Vita PoJttiani [a.d. 230 235] i.

pp. 62, 145 (Duchesne).
Eodem tempore Pontianus episcopus et YppoHtus presbiter exiHo
sunt deputati ab Alexandro in Sardinia insula Bucina, Severo et Quin-

tiano consulibus.
The same in both recensions, but 'depoitati' for 'deputati' in the later (see above,
I-
? 255)-

The fall during the reign of Alexander, but of Maxi-

date of the exile does not
minus. The Catalogue has 'insula nociva' (see above, I. p. 255),
text of the Liberian

which is doubtless correct (see Duchesne's note, p. 146); but there was an island
'
Bucina' or Bucinna,' one of the Agates; Pliny N. H. iii. 8,
'

92, Steph. Byz. s.v.

' '

The latter however wrongly calls it a city of Sicily.

{p)
Vita Gregorii III [a.d. 731 741] i-
p- 419.

Item tectum noviter restauravit;

in ecclesia beati Genesii martyris

ubi et altare erexit in nomine salvatoris Domini Dei nostri etc.

 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 341

(r) Vita Hadriani [a.d. 772 -795] i.

p- 511.

Simul et cymiterium beati Yppoliti martyris juxta sanctum Lau-

rentiuin, quae a priscis marcuerant temporibus, noviter restauravit.
Pari modo et ecclesiam beati Christi martyris Stephani, sitam juxta
praedictum cymiterium sancti Yppoliti, similiter restauravit.

{d) Vita Leonis III [a.d. 795 816] 11.

p. 12.

autem hisdem almificus pontifex in basilica beati Yppoliti

Fecit

martyris in civitate Portuense vestes de stauraci duas, unam super

corpus ejus et aliam in altare majore.

{e) Vita Leonis /F[a.d. 847 855] 11.

p. 115 sq.

Ipse vero a Deo protectus et beatissimus papa multa corpora

sanctorum... infra hujus alme urbis moenia congregavit mirifice. Nam et
corpora sanctorum martyrum iiiiCoronatorum sollerti cura inquirens
repperit; pro quorum desiderabili amore basilicam quae sanctorum fuerat
nomini consecrata... in splendidiorem pulcrioremque statum perduxit...
eorumque sacratissima corpora cum Claudio, Nicostrato... Ypolito
quidem, cum suis familiis numero xviii... pariter sub sacro altare
recondens locavit.

ib. II.
p. 125.
Obtulit et in ecclesia beati Ipoliti martiris, qui ponitur in insula
Portuensi, que nuncupatur Arsis, vestem de fundato habentem gam-
madias ex argento textas i, vela de fundato numero iiii.
There seems to be some confusion between this notice and the last in Bollinger
p. 38. We read of
'
insulam quae dicitur Assis (z^./. quod est inter Portum et
Arsis),
Hostia,' Vita Silvestri i.
p. 184. The island between the two branches of the Tiber
is clearly meant; but why it was so called, does not appear; see Duchesne's note,
p. 199.

B. Relating to S. Laurentius.

(a) Vita Silvestri [a.d. 314 335] i.

p. 181.

Eodem tempore fecit [Constantinus Augustus] basilicam beato

Laurentio martyri via Tiburtina in agrum Veranum supra arenario
cryptae et usque ad corpus Laurenti martyris fecit gradus ascensionis et
descensionis. In quo loco construxit absidam et exornavit marmoribus

purphyreticis et desuper loci conclusit de argento, et cancellos de

argento purissimo ornavit, qui pens. lib. i, et ante ipsum locum in

crypta posuit etc.

(l?)
Vita Xysti ///[a.d. 432 440] i.
p. 233 sq.

Item fecit Xystus episcopus confessionem beati Laurenti martyris

342 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
cum columnis porphyreticis et ornavit platomis transendam, et altare
et confessionem sancto martyri Laurentio de argento purissimo, pens,
lib. L, cancellos argenteos supra platomas purphyreticas, pens. lib. ccc.
Absidam supra cancellos cum statua beati Laurent! martyris
argenteam, pens. lib. cc.

Fecit autem basilicam sancto Laurentio, quod Valentinianus Augustus

concessit, ubi et optulit etc.

(c) Vita Pelagii II \K.\y. 579 590] i.

p. 309.

Hie fecit supra corpus beati Laurenti martyris basilicam a funda-

mento constructam et tabulis argenteis exornavit sepulchrum ejus.

{d) Vita Hadriani [a.d. 772 795] i.

p. 500.
Fecit in aecclesia beati Laurenti martyris foris muros, scilicet ubi
sanctum eius corpus requiescit, vestem de stauracim; et in aecclesia
maiore aliam similiter fecit vestem. Nam et tectum eiusdem beati
Laurenti bassilicae maiore, qui iam distectus erat et trabes eius confracte,

noviter fecit.

ib. p. 504.
{e)

In ecclesia vero beati Laurentii martyris atque levite foris muros

huius civitatis Romae fecit vela etc.

ib. p. 505.
(/)
Item ipse ter beatissimus praesul in basilica maiore, quae appellatur
sancte Dei genetricis, qui aderat iuxta basilicam sancti Laurentii

martyris adque levite ubi eius sanctum corpus requiescit, foris muros
huius civitatis Romae, obtulit vela de stauracim etc.

ib. p. 508.
{g)

Immo et porticus quae ducit ad sanctum Laurentium foris muros a

porta usque in eadem basilicam noviter construxit. Hie idem almi-
ficus vates eandem basilicam sancti Laurentii martyris ubi sanctum

eius corpus quiescit, adnexam basilicae maioris quam dudum isdem

praesul construxerat, citroque noviter restauravit.
ultro Immo et
aecclesiam sancti Stephani iuxta eas sitam, ubi corpus sancti Leonis
episcopi et martyris quiescit, similiter undique renovavit una cum
cymiterio beatae Cyriacae seu ascensum eius.

ib.
{h) p. 511.
Fecit autem idem praesagus antistes in confessione beati Laurentii
foris muros imaginem ex auro purissimo in modum evangeliorum,
eiusdem beati Laurentii effigies continentem, etc.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 343
1 6. Cyrillus of Scythopolis [c. a.d. 555].

Vita S. Euthyniii p. 82 (Hippol. Op. i.

p. ix sq, Fabricius).

Etous Tre fjLTTTOV i^rjKOdTOv TCTpaKO(TLO(TTOv Kara Tovs cruyypa^ei/ras

)(povov<; vTTo TMV (xyLMv Trarepcov 'IttttoXvtov tov TraXaiou Kai yvwpijxov riav
aTTOCTToXcO]/ Kttl YjTTL(j>aVLOV TOV KvTTptWTOU K.T.X.

17. Gregory of Tours [c.

a.d. 577].
Hisf. -Franc, i.
30 (i. p. 47 sq, ed. Arndt et Krusch).

Sub Decio vero imperatore...Xystus Romanae ecclesiae episcopus

et Laurentius archidiaconus et Hyppolitus ob dominici nominis confes-

sionem per martyrium consummati sunt.

18. EUSTRATIUS OF CONSTANTINOPLE [c.

A.D. 578].

Adv. Psychopannychitas 19 (Hippol. Op. 11.

p. 32, Fabricius).

Aerei ToiNYN innoAyTOc 6 MApryc kai eni'cKonoc po'jMHC

eN TO) Aeyxepcp Aopto eic ton AanihA toiayta.
ToT \)Xv ovv crv(TTas A^apcas o-[xa rots XotTrots St Vfxvov k.t.X.

19. Stephanus Gobarus [c.

a.d. 575 600?].

Photius Bibiiotheca 232 (p. 291 b).

"Ert Sc TTOtas v7ro\r]\l/L'i eax^v 'IttttoXvtos

kol ETrt^ai/to? irepl NiKoXaou
TOV evos Twv t, SiaKovwv koi otl l(r)(ypMS avrov KarayivwcrKoucrtv, k.t.X.

"Otl 'IttttoXutos Koi Etpijvatos ttjv vrpos EySpatous eTTtaToXrjv HavXov

OVK Ikclvov eti/at cj>aai.

Tivas VTToXr]\pei<i c'x^'' ayiwTaros IttttoXutos Trept tt^s twv MovTavicrTwc

aipecrews, Kat Ttvas o ev aytois T^S Nucto^t^s VprjyopLOS.

20. Leontius of Byzantium [c. a.d. 620].

(a) De Sedis Act. iii. i

{Patrol. Grace, lxxxvi. p. 12 13, Migne).

'EyeVovTO St Iv tois \povoi<i rots oiTro r^s yevvT^creoDS tou Xptcrrou fJi-^XP''
Trj'i PaaiXiMS KwvcrTavTtVow StSacTKaXoi Kai Trarepes otSe' lyvartos o
0(^opos, Eipr^i/atos, 'loucTTtvos ^tXocroc^os Kai fxapTVS, K.X7)fj.7]<; Kat

'ItTTToXvTOS CTTiVkOTTOI PlOjUTJS, K.T.X.

(Z*)
<:. Nestoriuiii et Eutyclicm Lib. i
(//-'. p. 131 2).

toy AfioY innoAyToy enicKonoy kai MAprypoc eK toon

eyAor'^N TOY BaAaam.
Iva 8ei;(^'>j
to crvvajxtfiOTepov i.'^Mv
Iv eaDTw k.t.X.
344 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
21. Chronicon Paschale [c.
a.d. 630].

p. 12 sq (ed. Bonn.).

'IttttoXutos roivvv 6 Trjs euo-e/Seias /Aaprvs, eTrtcr/coTros yeyoi/ws tov

KoKovfxevov HopTov Tr\r}<jLov t^s 'Poj/xtjs, eN Tcu npoc ATTACAC TAC

AipeceiC CYNTArMATI ypa\j/ev iirl Xc'lecos oijtws.

'Opw )w.v ow OTt (j>iXovLKta<; TO epyov. Aeyei yap outw?

'

eTroiTjcre to
'

TToxr^a 6 Xpto'Tos totc ttj rffxipo.

koX evraOev 810 Ka//. Set, ov rpowov o

Kijptos 7rot7yo"ev, owco Trotetv TreTrXavT^Tat 8e /at^ ytvwa/cwv oTt w Katpw

7rao-i^ev
o Xpio^Tos ouk e^ayc to KaTa vo/ao7' 7rao"xa, outos yap t^v to
to irpoKiK-qpvyfJL^vov Kai to TeXeiov/xevov t^
ira.(T)(a. (jopicTfJizvrj 7]fiepa.
KOi TrdXiv 6 aiJTos 6N Tco TOY TOY Afioy
TTpooTOi AofoJ nep'i

nACXA cyrrp'^^M'WATOC eipy]Kv ovtws-

OuSe ev TOts irpwroLS ovSi iv Tot? ecr^aTOts k.t.X.

Wordsworth (pp. 51, 267) ascribes this passage to Peter of Alexandria, and so
apparently did Biuisen (Wordsworth p. 51, Dollinger p. 19) in his earlier work, but in
his second edition (1854) he does not say anything of the kind (i. p. 420). The
authorship of Peter of Alexandria could only be maintained on the supposition that
the whole passage after the mention of his name (p. 4) is his; but this is impossible for
two reasons; (i) The writer quotes from '
the great Athanasius the luminary of the
Alexandrian Church
'

(p. 9), who was only a very little child when Peter flourished ;

(2) He uses such language as denrapdevov /cat Kara aX'^deiav deoroKov Mapias (p. 10),
which would be an anachronism in the mouth of Peter. A
better case might be made
out for Athanasius, but the author is probably the writer of the Chronicon Paschale
himself.

2 2. Concilium Lateranense [a.d. 649].

Labb. Cone. vii. p. 287 (ed. Coleti).

TOY AfiOY innoAyToy enicKonoy kai MApTypoc eK toy

nepi eeoAoriAC Adroy.
To BiX^iv c'xei o eo's, ov to \x.r\ ^eXetv, k.t.X.

ib. VII. p. 293.

toy Afioy innoAy'Toy enicKonoy kai MApTypoc eK thc

eic TO nACXA elHrHceooc.
''OXos rjv [ev] TTatrt
Kat 7ravTa;^ov, yc/xiVas 8e to irdv k.t.X.

23. Anastasius Apocrisiarius [a.d. 665].

jEj>tst ad Theodos. Gangren. (Fatrol. Lat. cxxix. p. 664 sq, Migne).

Praeterea misi ad praesens cum hac epistola mea Deo honorabilibus
vobis...rotulam habentem testimonia ex dictis sancti Hippolyti
episcopi
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 345

Portus Romani ac martyris Christi Dei nostri...Hunc qiiippe librum

Byzantii nobis antequam passi fuissemus delatum, cum hunc totum

vellemus transcribere, subito juxta consuetudinem suam insistentes
adversarii latronum more rapuerunt, et non valuimus ex ipso plusquam
haec octo testimonia toUere.

TOY ATioy innoAYTOY eniCKonoY ndproY, htoyn toy Ai-

MeNOC pCOMHC, KAI MApTYpOC THC AAH0eiAC, Ik TO? KATA
BHpOONOC KAI hAIKOC (v. H A K I'oO N c) TOON AipeTIKOON Ufpi
1. I

GeoAoriAC KAI CApKOOCeOOC KATA CTOIXeToN AOfOY, OU r] dpxV,

"Ayios, aytos, aytos Kvptos a-a/SawO, d(ny7/Ta) cjjaivfj ySowvra ra (jcpa^ifL top

'

A.7ripoSvvdfxw yap 6e\-^aL tov ov k.t.X.

24. Anastasius Sinaita [c.

a.d. 680].

(a) Hodegus 23 {Patrol. Grace, lxxxix. p. 301, Migne).

innoAyTOY eniCKonoY pooMHC eK toy nepi ANACTAceooc

KAI A(f)9ApCIAC AOfOY.
EcrovTat, <J3y](Tiv,
iv ttj dvacTacrei ol avOpwTroL k.t.X,

(^) Quaestiones 41 (p. 592, Migne).

InnoAyTOY eK toy eic to acma acmatojn.
Kat TTOV Trdcra -q
TrXovcria avTT] yvcGcrts ; ttov 8k rd [xvcTTrjpLa k.t.X.

(c) Qiiaestiones 48 (p. 604, Migne).

InnoAyTOY Ik toy eic ton AanihA.

Tcov ydp (XL8r]p<j}v Kvrjfxwv twv vvv liriKpaTOVdoiv iirl rd t)(yr]
TWf ttoScoi/

K.T.X.

25. Pseudo-John of Damascus [c.

a.d. 700?].

(a) Sacra Parallela Riipef. {Op. 11.

p. 787, Lequien).

TOY Afioy InnoAyTOY pooMHC.

Tavra Se ko.t
dvdyKrjv e^o/Atv SirjyrjcracrOai, ottcds ttjv VTTOVoiav, k.t.X.

{b) Sacra Parallela Rtipef. {Op. 11.

p. 781).

InnoAyTOY enicKo'noy pooMHC nepi xpicToy kai toy anti-

XpicToy.
aXXa. Toirrwv Iv Trpoot/xi'o) cts Sdfav 0eov elprjixevuiV'

26. Germanus of Constantinople [c.

a.d. 720J.

Rericm Ecel. Contempl. {Patrol. Grace, xcviii. p. 417, Migne).

TouTO K0.1 IttttoAutos Pw/i,7^? Ktti o ctyto? KuptXAo? Xkyov(Tiv Iv TOtS
346 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Trept Tov KvTi^KTTOV Xoyots avTwv f.v t<3 e^aKtcr^iXtocTTw TrevraKOO'ioo'Tw
tret Trjv jxiXkovaav irapovcxiav eaeaOai.

See Overbeck Quaest. Hippol. p. 30 sq.

27. Pseudo-Chrysostom [a.d. ?].

Z>e Pseudo-prop heiis (Chrysost. Op. viii. app. p. 79).

noD 'lymrios to tov 0eoD oiKrjTrjptov; irov o AtovuVtos to 7rTti/ov tou

oupavor; ttov IttttoAutos o yXuKUTttTOS Kat cwoDCTaTOs;

This work is manifestly spurious. The reference to Dionysius the Areopagite in
this very passage isa sufficient evidence. We
have no means of ascertaining its date ;
but it was evidently many generations later than Chrysostom.

28. Georgius Syncellus [a.d. 792].

{a) Chronographia p. 674 (ed. Bonn.).

'IttttoA-utos Upos (f)LXo(ro(f>os evrto-KOTros IIo'pTov tou Kara Trjv Vcafx'ijv

cre^oSpa StaTrptTTcjs yjvdcL cv rfj Kara XpicTTOV (^iXocroc^ta, TrXcitrTa i^u;)(co</)A.i7

a-vvTaTTQiv VTTOfxvrJixaTa. ei'c tc yap thn e^AHMepoN Ka'i eic TA

MeTA THN elAHMepON, eiC noAAA Te TOJN npO(})HT(JC)N, maAicta
lezeKii-iA KAi AanihA toon Mer^AcoN, eVi /jirjv eic ta acmata kai
eiC aAAAC nANTOlAC HAAaIAC kai NeAC rpA4)AC, CI' oh Koi eic
thn eN nATMcp TOY OeoAoroy ahokaAyyin, npdc MApKiooNA
Kat TAC AOinAC
AipeceiC, Kai ton, ezKAlACKACTHpiKON TOY nAC)(A
KAN ON A ii^dero irepLypaif/as ts to TrpwTov eVos 'AXe^avSpou to9 Ma/xp,atas
TOVTOV, Koi crvvT6p.w<; (f>avaL ^eo^paSTys 7roTa/Aos rfj cKKXijo"ta ^wvtwv vafxaruiv

yiyove, tov fxapTvpiKOV TreptOifJievos (TT<fiavov Trpos to) Te'Aet.

{I?) Chronographia p. 685 (ed. Bonn.).

TTavv yap oAtyov irepl tcov KaTa TOvaBe tous XP^^^^^ tcpwv Kat fiaKapLwv

TraTepwv lirtjxviqa'Oi.i'i, Xf.yop.ivov ^Tpw/xaTcws,

^\.iqp.cvTO% iTnroXvTov rov

lepop.dpTvpo<;, 'AcfipLKavov tov icrToptKou, Atovvcrtou tou p.eyaAou 'AAe^av-

Spetas, Kat oAAwv.

29. NiCEPHORUS [t A.D. 828].

Antirrhetica ii.
13 {Spicil. Solcsm. i, p. 347).

TOY Ari'oY innoAyTOY enicKonoy nopToy kai MApTypoc Ik

TOY KATA BHpOONOC KAI hAIKIOONOC TOON AipeTIKWN AofOy Ov
7] O-PXV' Aytos, aytos, aytos.
To yap ajreLpov Ka-r ouSeVa Xo'yor i] jpoirov k.t.X.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 347

30. Georgius Hamartolus [c. a.d. 810].

Chronicon iii. 134, p. 336 (Migne, Patrol Graec. ex. p. 521).

Ou ijJqv Se aXka. kol 6 6uo<i 'IttttoAvtos 'Pw/x>;s Trept tov K-qpvyjxaTO<i
KoX T-17S TeXetwo-ecos twv aTroo-ToXwv Sie^twv e^r;" 'IwavvT^s [8c] 6 dSeXcjios

^laKojjSov Krjpva-awv iv rrj 'Acrta tov \6yov [tov evayycXiou] e^wpca-Br] iv

UaT/xo) rrj vtjVu) vtto Ao/xeriavov /^acriXews 'Pw/trys, KaK^Wev TraXtv ets

"Ec^ecrov ck T57S i^opia? dvaKX-qOels v'n'o

l^iip/Sd kol to KaT atiTov euayyeXtov

evOa kol ttjv d-TroKoXv^j/LV Oeacrafxevo^ ireXevTrjaev, ov to

avyypa{pdfXVo<;,
Xetij/avov ^7]Tr]6eu ov^ vpWr].

31. Photius [c.

A.d. 850].

(a) Bihliotheca 48.

o ev aXXots dviyvMV iinypa-

'Aveyvwcr^iy 'Iwcrr/Trou nepi TOY TTANTOC,
<f>6fjievov nep'i THC TOY hantoc aiti'ac, iv aXXots 8e nep'i thc toy
TTANTOC ofciAC o-Tt 8e iv Sval XoytStoi?. SiiKwcn 8e ev avrots

Trpos eauTOV crTaa-idt,ovTa IIXaTCJva, eXey^^ct 8e kcu Trept il/vx^j'S xai vXt^s
Kat avao"Tao"ws 'AXki'vow aXoyws T koI if/evSw? eiTrovTa,
avTei(rayet Se
Tcts oiKetas TTcpi TowTcov Twv uTTO^eVeoJv So^as, S^lkvvctl re 7rp<Tf3vTpov
'EXXt^vojv ttoXXo) to 'lorSatojv yevos- So^a^ei 8e o-uyKeio-^at tov dvOpwwov
K TTUpo? Kai yi^s Kttt uSaTO?, Ktti eVt ck 7rvvp,aT0S, 6 /cat
{f/v)(7]U dvo/Aoi^et.

Trept ou TrvU/x.aT09 auTats Xe^eo^tv odtw <j>7)(n.

TovTOV TO KvpLMTepov aveXop,vos afxa tw o"a)/AaTi eTrXao^e, Kat 8ta

TravTos jiteXors Kat apOpov Tropetav ai^Tw KaTeo"Keuao"ev 6 tw awfxaTi

crvfXTrXaaOiv Koi Bid TravTos SttKvov/xevov tw aurw etbet toS ISXeirofxeuov

TwyaaTos TTUTrwTai, TT^v ovcrtav 8e ij/v^orepov iiTrap^et vrpos Ta Tpta, 8t' wv

to (rwp,a avvrjpfjLocTTaL.
OvTU) /xev ouv dva^LOi'i Trjs Te tcov loDSatwv Trept av^pcoTrou (^ucrtoXoytas

Tawa etTTWv Kat tt^s oXX?;? auToS Trept tous Xoyovs aaKy](Teu)<;, 8te'^tcrt Kat

/xevTot XptCTov toi; aXTj^tvoO

Trept Tvys Koo"p,oyovta? Kec^aXatajSws. Trept
eou ry/Awv ws eyyto"Ta ^eoXoyei, kXtjulv t auri^v ava^^eyyo/xevos Xptoroii,
Kat TTyv CK TTttTpos a^pao"Tov yevv7^0"tv a/xe/XTTTWs avaypacjicov. O Ttvas
to"ws Kat dp.(^tSo^etv, cJs Iwo^j/ttotj to o"vp'Tayp.aTtov, avaTretcretev.
etTy ouSev
Se TO TT^s (f)pdat(a<; auTw Trpos Tol WTrdXotTra tov avSpos aTro8er.

Eipov Se ev Trapaypa^ats oTt ouk eWtv o Xdyo? Iwctt^ttou, dXXci ratou

Ttvos TTpecrfSvTepov ev 'Pwfir] 8taTpt;8ovTOS, dv <^ao-t o-tjvrd^at Kat ton Aa-
ByPINGon" ou Kat 8tdXoyos <^epeTat Trpds IIpdKXov Tti'd virepfxa^ov rijs Ttov

MovTavto^Ttov atpeaews. aveirtypdcfiov 8e KaraXcLcjiOevTos tou Xdyou (^ao^t

TOWS p.ev Ia)(r7^Trou eTrtypai/'at, tows Se 'louo'Ttvow tov fxdpTvpos, dXXous Be.

l^lpyjvauw, a)0"Trep Kat tov KajivptvOov Ttvcs eTre'ypai^av cTret

'Optyei'ovs.
348 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Vatov iaTL Trovrjixa rov crirvTera^^oTOS tov AajSvpivuov, ws /cat
ttj dXrjdeLO.

auTos iv T<2 re'Aet tov Aa^vptvOov Sie/xapTVpaTO eavTOV civat tov nepi
ovttw
THC TOY nANTOC oyCIAC Xoyov. t 8' Tpo<; Koi ovx ovtos ia-TiV,

/JiOL yeyoi/ev ex)8r]Xov. tovtov tov Tollov 7rpe(r(3vTp6v <^a(ji yeyevrjauaL t^s
Kara 'Poj/xt^v eKKXr/crtas iirl OvtKTopos kol ZetfivpLVOv twv ap-)(Li.pi.oiv, X^V"
TofrjQyjvaL 8e aurov /<at c^vcov lirLCTKoirov. cruvTctfat Se Kat erepov Xoyov
iStcos KATA THC ApreMOONOC AipeCeOiC, KoX KATA npOKAOY ^^ O-TTOV-

SacTTOu Movravoi; o"7roi;8atav 8taXeftv o-uvTeraxeVat, Iv rj Tpicr/cai8cKa fxovas

eTTKTToXas dpi9p.LTaL JlavXov, ovk lyKpiVdiv ttJv TTpOS 'Fi/3paL0VS.

{b) Bibliotheca 121.

innoAyToy kata AipececoN BiBAiAApioN.

'Aveyvwcr^r; /3i/3AiSaptov 'IttttoAijtou" fjiaOrjTr)<;
8e Etpr^vaiou o Itttto-

AvTos. ^v 8e TO (TvvTayjxa Kara atpccrewi/ A^', apxrjv iroiovp-tvov Aoert-

^eavovs, Kat p-^XP'- ^or]TOv kol NoT^Tiavwv 8taAa/x/3avoi'. Tauras Se (jtrjcriv

eAey^ois viroj3Xr]6rjvaL o/aiAouvtos EipT^vat'ou, wv Kat avvoxj/iv o IttttoAvtos

TToiou/xcvos Td8e TO j3lI3Xlov (firj(rl crwTTaxevat. tt^v 8e (^paatv (rac/)7^s eo-Tt

Kal UTTOo-e/Avos Kat drrepLTTOs, el kol Trpos tci/ 'Attikov ouk 7ricrTpe^Tat
8e a'AAa Te Ttva T17S a/<pt^etas AetTTO/xeva, Kat OTt >? irpos
Ao'yov. At'yei

'EppaLov; iirLCTToXr] ovk Ictti tou aTrocTTo'Aoi; HaijAov. AeyeTat 8e outos

Kal 7rpoo-o/.ttAerv tw Aaw KaTa pLip-rjcnv 'Optyevous, ou Kat arvvy]9rj<; /xaAtcrTa
Kat lpa(JTr]<; Toiv Aoycov VTrrjpx^v, ws Kat irpoTpeil/aa-Oai
avrov tt/v ^etW vtto-

p,V7][xaTi(rat ypa<^r]v, eyKaTao-Ti/o-as

avTw
Kai vTroypa<^ia<; kivTa Taxyypa(^ov<;

KoX erepov? toctovtous ypacJiovTas ets KaAAos, wv ^v Kat T17S oaTrdvT]'; auTo's

Xppy]yo<i'
Kat TaiJTa i;7r'>7pTOi;)U.vos auTw aTratTttv auTov aTrapatTT/Tw? to epyov,

^ ou Kat epyoStojKTT/v v /Ata tojv e7rto-ToAc3i/ irapd '^piyevov; KXrjOrjvai,

TrXetcTTa 8e kol outos Ae'yerat cruyy eypa<^va t.

(^)
Bibliotheca 202.

innoAyToy eniCKonoy kai wAprypoc eic ton AanihA

epMHNeiA- KAI Adroc nepi xpiCToy kai ANTixpi'cToy.
'IttttoAijtod eTTto^KoVoi; Kat p.dpTvpo<; kpp.iqvi.La ets tov i\avn]X.
'Ai/eyvoJcr^Tj
KaTct Ae^tv p,V ov TrotetTat T17V dvaTrrv^LV, ttAt^V tov voCv ye, ws cVos etTretv,

ou TrapaTpe^et TroAAa p-evTot ap^atOTpoTraJS Kat ovk ts to vcTTepov SirjKpif^w-

"

p,eVov KaTaAeyet. aAA' cKetvwv ouk av etr; 8tKatos Aoyov UTre'xetv toi)s yap

apX^v Ectopias KaTa/3aAAop.evovs ov 8tKas aTratTCtv twv Trapct/xevwv, aAA

dya-rrdv p,aAtcrra auT^s
tc t^s cTrtySoAi^; Kat e^' oo^ov av KaTaAv^i/^eojs Ttuv

StaoTKOTTOV/Aevcuv to 8e ttJv tov 'AvTtxptcrTov 7rapovo-tav, Ka^ i^v

Trpox<J>poirj.
Kat TOV aiaOrjTOv Koap-ov TOvSe crvvTcAeta
77 to"TaTat, p.i;'8e tois jxa.dr]TaA,<;

8eoju.eVots TOV ^(jJTrjpo's diroKaXinj/avTO';, tTa avTwv TavTrjv TrevTaKoo-tots

Teo"tv avro Xptcrrov vrraxOivTa TrepLypdij/acrOai, wcravet twv aTro TrpwTqs tov
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 349

Koa-fxov KaTaj3o\y]'i e^aKicr^tXtcoj/ erwi/ avvTeXovfxiviDV,

kol T-qv SidXvaiv ai^roi)

iffieaTOLvai, tovto kol ^ep/xore/aas av etr]

toS TrpocrT/KOVTos yvwjxy]<;, kol -iq

ttA.X' ovk eTmrvoias Trjs dv(x)6ev

a7ro<^ao"t9 dvOpwirivy)'; dyvoms, 8ieXey;^et. ?;

Se (f}poicns avT(a to ca^es ort /AaXicTTa oiKCtov/xevT; vrpeTroi ctv p/x,7;vta, ei Kai

Tovs 'Attikous ot Tt /ActXa Oeafiov; Svo-WTrciTai.

Straveyvwo-^T; avToij Kat eVcpos Ao'yos TTGpi XpiCTOf KAI ANTI)(piC-
TOy, fi'
*^ ^7
Tc avTTy Twv Aoywv i8ea StaTrpeTrct, Kal to tojv vor]fjidTO)v

dirXov(TTep6v tc Kat ap-^aioTpoTrov.

32. CECUMENIUS [c.

A.D. QQO ?].

/^ Apocalyps. Praef. (Cramer's Catena p. 173).

IIpoS TOVTOIS Ktti ItTTToXuVo) TW 'Pw/XiyS TTpoiZpi^ EN TH TOf GIC AANIhlA

epMHNeiA AoroY-

33. ZONARAS [c.

A.D. II20?].

(a) Annal. vi. 4 (p. 267).

'Ev Se Tw Trpos "EXXT^vas auTou Xoyw, o? KATA nAATCONOC cTriycypaTTTat

nepi THC TOY HA NT dc AITIAC,

ov Kttt o aytos 'IwavvT^s Aa/xao-KT^i/os /xi/etW

TTCTTOtTyTat v T^ TTovrjOeiCTr) avT(2 ^i/3Xa) TTj KaXovfJiivji YlapdWrjXa, ravra

(jir)(rL'
TravTes ydp 8i/<atot Te Kat aSt/cot evwTrtov tou 0eou Xoyov, k.t.X.

(/')
Anna/, xii. 15 (p. 620).
Tote Ovpfiavov rrj<; lin(TKOTrrj^ tt^s 'Pw/xatW Tro'Xews Trpoeo-TwTO? k(xi

'IttttoXutos :7V^et avvyp tcptoTaTos Kat (70(fiwTaT0<; cTrto-KOTTOs tov kutci 'Pa'yfjirjv

IIopTOT; yvo/xvos, OS Kat TroXXa (rvyypafXfJLara avveypdif/aro, Siac^opa tt^s

^etas ypacjjrj? i^r]yr](rajxVO<;.

34. SUIDAS [c. A.D. 1 1

00?].

p. 1058, ed. Bernhardy.

'IttttoXutos ouTOS eypaipev eic TAC opACeiC TOY AanihA vTroixrrjiia

KOL etc TAC nApOIMIAC COAOMOONTOC.

35, NiCEPHORUS CaLLISTUS [c.

A.D. I300].

Ecdes. Hist. iv. 31.

Tots 8e KttTa Seu^pov Kat IttttoXvtos o IIopTOK tt^s

;(po'i'ots 'Pw/xTys
eTTto-KOTTOs yeyoi'OJS dKfxdt,o)v rjv.
koL 877 ttoXXwv VTTop.vr]p.aTinv o-vj/ctws

avTU) yf.ypap.p.i\mv, kol to nep'l TOY nAC)(A eKTi^eTat (Tvyypafi/xa, iv <L twv

vpovcDV dvaypa(f)rjx' K^ep,vos Kat Ttva Kavoi-a KKat8KaeT77ptSos Trept toC

irdaxo- Trpo^ets eVt to TrpcoTov

eTOs 'AXe^ai/Spou 7reptypa<^ct TOi)s ;(poVous.
350 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
TCI
ye eicri" (3ij3Xiov eic THN
avTOv avyypdfxixaTa ravTa
fx-^v ezAHIwepON'
TA MeTA e^AHM.epON" aVrtppr/riKO? npoc MApKl'oONA* 6IC
T(.pov eic

TO ACMA TOON ACMATCON" eiC MepH TOY lezeKlHA" nepi TOY nAC)(A"
CYNTATMA np6c nACAC TAc Aipeceic /Stw^eXeWarov nepi thc
nApOYCIAC TOY ANTIXpiCTOY' nepi ANACTACeOOC KoX aXka TrXciCTTa.
eic 2A)(ApiAN* nepi yaAmoon" eic ton hcaTan' eic ton Aanih'A'

nepi AnoKAAYyeooc" nepi nApoiMiooN- nepi caoyA kai nfOoiNOC

nepi enAiNCON toy KYpiOY hmoon incoY XP'ctoy" ^^ of^^ Trapovros
flptyevovs wfx.i\r]a-. ri.va 8e twv (TvyypafXfxdTOiV iiriX'qiJ/LfJia c^wv, tw Trepi

XptaTou fjiapTvptio /xera raura TeXeiw^ets tov t^s ayvotas a-rreTpLif/aTO

fxw/xov. i^ koX QpLyevtjv ap^yjv iaxrjKivaL raig

u)v (pacrt ^'ei'ais 7ri^aXXeiv
ypa(f>als. Toaavra Se koL to. 'IttttoXiitov.

36. Ebed-jesu [c.

a.d. 1300].

Catalogus c. vii
(Assemanus Bibliotheca Orientalis iii. p. 15).

Ki'ptos 'IttttoXutos fxapTv^ r^.lCQflO J30CXjLilc\^At<' .^V''^

Ktti erria-KOTTOs
eypa\j/e )Si/3Xt'ov r<lao\& poflP T*^<Vrt F>cy*.^f^<\

TTcpi oiKOVO/xias /cai kpjxrivdav jiX-OAO :r<'^Oji=J.lS>3 A2k..l

Aavtv^X To{! fXLKpov koI %ov(rdvva<;

:^as.o rc'io^t Ar<Lu.i
KOL KccfiaXaia Kara ratoi;

Koi (XTroXoytav virlp t^s aTTOKaXv-

rdA-A^ .L^.n ojc\i-an*Nrao

Ktti TOV evayyeXiov 'Iu)dvov . >^*;i r^O^OtOT^O

TOii ttTTOO-ToXov Kttt evayycXKTToS. r^XjaxA^iOK'O KIaJluX.

Though this Catalogue was originally written in Syriac, I have

thought it worth while to translate the passage into Greek, so as to show

itscorrespondences with other lists of Hippolytus' writings.
There can be no reasonable doubt that oiKovo//,tas (ver. 3) is the
right translation, the corresponding Syriac word being an ordinary
rendering of otKovo/Ata in its technical sense referring to the Incarnation;
see Payne Smith's T/ies. Syr. s. v, p. 818. The expression 'the little
Daniel,' if the epithet be correctly so translated rather than
'

young,'
occurs again J5il?/. Orient, iv. p. 6, where Assemani explains it of the
apocryphal additions to Daniel, i.e. the history of Susanna, the Song of
the Three Children, and Bel and the Dragon, though Susanna is
mentioned separately in the preceding line. On the other hand Wright
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 351

{Catal of Syr. MSS of Brit. Mus.i.

p. 19) gives an account of a MS

containing the prophets of the Old Testament and other matter, which
between Susanna and Baruch has Daniel the youth (so he translates
'

it) concerning our Lord and the end

of the world.'

37. Inscriptions relating to reliques.

(a) Inscriptio in Basilica S. Laurentii.

continet hoc templum sanctorum

corpora plura
a quibus auxilium supplex hic
poscere cura
cum xisto jacet hic laurentius
igne crematus
et protomartir stephanus levi
ta beatus
post hos ipolitus collis re
10 ligatus equorum
cum nutrice sua cum cunc
ta plebe suorum
romanus miles triphomia
virgo cirilla
et quadraginta quos passio
continet ill a
justinusque sacer defunctos
qui tumulabat
ciriace vidua que sanctos
20 clam recreabat
cujus matrone fuit hec
possessio cara
ipsius nomen specialiter
optinet ara
martir ireneus qui tecum
martir abundi
decedens sprevit fallacis
gaudia mundi
vlarus et zosimus pelagius
30 hic retinentur
tertius et xistus cum multis
qui reticentur
352 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
This inscription was found in the narthex of the lower basiUca of
S. Laurentius in 1853. It is given in De Rossi Bull, di Arched Crist. .

i88t, p. 87. The alternate (shorter) lines are in red. It belongs to the
xiiith century. For the reference in 'passio ilia' see below, p. 473.
In the inscription itself, 1.
13 miles is written milex, and in 1.
29 ylarvs
isXLARVS.

ib) l7iscriptio in Ecclesia S. Silvestri.

^ IN N DNI HEC EST NOTICIA NATALICIORUM

SCORUM HIC REQUIESCENTIUM

MENSE AUGUSTO DIE VIII NA SCORU

QUIRIACI LARGI ET SMARAGDE ARCHEL
DIE XIII M SS NA SCi YPPOLITI,

where m ss means mensis suprascripti (i.e. August). This table of

the inscription, relating to the male saints, was known long ago, and will

be found in Muratori Nov. Thes. p. mcmlxvi.

^ INN. DNI. HAEC. NOT. NAT. SC[aRUm]

HIC requiescent[ium]

MENSE AUG. D. VIII. N. SCAR. MEMMIAE

ET JULIANAE
D. VIII. M. SS. N. S'CAE ARTHEMIAE
D. XII. M. SS. N. SCAE CONCORDIAE
MENSE SEPT. D. XXX. N. SCAR SOFIAE
PISTIS. HELPIS. ET. AGAPE
MENSE OCT. D. XIII. N. SCAE CONCHYLE
D. XVIII. M. SS N. SCAE TRIFONIAE
D. XXVIII. M. SS. N. SCAE CYRILLAE

This female saints, has been pieced together

table, relating to the

recently by De
Rossi; see Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1882, p. 39 sq.
These were the reliques taken from the demolished and rifled
suburban cemeteries and placed by Paul I between a.d. 757 761 in
his monastery of S. Silvester in Capite.

38. Itineraries.

These extracts are taken from De Rossi Roma Sotterranea i. p.

144 sq, where the documents are described and their dates fixed. The 1
extracts are on pp. 178, 179.

i
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 353

(a) Iti7ierarhiin Codicis Salisburgensis [a.d. 625 6 3 8].

Postea illam viam demittis pervenies ad S. Ypolitum martyrem

et

qui requiescit sub terra in cubiculo, et Concordia mulier eius martyr

ante fores, altero cubiculo S. Triphonia regina et martyr, et Cyrilla
filia eius et martyr, quas meditus Decius interfecit uxorem et filinm,

et S. Genisius martyr. Postea pervenies ad ecclesiam S. Laurentii ;

ibi

sunt magnae basilicae duae in quarum quis speciosiorem et pausat,

et est parvum cubiculum extra ecclesiam in hoc occidentur. Ibi

pausat S. Abundius et Herenius martyr Via Tiburtina ; et ibi est ille

lapis quem toUent digito multi homines nescientes quid faciunt. Et

in altera ecclesia sursum multi martyres pausant. Prima est Cyriaca
sancta vidua et martyr, et in altero loco S. Justinus, et iuxta eum
S. Crescentius martyr, et multitude sanctorum, longe in spelunca deor-

sum S. Romanus martyr. Postea ascendes ad ecclesiam S. Agapiti

martyris et diaconi S. Syxti papae.
' ' '

In 1.
4 for 'meditus' read Messius ; in 1. 6 for 'in quarum... pausat read
' '

probably
'
in quarum quae speciosior est pausat ; and '
in 1. 7 occidentur should be

read '
occidente,' even if some greater correction is not needed.
This is the itinerary attached to William of Malmesbury's Gesta Regitm Anglonun.

(b) Epitome Libri de Locis Sanctorinn Martyruin [a.d. 635 645].

Juxta Viam Tiburtinam (prope murum civitatis ecclesia est S.

Januarii episcopi et martyris, eademque via) ecclesia est S. Agapiti

multum honorabilis martyrum corporibus. Et prope eandem viam
ecclesia est S. Laurentii maior, in qua corpus eius primum fuerat

humatum, et ibi basilica nova mirae pulchritudinis, ubi ipse modo

requiescit. Ibi quoque sub eodem
altare Abundus est depositus et
foris inportico lapis est, qui aliquando in collo eiusdem Abundi pen-
debat in puteum missi ibi Hereneus, Julianus, Primitivus, Tacteus,
:

Nemeseus, Eugenius, Justinus, Crescentianus, Romanus sunt sepulti,

et S. Cyriaca, S. Simferosa, et Justina cum multis martyribus sunt
sepulti. Inde in boream sursum in monte basilica S.
Hippolyti est,
ubi ipse cum familia sua tota martyres iacet.
xviiii Career ibi
est in quo fuit Laurentius. Ibi est Triphonia uxor Decii Caesaris et

Cyrilla filia eius : inter utrasque Concordia et S. Geneseus, et multi

martyres ibi sunt.

In 1. I, 2, the words in brackets are in a later hand. In 1. 11 read 'sepultae'.

(r) Notitia Portarum Viariim Ecclesiarum [a.d. 648 682].

Sexta porta et via Tiburtina, quae modo dicitur S. Laurentii, iuxta
banc viam iacet S, Laurentius in sua ecclesia ct Habundius martyr.
Et ibi prope in altera ecclesia pausant hi martyres, Ciriaca, Romanus,
CLEM. II. 23
354 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

Justinus, Crescentianus, et ibi non longe Ipolitus vel basilica S. Ippo-

lyti, ubi ipse
cum familia sua pausat, id est xviii [v. l. xxviii]. Et ibi
requiescunt beata Triphonia uxor Decii et filia eius Cirilla et Concordia
nutrix eius. Et in altera parte viae illius est ecclesia Agapiti martyris.

{d) Topographia Einsiedlensis [after a.d. 750].

In via Tiburtina foris murum in sinistra S. Ypoliti, in dextera S.

Laurentii.

(e) Liber Mirahilinm Urbis Romae [later, various recensions].

Coemeterium in agro Verano ad S. Laurentium.

39. Western Service Books.

(rt)
Sacramejitanum Leonianum (Muratori Liha'gia Romana Vetjis

I.
p. 400).

Idibus Augusti.
NATALE SANCTORUM HIPPOLVTI ET PONTIANI.
Tibi enim, Domine, festiva solemnitas agitur, tibi dies sacrata cele-
bratur, quam Sancti Hippolyti martyris tui sanguis in veritatis tuae
testificatione profusus magnifico nominis tui honore signavit.

(J))
Sacramentariiim Gregorianum (Muratori 11.
p. 112).
Idibus Augusti.
NATALE SANCTI HIPPOLYTI.
Da nobis, omnipotens Deus, ut beati Hippolythi martyris tui vene-
randa solemnitas et devotionem nobis augeat et salutem.

(yc)
Missale Mixtum Mozarabicum {Patrol. Lot. lxxxv. p. 816 sq).

Hunc [Laurentium] Hipolitus dum sibi traditum asservaret custodia

militari etc.
With more to the same effect. So again p. 818.

SANCTI HYPOLITI SOCIORUMQUE EJUS.

But this document has been added to from time to time, and contains saints of the
13th century, e.g. Thomas Aquinas.

{d) Breviariiim Gothicuvi Sandorale {Patrol. Lat. Lxxxvi. p.

ii34sq).
Aug. xiii. In festo sancti Hippolyti Martyris.

Ferreis percalidus unguibus artifex

Armat spiniferi spicula cardui ;

Corrupta penitus viscera martyris

Perfundunt rosei flumina sanguinis.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 355
Hinc ad cornipedum terga ferocium
Innexu religant ;
tractus in aspera.
* * *

Christe Domine omnipotens, qui sanctum martyrem tuum Hippoly-

tum, dum equina per si)inarum traheretur acumina, etc.
feritate

There is no trace of any connexion with S. Laurentius here, and no

mention of any companions.
See more on this subject in De Rossi Bullettifio p. 30 sq (1882).

40. Calendars and Martyrologies.

{a) Liherian Chronographer [a.d. 354].

(Mommsen, p. 635 see above, i. p. 255).

Successio episcoporiim ;

Eo tempore Pontianus episcopus et YppoHtus presbyter exoles

sunt deportati in Sardinia, in insula nociva, Severo et Quintiano
cons. [a.d. 235];

Depositio Marlyruin (Mommsen, p. 632 sq).

viii Idus Aug. Xysti in Calisti
iiii Idus Aug. Laurenti in Tiburtina
Idus Aug. YpoUti in Tiburtina

et Pontiani in CaHsti
Non. Sept. Aconti in Porto, et Nonni et Herculani et Taurini.

{b) Anciejit Syriac Martyrologv [c.

a.d. 350 ?] ed. Wright, pp. 4, 8.

Jan. 30. In the city of Antioch, Hippolytus.

Aug. I. On the same day, the commemoration of Xystus, bishop

of Rome.

{c) Calendar of Polemius Sylvius [a.d. 448].

iiii Idus Aug. Natalis S. Laurentii mart.
ii Idus Aug. HyppoHti mart.

{d) Consular Fasti [a.d. 493].

Decio II et Rustico [a.d. 251].
His coss. passus S. Laurentius iii Idus Augusti.

((?)
Kalendarium Carthaginense.
viii Idus Aug. sancti Systi episcopi et martyris Romae.
iiii Idus Aug. sancti Laurenti.
Idus Aug. sancti Hippoliti.

232
356 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

Martyrologium Hieronyviianum (Hieron. Op. xi. pp. 551,

(/)
585 sq).
iv Kal. Febr. In Tursia, Constanti, Hippolyti episcopi de an-
tiquis.
iii Kal. Febr. In Antiochia, passio sancti Hippolyti martyris.
Prid. Kal. Febr. In Alexandria, Tarsici, Zotici...Gelasi, Hippo-
lyti, Ursini, Tyrsi.
viii Idus Aug. Romae in coemeterio Calesti, via Appia natalis
Sixti episcopi, et Felicissimi... Laurentii, Hippolyti, et militum
centum sexaginta duorum.
iv Idus Aug. Romae via Tiburtina, natalis sancti Laurentii archi-
diaconi et martyris. In via Appia Felicissimi. Et alibi Cres-
centiani .Pontiani.
. .

Idus Aug. Romae, natalis sanctorum, Hippolyti martyris,

Pontiani episcopi, Cornelii, etc.
xiii Kal. Sept. In Portu Romano, natalis sancti Hippolyti mar-
tyris. In Sardinia natalis sancti Luxurii, etc.
xi Kal. Sept. Et in portu Romano peregrinorum martyrum.

X Kal. Sept. In portu urbis Romae natalis sancti Hippolyti

qui dicitur Nunnus cum sociis suis. In Ostia
natalis sancti Quiriaci, Archelai.

{g) Martyrologhan Vetus Romanuin (^Patrol. Lat. cxxiii. pp. 147,

165, Migne).
iii Kal. Febr. Antiochiae, passio sancti Hippolyti.
viii Id. Aug. Romae, via Appia, Xisti papae et martyris.
vi Id. Aug. Romae, via Ostiensi, Cyriaci martyris cum aliis xxi
quando viii die mensis Augusti reconditi sunt.
V Id. Aug. Romae, Romani militis
Vigilia sancti Laurentii.
iv Id. Aug. Romae Laurentii archidiacon, martyris et militum
clxv.
Idus Aug. Romae, Hippolyti martyris cum familia sua, et
S. Concordiae nutricis ejus.

On the relations of the older Roman Martyrologies see Ignat. and Polyc. i.
p. 554
(ed. i), p. 570 (ed. 2).

41. Florus-Beda [c. a.d. 870].

Patrol. Lat. xciv, pp. 827, 999 sq.

iii Kal. Febr. [Vacat].

viii Kal. Aug. Romae S. Xysti episcopi.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 357

vi Idus Aug. Natalis S. Cyriaci.

V Idus Aug. Vigilia S. Laurentii. Eodem die Romae S. Romani
militis, qui confessione S. Laurentii compunctus
petiit ab eo baptizari; et mox
jubente Decio
cum fustibus exhibitus ac decoUatus est.

iv Idus Aug. Natale S. Laurentii sub Decio ; qui post plurima

tormenta verberum diversorum, lami-
carceris,
narum ardentium, ad ultimum in craticula ferrea
assatus martyrium complevit.
Idibus Aug. Romae S. Ypoliti, qui tempore Decii ligatus pedes

ad coUa indomitorum equorum sic per carduos

tribulosque tractus emisit spiritum; et Concor-
diae nutricis ejus, quae ante ipsum plumbatis
caesa martyrizatur ; et aliorum de domo ejus
decern et noveni, qui simul decoUati sunt.

42. Ado of Vienne [f a.d. 874].

Martyrologmm {Patrol. Lat. cxxiii. pp. 224, 318 sq, Migne).

Ill KAL. FEBR.
Passio sancti Hippolyti martyris qui Novati schismate aliquantulum

deceptus, operante gratia Christi correctus

ad charitatem ecclesiae
rediit; pro qua et in qua illustre martyrium postea consummavit.
VIII IDUS AUG.
Romae, via Appia, in coemeterio Callisti, natale S. Sixti episcopi et

martyris et in coemeterio Praetextati sanctorum Felicissimi et xAgapiti

diaconorum ejusdem, sub Decio imperatore, Valeriano praefecto; qui
tenuit beatissimum senem Sixtum episcopum Romanum cum omni clero
suo et reclusit eos in custodia publica etc.

[Sixtus, Felicissimus,
and Agapitus, are beheaded with others.]
V ID. AUG.
Vigilia sancti Laurentii.
Eodem die Romae, sancti Romani militis qui in confessione sancti
Laurentii compunctus petiit ab eo baptizari, et mox jubente Decio cum
fustibus exhibitus ac decollatus est.
IV ID. AUG.
Romae natale sancti Laurentii archidiaconi et martyris sub Decio.
Cui beatus Sixtus omnes facultates ecclesiae et thesauros, pergens ad
coronam martyrii, tradidit.

[Hippolytus his gaoler, seeing the miracle of giving sight to the blind
wrought by Laurentius, is converted and baptized. T,aurentiiis is
358 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

brought before the tyrant Decius, ordered to surrender the treasures of

the Church, and put to torture.]
Tunc unus ex miUtibus, nomine Romanus, credidit Domino Jesu
Christo et dixit beato Laurentio Video ante te hominem pulcherrimum
:

stantem cum hnteo extergentem membra tua; adjuro te per Christum

et

qui tibi misit angehmi suum, ne

me dereHnquas. Levatus igitur beatus
redditus est Hippolyto tantum in palatio.
martyr de catasta et solutus,
Veniens autem Romanus offerens aquam misit se ad pedes beati
Laurentii ut baptizaretur; qui benedicta aqua baptizavit eum: quod
factum audiens Decius jussit eum sibi exhiberi cum fustibus. Non
interrogatus coepit clamare, Christianus sum.
Et jubente Decio eductus
foras muros portae Salariae decollatus est quinto Idus Augusti. Cujus
et sepehvit in crypta in agro
corpus noctu collegit Justinus presbyter
Verano.
roasted ahve on a
[Laurentius then undergoes martyrdom, being
gridiron.]
Mane autem primo adhuc crepusculo rapuit corpus ejus Hippolytus
et condivit cum Hnteis et aromatibus et hoc factum mandavit Justino
;

presbytero. Tunc beatus Justinus et Hippolytus plorantes et multum

tristes tulerunt corpus beati martyris et venerunt in via Tiburtina, in

praedium raatronae viduae Cyriacae in agro Verano, ad quam ipse

martyr fuerat noctu, cui et linteum dedit, unde pedes sanctorum ex-

terserat, jam hora vespertina sepelierunt iv Idus Augusti.

et illud ibi

Et jejunaverunt agentes vigiUas noctis triduo, et muititudine Christi-

anorum. Beatus autem Justinus presbyter obtulit sacrificium laudis,
et participati sunt omnes.
Eodem die Romae, miUtum centum et sexaginta quinque. Tunc
passi sunt Claudius, Severus, Crescentio, et Romanus, ipso die quo
beatus Laurentius, post tertium post diem passionis sancti Sixti.

ID. AUG.

Romae, sancti Hippolyti martyris, sub Decio imperatore, Valeriano

praefecto.Hunc beatum Hippolytum vicarium sanctus Laurentius,
cum apud eum esset in custodia, baptizavit. Qui de Sanctis exsequiis
martyris post tertium diem ad domum suam rediens dedit pacem
omnibus servis suis et ancillis, et communicavit de sacrificio altaris

beati Laurentii martyris. Et posita mensa, priusquam cibum sumeret,

venerunt milites et tenuerunt et perduxerunt ad Decium. Quern ut
vidit, subridens dixit ei Numquid et tu magus effectus es, quia corpus
:

Laurentii abstulisse diceris? Sanctus Hippolytus respondit; Hoc feci

non quasi magus, sed quasi Christianus. Decius furore repletus jussit
ut cum lapidibus os ejus contunderetur. Et exspoliavit eum veste qua
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 359
induebatur habitu Christiano et dixit ei :
Sacrifica, et vives ;
sin aliter,

peries per tormenta sicut Laurentius. Sanctus Hippolytus dixit ;

Exemplum nierear beati Laurentii martyris fieri, quern tu, miser, ausus
fuistiore pollute nominare. Extensus igitur fustibus et cardis diu
caesus est, donee caedentes deficerent. Inde levatus est a terra, et
jussit eum Decius vestiri militari veste qua gentilis utebatur, et dixit ei :

Recole militiam, et esto noster amicus, et in conspectu nostro utere

quam semper habuisti. Cumque beatus martyr dixisset

militia pristina ;

Militia mea haec est, Christianum firmum militare, unde cupio ad

celerem palmam cum fructu venire iracundia plenus Decius dixit
;

Valeriano Accipe
;
omnes facultates ejus, et interfice eum crudeli
exanimatione. Valerianus itaque, exquisita omni facultate ejus, invenit
in domo Hippolyti omnem familiam Christianam, quam conspectui suo
praesentari fecit. Et jussit beatum Hippolytum foras muros portae
Tiburtinae cum Beatus vero Hippolytus confortabat
familia sua duci.

omnes, dicens Fratres, nolite metuere, quia ego et vos unum Deum
;

habemus. Et decoUati sunt promiscui sexus numero decem et novem.

Beatus vero Hippolytus ligatus pedes ad coUa indomitorum equorum,
sic per carduetum et tribulos tractus, emisit spiritum. Nocte venit
beatus Justinus presbyter, et collegit corpora, et sepelivit in campo
eodem juxta Nympham, ad latus agri Verani, Idibus Augusti.
Eodem die natale sanctae Concordiae, nutricis ejusdem beati
Hippolyti. Cum Valerianus ad familiam beati Hippolyti sibi prae-
sentatam dixisset, Considerate aetates vestras, ne simul pereatis cum
Hippolyto domino nostro (/. vestro) respondit beata Concordia,
;
Nos
desideramus potius cum domino nostro pudice mori quam impudice
vivere. Ad hoc Valerianus Genus, inquit, servorum nisi cum suppliciis
;

non emendatur. Et jussit ut beata Concordia cum plumbatis caederetur.

Et cum caederetur, emisit spiritum, corpusque ejus est in cloacam
projectum. Cumque diu quaereret illud sanctus Justinus, et non in-
veniret, ita tristis redditur ut non cessarent flere oculi ejus. Tertio
decimo vero die post passionem sancti Hippolyti, venit quidam miles
Porphyrius nomine, ad Irenaeum cloacarium qui occulte Christianus
erat, et dicit ei ;
Si secretum possis custodire, divulgabo arti tuae mul-
tum ad quaestum ;
ante hos dies jussit Valerianus praefectus in con-

spectu suo quamdam creditariam Hippolyti plumbatis deficere, et corpus

ejus in cloacam jactari haec in vestibus suis spero quod margaritas

:

habet absconsas vel aurum. Audiens haec Irenaeus, intimavit secreto

beato Justino presbytero; (\\x\ flectens genua gratias egit Deo. Por-

phyrius autem noctu veniens cum Irenaeo invenit corpus sanctum ;

sed
in vcstimentis nihil invenerunt. Beatus autem Irenaeus vocavit ad se
J 60 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
quemdam Christianum Abundium nomine, et tulerunt corpus ejus et

perduxerunt ad beatum Justinum ; qui gratias agens Deo illud sus-

cepit, et juxta corpora martyrum Hippolyti et aliorum sepelivit, viii

Kalendas Septembris.
XV KAL. OCT.
Item Romae via Tiburtina, ad sanctum Laurentium, natale beati
Justini presbyteri, quern beatus Sixtus ordinavit.
[After speaking of the relations of Justinus with S. Laurentius and
S. Cyriaca, the account concludes :]
Hie sanctum Hippolytum et Concordiam, Irenaeum, Abundium,
Cyrillam filiam Decii Caesaris, martyres, et alios plurimos sepulturis
condivit. Et persecutione Decii, Galli, et Volusiani, confessionis gloria

insignissimus fuit.

Romae, in crypta arenaria, sanctorum martyrum Narcissi et Cre-

scensionis.
VII KAL. SEPT,
Item natalis sanctorum Irenaei et Abundi Romae ; quos Deciana
persecutione jussit Valerianus incloacari eo quod corpus beatae Con-
cordiae cloacam missum levaverunt. Et ipsorum quoque corpora
levavit Justinus presbyter et sepelivit in crypta juxta beatum Lauren-
tium.
XV KAL. NOV.
Item Romae sanctae Triphoniae uxoris Decii Caesaris quae, viro ;

suo post interfectionem beatorum Sixti et Laurentii divinitus punito,

petiit baptizari cum filia Decii Cyrilla a Justino presbytero et alia die ;

defuncta est ac juxta Hippolytum in crypta sepulta quinto decimo Kal.

Novembris.
VIII KAL. NOV.

Ipso die Romae via Salaria natalis quadraginta et octo mihtum, qui
simul baptizati a beato Dionysio papa; et mox jubente Claudio
imperatore decollati sunt. Quorum corpora noctu collegerunt beatus
Justinus presbyter et Joannes, et sepelierunt in crypta cum multitudine
Christianorum in via Salaria in clivum Cucumeris viii Kal. Novembris,
ubi positi sunt et alii martyres centum viginti et unus. Inter quos
fuerunt quatuor milites Christi, Theodosius, Lucius, Marcus, et Petrus.
Hi videntes ad se venire armatos, rogabant ut primi decoUarentur.
Scriptum in passione sanctorum martyrum Sixti, Laurentii, et Hippolyti.
V KAL. NOV.
Romae sanctae Cyrillae filiae Decii Caesaris quae sub Claudio

principe jugulata et necata est gladio, ac sepulta a Justino presbytero

cum matre sua juxta sanctum Hippolytum.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 361

43. Men^a [a.d. ?].

Jan. 30 (p. 230, ed. Venet. 1877).

"A^Ar/crts rot! aytov iepofxapTvpo<; iTnroXvTov TraTra Pw/Ar/s Kat twv avu
avTio Kei'o'ouptvou, ^ajSa'Cvov, Xpvaijs, Kat twi' Xolttwv'

ToXfJ-y Oakaaaav 'IttttoXutos cttrSui^et

ola KpoaivdiV tTTTros ^v Aetw Tre'Sw

'IttttoXvtov ttovtov TpLaKOCTrj KTav pevfxa.

AvTY) Tj upa 6jJi-qyvpi<i VTrrjp)(ev

iirl rrjs ySacrtXeia? K.XavSLOv, i^yepiovevovTos

(iiKapiov rov koL OvXttlov 'PwjxvXov KaXovp-evov Kat o /xev Kevcrovpivos,

/Aayiorpos cSv /cat tcu ^acrtXet ayaTrco/xei/os, eVe^Sero tov XptCTToV AeXiy^oVcos
Kat Twv XptcTTiavwi/ VTreprjo-TTi^eTO
'

yvwaOel^ 8e aTrcKXetcr^Tj ev <}ivXaKy

'

vua veKpov dvacTT'ija'as CTretcre Travras tovs (TTpaTtcuras TrtcTTCvcrat tw

Xptcrrw' otTti/es Trpocrra^et toi; rvpavvou a7reK<^a\to"^7jo"av, /cat o"i-v aurots

j^ fxaKapta X.pv(Trj /cat d ravTTys ijVovpyds SaySa'tVos, Trpdrepov TroXXas

uTTo/ACtVavTes Tt/Acoptas 8ta to Sta/covetv rots aytots Kat tovs l\wpas avTuiv

iKp.acraeiv koI iavTOvs aXetc^etF.

Tavra jxaOwv 6 /xaKaptcuTaros TraTras 'IttttoXvtos, ^>?Xw ^eto) KLvr]9u<i,

qXOe Koi rjXey^e tov Tupavvov Kara TrpofTwirov. 6 8e UTrep^ecras tw dv/xw

TrpwTov /AEV auTOi' i{3acravi(r //.era tcuv aKoXout'owi/Twv avTw Trpecr^uTtpwi/

*
Kat StaKovoJV Kat tov cTrtcrKOTrov etTa Srjcras avTwv Tas ;(tpas Kai tous TroSas
ev T(3 ftvOw TT7S OaX(x<jar]<; eppL\f/e, koL ovtw^ CTeXettu^jycrav.

This is found also in the Menologium of Basil {Patrol. Graec. cxvii.

p. 285, Migne) almost verbatim) but the words toij Kat OuXTrtou
'Pw/AuXov Ka.Xovp.kvov are omitted. Hippolytus however is called TraTra

simply without the addition of 'Pw/at^s.

August loth (p. 53).

Tiiy t tou avTOu p.y]vo% p.vijp.r]

twi/ dytojv p.apTvpwv AavpeuTiov o.p-^i-

StttKovou, EwTOU TraTra Vujfxr]<s,

Kat 'IttttoXvtou.
* * *

Tdv 'Itttto'Xijtoi/ t7r7ro8eo-/xtov /^XeVw

cvavTtov Trao-;(ovTa ttj KXyyVet Tra^os.

WTTTTjaav SeKaTT] Kavpivriov rjin l^uvv.

[The charge of Xystus to Laurentius and the Martyrdom are then

recorded as in the Latin Acts.]

Eto-ap(6ets 877 Aaupevrtos o'

ap;i(t8taKovos Kat Ta tepa )(^py)p.aTa airaiTOv-

/jievos, am/aas d/xd^as kol Xafiwv tous ^^wXous Kat dvatryjpovs, ots SttVct/xe Ta
'^prjp.aTa,
koX rats a/xa^at? eVtCTTt/^aira?, rjyayf. Trpos TOi/ /?ao"tXa' ovs
362 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
ISwv Koi upyL(T9^i<; k(.\(.vi rov ayiov Aavpevriov TV^Orjvat cr^oSpojs, etra
Iv iv laro vravxas ocrot o-vtov
(i\y]9yjvai ry <f)v\aKy, fj yevo//.evos Trpos

If^oLTOiV, (5 av exacTTOS Karerj^ero voarjixaTi. anep o Tpi{3ovvos KaXXtVtKos

ySXeVwi/, d Kat TTj elpKTrj iiriaTaTOiv, 7rto"Teuo"c tw Xpicrrw /<ai IBairridu-q.

fxerd TOVTo Se TraptcrTaTai d aytos Aavpei'Ttos

rw /3ao"tA.t, Kai /xt) TretcrPeis

Ova-at Tots eiSwA-ots eTrt

ecr^^apas aTrXoGrat, Karw^ev vcfja-rrTOfiivov Trvpos*
Kai eV auTTj tw ew eu;(api(TT7y(7a? d(f)rJK to TTvcvfia, Koi Ki^Seias Tiys

d<j!)eiXo/i.ev>j vrapd toi) IttttoXtjtou rvy^avet.

ToSto yvovs o ySacrtXevs Kat /AeraTrcyai^a/Aevos aurov eweXeuo'e Kivapats

(nSrjpai<; fxaaTLywOrjvaL,
eira tTTTrot? TrpocTdeOrjvat ayptots* t"^' wv eTrt ttoXv

avp6p.vo<; Tw 0ew to nv^vjxa TrapiOero. XeycTat Se on ttJ e/3So/.tr/ rjixlpa

fxerd TO Tradelv rov dyiov YtvttoXvtov Aeklos koL OiiaXXepiai/ds Ka07][XVOi ivrl

Twv LTTTTOiv ovTwv Tov dcfiiKi.a6aL TTpos TO uiarpov i^eTTvevcrav, Kpa^a? o

AeKtos V T']^ wpa tou Oavdrov auxov' 'fi 'iTTTroXure, ws ai;(p,aXcoToi/ ovtw

8e8ep,eVov otTrayets p,e; eKpa^e 8e Kat o OuaXXeptaj/o's* IluptVats p.e KaT7;vais

ouTws eXKets; toCto Se S^Xov yiyove Ka6' oXr]v Tiijv oiKovfJLevrjv, Koi iravTcs

i(rTpeioOr}(Tav rfi ttlcttcl tov J^vpiov 7^p.cov 'It^ctoi; XpicTTOv,

w 77 So^a ets tgus
aiwvas. afjLrjv.

The same account is given in a much abridged form in the Meno-

logium of Basil (Patrol. Graec. cxvii. p. 580, Migne).

44. S. Petrus Damianus [c.

a.d. 1060].

Epistola ad Nicolaum // (Hippol. Op. i.

p. xi, ed. Fabricius).

Beatus quoque Nonus martyr, qui Hippolytus, memoriae nostrae et

non praetereundus occurrit; qui nimirum postquam triginta milha Sara-

cenorum ad Christi fidem efiticacissima praedicatione convertit, post-
quam beatam quoque Pelagiam de lupanaribus ad ecclesiae pudicitiam
provocavit, postquam denique nonnullos sanctarum expositionum libros
luculenter expHcuit, tandem episcopatum deseruit, de Antiochenis par-
tibus unde erat oriundus abscessit, Romanos fines appetiit: cumque
beata Aurea apud Ostiam civitatem saxo cervicibus aUigato in mari-
nis fluctibus martyrium consummasset, beatus Nonus sanctum cada-
ver pia devotione collegit et cum omni diligentia tumulavit. Quern
mox idem persecutor, qui dicebatur Ulpius, juxta Tyberis alveum in
foveam aquis plenam mergi praecipit; cujus postmodum corpus con-
summato triumphali martyrio in civitate, quae Portus dicitur, Christiana
devotio sepelivit. Ilhco audita vox vekiti infantium per unam fere
horam clamantium, Deo Qui ergo talem vitae meruit clau-
gratias.
sulam, liquido patuit quia episcopatum deserens coram Deo non incurrit
offensam.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. .-^6.^
:)^:)

45. PaSSIO SaNCTI SiXTI LaURENTII HlPPOLYTI.

Hippolytus Romanus p. xiii, ed. Lagarde.

Xystus
igitur Romae apud Athenas natus et doctus,
urbis episcopus

quidem philosophus, postea vero Christi discipulus, audiens Decium

prius
Caesarem Romam esse venturum ait;

[He gives instructions in the face of the coming persecution; en-

trusting his archdeacon Laurence with 'universas facultates ecclesiae'.
The treasures are sold by the archdeacon and distributed to the poor.

Decius arrives,bringing with him two Persians, Abdo and Sennes,

bound for the name of Christ. The tyrant puts Abdo and Sennes to
death. Their bodies]
noctu a Cliristianis sublata sunt et posita in cimiterio Pontiani die
iii Kal. Augusti. Post haec autem jussit ad se adduci Xystum urbis
episcopum.

[Xystus is then condemned to death.]

DecoUatus est autem extra muros urbis via Appia in loco qui ap-
pellatur clivus martyrum. Rapuerunt autem Christiani corpus ejus et
posuerunt in cimiterio Calisti die octavo Id. Aug. Eodem namque die
Decius Caesar adduci in conspectum suum beatum Laurentium prae-
cepit et ait; Ubi sunt thesauri ecclesiae quos penes te esse cognovimus?
Cui beatus Laurentius dicit; Biduo mihi dentur induciae, ut ex omnibus
ecclesiis universa deferam. Tunc Caesar jussit ut sub custodia Hip-
polyti ducis Laurentius ageret.

[Laurentius converts his guard Hippolytus by his words and deeds.

He is then handed over to Valerianus the Prefect of the
city, and put to
death by roasting on a gridiron.]

Die vero eadem rapuit corpus ejus Hippolytus et condivit aro-

matibus et posuit in crypta abditissima quarto iduum augustarum,
fecitque illic biduum jejunans et orans. Egressus autem tertia die
Hippolytus venit ut ingrederetur domum,
et priusquam caperet cibum,

a militibus conprehensus est et perductus ad Caesarem. Cui Caesar

ait :
Numquid et tu magus effectus es, ut corpus Laurentii abstulisse

dicaris? Sanctus Hippolytus, cujus jam gloriae corona parata erat,

ad laudem intrepidus respondens dixit Hoc : feci non quasi magus
sed ut Christianus. Quo audito Decius Caesar ira commotus jussit os
ejus contundi lapidibus et exui eum vestem quam habuit et extensum
ad cardos ferreos caedi. Post haec autem seminecem jussit duci extra
urbcm et pedes ejus ligari pedlbus equorum indomitorum et dimitti
364 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
in cardeto. Dum autem eum traherent, reddidit spiritum. Tunc
corpus ejus rapuerunt Christiani et posuerunt in crypta, quae est juxta
agrum praetorianum die id. aug. Post diem autem septimum passionis
ejus dedit munera Decius et sedit in curru una cum Valeriano prae-
fecto urbis; ut jam descenderent et amphitheatrum introirent, uno
momento ambo expiraverunt. Clamabat autem Decius in hora mortis
suae dicens : O Hippolyte, quasi captivum me vinctum ducis. Vale-
rianus autem clamabat: O Laurenti, igneis me catenis vinxisti et trahis.

'

46. Acta SS. Cyriaci, Hippolyti, Aureae, etc.

Hippolytus Romanus, p. v (ed. Lagarde).

MAprypiuN TOY Afioy KypiAKoy, innoAyTOY, maHimoy,

XpYCHC, KAI TOON AoinoON.
Ev rats 7//Aepats KXauSiou Toi? Trapavo/xov /^acriXews, TrapWTOs fiiKaptov
OvXttlov FwjxvWov, /xeyto"T05 av^cfiOr) 8tcay/x,os TOis Tr]VLKavTa ovtriv Xptaria-
vots. rjv ovv Tis avrjp KEVcrovpivos k.t.A.

[Then follows the account of the good confession of Censurinus who

isaccordingly imprisoned at Ostia, where he is visited and looked after
by one Chryse of royal race, who had undergone many persecutions for
Christ. The priestMaximus and the deacon Archelaus offer spiritual
ministrations. The guards of Censurinus are struck by a miracle wrought
and by exhortations spoken by Maximus.]
Tore ofJioOviJiaSov dVavTes avrwv, o re ^rjXi^, Ma^t/x,os, Tavp2vo<i, 'EpKov-
Xtavos, Ne^eptos, '^Topa.KLVO';, Mrjvas, Ko/x,/xo8tos, 'Ep/xi^s, Maupos, EvVe^tos,
'

'PwcrTtKtos, Moi/aKptos, Ap-avScvos, 'OAv/attios, KuTTptos, Koi ed8wpos o

TpL(3ovvo<;, i/SaXov eavTov^ ap.a irpos tovs 7ro8as rov /Aa/captcorarou Ma^ip,ou
70V TrpecTySurepov.

[They are all baptized and looked after by Chryse ; and Cyriacus
the bishop anoints and seals them. Then follows the story of the shoe-
maker, who having lost his son, a child of twelve years, is converted to
Christ. The child is restored to life and christened Faustinus.
Owing
to this resurrection, Chryse is accused of magic, and tortured on the
wheel and in other ways. Cyriacus, Maximus, and Archelaus are put to
death, as are also the soldiers, Cyriacus and Maximus are burned by
the presbyter Eusebius on the Ostian ^Vay, on vi Id. Aug. The other
soldiers are laid near them.]

HavplvOV 8c Kol 'Ep/COvAtai'OV Iv TW TIopTO) 'Pw/X?;? KaTKpvlj/V.

 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 365

[Then Romulus commands Chryse to be brought before him. She

confesses Christ boldly. In a fury he orders her to be beaten with
leaden bullets, but to no effect.]

'EKe'AeDcre 8e TraAtv \l6ov fxiyav SedfJievOrjvaL Kara, tov Tpa)CQ\ov avTrj<;

Kat OVTWS KpeixaaOrjvai iv rrj Oakacrarj' tJcttivos to ay tov croj/xa irepLrjXOev ew?
TOV alytaXov' oirep 6 jLiaKaptwraTO? Novo? d Kat pf.Tovop.ao'dii^ IttttoAdtos

(TVinqyay^v, kolL tovto KaTiOaij/ev iv tw iSiw avTrj<; ^wptw, tv6a Kat KaTioKH,
e^co Tojv Tet;^eo)v t^s OaTt)(TLa% ttoXcws Trj irpo ivvea KaXavSwv 27rTe/A/3ptwv.

[Then follows the apprehension of Sabinianus a Christian, the pro-

curator (i-mfjieX'qTrj';) of that district, who is ordered to discover the
whereabouts of Chryse's treasures. Romulus orders him to be cruelly
tortured.]

Tovto Se aKovtras d juaKaptwraro? 'IttttoAutos o 7rpea-j3vTpo'; (XOmv eaTq

evutTTiov TOV Fa)p.vXov Kat XajXTrpa Trj (ftwvi] enrev' '11 a^Xte k.t.X.
TavTa aKowa? d ao"6/5c(TTaTos 'PcojUvAos iOvfxwOr} crtftoSpa Kat Trpocrera^e
Tois TToSas aiJrou Kat ras ^^etpas SeSe//,e'vov ets fBoOvvov KaTaKpr)fjivi(T9rjvai.
TOV ovv jxaKapLov 'IttttoXvtov [ivOitflfJiivov Iv tw Tf.i'xe.i et? tov j369vvov irdpTOV
TOV avayopevoyLtevov IldpTov (j"/V), a^vw (juavrj rJK0va9r] ojcret Stao-TTjp-aTO?

wpas /Ala?, KaOanep vqiriwy XeydvTwv euvaptcm'as tc3 ew* Kat ev tw raOra

tTTCtv acjirJKv to Trvevfia tw Kvpt'co ttj Trpo SeKap,tds KaXai'Sojv SeTrTe/A^pttov.

[The rest of the story is taken up with the martyrdom of Sabinianus

which is placed v Kal. Febr.]

2.

MODERN LITERATURE.
There no complete edition of the works of Hippolytus. Of the
is

Philosophiiviena, as a whole, the best and most convenient text is that

of Duncker and Schneidewin, but the first book has been edited with

special care by Diels; of the other Greek remains, that of Lagarde.

The fragments preserved in Syriac, Arabic, and Coptic, must be sought
elsewhere. Migne's edition of the Greek works (without the Philosflp]ui-
viena) is very convenient as containing a reprint of the most important
parts of Fabricius and De Magistris, besides other materials from older
writers.

Of the several lists of the literature connected with Hippolytus

the fullest is in Richardson's Biblioirrnpliical Synwpsis of Anienicene
366 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

Literature, Buffalo 1887. The plan of my own list differs from his.
My aim not completeness, but usefulness.
is For this reason I have
struck out a large number of works which have been superannuated
either by the discovery of the Philosophiwiena or from other causes.
On the other hand I have introduced very many (e.g. a complete list of
De Rossi's articles in the BiiUettino, which bear directly or indirectly on
the subject), because I have found them of great use, even where they
did not bear the name of Hippolytus on their face. For this same
reason also I have mentioned a few of the principal works on the
Muratorian Cano^i, because in the subsequent discussions (see below,
p. 405 sq) I have connected it with Hippolytus.

A. Editions.

Bardenhewer Des Heiligen Hippolytus v. Rom Covimentar zuvi Buche

Z>rt ;'(?/ (Freiburg im Br. 1877).
Canisius Lectiones Atitiquae 11. p. 218 (ed. Basnage 1725). The
Chronica in one Latin version (see above i. p. 259), reprinted in
Du Cange Chron. Fasch. 11.
p. 23 (ed. Bonn).
De la Rue Orig. Oper. i.
p. 872 sq (ist book oi Philosophumcnd).
DiELS Doxographi Graeci p. 144 sq p. 553 sq (Berolin. 1879). ^st

book of PhiIosophume7ia.
DuNCKER ET ScHNEiDEWiN S. Hippolyti Episcopi et Martyris Refuta-
tionis Omnium Haeresium Libri Decem (Getting. 1859).
Fabricius (J. A.) S. Hippolyti Episcopi ct Martyris Opera Vol. i.
(17 16),
Vol. II.
(17 18) Hamburg. Works omitting Philosophumena.
Galland. Bibliotheca Patriim 11.
p. 409 sq.

PcwpyiaSTys (B.) Trept opao-ecos tou Trpotp-^TOV AavirjX, in ^EKKXrjarLaa-TiKrj

'AXT^'^eia 1885 May.

GwYNN Hermathena vi. 397 sq Hippolytus mid his Heads against
p.

Caius; ib. vii. p. 137 (1889) Hippolytus on S. Mattheiv xxiv. 15

22.

Haneberg Canones S. Hippolyti Arabice eic. (Monachii 1870).

Kennedy (J. H.) Commentary of St Hippolytus on the Book of Daniel
(Dublin 1888).
Lagarde Hippolytus Romanus (Lips, et Lond. 1858). Works omitting
Philosophimena.
Analecta Syriaca p. 91 sq (Lips, et Lond. 1858). {Fragmetits.)
Le Moyne Varia Sacra i. Prol. p. 23, Text p. 53 sq, 11.
p. 930 sq notes
Lugd. Bat. 1694) Contra Graecos.
(ed. 2,
Mai (A.) Script. Vet. Coll. Nov. vii.
Biblioth. Nov. Patr. vii. Pars ii.
 HIPPO LYTUS OF PORTUS. 3^7

MiGNE Patrologia Graeca x. p. 201 sq (Paris, 1857). Works omitting

Philosophiwiena.
Miller (E.) Origenis Philosophuviena (Oxon. 1851). (Editio princeps
of great part of the Philosophumena).
MoMMSEN Ueber den Chronographen vom Jahre 354, p. 549 sq (Leipz.
1850), an extract from the Ahhandl. der Konigl. Sachs. Gesclhch.
d. IVissensch. The Chronica in the second Latin version, with
the accompanying works.
RouTH Scriptoncin Ecclesiasticoruvi Opuscula i.
p. 45 sq (ed. 2, Oxon.

1840) Contra Haeresim Noeti.

Tregelles Canon Miiratorianus (Oxf. 1867).
Wordsworth Hippolyhis and the Church of Rome (ed. 2, Oxf and
Cambr. 18S0) Philosophumena ix (p. 62 sq); Fragm. dc Universo

(p. 306 sq).

B. Literature.

Allard Histoire des Persecutions pendant la premiere moitie du Troisihne

Siccle p. 195 sq (Paris 1866).
Arm ELLIN I
(T.) De prisca refutatione Haereseon Origenis nomine etc.

comtnentarius (Romae 1862).

AuB^ (B.) Les Chretiens dans l'
Empire Remain (a.d. 180 249) p. 428 sq
1
(Paris 881).
nEglise et VEtai (a.d. 249284) p. 362 sq (Paris 1885).
Baronius Annates Ecclesiastici s. ann. 226, 229, 11. p. 407, 409 sq
(Venet. 1738).
Baxmann Die Philosophunmia n. die Peraten in Zeitschr. f. die Histor.
Theol. (i860).
Benson (E. W., now Archbp.) Jourtial of Classical and Sacred Philology
I.
p. 188 sq (1854) On the Martyrdom and Commemorations of
Saint Hippolytus.
BiANCHiNi (F.) De Kalendario et Cyclo Caesaris et de Paschali Canone
S. etc.
Hippolyti
BoLLAND. Acta Sanctorum Januarius 11. p. 1027 (Jan. 30 De S. Hippolyto
Presbytero Antiochetio), Augustus in. p. 4 sq(Aug. 13, De S. Mart.
Rofnanis Hippolyto Concordia etc.), iv. p. 504 sq (Aug. 22, De S.
Hippolyto Episc. et Mart, in Portu Roma?to\ iv. p. 755 sq (Aug. 24
De SS. Aurea sai Chryse Virgine, Censorino, etc.).
BuNSEN (Chr. C. Hippolytus and his Age (ed. 2, London, 1854).
J.)
Caspari Quellen zur Geschichte des Ta^fsymbols etc. iii. p. 374 sq

(Christiania 1875).
Cave Scriptorum Ecclcsiasticorum Hisioria Litcraria i.
p. 102 sq.
368 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Cruice Etudes sur de nouveaux docmneiiis des PhilosopJmmena (Paris

1853). Histoire de P Eglise de Rovie sous ks FoJitificats de S.

Victor, de S. Zcphirm, et de S. Calliste (Paris 1856).
De Magistris (S.) Acta Martyriwi ad Ostia Tiherina (Romae 1795)
(parts reprinted in Migne, p. 547).
De Rossi (G. B.) Btillettino di Archeologia Cristiana
Scrie Prima.
I.
pp. 8, 16 sq, 32, II, 47, 68 sq, 73 (1863) Basilica
di S. Lorefizo fuor le vmra; 11.
p. 33 (1864) Scoferte iiella
basilica di S. Lorenzo ?ielP agro Verano 11.
p. 41 sq (1864)
\

Le due hasiliche di S. Lorenzo nelV agro Verano; iv. p. i sq,

p. 17 sq, p. 65 sq, p. 77 sq (1866) Esame archeologico e critico delta

storia di S. Callisto narrata net libro none dei Filosofttmeni ;
IV. p. 37 sq, 63 (1866) / 7nonuviejiti cristiani di Porto ;
iv. p. 99
(1866) Lo Xenodochio di Pavimachio in Porto; v. p. 49 sq (1867)
/ vwnumenti del secolo quarto spettaiiti alia chiesa di S. Picdenziana.
Scrie Terza.
I. 16 sq (1876) Scoperte nelV agro Verano e nel Sotterraneo
p.
Cimitero di Ciriaca; i. p. 145 sq (1876) Arcosolio dipinto del
Cimitero di Ciriaca etc.; 11. p. 5 sq (1877) // mnseo epigrafco
Cristiano Pio-Lateranense (see p. 15 sq) ; vi. p. 5 sq (1881)
La Silloge epigrafica d'un codice gia corbeiense etc.; vi. p. 26 sq

(1881) Elogio Dauiasiano del celebre Lppolito martire sepolto presso

la via Tiburtina; vi. p. 86 sq (1881) Dello scavo fatto neW
antica basilica di S. Lorenzo per collocai'e il sepolcro di Pio LX etc. ;

VI. p. 93 sq (1881) Eepitafio metrico del papa Zosivio sepolto in

S. Lorenzo neW agro Verano.
Serie Quarta.
I.
p. 9 sq (1882) // Cijuitero di S. Lppolito presso la Via
Tiburtina e la sua principale cripta storica ora dissepolia; i. p. 176
(1882) Continuazione delle scoperte nella cripta storica e nelle
adjacenti gallerie del cimitero di S. Lppolito; 11. p. 60 sq (1883)
Lscrizione storica dei tempi di Damaso papa nel Cimitero di S.

Lppolyto; ill. p. 7 sq (1884, 1885) / Carmi di S. Damaso; v.

p. 60 sq (1887) Lite LLippolytjis of the Appian Way.

Lfiscriptiones Christianae Urbis Romae i.
p. LXXix sq De LLippoliti

Cyclo inventione, etc.; 11.

p. 72 sq Sylloge Cetitulensis p. 82.
Roma Sotterranea i.
p. 178 sq, i%i, Notices in the Ltineraries; p. 263
sq The LLippolytus of the Appiaji Way; 11. p. 23 sq The LLippolytus
of the Appian Way; iii. p. 193 226 {The Acts of LLippolytus atid
the Greek Martyrs, and the Arciiarium LLippolyti), 301 312, 317.
DoLLiNGER LLippolytus and Kallistus (Regensburg 1853).
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 369
Draseke Zu Pseudo-Hippolytos (^Contra Beronem etc.) m.Jahrb.f. Protest.
Theol. X. p. 342 sq (1884); Zu Hippolytos' De^nonstratio adv.
Jiidaeos, ib. xii. p. 456 sq (1886).
Beron und Pseudo-Hippolytos in Zeitsch. f. Wiss. Theol. xxix. p. 291

sq (1886).
Duchesne (L.) Liber Pontificalis Tome i
(1886); Tome 11, Fascicule
i
(1888).
Erbes Die Lebenszeit des Hippolytiis nebst der des Theophilus von Antio-
chieii vci Jahrb. f. Protest. Theol. xiv. p. 611 sq
(1888).
Fabricius Bibliotheca Graeca vii. p. 183 sq, ed. Harles 1801.
Funk Theolog. Quartalschr. lxiii. p. 277 sq (1881) 1st der Basilides der
Philosophiwien Pantheist 1 lxiii. p. 423 sq (1881) Ueber den
Verfasser der Philosophumenen ; Lxvi. p. 104 sq (1884) Die Zeit
der Hippolyt-statue.
Gruber Die Ophiten (Wiirzburg 1864).
GuNDERT Zeitschr. f. Luther. Theol. xvi. p. 209 sq, xvii. pp. 37 sq,
443 sq.
GuTSCHMiD {A. V.) Ueber die Verhiiltniss d. Llippolytischen Liber Genera-
tionis etc. zti
Jziliiis Africanus (1856).
Hagemann Die Romische Kirche (Freiburg 1864).
Harnack Dogmengeschichte p. 437 sq and elsewhere
i.
(1886).
Zur Qtiellenkritik der Geschichte des Gnosticisnms (Leipzig 1873),
Zeitschr. f. His tor. Theol. p. 170.
Heinrici Die Valentianische Gnosis etc, (Berlin 1871).

Hesse (F. H.) Das Muratorische Fragment (Giessen 1873).

HiLGENFELD Zeitschr. f. Wiss. Theol. v. p. 400 sq {i 862) Der Gnosticis-
nius und die PhilosophurjieJia ; xxi. p. 228 sq (1878) Der Basilides
des Hippolytus.

Ketzergeschichte des Urchristenthmns (Leipzig 1884).

HoRT in Smith-Wace Diet, of Christ. Biogr. i. p. 268 s. v. Basilides.

Jacobi Deutsche Zeitschr. f. Christl. Wiss. 185 1 no. 25; 1853 no. 24.
Herzog's Real-Encyklopddie s. v. Hippolytus ed. 2 (
1
880). Brieger's

Zeitschr./. Kirchengesch. l.
p. 481 sq (1878) Das urspriingliche
Basilidianische System.

JUNGMANN Dissertationes in Histor. Eccles. p. 173 sq (Ratisbon

1880).
KiMMEL (E, J.) De Hippolyti Vita et Scriptis (Jena 1839).
Langen (J.) Geschichte der Romischen Kirche (Bonn 1881).
LiPSius (R. A.) Quellenkritik des Epiphatiios (Wien 1865).
Die Quellcn der Aeltesten Ketzergeschichte (Leipzig 1875).
Smith-Wace Diet, of Christ. Biogr. iv. s. v. Valenti?ms.
CLEM. II. 24
370 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Lumper Histor. SS. Fair. viii. p. i sq (Aug. Vind. 1791); reprinted in
Migne.
NoLTE Theolog. Quartahchr. 1862 p. 624 sq
OvERBECK Quaestiomim Hippolytearum Specifuen (Jena 1864).
R^viLLE (A.) Revue des Deux Mondes 1865, iii. p. 892 Saint Hippolyte ;

et la Soci'et'e Chretienne de Rome aji commencement dii IIP. Siccle.

RoEPER (G.) Philologus vn. p. 511 sq, 607 sq, 767 (1852).
RuGGERius (Const.) De Portuensi S. Hippolyti Episcopi et Marty ris
Sede etc. (Romae iTTi), reprinted in Lumper and in Migne.
Salmon in Smith-Wace Diet, of Christ. Biogr. i. p. 506 sq, 509,
Chronicon Canisianum., Chronica Horosii; 11. p. 679 Gnosticism;
HI. p. 85 sq, Hippolytus Romanus ; iv. p. 80 Ophites etc.
Hermathena i.
p. 82 sq (1874) Chronology of Hippolytus ; xi.

p. 389 sq (1885) Cross-references i?i the PhilosopMmiena.

Infallibility of the Clmrch, p. 382 sq (London 1888).

Smedt Dissertationes Selectae (Ghent 1876) De Auctore Philosophumenon
p. 83 sq.
TiLLEMONT Memoires in. p. 238 sq, 672 sq.
Uhlhorn Das Basilidianische System (Gottingen 1855).
VoLKMAR Hippolytus tmd die Romischen Zeitgenossen (Zurich 1855).
Westcott Cation of the New Testanmit Appendix C (ed. 6, 1888)
Muratorian Canon.
Wordsworth (Bp Chr.) St Hippolytus and the Church of Rome (ed. 2,
Oxf. and Cambr. 1880).

3-

NAMESAKES OF S. HIPPOLYTUS.

Among these stands foremost the hero of Greek story, who has

bequeathed not only his name, but also the myth of his death, to the
Christian theologian and bishop. I need not however dwell now on

which I shall have to speak hereafter. I would

this inherited legend, of

only remark on one other point of contact, which (over and above the
name) might suggest the propriety of adapting the legend of the earlier
Hippolytus to the later. The son of Theseus was the type and
embodiment of continence in Greek mythology. The opponent of
Zephyrinus and Callistus was the champion of purity in the Church
the severe opponent of any laxity which might endanger the virgin

discipline of the Christian brotherhood.

 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 37 1
But my business now is rather with those contemporaries or nearly

contemporaries imaginary persons who have been blended

real or

with the hero of the Tiburtine Way, and thus have confused his per-

sonality and involved his history in endless perplexity. Of such name-

sakes I single out five.

(i)Hippolytus the martyr of Aiitioch. DoUinger (p. 51 sq) sup-

posed that he had read the riddle of this Antiochene martyr's creation ;
and indeed his solution seemed, with the imperfect knowledge which
they then possessed, to be highly plausible. He
supposed that the
same passage of Eusebius which, as translated by Rufinus, had be-
stowed on Hippolytus the see of Bostra (see below, p. 428), had also,
as adopted by Jerome', transformed him into a presbyter of Antioch.
The notice in the Chronicon of Jerome (Euseb. Chron. 11, p. 179)
under the year 227 Geminus presbyter Antiochenus et Hippolytus
is
'

et Beryllus episcopus Arabiae Bostrenus clari scriptores habentur.'

Bollinger postulates the omission of 'et' in some copies, so that the
'

connexion presbyter Antiochenus Hippolytus would be estabHshed

'

In the Hierojiymian Martyrology we have under iii Kal. Febr. (Jan. 30)

In Antiochia passio sancti Hippolyti martyris.

Moreover on the previous day (Jan. 29) we have

iv Kal. Feb. Hippolyti episcopi de antiquis,
and on the succeeding (Jan. 31) there is also a mention of a Hippolytus.
These all doubtless represent the same person, the notices having been
derived from different but allied sources. Accordingly in the Oid
Ro7?ia?i Martyrology there is a similar notice on the same day

Antiochiae passio sancti Hippolyti,

and consequently his name occurs in this place in Ado and the later

Latin Martyrologies. But Bollinger's hypothesis offers no explanation

of the difference of the day, iii Kal. Feb. in place of Id. Aug.
The pubhcation of Wright's Syriac Martyrology shows that this
Antiochene Martyr Hippolytus was a real person celebrated on this day
from the beginning.
Later Kanun [Jan.] 30 In the city of Antioch, Hippolytus.
Here, as elsewhere, the contents of this ancient list have found their
1
See AR.^.'k. So far as regards to him elsewhere (FiV. ///wj/r. 64), where
he describes him as
'
Antiochenae eccle-
Hippolytus and Beryllus this notice is
taken from Euseb. 11. E. vi. 20 but ;
siae presbyter,' who flourished under the

Eusebius does not mention Geminus. Je- emperor Alexander,

rome himself however devotes a few lines

242
Zl^ EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

way into the Roman Martyrologies through the so-called Hieronymian.

But they can us nothing about him ; except that they transfer to
tell

him the notice ascribing the lapse into Novatianism and recantation
which belongs the Roman Hippolytus.
first to The Greek books
are equally ignorant of any circumstances relating to the life or
martyrdom of this Antiochene Hippolytus. But the Meficsa, like the
later Latin Martyrologies, clothe him with borrowed plumage taken

from the martyr of the Tiburtine Way adopting however not the
Novatianism but the incidents of the Chryse legend as told in the
Roman story (see AR. 44). But both Eastern and Western Martyro-
logies preserve for this Antiochene Hippolytus his proper day.
This Hippolytus therefore is a real person distinct from any Roman
Hippolytus, as the Syriac Martyrology (p. 646) shows and it is strange ;

that a modern critic, Erbes, should have confused the two and imagined
that he had found support for his theory of the Antiochene origin of
the Roman Hippolytus. But he does not seem to have seen the notice
in the Syriac Martyrology, which is the key to the whole position. I
'

may mention by the way that the expression, of the ancients,' de

ajitiqids, is characteristic of this Syriac Martyrology and designates

those martyrs and confessors who perished in some earlier persecution
than the last under Diocletian, which was recent when the list was first
drawn up.
(2) Hippolytus, the Alexaiidrian cofineded with Dionysitts. In his
account of the letters of Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria (a.b. 249

265), the historian Eusebius {H. E. vi. 46) mentions among others one
addressed to the Romans, which he describes as SiaKovtKjj Sta 'ItvttoKvtov.
This Hippolytus therefore must have been the delegate who was
charged with delivering the letter. What may have been the purport of
this letter StaKovix?/, de ministeriis or de diaconis^ we cannot say. But as
we are told on contemporary authority {see i.
p. 255) that Fabianus
bishop of Rome (JA. d. 250) about that time 'regiones divisit dia-

conibus,' a reasonable conjecture that the letter had some reference

it is

to these arrangements. Cornelius the successor of Fabianus informs

us [H.E. vi. 43) that there were in the Roman Church in his time
'
seven deacons and seven subdeacons.' We may therefore believe that
there is some truth in the notice of the Liber Po7itificalis (i. p. 64)
found even in its earlier form (c. a.d. 530), which adds to the con-
temporary notice above quoted 'et fecit vii subdiaconos qui septem

notariis imminerent ut gesta martyrum fideliter colligerent' At all

events this division of the city by Fabianus among the seven deacons
was sufficiently important in the eyes of the contemporary chronicler to
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. ^7Z
entitle it to a special notice which is unique of its kind in his chronicle.
But however Hippolytus is a fairly common name, and
this may be,
we should want better evidence than we possess that the Roman
Hippolytus was living and able to take a long journey at so very late a
date ; nor is there any notice which connects him even remotely with
Alexandria.

(3) Hippolytus the Greek captain of brigands. In the Notitia

Portarum, Viarum, Ecclesiarum, or guide book of the close of the
7th century, which William of Malmesbury has appended to his Gesta
Anglorum, there is a notice
referring to the papal crypt on the Appian
way, 'non longe pausant martyres Hippohtus, Adrianus, Eusebius, Maria,
Martha, Paulina, Valeria, Marcellus' {Rom. Sott. i. p. 181). The
portion of the Acts of these Greek martyrs is extant in a single
Latin ms, of which the text has been carefully edited by De Rossi
Ro7n. Sott. III. p. 201 sq. Baronius, who had first published them,
took considerable liberties with the ms, so that his text is worth-
less. The heading is; 'Pridie Kl. Decembris festivitas sanctorum
martyrum, Eusebii presbyteri, Marcelli diaconi, Hadrias, Hippolyti,
Paulinae, Neon Mariae, Maximi, Martanae, et Valeriae.'
et The date
given is 'Valeriano et Lucullo consulibus" [a.d. 265], but the persecut-

ing emperor is
represented to be Decius [a.d. 250 252] and the
Roman bishop Stephen [a.d. 254 257]. They begin by describing
how Hippolytus
'
the monk '
lived in the crypts (' in cryptis ') where he

gathered together the believers in secret. The place is more than once
called 'arenarium.' Paulina, the wife of Hadrias, the sister of Hip-
is

polytus, and Maria and Neon are their children, aged thirteen and ten

respectively. They are all converted and undergo martyrdom, though

not at the same time. Paulina suffers first, together with Eusebius the

priestand Marcellus the deacon, and they are buried by Hippolytus in

the 'arenarium' at thefirst mile-stone from the city. Then Neon and
Maria; and they too are buried, vi Kal. Nov., 'in ipsa via Appia milliario
ab urbe Roma primo in arenario ipso ubi consueverant con venire.' A
few days afterwards Hadrias and Hippolytus are seized and beaten to
death. Their bodies are left 'in eodem loco juxta insulam Lycaoniam';
but a certain deacon" comes by night and reverently deposits them in
the same 'arenarium' with the rest v Id. Nov. Nine months later two

^
De Rossi has been able to explain -
The present text says
'
venit quidam
how a false consular date became attached Hippolytus diaconus noctu'; but obvi-
to this Bull, di Archeol.
persecution, ously the transcriber through carelessness
Crist. 1887, P- 65. has substituted the wrong name.
374 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Greek Christian ladies, Martana and her daughter Valeria, arrive in
Rome. They also die as confessors, apparently starved to death ;
and
are buried in the same place iv Id. Dec.
Though these Acts are free from the accumulation of horrors and of
miracles which condemn so many other accounts of martyrdom, their

chronological inconsistencies, not to mention other signs, show that

they cannot be a contemporary or nearly contemporary record. De
Rossi (7?. S. III. p. 200) contents himself with stating that in their
present form they ought not to be placed later than about the eighth

century.
We have however older evidence for the story than these Acts in
two inscriptions which were read by the medieval pilgrims in the ce-

metery of Callistus in the neighbourhood of the papal crypt. They run

as follows ;

NATA MARIA SIMUL CARO CUM FRATRE NIONE

GAUDENTES SACRAM PROMERUERE FIDEM
DIVITIAS PROPRIAS CHRISTI PRAECEPTA SECUTI
PAUPERIBUS LARGA DISTRIBUERE MANU
QUORUM PRECLARIS MONITIS MULTOQUE LAHORE
ACCESSIT SUMMO SANCTA CATERVA DEO
POST ANIMAS CHRISTO TRADENTES SANGUINE FUSO
UT VITAM CAPERENT NON TIMUERE MORI
HORUM VIRTUTES QUEM PASSIO LECTA DOCEBIT
RITE SUIS FAMULIS DISCET ADESSE DEUM

GLIM SACRILEGAM QUAM MISIT GRAECIA TURBAM

MARTYRII MERITIS NUNC DECORATA NITET ;

QUAE MEDIO PELAGI VOTUM MISERABILE FECIT

REDDERE FUNEREO DONA NEFANDA JOVI.
VPOLITI SED PRIMA FIDES CELESTIBUS ARMIS
RESPUIT INSANAM PESTIFERAMQUE LUEM.
QUEM MONACHI RITU TENUIT SPELUNCA LATENTEM
CHRISTICOLIS GREGIBUS DULCE CUBILE PARANS
POST HUNC ADRIAS SACRO MUNDATUS IN AMNE
ET PAULINA SUO CONSOCIATA VIRO.
xiii K. JUN.

inscriptions are given by De Rossi J^om. Soft. iii. p. 194 (comp.

These
1.
263) and in Inscr. Christ. Urb. Rom. 11. p. 66 sq.
p. For reasons
which seemed satisfactory, but which it is unnecessary to repeat here,
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 375
De Rossi had inferred that these inscriptions must be anterior to the
7 th century and were probably written in the 5 th or at the latest in the
6tli (in. p. 197). A few letters of the first inscription itself have been
discovered very recently {Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1887, p. 60 sq), which

fully confirm this surmise. They suggest the age of Symmachus as the
date of the inscription. The fragment contains the date v Id. Nov. at
the heading, which is the day of Hippolytus' martyrdom.
Our evidence however goes much farther back than this date. In
the inscription which pope Damasus (a.d. 366 384) placed in or near
the papal crypt he enumerated the illustrious dead who were buried
there (see Rom. Soft. 11. p. 23; comp. hiscr. Christ. Urb. Rom. 11.

p. 66); and among these are specified

HIC POSITUS LONGA VIXIT QUI IN PACE SACERDOS

HIC CONFESSORES SANCTI QUOS GRAECIA MISIT,

where we have evidently a reference to this same group of Greek

martyrs and confessors of whom this Hippolytus was the chief; though
he does not tell us any particulars about them. To one of this group,
possibly to Hippolytus himself, may refer the Damasian verses Inscr.
Christ. Urb. Rom. 11. p. 108, where he apostrophizes a certain martyr

quod fama refert, te Graecia misit,' but it throws no additional light on

'

the subject.
Comparing the extant Acts with the inscriptions above cited, which
once were read in the cemetery of Callistus, we see that these Acts
take up the story at a late point, after the conversion of Hippolytus.

They must therefore have lost their beginning; or at all events they
presuppose some previous document giving an account of the earlier
history. This story related how Hippolytus was the captain of a band
of Greek robbers how on his voyage he had vowed a vow to Stygian
;

Jove (funereo Jovi) or Pluto ; how arrived at Rome he had established

himself in an arenarium or disused cave whence sand had been ex-
tracted; how he had been converted to the Christian faith and exchanged
the life of a free-booter for the life of a recluse ('
how he had
monachi');
been instrumental in the conversion of his companions and gathered
together a Christian congregation in this cave ; and how finally he had
left this arenarium as a catacomb ('dulce cubile') for Christian folk he
himself and his companions being buried there.
These are doubtless the martyrs who are commemorated in the

Hieronymian Marty rology under xiii Kal. Jul., where the notice as
corrected by De
Rossi {Rom. Sott. i.
p. 264 ; comp. in. p. 197) from a
comparison of mss runs
376 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Romae in coemeterio Hippolyti sanctorum Honorii, Evodii, Petri,

Valeriae, etc'

thus giving xiii Kal. Jul. where the inscription (as transcribed) has
xiii Kal. Jun., so that there must be an error in the one or the other.

This is a very common form of blunder, see e.g. Ignat. and Folyc,
I.
p. 666, ed. I ; p. 683, ed. 2.

On this notice De Rossi points out that the consuls of the year 386,
Honorius and Evodius, are mixed up with the names of the martyrs,
probably (as he suggests, iii. p. 197) because the bodies of Gervasius
and Protasius, commemorated on this same day (xiii Kal. Jul.), were
discovered in this year. Marcellus is connected with these Greek
martyrs in the Acts, as we have seen ; but of Petrus, here associated
with them, no account has been given. Of Maria and Neon there are
some traces though very corrupt in this Martyrology under vi Kal. Nov.
The bodies of Hippolytus, Adrias, Maria, Neon and Paulina were de-
posited in S. Agatha of the Suburra under Leo IX (a. d. 1048 1054);
but whether they were translated thither straight from their original
resting place we do not know.
A description of the catacomb supposed by De Rossi to be the
arenarium of Hippolytus to the N.E. of the cemetery of Callistus is given
in Rom. Sott. iii. p. 213 sq, p. 301 sq (see Tav. xiii xlv). He places it in
the second half of the third and beginning of the fourth century. From
this sanctuary on the Appian Way, not from the more famous cemetery

on the Tiburtine, was taken in the year 1646 the sepulchral in-
scription bearing the words at epolitv (ad Hippolytum); see Rom.
Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1882, p. 48.
Sott. III. p. 215,

Hippolytus the soldier, the warder of S. Laurence.

(4) Much has
been written on the supposed confusion of Hippolytus the theologian
and Hippolytus the soldier and not a few critics have found in this
;

confusion the key to most of the perplexities which confront us in the

story of Hippolytus. I shall have occasion to discuss the whole subject
at a subsequent point and it will then be shown that this was not a
;

case of confusion. There was no Hippolytus the warder of S. Laurence

distinct from Hippolytus the famous divine : but at a very late period
in his legendary career popular opinion transformed him from a cleric
into a soldier, connecting him at the same time with S. Laurence.

^
In the Berne MS, generally our best pian way with the more famous Cemetery
authority for the text of this Martyrology, of the more famous Hippolytus see Rom. ;

the scribe has inserted VIA tibvrtina, Sott. 11. p. 198.

thus confusing this arenarium on the Ap-
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. ^^y-]^

(5) Hippolyhis of Thebes, a writer of the eleventh century; on whom

see Fabricius Bibl. Graec. vii. p. 198 sq, ed. Harles. Fragments of this
writer are included in Fabricius Hippol. Op. i. App. p. 43 sq. He is
quoted by Michael Glycas as 'IttttoAutos o &r](3aiO'i. In Niceph. Call.
If. E. ii. 3 a fragment of this writer is given as from Hippolytus os

IIo/OTOu T17S Trpea/SvTipa? 'Fw/jltj^ eTTtcTKOTros Irvyxo-vev coV. He was the

author of a Chrojiide (xpovtKov o-iWay/^a). The accounts De Duodecim
Apostolis and De Septuagbita Disdpulis, which have sometimes been
included in the works of our Hippolytus, are his.

4-

GAIUS OH HIPPOLYTUS?

Gains, the Roman presbyter, plays an important part in the literary

history of Christianity at the opening of the third century. If the
ravages of time have spared only fragments of his works, he has not
been more hardly treated in this respect than many famous writers of
the Antenicene Church. Even without the important fragment desig-
nated the Muratorian Canon, and the elaborate Refutation of all
Heresies discovered in our own generation, both of which works have
been ascribed him by some modern critics, the literary remains
to

bearing his name with the accompanying notes occupy some thirty
pages in Routh's collection. Will it be thought audacious if I venture
to question the existence of such a person ?
The works attributed to Gaius by ancient writers and included under
his name by Routh are the following :

(i) The Dialogue with Frodus, directed against the Montanists.

It is quoted several times by Eusebius, who mentions Gaius as the
author {H. E. ii.
25, iii. 28, 31, vi. 20).

(2) A treatise on the Cause of the Universe, directed against the

Platonic doctrine. Photius {AR. 32. a) states that certain persons
attribute it to Gaius. A considerable fragment of this work is extant.
(3) The
Little Labyrinth, from which long quotations are given by

Eusebius, and which is mentioned by name by Theodoret {AR. 12 e).

Of the relation of this work to the Labyrinth of Photius I shall have
something to say hereafter (p. 378 sq).

(4) A treatise Against the Heresy of Artenion, mentioned by Pho-

tius {AR. 32. a) as assigned to Gaius.
^y^ EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
But besides the works above enumerated, of whose Uterary parentage
some account must be given, before we can dispose of Gaius, certain
facts are recorded of his Hfe, which seem at first sight to give him a
substantial existence and to resist
any attempt to annihilate him.

We learn from Eusebius that he was a member of the Catholic

Church (iKKXrja-taa-TLKos a.v7]p) ; that he was a man of great learning
(XoytwraTos) ;
Rome
that he held the dialogue with
that he resided at ;

the Montanist Proclus during the pontificate of Zephyrinus; and that he

received only thirteen Epistles of S. Paul, thus excluding the Epistle to
the Hebrews. Jerome, as usual, derives all his knowledge from Euse-
bius,and repeats the same statements somewhat more loosely. Theodoret
only knows Gaius as the writer of the Dialogue against Proclus. Photius
(AJ^. 32. a)is somewhat fuller. This Gaius,' he writes, 'is reported to
'

have been a presbyter of the Church in Rome during the pontificate of

Victor and Zephyrinus, and to have been ordained bishop of the

Gentiles.'
Ihave already alluded to the fact that the 'Refutation of all
Heresies,' which was brought to light less than forty years ago, was
added to the literary achievements of Gaius by several able critics. This
fresh honour was the immediate occasion of his downfall. The Refuta-
tion is ascribed by pretty general consent to his learned contem-
now
porary Hippolytus, On this point the representatives of the most
opposite schools Bunsen, Wordsworth, DoUinger are agreed; and
the coincidence with respect to the authorship is the more striking,
because the work affords material for manifold theological contro-

versy.
Unhappily for the fame of Gaius the Refutation cannot stand alone.
Its author must have written all the treatises ascribed by ancient
authorities to this learned Roman presbyter with the exception of the
Dialogue with Proclus.
The Treatise against Artemon may be conveniently taken first. There
cannot be much doubt that this treatise is identical with the Little Laby-

rinth mentioned by Theodoret {AR. For though the extant 12. e).

fragments are directed

chiefly against Theodotus, another leading

monarchian, yet Eusebius, to whom we are indebted for their preser-

'

vation, says that the work was written against the heresy of Artemon
'

{H. E. V. 28); and Theodoret, after mentioning both

Artemon and
Theodotus, says
'

against the heresy of these

men was composed the
Little Labyrinth.^
The testimony of Photius {AR. 32. a) requires careful scrutiny.
After discussing the authorship of the Treatise on the Universe he men-
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 379
tions marginal notes [iv irapaypac^al'i) to the effect that it was written by
Gaius, an elder living in Rome, who they say composed The Labyrinth
also, and of whom a Dialogue is extant against a certain Proclus,

champion of the Montanist sect; which (treatise On the Universe^

being left anonymous has been ascribed to diverse persons, just as
The Labyrinth has been ascribed by one to Origen. But in truth,' he '

continues, 'it is the work of Gaius who composed The Labyrinth, as

he himself testifies that the Treatise on the Nature of the Universe is
his.' 'They say that this Gaius,' he adds, 'composed another treatise
also specially directed against the heresy of Arternon, and an important
Dialogue against Proclus, a champion of Montanus.'
What does Photius mean by this Labyrinth ? Shall we identify it

with the Little Labyrinth of Theodoret? Our first impulse is to identify

the two; but, if so, Photius must have given an incorrect account,
for he obviously contemplates two separate works. This however he
might very well have done, since he seems not to have seen the Little
Labyrinth. But another solution offers itself, which deserves more
consideration. There is every reason to believe that the Summary
comprising the loth book of the Philosophumena was circulated sepa-
rately from the main portion of the treatise, and fell into the hands
of some who were unacquainted with the rest. Now in the opening
words of this loth book Hippolytus says that after 'breaking through
the Labyrinth of Heresies,' he will proceed to the Demonstration of the
Truth. It would seem therefore that this summary was known as the

Labyrinth from the opening words. This explains the further statement
of Photius that at the close of the Labyrinth he testifies that he wrote
'

the treatise On the Nature of the Universe^; for in one of the final
chapters the author of the Philosophumena (x. 32) refers his readers to
this work, as his own.
But though different works are probably indicated by the Little
Labyrinth and the Labyrinth, the nomenclature points to the identity
of authorship. The same person, describe a general work
who would
on heresies as penetrating a labyrinth, would select as the appropriate
title for a special treatise dealing with a particular group of heresies the

Little Labyrinth. Thus the reference in the Philosophumena gives an

additional confirmation of the Hippolytean authorship of the treatise

Against Arternon. Even before the discovery of the Philosophumena,

Routh had suggested this as the probable inference from the facts
before him^
^
Inihe yournalof Philology ^. gS, s,(\, appeared in its original form, I had
where this essay Gaius or Hippolytus 'i identified the Little Labyrinth of Theo-
380 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
TheLittle Labyrinth. The comparison of Eusebius with Theodoret
leaves no doubt that by this name the ixo.dXv&t Against Artemon is meant
as I have just shown. Gaius therefore is deprived of the credit of the
authorship of this work. Indeed the identification of the two supplies
additional grounds for turning to Hippolytus as the true author.
To Hippolytus also must be assigned the Nature of the Universe.
For this ascription there are abundant reasons, as I shall show below
(p. 395 sq). It is sufficient to say here that the author of the Refutatio
distinctly claims it as his own work and no case has been made out for
;

denying the Refutatio to Hippolytus. Indeed we may consider this

latter point as estabHshed irrefragably, whatever doubt may have been
entertained among critics at an earlier date.

article which I
[The above paragraphs are taken partly from an
wrote in 1868 in the Journal of Philology i. p. 98 sq, in which I
was disposed to maintain that Gaius was only the double of Hippolytus,
and that all the works ascribed to the former belong rightly to the
latter. Only here and there a correction of statement has been rendered
necessary in the foregoing paragraphs by further knowledge. So far I
adhere to my former opinions. But in the light of recent discovery, as

I shall explain presently, I feel myself no longer able to maintain this

extreme view. It is now quite certain that there was a certain Gaius,
against whom Hippolytus wrote. Yet my former discussion seems to
me worth while reproducing in part, because it brings out many
difficulties attending the question which have never been solved and

because it some suggestions which may not be useless in other

offers
If we could suppose the
ways even in the light of further knowledge.
writer against the Montanists to be Hippolytus, and the opponent
of the Apocalypse some unknown person of the name, we should have
a solution of our difficulties but I feel that I have no right to suggest
;

this solution, except provisionally, with the evidence now before me.]

stripped of his borrowed plumage, Gaius retains only the

Thus
Dialogue with Proclus the Montanist. Of this work a brief notice
is by Eusebius, who also preserves two or three short fragments.
given
appears from these that the dialogue professed to have been
It held in
Rome during the pontificate of Zephyrinus ; that Gaius was the orthodox

doret with the Labyrinth of Photius, as the loth book of the Philosophumena
writers before me had done but the ; gives another aspect to the question. The
investigations of subsequent critics, shovif- two can no longer, I think, be treated as
ing the separate use of the Summary in titles of the same work.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 381

and Proclus the Montanist disputant ;

that in defending the prophesyings
of his sect Proclus appealed to the four daughters of Phihp, who with
their father were buried at Hierapolis and that, as a set-off against ;

these precious reliques, Gaius offered to show his antagonist the tombs
of St Peter and St Paul, the one at the Vatican, the other on the
Ostian Way. Moreover, a passage is quoted (obviously from a speech
of Gaius), which, as the exact expressions have an important bearing on
the subject of this paper, I shall here quote at length :

"
But Cerinthus also, by means of revelations purporting to have
been written by a great apostle, lyingly imposes upon us marvellous
prodigies which he professes to have been shown him by angels,
saying that after the resurrection the kingdom of Christ is an earthly
kingdom, and again that men shall live in Jerusalem in the flesh
and be the slaves of lusts and pleasures. And, being an enemy
to the scriptures of God, he would fain deceive, and says that a tale
of a thousand years is to be spent in marriage festivities'."

Having thus given the facts which bear upon the decision, I will
state my hypothesis. Unless I am mistaken, it
explains all the pheno-
mena better than they have hitherto been explained; and, if so, it may
fairly claim a hearing.
Gaius is simply an interlocutor in a dialogue against the Montanists
written by Hippolytus. By this person, who takes the orthodox side in
the discussion, Hippolytus may have intended himself, or he may have
invented an imaginary character for dramatic purposes. In other
words, such a dialogue may really have taken place, or the narrative may
be fictitious from beginning to end. In the former case, we may
suppose that Gaius was his own praenomen; for then he would naturally
so style himself in the dialogue, just as Cicero appears under the name
of Marcus in his own writings. Not being a slave and being in some
sense a Roman, Hippolytus must almost necessarily have had two
names, if not more ; just as his Alexandrian contemporary is styled in
fullT. Flavins Clemens, and his African contemporary Q. Septimius
Florens TertuUianus. Such a combination as Gaius Hippolytus is
natural in itself, and indeed occurs in an extant inscription found at

Placentia; q. poblicio l.l.c. hippolytus^ On the latter supposition

^
Euseb. H. E. III. 28 ciXXd Kal "KpiaTov' Kal wdXii' Tri6v/j.lai.s Kal yjSovah

Kripivdos 6 5t' diroKoKiixpeiov us vtto oltto- ev 'lepovaaXTj/M rr/v crdpKa TrokLTevoixivrjv

(TToXov /xeyaXov yeypafj.p.ivuv reparoKoylas dovXeveif. Kal ex^pos inrdpx'^v rah yp(x<pais
Tjixiv cis 5i dyyiXwv avrQ oeoeiyfi^vas tov eoO api.dp.bv x'^""'''''^"'^cts eV yap,o}

xpevSopLevos eTreiadyei, X^ywf /xero. rr^v eoprrji OiXuiv irXavav \iyei. yeviadai,
"
ivdffTacnv iwiydov dvaL rb ^ajiXeiov rod Gruler, DCCCCLXXXl.x. 4.
 382 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

(that Gaius is an imaginary person), we may appeal to the legal formula

'Ubi tu Gaius, ego Gaia,' as suggesting that Hippolytus might avail
himself of the name which corresponds to the anonymous N. or M. of
our own formularies'. Of the former kind of dialogue, where the author
himself is the orthodox disputant, the work of Justin against Trypho may
be taken as a type of the latter, where a fictitious person maintains the
:

right cause, the dispute between Jason and Papiscus by Ariston of

Pella will serve as an example^.
I suppose then that the copies of the Dialogue in general circulation

were anonymous. The title may have run Aia'Aoyo? Taiov koL lipoKXov

(or TTpos UpoKXov) rj A writer, into whose hands this

Kara MovTavLarwv.

Dialogue fell, would naturally infer, as Eusebius inferred, (and the

analogy of Justin's work would favour the inference), that Gaius was the
actual author of the book. The few particulars which Eusebius gives
respecting the life of Gaius were doubtless drawn from the Dialogue
itself. Those which are added by Photius came from the other
writings attributed to Gaius, from the Caiise of the Universe or the
Labyrinth, or perhaps even from the Refutation itself The critics,
whom he quotes and to whom he is indebted for these particulars, had
observed the cross references from one work to another and correctly
inferred therefrom the identity of authorship. Amongthese cross references
was one which connected the authorship of the Dialogue of Gaius and
Proclus with the other works, just as these are connected among them-
selves and proved to belong to the same author. Hence Gaius assumed
to be the author of the Dialogue was credited with the other works
also.

This the explanation of the fact that all the particulars, which are
is

predicated of Gaius, are predicated or predicable of Hippolytus also.

They both flourish during the same pontificates ; they are both styled
'presbyters,' and both live in Rome; they both receive only thirteen
Epistles as written by St Paul, excluding the Epistle to the Hebrews ;
they both are men of great learning, though the Roman Church for
some generations before and after this time was singularly devoid of

literary eminence. And lastly, we have here an explanation of the

^
So Tertullian Apol. 3 '
Nemo re- chief disputant on the right side is a

tractat, ne ideo bonus Gaius et prudens third person, the writer himself is sup-

Lucius, quia Christianus'; ib. 48 'At posed to be present. Another instance

enim Christianus, si de homine hominem of an early polemical writing thrown into
'

ipsumque de Gaio Gaium repromittat. the form of a dialogue is the dispute of

2
The work of Minucius Felix stands Archelaus and Manes. (Routh's Rel,
midway between the two for, while the
;
Sacr. v. p. 3 sq. )
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 383

otherwise not very intelligible statement, that Gains was appointed

'bishop of the Gentiles' {AR. 32. a); for Hippolytus in the Refutation
speaks of himself as holding the episcopal office {AR. i),
and addresses
the Gentiles more than once as though they were his special charge'.
If the designation 'bishop of the Gentiles' is not strictly correct, it was

at very easy inference from his language in this work; and

least a

probably he expressed himself similarly elsewhere, when the occasion

demanded, as for instance in the treatise on the Universe addressed to
the Greeks.
To this identification of Gaius and Hippolytus another ancient
notice also points. The
extant manuscripts of the Martyrdom of Poly-

carp profess to be derived ultimately from a copy which was 'tran-

scribed from the writings (or manuscripts or lectures) of Irenseus the

disciple of Polycarp by Gaius who also was intimate with Irenaeus^

Now not stop to enquire whether this postscript to the account
I shall

of Polycarp's martyrdom contains authentic matter or not; but in any

case it would seem that the transcriber here intended was none other
than our Gaius, the Roman presbyter; for he is the only notable per-
sonage of the name and age, whose attestation would be of value to
accredit the genuineness of the narrative. If so, it is remarkable that

he is represented as a disciple of Irenseus. For Hippolytus also at-

tended the lectures of this father, and was much indebted to them for

the materials of his earlier Compendiwn against Heresies. In his later

Refutation also he twice mentions Irenaeus as the blessed elder,' and

'

in the second of the two passages avows his great obligations to him

{Ref. Haer. vi. 42, 45). May we suppose that Gaius in the Dialogue
with Proclus expresses himself similarly with respect to this father ?
Again, the hypothesis of an anonymous copy falls in with another
class of facts The knowledge of Eusebius was limited
mentioned above.
in character and extent by the materials within his reach. To the
library at Caesarea, collected by the diligence of his friend Pamphilus,
we probably owe the valuable remains of early Christian literature which
he has preserved to us and, where this library was defective, his know-
;

ledge would be defective also. Now it appears to have contained some

volumes bearing the name of Hippolytus; for, though he passes over
^
X. 31, 34. In the close of the 'Elprjvalov fxadrjTOv toO HoXvKtipirov, os Kai
32,
treatise, which is wanting, he may have avveiroXiTeiJtTaro t<^ Blp-qvalip; or, as it

alluded to his episcopate more directly, in appears in the Moscow MS, iK tovtuv ovv,
connexion with the Gentiles to whom ws TrpoXAe/crat, t(2v tov Eip-qvalov avy-
this peroration is addressed. ypap-ixaruv Talos fueTeypaxl/aTO (see Ignat.
^
TaOra ixereypafaTO jj-kv Falbs ex tQv and Polyc. III. pp. 401, 403, ed. 2).
384 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
this father very lightly, he gives a list of several books written by him,

adding,
'
And you may find very many works besides still extant in the
hands of many persons' {H. E. vi. 22). But, in addition to the works
which he enumerates, the library also contained another stray volume,
from which the writer's name was accidentally omitted, and of which
Eusebius therefore did not recognise the authorship. This volume
comprised the Dialogue of Gains and Froclus, the Little Labyrinth, and
the Ca2ise of the Universe. The first of these Eusebius ascribes to Gains

(of whom he evidently knows nothing besides), because Gaius is the

orthodox interlocutor. The second he quotes but quotes anonymously,
not knowing who was the author. Of the third it is worth remarking
this negative fact, that he has not included it in his list of the works of
Hippolytus, though it is so included in the catalogue on the statue.
From its probably would not
subject it assist his historical researches,

and he therefore does not quote from it, and probably did not read it.

In the same form also perhaps in a copy transcribed from the arche-
type in the Caesarean library the three anonymous treatises fell into
the hands of the critic or critics mentioned by Photius. They saw from
the cross-references that the three works must be ascribed to the same
author; and, either following Eusebius or drawing the same easy but
incorrect inference independently, they attributed the Dialogue against
the Montanists to one Gaius. To Gaius therefore this anonymous
volume was assigned.

But independently of the theory itself, are there reasons for sup-

posing that Hippolytus .ever did write against Montanism ? There is

at least a presumption, that so ruthless a scourge of heterodoxy in all
its forms should not have left this type of error unassailed. Besides
writing two general works against all the heresies his earlier Compen-
dium, the little book read by Photius, and apparently preserved (though
not without considerable modifications) in the Latin treatise attached
to the Praescriptio of Tertullian (see below, p. sq), and his later and 413
fuller work, the Refutation, first and published in our
brought to light
own generation he likewise attacked in special treatises the more im-
portant heresies which were rife in his own age and church. We have
seen how he refuted the monarchian doctrines of Theodotus and
Artemon, by which the Roman community was assailed about this
time. We
have moreover an extant fragment of a work against Noetus
(whether an independent treatise or not), whose heretical views also
threatened this same church in his day. He wrote likewise against
Marcion. It would seem strange therefore if so persistent a champion
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 385
of orthodoxy had been silent about Montanism, which was certainly one
of the most formidable antagonists of the Catholic Church among the
Roman Christians at this time.
On the other hand, in the Refutatmi he dismisses this heresy very

meagre,' and fails

'

briefly. Bunsen complains that the whole article is

to fulfil the promise which Hippolytus made at the outset, that he

would leave no form of error unanswered. I think this meagreness is
easily explained on the hypothesis which I have put forward. Just as
in a previous section Hippolytus had dismissed the heresy of Theodotus

(though second in importance to none in its influence on the Christian

history of his time) with a very few lines', because he had controverted
It in the Little
Labyrinth, so now he disposes of Montanism with the
same despatch, because he either has written, or intends to write, a
special treatise on the subject. If the words which follow refer, as they

perhaps do, not to the Noetians who are mentioned just before, but to
the Montanists who are the main subject of the paragraph, this polemical
work was still an unaccomplished project. '

Concerning these,' he says,

'
I will write more in detail at a future time.' The supposition that the
Dialogue was not yet written, though projected, is quite consistent with
the fact, that the discussion which
reproduced purported to have been
it

held during the pontificate of Zephyrinus. The Refutation indeed was

not written till after the death of Callistus, the successor of Zephyrinus.
But, as Callistus only held the see for four years (219 223), no long
time need have elapsed between the supposed date of the discussion
and the publication of the Dialogue, so that no dramatic propriety
would be violated. But on either supposition, whether the Dialogue
existed already, or was only planned in the author's mind, the fact
would explain why he is satisfied with this very cursory notice of the
Montanists in his great work.
From this Dialogue also Stephanus Gobarus {AR. 20) may have
quoted, when, as represented by Photius, he stated what opinions the
'

most holy Hippolytus held concerning the Montanists.' The account

of these heretics in the Refutation is almost too short to explain this

^ the text
Ref. Haer. y\\\. 19. Another case in The account I have given in

point is tlie article on the Quartodecimans seems to me much more probable. At

(viii. 18), who are dismissed still more the same time I am disposed to think
summarily. Hippolytus had discussed that the j^^///r7//o was left unfniished by
them in his treatise On the Passover. its author, and that he had intended to
Tn all these three cases Bunsen (Hip- expand these meagre articles, making use
polytiisI.
pp. 376, 382, 38_s) supposes of his special treatises for this purpose,
that our manuscrijit has preserved only This hypothesis will explain much which
an abstract of what Hippolytus wrote. needs explanation in the form of the work.

CLEM. II. 25
386 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

language. And, if the Latin of the Pseudo-TertuUian at all adequately

represents his earlier work, the Compendium also was equally
brief.

Indeed in the later work he does more than repeat the statements
little

of the earlier respecting these heretics.

It only remains to enquire, whether the extant fragments of the

Dialogue are consistent with the hypothesis that Hippolytus

was the
author.
As regards work might well have been written by this father;
style, the
but little
though any inference drawn from such scanty extracts can have
value. The matter however presents some difficulty. The inference

has been often drawn from the passage quoted above (see p. 3S1)', that
the writer of the Dialogue considered the Apocalypse of S. John to be a

forgery of Cerinthus and, if this inference were true,

; my hypothesis
must be abandoned ; for Hippolytus not only quoted largely from the
Apocalypse as a work of S. John, but also, as we have seen, wrote a
book in its defence. This adverse interpretation however may reason-
ably be questioned. It is difficult to see how an intelligent person

should represent the Apocalypse as teaching that in the Kingdom of

Christ men should Uve in the flesh in Jerusalem and be the slaves of
'

'
lust and pleasures,' a thousand years should be spent in
and again that
marriage festivities".'hardly less difficult to imagine how a man
It is

of great learning, as the author of the Dialogue is represented to have

been, could have reconciled such a theory with the known history and
tenets of Cerinthus. It must be confessed indeed that Dionysius of
Alexandria appears so to have interpreted the language of Gaius in tlie
Dialogue. At all events he speaks of some previous writers (nve? twi'
Trpo 7?/xc3v) as maintaining that the Apocalypse was written by Cerinthus,
and describes their views in language somewhat resembling the passage
of the Dialogue (Euseb. H. E. vii. 25 \ comp. iii. 28); though he him-
self, while questioning the Apostolic authorship
of the book, has the
not
good sense and feeling to reject this solution as untenable. It is

so clear that Eusebius also understood the passage in the same way.

1
Neander (il, p. 441 Bohn's transl.) know what respect the opinions of
in

writes thus: 'Moreover it deserves con- these fathers were contrasted by

two
siderationinthisrespect,thatbyStephamis Stephanus, if they were contrasted. At
Gobaras the judgments of Hippolytus and allevents Hippolytus in the Refutation
of Gregory of Nyssa respecting the Mon- speaks quite as strongly against the
tanists are set one against the other, so Montanists as the case justifies,
"
that we may conclude that the former The word 7dyuos however need not
signify a marriage festival,
as used
belonged to the defenders of Montanism.'
it is

And others have attributed Montanizing elsewhere of festivities generally; e.g.

views to Hippolytus. But we do not Lxx, Esth. iv. 22.

 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 387
On the other hand Theodoret adopted a different interpretation.
' '
Cerinthus,' writes this father, also invented certain revelations pre-

tending to have seen them himself (ws avVo; re^ca/xeVos). Against him
not only have the above-named persons written, but with them also
Gaius and Dionysius the Bishop of Alexandria {AJi. 12 d).' So
interpreted, the passage signifies that Cerinthus set himself up for 'a
great apostle' who had revelations': and this is more in accordance
S. John as it appears in other ancient notices.
with his attitude towards
But, whatever be the exact bearing of the words ws vtto aTroa-roXov
fxeyaXov yeypaixfjLevwv, the description is inappropriate to the Apocalypse
of our Canon. Nor indeed is it likely that an orthodox presbyter of the
Roman Church sliould have so written of a book which a contemporary
presbyter of the same Church reverenced as the genuine work of an
inspired Apostle ; for the author of the Dialogne does not write as one
who is
putting forward an opinion \vhich would be contested by his own
compeers.
If may be said, however, that at all events Gaius attacks the millen-
narians, whereas Hippolytus himself held millennial views. But both
propositions involved in this statement are open to question. Gaius
did indeed condemn a sensuous millennium, but it is
by no means clear
that the passage goes so far as to condemn Chiliastic doctrine in all its

forms. On the other hand

not certain that Hippolytus was a
it is

Chiliast at all, while it is quite certain that he must have scouted all
Chiliastic views which wore a sensuous garb. As regards the first point,
he does indeed maintain that the world will last six thousand years, cor-
responding to the six days of creation, and that afterwards will come the

reign of Christ, of which the Sabbath is the type", but the parallel is not
pressed so far as to insist upon the same duration for his antitypical
sabbath as for his antitypical working-day; and he elsewhere speaks of
the second Advent in such a way as to leave no room for a millennium.
It is at least remarkable, that though he again and again enlarges on
eschatological subjects he is wholly silent on this one point, even where
the subject would naturally lead him to state the doctrine, if he held
it^ But, if it is hardly probable that Hippolytus held Chiliastic opinions

Seethe parallel given by Routh (11. p.

^
forged Apocalypses under the name of

i39)from Apollonius in Euseb. H.E. v. 18, some Apostle, perhaps S. Peter.

"
fiL/xov/xevos rbv airocToXov, KaOoXiKrin riva Ilippol. Fragm. 59 (on Daniel),
avvra^afievos iri(TTo\riv, speaking of one p. 153 (Lagarde).
^
Themiso, a Montanist. The more natural Seethe on Antichrist through-
treatise

interpretation of the words however seems out (especially 4489), besides several
c.

to be, that Cerinthus palmed off his fragments bearing on the subject.

25 2
388 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
of any kind, it is quite certain that he would have condemned, as
strongly
as any one, the sensuous conception of the millennium attributed by
Cerinthus in the Dialogue. In the resurrection,' he writes, men shall be
' '

as angels of God that is to say, in incorruption and immortality and

:

immutability (dpcva-ia). For incorruptible being is not born, does not

grow, does not sleep, does not hunger, does not thirst, does not toil,
does not suffer, does notnot pierced by nails and spear, does not
die, is

sweat, does not shed blood such beings are those of the angels and of
:

souls released from bodies; for both these are different in kind from

(crepoyevtis), and alien to, the visible and corruptible creation of the (pre-
sent) world'.'

When the above essay was written, I had thought also that the
Heads agamst Gains, which are mentioned in Ebedjesu's list {AR. 37)
might have been this very Dialogue of Gaius and Proclus, which Euse-
bius mentions; and that owing to a careless heading, or to a superficial

impression derived fromits opening sentences, it might have been taken

to be written against Gaius, because the interlocutor Proclus, who

perhaps opened the debate, was found arguing against him. Thus the
last vestige of evidence for the existence of Gaius as distinct from Hip-

polytus would have disappeared. But only last year Prof. Gwynn of
Dublin discovered and published from Dionysius Barsalibi several frag-
ments from this very treatise, in which Hippolytus maintains against
Gaius the genuineness and authority of the Apocalypse of S. John
(see below, p. 394 sq). Gaius therefore is alive once more, though he
seemed to me to be dead. But, whether this is really Gaius the Roman
presbyter or another, may perhaps be still an open question.

5.

THE LITERARY JVORKS OF HIPPOLYTUS.

With most writers the obvious order would be the life first and the
works afterwards. The works are the fruit and consequence of the life ;

the works live and flourish after the life is ended. But with Hippolytus
it is convenient to reverse the natural order. We know next to nothing
about Hippolytus except what we learn from ; and, as the
his own works
genuineness of the productions ascribed to him is beset in many cases
with great difficulties, we are quite powerless to deal with the life, until
the preliminary questions affecting these are first settled.
J
*

Hippol. Fragm. 9, p. 90 (Lagarde).

 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 389
In the following account I have been greatly assisted by J. A. Fabri-
cius Bibl. Graec. vii. p. 1S3 sq (ed. Harles); Bunsen Hippolytus and
His Age 514 sq (1854); Caspari Taiifsynibol u. Glaubensregel iii.
I.
p.

P- 377 sq; and especially Salmon in Smith-Wace's Did. of Christ.

Biogr. III. p. 91 sq s. v. Hippolytus Romanus,' whose list is the most

'

careful and complete.

His work may be divided conveniently for my purpose into four
classes ;

(a) and Exegetical ;

Biblical

(b) and Apologetic ;

llieo logical

(c) Historical and Chronological ;

(d) Heresiological.

Where a strictly logical classification is impossible, and where in many

cases either from the character of the writing itself or from the defect
of our information we may doubt where to place any particular work,
this rough division will suffice.

A. BIBLICAL AND EXEGETICAL.

1. The Muratorian Canon. The reasons for assigning this work to
Hippolytus require to be stated in full, and are given in a separate
section. See below, p. 405 sq.
2. On the Hexaenieron. This work on the days of Creation seems
to have been well known in early times. It is mentioned in several

Usts, and Jerome {AR. 8. g) tells us more especially that S. Ambrose in

his extant work on the same subjects made great use of it. Some frag-
ments are given in Lagarde, p. 123 141. The reference of Jerome to
the charge brought against himself of misinterpretation in explaining
the odd and even days of Creation (AR. 8. d) must be to this work.
3. On Hexaemeron. This work (cis to, /mctci ttJv
the Sequel to the

e^at^jxepov) mentioned is
by Eusebius and others. The commentary In
Genesini, included by Jerome in his list, is probably the same. It would
deal with certain passages in the patriarchal history. Jerome elsewhere
(AR. 8. c) gives a mystical interpretation of one of these from
Hippolytus. Isaac symbolizes God the Father, Rebecca the Holy
Spirit, etc.

4. On Exod^is, only in Jerome's list. It is questionable whether

77 wSt; 7; fxeydXr] in Theodoret's quotation (AR. 12. b) has anything to
do with the Song of Moses Exod. 15.
5. On the Benedictions of Balaam. This work is quoted by Leon-
390 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
tius of Byzantium [AR. 21. b), but there is a v. 1.
'AfSpaa/i for BaXad/x

(see Lagarde, p. 140). The more likely

blessings of Balaam are a
subject to have been chosen by Hippolytus; and a copyist would be
tempted to substitute the commoner word ^AfSpad/x. The extract itself
contains nothing which is decisive.
Fabricius (11. p. ;^;^ sq) gives extracts from some Arabic Mss at

Oxford of a Catena on the Pentateuch, which contains numerous pas-

Hippolytus the expositor of the Targum.' We are
'

sages ascribed to
not encouraged either by the source of these extracts, or by their con-
tents, to regard them as a genuine work of our Hippolytus.
6. O/i Elka)iah and Hannah. This discourse is twice quoted by
Theodoret {AR. 12. a, b).
7. On Saul and the Witch of Endor (-n-epl ^aovX kol ttiJ^wvos) or, as
it is described on the chair, It is found also
[ets rrjv iy]yaaTpLfjivdov.
in Jerome's list. This same incident is made the subject of a discus-
sion by Hippolytus' contemporary Origen and his representation of it
;

was considered so important that it was specially answered by Eusta-

thius of Antioch. The two tracts have been recently edited together
by Jahn in Gebhardt u. Harnack Texte u. Untcrsjichimgen, 1886.

8. On the Psalms. Theodoret {AR. 12) quotes from the com-

mentary on the 2nd, the 23rd, the 24th, and (if he means this by
T-rjv fxeydXyjv), the 119th Psalm.
TT/v wSy?v See also in Migne (p. 611)
a fragment on the 77th Psalm, published by Bandini (Catal. Cod.
Grace. Medic, i. p. 91). There is likewise a possibility that the Demon-
stration against the Jews may be a commentary on Ps. Ixix.

There also a long passage extant (Lagarde, p- 187 sq) entitled the
is

hypothesis or introduction of Hippolytus the bishop of Rome to the

' ' '

Psalms,' which seems to show the influence of Origen's Hexapla (Over-

beck Qiiaest. Hippol. p. 6 sq). The genuine introduction of Hippolytus
appears to be preserved in the corresponding Syriac (Lagarde's Anal.
Syr. p. 83), and confirms Overbeck's view, as pointed out by Salmon

('Hippolytus Romanus,' p. 103). The Greek frag-

writer of the extant
ment has worked together and Origen. We find
materials of Hippolytus
a characteristic trait of Hippolytus which appears much more definitely
in the Syriac than in the Greek. In the Chronicon he enumerated the
72 nations of the earth (25 from Shem, 15 from Japhet, and 32 from Ham);
and in the Philosophumena (x. 20) he refers to his enumeration. Now
in the Syriac fragment he tells how David's four chief singers had each

72 players of instruments under him, corresponding to the 72 nations,

which again he distributes in the same way, 25 to Shem, 15 to Japhet,

and 32 to Ham.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 39 1

9. On the Proverbs, mentioned in several lists. Some fragments

are given in Lagarde, p. 196; and one long additional passage in Migne

p. 616 sq from Mai Bib/. Nov. vii. ii. p. 71 (1854).

10. On Ecdesiastes, mentioned by Jerome. A quotation is given
by S. de Magistris as from Anastasius of Sinai, but it is not in the printed
editions; comp. Lagarde p. 201.
11. On the Song of Songs in several lists: see Lagarde p. 200 sq.
Apparently extant in a Syriac translation ;
Assem. Bib/. Orient, i. p. 607.
12. On Isaiah, mentioned by Jerome. Theodoret {AR. 12. a)
quotes from the beginning of it. See Lagarde Hippo/, p. 142 and
Ana/. Syr. p. 87.
13. On Jeremiah. At least Assemani {Bib/. Or. i.
p. 607) mentions
the existence of such a work, but does not state whether it is a com-

plete commentary.
14. On parts of Ezekiei, in the list of Eusebius. The work on 'the
four living creatures' is mentioned by Assemani {Bib/. Or. i.
p. 607)
as extant in a Syriac translation.

15. On Danie/, in most of the lists, though not in Eusebius.

Apparently a very popular work and several times quoted {AR. 8. h, 18,
32? ZZ^ 35)- This work is the subject of a careful monograph by
Bardenhewer (1877), who had pointed out that the long and important
Chigi fragment (Lagarde p. 151 sq) does not preserve the Commentary
of Hippolytus in the original form. For the fragments known when this
work was written see Lagarde p. 145 sq, Migne p. 6-^^ sq. Quite recently
a very important discovery has been made. Georgiades has published in
the 'E/<A.7jcrtao-riKT7 'AXyjOeia, May 1885 for the first time. Anal. Syr. -rrepl

opacrecos rod TrpocjjrjTov ^avLrjX Aoyos 8', and is preparing a greater work for
which he is
collating in the libraries of Europe. Meanwhile Kennedy
(Dublin 1888) has reprinted the Greek text with an English translation.
As the fourth book contains the last six chapters, Georgiades infers that
Aoyos a contained the History of Susannah, Aoyos fS' the Song of the
Three Children, and Aoyos y' the earlier portion of the Canonical
Daniel. On p. 13 eV ttj -n-po TavTrjs (3t/3Xii) creayfjiavTaL we ought pro-
bably in the light of this new discovery to see a reference to the 3rd

book, as the prophet was divided in Hippolytus. Hippolytus states

(p. 42) that
our Lord was born on viii Kal. Jan. on the 4th day, in the

55th year of Augustus being the 5500th year from Adam and that He ;

was crucified in His 33rd Kal. Apr. on Friday {TvapacrKivfj)

year, on viii

in the i8th year of Tiberius, in the consulship of Rufus (Fufius) and Ru-

belUo, or (as it is elsewhere expressed) 'duobus Geminis' (see i. p. 253).

He thus places the Crucifi.xion on March 25 a.d. 29, and the Birth on
392 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Dec. 25 B.C. 4, which he regards as the 42nd of Augustus. If this

be the genuine text of Hippolytus (and there seems no reason to

doubt it), the information is highly important. It shows that the date

which we find elsewhere for the Crucifixion in the Liberian chronicle

expresses Hippolytus' deliberate view.

This date also of the Crucifixion
is involved in the Paschal Tables. For the reasons which led Hippolytus
to fix on this day, though not the real full-moon in a.d. 29, see Salmon
'

in Smith-Wace Diet, of Christ. Biogr. s.v. Chronicon Canisianum '

506; 'Hippolytus Romanus' 111. p. 92 sqjand Hermathena

i.
I.
p. p. 96.

But has a still more important bearing.

it In the corresponding frag-
ment in the Chisian fragment of Daniel (Lagarde p. 153) we have
exactly the same statement liraOi. 8e tw rptaKoo-TU) TptVo) eVet, though
without the same particulars. Salmon {Hcrmath. I.e.) expresses his sur-
prise that, while Hippolytus defends
the authenticity of the fourth

Gospel and founds his chronology of the passover on S. John (see

in.

p. 104), he has
not in the Paschal Tables and in the Chronicle made the

usual inference from S. John's account as to the duration of our Lord's

ministry. This indeed would be the more surprising because his

master Iren^us not only does this, but exaggerates the inference from

S. John, alleging the tradition of the elders that Christ's ministry ex-
tended over many years and thus refuting the Valentinian argument
for their thirty a;onsderived from the thirty years of Christ's earthly
life'. He
therefore supposes that 'thirty third' was a transcriber's cor-
rection in the Chisian fragment to improve the chronology. Now
however that this new authority is discovered it seems impossible to
maintain this view. If the crucifixion which he certainly places duobus
'

Geminis' i.e. a.d. 29, and the duration of our Lord's life to His 33rd

year, are both

inconsistent with the reckonings of the Chronicle and the
Paschal Tables., the inconsistency must be allowed. The real difficulty
iswith the Paschal Tables, where the reNecic xc is placed on iv Non.
Apr. in the 2nd year of the first cycle, and the nAeoc xc on viii Kal.

April in thei6th year of the second, thus making an interval of 31

years within a few days between the two, it being assumed that the
peNecic means the visitation. As the Commentary on Daniel was
apparently written much earlier than the other works, perhaps Hippo-
lytus saw some way meanwhile of fitting in the three passovers of

S.John into his later chronology. At all events he cannot have been
unaware of the difficulty.
In the ordinary Greek Bibles Susannah precedes, the Song of the
Three Children follows, and last comes the Book of Daniel proper,
22; see Essays on Supernatural Kdigion, p. 245 sq.
1
Iren. Hacr. ii.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 393
This was doubtless the case with the copy of Hippolytus. The long
fragment (Lagarde p. 145 sq) relating to Susannah has every appearance
of being the introduction to the whole work. Hippolytus begins by
explaining why, though the events took place later, they are recorded
at the beginning of the work {>] la-Topia yeye'i/T^rai vo-rcpov, 7rpoeypd(f>r] 8e

fiipXov TrpcoTT/';); for it was customary, he adds, for the scribes to

Trj<;

record things in reversed order (uo-TcpoVpwTa), as we find with many

visions of the prophets. It is needless to say that Susannah signifies

the Church, and the two elders are the two peoples, the Jewish and the
Gentile. This mystical interpretation constituted its great attraction to
the fathers. But what is the Zi^^/e Daniel, which according to Ebedjesu

{AR. 36) Hippolytus commented on? It is commonly explained of the

ordinary Lxx apocryphal additions to Daniel (Susannah, the Three
Children, Bel and the Dragon); but these would all be included
ordinarily under Daniel, and in Ebedjesu's list Susannah is specially
mentioned. In Wright's Syriac AISS Brit. Mus. i. p. 19 (see above,
p.350 sq) there is a fragment from the 'Daniel the less (or the youth)
on our Lord and the end of the world.' It seems to be a distinctly
Christian apocryphal writing. Daniel is represented as preaching the
future judgment in the language of S. John's Gospel 'He will come to
His own, and His own will not recognise Him... I am not able to ex-

plain who He
is, but by the Spirit in a mystery. The servant is not able
to overcome his master, but I give signs and preach concerning Him.'
The book recovered and published by Georgiades evidently preserves
the Commentary of Hippolytus in its original form. Bardenhewer had
surmised that in the long fragment of the Chisian ms (Lagarde
p. 151 168) it was much compressed; and this new discovery has
confirmed his suspicion.
Moreover this new discovery throws some light on the date of the
work. Bardenhewer (p. 68), impressed by the language used of the
persecutions of the Church, places it as early as 202. To this early date
Salmon 104) objects, calling attention to the fact that according
(in. p.
to Eusebius {H. E. vi) Judas, writing on the 70 weeks of Daniel, brought
his chronography down to the loth year of Severus and maintained that
the coming of Antichrist was imminent (r/S?/ to'tc irapdvai), and he argues
that at least a dozen years must have elapsed to 'allow the minds of the
Christians to cool down.' But now that we have the complete words
of Hippolytus, we see that the excitement was still at a red heat and
that probably this treatise was written to calm men's fears. He
mentions apparently this very Judas; 'I will relate,'he says, 'what took
place not long ago {t6 avfi-fidv uv irpo ttoXXuv )(p6vov) in Syria,' where a
394 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
certain leader of the Church led himself and others astray, persuading
'many of the brethren with their wives and children to go out into the
wilderness to meet Christ.' He adds that if his wife, who was also a
Christian, had not been wiser than himself and prevailed upon the gover-
nor, he would have slain them all as robbers. He mentions also another
ruler of a church in Pontus, whom I do not know whether it is possible
to identify, 'a pious and humble man, but with no firm grasp (ju.77 Trpoa-e'^wv

da-ffiaXm) of the scriptures,' who, misled by visions, staked his credit on

the immediate coming, and the people sold their lands accordingly.
16. On Zac/iaria/i, mentioned by Jerome.
17. On S. Matthew. This
is not included in Jerome's list, but he

himself {AR. 8.
i) especially
elsewhere mentions Hippolytus as having
written on this Gospel. De Magistris has given an extract on eViow'o-ios
in the Lord's prayer, purporting to come from Hippolytus (Migne
p. 700) and;quite recently Gwynn has printed and translated from the
Syriac of Dionysius Barsalibi {Hermathena vii. p. 137, 1889) a long and
important comment on Matt. xxiv. 15 22, which may have come from
(p. 142) seems to state
Indeed Barsalibi
this work. this 'in the

Commentary on the Gospel,' as if distinguishing it from an earlier

quotation taken from some other work. Assemani {Bibl. Or. i. p. 607)
mentions Hippolytus as writing on the five persons omitted in S.
Matthew's genealogy.
18. From
the way in which they are quoted by Theodoret {AR.
12. b, c) The Discourse on the Distribution of the Talents, and The
Discourse on the Two Thieves would seem to have been separate
homilies, not portions of a Commentary.
What may be the source of the fragments relating to the early
chapters of S. Luke (Lagarde p. 202), we do not know. There is no
notice of any Commentary on this Gospel. They may have been taken
from the Trepi oiKovo/Atas, or from almost any of his theological works.
19. Defence of the Gospel and Apocalypse of S. Johti. From the
preposition (wep, not Trept) and from the association of the two works
together, it is a safe inference that this was an apologetic work, directed
against those persons who objected to both works alike, because they
described our Lord as the Adyos; but they must have contained much
exegetical matter. Indeed we may suspect that Epiphanius borrowed
the name aAoyot 'the irrational ones,' from Hippolytus for these jokes
;

are very much in his way; e.g. vot^to?, ai/oi^ros (ix. 10), and Soko's, Sokciv,
SoKTjTttt (viii. i). Dionysius Barsalibi states that Hippolytus, like Irenaeus,
holds the Apocalypse to have been written by John the Evangelist under
Domitian (Gwynn Hennathe/ia vu. p. 137).
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 395
The Heads against Gains are mentioned in the Hst of Ebedjesu
{AR. 37) as a separate work. But they have every appearance of being
extracts from that part of this apologetic work which relates to the

Apocalypse. I have already considered what relation these bear to the

notices of other writers relating to Gains the Roman presbyter (p. 388).

B. THEOLOGICAL AND APOLOGETIC.

20.Dcnioiistratio c. Jiidaeos ('ATroSetKriK?/ Kpo'i 'louSatou?). large A
portion of this treatise was first published by Fabricius (11. p. 2 sq) from

a Vatican ms communicated to him by Montfaucon.

But besides this Greek portion De Magistris (p. 435 sq) connected
with it, as part of the same work, a Latin treatise commonly printed
among the spurious works of Cyprian (e.g. Hartel's edition, iii.
p. 133 sq). So far as I can discover, he had no ground whatever
except his own arbitrary assumption for assigning it to Hippolytus.
At he gives none.
least If there is no reason for assigning this work to

Cyprian, it seems even less possible to maintain the Hippolytean

authorship. Yet Bunsen 450) accepts it without a question,

(i. p.

describing it as
'
far more
interesting than the part preserved in the
Greek text.' The connexion of this Latin tract with the Greek fragment
is purely arbitrary. On this subject see Draseke Jahrb. f. Prot. Theol.
XII. p.
456 sq (1886).
This might seem at first sight to be part of his commentary on the
69th Psalm. But the mutilated title on the Chair cannot be so well
supplied as by [npoc Toyc ioy^a]ioyc. Moreover the Jews are directly
addressed again and again, (3 'louSaie, w 'lonSatot. Again, though it is
largely taken up with the exposition of this one psalm, it is not wholly
so. Lastly ;
the sequence of scriptural authorities quoted (p. 66 sq
Lagarde) ws
i^avtS o o-os XP'^^os, o /xeyas 'Iw/3, c^epoj Si) e's /xeo-ov Koi rrjv

Trpo(fi7]TeLav '^oXofXMv,
Kai 7raA.tv o ^auiS iv i/'aA/xots, Kal TraAtv ^oXofjLwu,

points to a more general treatise than the exposition of an individual

psalm.
21. On the Nature of the Universe or, as it is described on the
Chair, Against the Greeks or Against Plato or Concerning the Universe.
I may observe by the way, that according to the general
arrangement
of titles (see p. 325) yjioviKw is a distinct work from -n-pos "EXAr/ms

K.T.X., and that the two should not be fused, as is sometimes done.
Thus the genuineness and identity of the work are established on the best

possible authority. Nevertheless Photius {AR. 32. a) found it ascribed

in his copy to Josephus ; but he saw that this was impossible owing to
39^ EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
its distinctly Christian theology. He adds that he has found it stated
in some notices that it was really written by Gaius the Roman presbyter,
the author of the Labyn7ith. This Labyrinth, as I have shown elsewhere
is
(see above, p. 37 y), probably the tenth book of the Fhilosop/mme?ia,
in which Hippolytus distinctly mentions himself as having written a
treatise Concerning the Nature of the Universe {Ref. x. 32). Photius
further mentions the report that, having been left anonymous, it is
assigned by some to Josephus, by others to Justin Martyr, and by
others to Irenseus, just as some assign the Labyrinth to Origen. In the
so-called John Damascene {Sacr. Parallel. 11. pp. 755, 789) it is twice

quoted, and ascribed in the one passage to Meletius, in the other to

Josephus. By Joannes Philoponus (Lagarde, p. 124), who gives a few
lines, ascribed to 'Josephus the Hebrew' and entitled Trept t^s toi)
it is

TravTos In the MS from which Hoeschel first printed the

amas.
important fragment (Lagarde p. 68) in his notes to Photius (Phot.
Op. IV. p. 362 Migne) it was ascribed to Josephus, and seems to have
borne the title Trepl t^s tov Travros alriaq rj ovaias. The resemblances of
language and substance bespeak the same authorship with the Philoso-
phuinena, even if we had not the author's own certification (see
Wordsworth, p. 211 sq). Wordsworth (p. 306) gives the latter part of
Hoeschel's fragment (from p. 27, 1. 5, 6 /xeyas twv StKatwi/ k.t.A.. Lagarde,
onward), where it is carried a few lines farther from an Oxford MS,
Barocc. 26, which however had been previously printed by Hearne.
This additional part contains the apocryphal quotation, i.^ oU av vpu>
vfxd<;, eTTt tovtols Kptvia, which is quoted by Justin Martyr and several

fathers (Resch Agrapha 112 sq, 226 sq, 290 sq, in Gebhardt u.
p.
Harnack Texte u. Untersuch. v. Hft. 4, 1889). This is quoted as from
Ezekiel (i.e. the pseudo-Ezekiel) by some of the fathers; and it is

noticeable that Clem. Alex. Qids div. Salv. 40 (p. 957) after Kpivw ends
the quotation in the same way as Hippolytus, Kai irap eKaara /Soa to
TcXos TravTwv.
In the long extant fragment Hippolytus addresses the Greeks more
than once, and he mentions Plato by name (p. 70, Lagarde). Photius
also says that he refutes Alcinous 'concerning the soul and matter and

resurrection,' and shows after the manner of the Christian apologists

generally, and indeed of Josephus, 'the much greater antiquity of the
Jews than the Greeks' {AP. 32. a). Alcinous is not mentioned in the
extant fragments.
In the passage of the Philosophumena (x. 32) he expounds briefly
the cosmogony which was the foundation of this treatise. God was
absolute and alone. He created from simple elements, fire, spirit,
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 397
water, and earth. Those creatures which are composed of more than
one element are capable of dissolution. The soul is pure air or spirit
(TTvev/xa). The great interest in the extant fragment is the application
of his cosmogony to explain the intermediate state, which was a favourite
subject of Hippolytus.
2 2. An exhortatioji addressed to Severina (TrporpeTTTiKos Trpos 1e(3rj-

pivnv). This is mentioned on the Chair, and it is

generally identified
with TT/Dos quoted by Theodoret {AJ^. 1 2.
jSao-iXiSa tlvo. eTricTToXi) twice
b, c). The fragments have reference to the Resurrection, and more
especially to Christ as the aTrapyrj. No princess bearing the name
Severina mentioned anywhere either in inscriptions or in literature.
is

Bunsen supposed that she was a daughter of Alexander Severus, but he

only married in 229, and his daughter, if he even had one, can only
have been four or five years old at Hippolytus' death. Le Moyne
identified her with Severa the wife of Philippus ;
and DoUinger (p. 25)
with Julia Aquilia Severa the second wife of Elagabalus. But no
reason is given why either of these should have been called Severina.
As no princess of the name is known, it is perhaps better to identify
the /Saa-iXU of Theodoret with Julia Mammsea the mother of Alexander.
22*. A letter to a certain priricess twice quoted by Theodoret {AR.
12. b, c). See the last section.

The quotation in Anal. Syriac. p. 87 sq (Lagarde) belongs not im-

probably to the same work. It runs as follows ;

'OF HIPPOLYTUS BISHOP AND MARTYR On the Resurrection to

the Empress Mammcea was the mother of Alexander who was
;
for she
at that time emperor of the Romans.'

Now the cause of the heresies of the Nicolaitans was first brought
'

forward in like manner by Nicolas he was one of the deacons who were
elected at the first and is recorded in the Acts when he was troubled
by strange spirits saying that the resurrection had taken place ; sup-
posing that the resurrection was to believe in the Messiah and to be
baptized, not meaning the resurrection of the flesh.'
To him Hippolytus goes on to trace the errors of Hymenaeus and
Philetus and of the Gnostics ;
and he couples with them the false
teachers at Corinth, explaining S. Paul's language 'we have this treasure
in earthen vessels' of the gift of immortality; for 'what is our dead
flesh but these vessels before mentioned, into which the treasure of
incorruption being put makes them immortal?'
This the passage to which Stephanus Gobarus refers
may be
(AR. 20), but the same opinion was expressed by Hippolytus in both
his general works on Heresies.
39^ EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
23. On the Resurrection, mentioned by Jerome {AR. 8. b), and
on the Chair (Trepi eo{i koI o-apKos avao-TcttreoJs).

24. A Homily on the praise of 07ir Lord and Saviour (Trpoo-o/AtXia

de Laude Domini Salvatoris) mentioned by Jerome as having been de-
livered before Origen. I shall have occasion to refer to this again, as
it is one of our very few chronological land-marks (see below, p. 423).
It is possible that this homily is the Trcpt olKovofXLa<; of the Chair and
Ebedjesu (A. R. 37).
25. On Christ and Antichrist. This work is mentioned by Jerome
under the title 'de Antichristo,' and under the further title ttc/di Xptcrrov
Ktti
^kwv)(fiia-jov by Photius who read it.

A spurious work bearing the title Trcpl T17? o-wreXeias rov Koafxov koI

Trept Tov KvTL-)(^pi(TTov Koi CIS rr]v Seurepav irapovariav rov Kupt'ov 7j[X(2v Irjcrov

XpL(TTov was published by Joannes Picus (Paris 1556), and still retains a
place in the editions (e.g. Fabricius 11. p. 4 sq, Lagarde p. 92); but it is

universally condemned as spurious. It begins 'EttciS-)) 01 /xaKaptoi k.t.X.

The genuine treatise, which was read by Photius, entitled Trepi tov
o"(i)T7ypos )]fxwv 'Irjaov XptCTToS
kol Trept rov 'AvTi^picrroi; was first published

by Gudius (Paris 161 1), and will be found in Fabricius i. p. 4 sq and

in Lagarde p. i 36. It is apparently almost complete. It is addressed

to one 'brother Theophilus,' possibly like the Theophilus whose name

the Acts bears on the forefront, an imaginary person; and, as it deals
with prophecy affecting the future of the Roman empire, Hippolytus
not unnaturally cautions his friend in the language of S. Paul to
Timothy to guard the deposit carefully, and only to commit it to faithful
and discreet disciples. The general scheme of the world's history and
the end of all things is the same which this father has evolved
from Daniel's prophecy as described above; though in some respects it is
more fully drawn out. He deals with the mystical number of the beast
in the Apocalypse, mentioning the alternative explanations tcitan,

eyANeAC, and AAjeiNoc, as Irenseus has done before him (Haer. v. 30. i),
and deciding in favour of the last (p. 26). For other obligations of
Hippolytus to his master in the work on Antichrist see Overbeck p. 70 sq.
On the whole there seems to be reasonable ground for Overbeck's
contention(p. 88 sq), that this work was written at a time of perse-
and therefore presumably in the age of Severus, about a.d. 200.
cution,
The awe of the Roman power, and the warnings of caution, both point
in this direction. The coincidences of interpretation, which he mentions
between Hippolytus and Origen, are curious but not sufficient, I think,
to establish on either side any direct obligation of the one from the
other ;
which is improbable in itself
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 399

26. O71 the Holy Theophany (cts ra a'yia ^eo<^avta). This is a

discourse on the Baptism of our Lord, preserved in a Gale MS Trin.
Coll. o. 36 at Cambridge. It was probably addressed to candidates
5.
when they presented themselves for baptism (see Wordsworth, p. 224).

Though it is nowhere quoted (at least under this name), so far as I am

aware, by ancient writers, there is nothing which Hippolytus might not
have written.

C. HISTORICAL AND CHRONOLOGICAL.

27. Chrojitca. This work is mentioned on the Chair, and even
without this certification it contains unquestionable internal evidence of
itsauthorship. The original Greek is lost; but it is extant in two
Latin translations, of which the one first published by Canisius may

be conveniently consulted in Ducange Chroii. Pasch. 11. p. 96 sq (ed.

Bonn.) under the title Z/7vr Generationis ; the other, being incorporated
in the collection of the Chronographer of 354, is admirably edited by
Mommsen. In this latter connexion I have had occasion to speak of it

at length in my previous volume (i. p. 258 sq). It is brought down to

A.D. 234 (the xiiith year of Alexander), when doubtless it was com-
pleted. It is not in any strict sense a chronicle, but is partly ethno-

graphy and partly chronography. One of its main purposes, as with

most early apologists, was to show the superior antiquity of the Jews to
the Classical nations of antiquity.
28. Paschal Tables^. This record is found inscribed in full on the
sides of the Chair, where it is described as aVoSet^is
ypovii^v tov -n-uo-xa
Kara \ja\ Iv tw ttivo-ki. The more important parts of it are given above
{AR. 2). It is a calculation of the times of Easter according to a
cycle of sixteen years from a.d. 222 333. Salmon however has given
strong reasons {^Hermathena i. p. 88 sq ; Smith-Wace Did. of Christ.
Ant. 'Hippolytus Romanus' iii. p.
s.v. 93) for supposing that it was
issued A.D. 224. It has received great attention from Scaliger, Bucher,

Bianchini, and others ; and more recently from De Rossi and from
Salmon, who have rendered very efficient service. The table not only
calculates the Easters for more than a century, but likewise fixes all
those mentioned in the Old Testament. Thus it affords many tests for

establishing the authorship of works ascribed to Hippolytus, as well as

for the criticism of his life in other ways. I shall have occasion more

than once to refer to it for these purposes.

^
This work is mentioned by Eusebius construction tlie calculation was found to
and Jerome, as well as by others, and be incorrect, and it had to be abandoned
seems to have excited considerable at- in favour of other systems,

tention, though within a few years after its

400 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT

D. HERESIOLOGICAL.

29. The Compe7idinm against all the Heresies, an early work, founded
on the lectures of Irenaeus. This will be considered immediately in a
section to itself. See below, p. 413 sq.

29*. Against Noetus. Reasons will be given presently for sup-

posing that this only the peroration of the previous treatise
is ;
which is

known to have ended with the heresy of Noetus,

29**. Against the Heresy of Artemon. The reasons for assigning

this work to Hippolytus have been given already (p. 377 sq).
Only one objection of apparent force to the Hippolytean authorship
is Salmon (p. 98). The anonymous writer against Artemon
alleged by
(Euseb. H. E. v. 28) speaks of Victor as the 13th bishop of Rome from
Peter; whereas in the Liberian list Cletus and Anacletus are made two
distinct persons, so that he would be the 14th. I have anticipated this

objection, and shown already (i. p. 282 sq) strong reasons for believing
that Hippolytus cannot be made responsible for these blunders in the
earlier part of the papal list.

30. This treatise is mentioned by Eusebius

Against Marcion.
and Jerome and by others, and seems to have been one of considerable
importance. As the fundamental idea of Marcion's theory was the
dual principle of good and evil {Ref. Haer. vii. 30 aVrtTrapa^ccns aya^oD
Kttt KaKoG, vii. 3 1
'7 TrpiiiTTj
Kai KaOapnardrr) MapKtojros atpeo'is l^ aya^ow
Kttt KaKov TTJv (jvaTacTLv exovara), there is every reason to think that this
'
is same treatise which is designated on the Chair
the Concerning the
Good and whence cometh the EviV
Concenmig Spiritual Gifts (;(apto-/>iaTO)v) the Apostolic Tradition.
31.
This work is mentioned on the Chair, but its purport has been differently

explained. For reasons which I have given in another instance (p. 395),
we must regard this as a single title, and not, as has been suggested
(see Caspari iii. p. 390), separate it and regard it as giving two distinct
works; (l) Trepi T^aptcr/xarajv, and (2) ctTroorToXtK?} TrapaSoo-i?. The
Apostolic use of the word xapto'/*a''"a seems to furnish the safest key to
'

In his discourses on the Witch of Endor

'
the purport of this work.
and the Blessings of Balaam Hippolytus sought
'
'
to explain some of the
anomalies attending the bestowal of these graces, and it seems probable
that in this treatise he attempted to give something like a systematic

exposition of the whole subject based upon the Apostolic teaching.

The vagaries of Montanism more especially would force it on his notice,
as pressing for some reasonable treatment. How far and under what
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 401
circumstances was the presence of moral or intellectual obliquity
consistent with the bestowal of such exceptional graces from above?
In fact all those questions which are suggested by S. Paul's account of
the abuses in the Corinthian Church, and many more which start
up
when we stir the question ourselves, must have been more rampant in
early ages, when the disciples were face to face with similar phenomena
in heathendom.
This I believe to have been the intention of our author's treatise

respecting charismata. On the other hand a wholly different explanation

has been sometimes given of it. It is supposed to have been a code

of Church ordinances or constitutions regulating the appointment to

Though this view does not commend itself at

ecclesiastical offices.
first sight, it can claim a large amount of traditional support of a certain
kind. I cannot however reckon in this the statement of Jerome {AR.
8. f) who quotes
Hippolytus as explicit on the point whether fasting
should be observed on the sabbath and whether there should be a
daily celebration of the eucharist. He might have delivered himself of
such dicta in many other places, as in his treatise on the Hexaemeron
or in his books on the Paschal Festival or in his Demonstration against
the Jezus. But there is extant in the Alexandrian Church a code of
38 Canons published by Ludolf (a.d. 1691) and bearing the name
first

of Abulides,' which is only another transliteration of Hippolytus, here

'

first patriarch of the city of Rome

' '

styled and chief bishop of the

'

city of Rome' though Wansleb who first called attention to these

J

canons (1672, 1673) did not know who could be meant. These have
been recently re-edited by Haneberg Canones S. Hippolyti Arabice
(Monachii 1870), who has given reasons for supposing that they were
originally written in Greek. Connected with these are the Stara^ets twi/
avrOtv aytW aTrocTToAwv Trept yi.ipoTovmv 8ta 'l7r7roA.urov, as they are Called
in the ms from which Lagarde has edited them {Monac. 380), and their
designation similar in others (see Caspari in. p. 387).
is
Corresponding
to the 8th Book of the Apostolic Constitutions are two early elements
in Greek, from which it was apparently compounded and amplified :

(l) AiSacTKaXta tQv dycwv ciTroo-ToAwv Trept xapLO-fJidTijiV corresponding to

Apost. Const, viii. i, 2 {Rel. fur. Eccl. Ant. p. i sq, Lagarde), which

contains a sort of preface concerning spiritual gifts; and (2) Aiara^eis

K.T.A.. as already given, corresponding to Apost. Const, viii. 4 sq
(p. 5 sq)
on ecclesiastical offices, etc. The name of Hippolytus is attached to
this latter only.Yet here we have seemingly the explanation which we
seek. Not improbably to these ecclesiastical rules were prefixed (with
modifications) some remarks of the genuine Hippolytus from the work
CLEM. II. 26
402 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
whose title is given on the Chair ;
and in this way he came to be
regarded as the author of the Canons themselves. It is hardly probable
that even in their present comparatively simple form they can have
'
been his product, as they are attributed to the several Apostles, I Peter

first,' 'I the beloved of the Lord,' etc., and prefixed with the fiction
'
We the twelve Apostles of the Lord met together in conjunction with
Paul the vessel of election our fellow-Apostle and James the bishop
and the rest of the presbyters and the seven deacons.' We have also
'
Canons extant in Syriac designated Ordinances of the Apostles given
through Hippolytus' (Wright's Syriac Catal. of MSS of Brit. Mus. ii.
pp. 949, 1033, 1037). CanonsAll which
theseare ascribed to

Hippolytus are apparently simpler and allied forms of the ordinances

in the present 8th Book of the Apostolic Constitutions. As against the
supposition of the Hippolytean authorship however of the portion Trept
)(apL(TixdT(i)v, Caspari (in. p. 389)
observes that it presents no coincidences
of conception with the parts of the genuine Hippolytus where we should
expect to find them, the conclusions of the Refutatio and of the
Treatise against Noetus ; whereas several may be found with the other

parts of the Apostolic Constitutions. On the other hand I note what

seems to me a more weighty consideration on the other side that in
this very short treatise consisting of five octavo pages great emphasis is

laid on two topics which are characteristically Hippolytean; (i) The

enumeration of the prophetesses, to which Hippolytus devotes a section
in his Chronicon (Mommsen p. 641, Ducange ii, The stress
p. 108); (2)
laid on the history of Balaam, which Hippolytus made the subject of
a special treatise (see above, p. 389). We can imagine how Hippolytus,
starting from the discussion of the x^p'^^i^^'^^- generally, might have
been led to speak about some of the special gifts mentioned in
S. Paul's two lists (i Cor. xii. 28, Ephes. iv. 11), and that some later

editor, working up the material of Hippolytus and others, would give to

it the name of this father. The fact that Hippolytus is designated ' an
acquaintance (yvwpt/xos) of the Apostles' by Palladius (^AR. 11), as soon
as the early decades of the fifth century, is significant in this connexion.
It seems to indicate that some such work had been already attributed
to him and at all events it shows that a spurious progeny was fathered
;

upon him as coeval with the Apostles. The next writer who so designates

him, Tou TraXatoS kox yvwpLixov tcov aVocrToXwi/ (AR. 16), lived in the middle
of the sixth century. There seems therefore to be some ground for the
opinion of Bunsen (see esp. 11. p. 412 sq) and others, that the treatise
mentioned on the Chair lies at the root of the tradition respecting the
authorship ; but when with him we expunge the
'
We the Apostles
'
and
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 403
other dramatic parts, we introduce a vital change into the document,
which altogether capricious, and we have no basis of criticism for the
is

reproduction of the Canons of Hippolytus, if he drew up any.

This appears to me the most probable account. At the same time
I do not wish
to speak with any confidence; for this would not be

justified without a thorough investigation of the origin and development

of the Apostolic Constitutions such as I cannot pretend to have given.

32. On the Passover. This work must be carefully distinguished

from the Paschal Cycle with the Paschal tables engraved on the
Chair. It is mentioned separately in the lists both of Eusebius and
of Jerome. From the reference in the Chron. Pasch. (^AR. 22) we find
it consisted of more than one book.
that Along with Irenaus and (so far
as we know) all the Asiatic fathers of the school of S. John', Hippolytus
maintained that our Lord Himself was the true Passover, suffering on
the 14th Nisan, and thus superseding the legal Jewish passover. This
position he took up also in both his general books against the heresies,
the early Compendiiivi and the later Refutatio. It may be regarded

therefore as written to refute the Quartodecimans, as the fragments in

the Chron. Pasch. {AR. 22) show.

33. The Philosophiimena or Reftdation of All Heresies, his final

work, probably left incomplete at his death. This will demand a

section to itself ^

SPURIOUS HIPPOLYTEAN WORKS.

(i) The treatise Contra Bero?iem et Helicem (?) haereticos de Theo-

logia et Incarnatione Sermo is now almost universally allowed to be

spurious, though accepted as genuine by Dorner {Lehre v. der Person
Christi i. p. 536 sq) and by Bunsen (i. p. 448 sq) in our own generation,
as at an earlier date it had been defended by Bull. Its rejection by most

recent critics, e.g. Haenell, Kimmel, Fock, Bollinger, Overbeck, Caspari,

Draseke, and Salmon, has left it without a friend; and I have no inten-
tion of defending a hopeless cause.
Anastasius the Apocrisiarius, or Papal Nuncio at Constantinople (a.d.

665), saw this work at Constantinople and made a iQ.\s extracts from it,
which are preserved {AR. 24). It is quoted also {AR. 30) by Nicephorus
of Constantinople [t a.d. 828]. The manuscripts vary between 'HXikos
^
This is distinctly the case with rest of the school ;
see Essays on Super-
Clandius ApoUinaris, whose language natural Religion, t^. i^1 %(\.
^
Hippolytus closely resembles and there ; [The section in question was never
is no ground for separating him from the written.]

26 2
404 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
or 'HXiKtovos ('HXtKcWo?) as the companion heretic of Bero or Vero.
But no Helix or HeHcion mentioned in the extant fragments; whereas
is

in one place we read (p. 6i, Lagarde) Brjptov ns Ivayxos /xe^' hipwv
Ttvwv Trjv BaXevTt'vou (^avracrtav ac^eVrcs k.t.X. There can be little or
no doubt therefore that Fabricius (Hippol. Oj>. i.
p. 225) was right in his
conjecture T^XtKtwrwv aiperiKwv for "HXikos twv alpcriKiZv. On the title

see Draseke Zahrb. f. Prot. Theol. x. p. 342 sq.

Of this Vero or Bero we never hear in the heresiological writers of
the fifth and earlier centuries. This would be astonishing if the treatise
had been genuine or even early. Epiphanius and Philaster and Theo-
doret the two former especially are eager to make their list as com-

plete as possible. Moreover a,ll the three were acquainted with the

writings of Hippolytus; and therefore their silence would be the more

inexplicable nothing else so explicit or so important was written
;
for

by Hippolytus on questions of Christolugy, and we should have expected

frequent references and quotations to it.
Moreover, when we investigate the fragments themselves, the trea-
tise condemns itself by its style and substance. It is much more philo-
sophical in its language than Hippolytus itself It uses terms and modes
of thought which betoken a later stage of the Christological controversy.
On this point however it should be observed that /ceVwo-tv is probably a
false reading and that we should probably read cVwcriv instead (Draseke
I.e. p. 344 sq). Bunsen, accepting the work as genuine, considers one
expression only Ik Tr}<; Travaytas deLTrapOivov Maptas to be interpolated
(i. p. 448). If this had been the only difficulty, we should have agreed
with him that '

proves nothing against the authenticity of the work.'

it

But, as Dollinger (p. 319 sq) points out, the terminology bristles with
difficulties on the supposition that it was a work of the beginning of

the first half of the third century. Fock and Dollinger connect it
with the Monophysite disputes, and assign it to the sixth or seventh

century. The subject has more recently been investigated by Draseke

{Zeitschr. f. Wiss. Theol. xxix. p. 291 sq, 1886), who would assign it to
a somewhat earUer date. He ascribes it to the Apohinarian school, and
supposes it to have been written not later than the early decades of the
fifth century (p. 318). need not pursue the subject further. It has no
I

bearing on my theme, the life and opinions of Hippolytus, though not

without an interest for the later stages of the Christological controversy.

(2) A story told at length by Palladius (AR. 11), in which a virgin

was placed in great danger to her chastity by the iniquity of the magistrate,
and only rescued by the continence and purity of a youth to whom her
honour was to be sacrificed,
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 405

(3) The Arabic Catena on tiie Pentateuch, of which mention has

been made already (p. 390).

(4) The treatise De Consummatione Mundi, which for some time

took the place of the genuine work De Christo et Antichristo ; see

above, p. 398.
(5) The Apostolical Canons, which however are perhaps not without
some foundation of fact; see above, p. 401 sq.

6.

THE MURATORIAN FRAGMENT.

In the early part of his work {Haer. i. 15, 16) Iren^eus quotes,
from one whom he describes as the divine elder and herald of the
'

truth,' some verses (/x./x,eTpws)

written against the Valentinian heretic
Marcus. They run as follows ;

EiScoXoTTOie MapKC koX TeparocTKOTre,

kol fxayLKrj<i rexvrjs,
ctcTTpoXoyiK^S efJ.-n-e.Lpe

8l wv KpaTvveis rrjs TrXdvr]<; ra StSay/xara,

vtto <tov TrXavw/^eVots,
arjfiela heiKvv% rots

aTTOO-TaTLKrj? 8wa/iews eyx^etprjfiaTa,

a (TOL ypprjyel cros irarrip ^arav aet

St'
ayyeXiK^s 8wa|U.ews ^A.t,at,rj\ Troictv

e\wv ere irpoSpoixov dvTiOeov Travovpyias,

some slight corrections being made in the sixth line on which all

critics are agreed, and which are suggested by the ancient

Latin
version. It will be observed that our poet is very fond of trisyllabic

feet, and that more especially he affects anapaests in the

fourth and
fifth places. I should add that, as the editors give his text, he does

not shrink from a spondee in quarto ; but we might easily relieve him
of this monstrosity by reading Swa/tios in both cases, thus giving him
two more of his favourite anapaests instead.
for they were
In this instance the editors could not well go wrong ;

warned by i/xixerpw^ that some verse was coming, and have printed

accordingly. But elsewhere, where there was no such warning, they

are altogether astray. Thus in J/aer. iii. 17. 4 (a passage preserved
only in the ancient Latin version) Irenteus is made to write ;

'Aquae mixtum gypsum dans pro lacte seducat per similitudinem

coloris, sicut quidam dixit superior nobis de omnibus qui quolibet
406 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
modo depravant quae sunt Dei et adulterant veritatem In Dei lacte
gypsum male miscetur^
where the Claromontane ms has 'veritatem Dei, Lacte,' etc. This is
the correct reading {in being a repetition of the previous ;;/),
but not
the correct punctuation. The sentence should run,
'
Dei lacte gypsum male miscetur,'
which in Greek is

eov ydXaKTL yatyvvrai yvi(/o<; KttKws,

SO that the mixing of chalk and water with milk is not a discovery of
modern civilisation. I may mention by the way that not a few of our
homely proverbs are anticipated by the fathers. A lively writer like
Jerome would furnish several examples. One occurs to me at the
moment, 'equi dentes inspicere donati,' 'to look a gift horse in the
'

mouth,' which Jerome calls a vulgar proverb even in his own day
'

(vii. p. 538, Vallarsi).

Nor is this the only instance in which the editors of Irenseus
have been at fault. In Haer. i.
praefquotes one
2 likewise this father

whom he same way (d KpetVraiv tjixwv, here however rendered

styles in the
melior nobis in the Latin), and who is doubtless the same person. Here
the original Greek is happily preserved, which I will write out as it

ought to be written, separating the prose from the verse (without how-
ever altering a single word);

Ka^ws wVo Tov KpeLTTOvo<; yjfitav up-qrai lir\ twv tolovtwv [twv atpeTiKwv]
OTl

XlOoV tov TlfJiLOV

(TfJiapaybov ovra Kat iroXvTtjJLrjTov tictlv

vaXo^ ivvjBpit^ii 8ta rixviq^

TrapoixoLOVfJiivr], otroTav pLTj Trapy 6 crOevwv SoKt/xacrat Kat
TT(vy SieAey^at T>yv Travovpyws yevofievrjv
orav oe

CTTt/Xtyi/
o ^aX/cos TOV apyvpov, rts evKoXws
is

Bvvy]crTaL tovtov a/cepatojs SoKifiaaai;

where however for a/ccpaiws we should probably read dKepaLc;, as the

Latin has 'rudis quum sit.' Very slight alterations would bring more
of the context into the verses. Thus ojxoiovjxivq might be substituted
'
for -rrapoixoiovfjievr], and OTav yap for orav Se, the Latin having quum
enim.' But this is sufficient to show that several verses are embedded
in a passage which the editors print continuously as prose. Probably
 HIPPO LYTUS OF PORTUS. 4^7
'

passages is the same with the divine

two
' '

our superior in the last

elder who writes against Marcus in the first.

'

The employment of verse or of rhythm for theological teaching was

not uncommon in these early ages. The heretics had their own psalms,
in which they propounded their favourite doctrines. From the orthodox
point of view Clement of Alexandria, at the close of his Paedagogus
(i. p. 312 sq), has written a metrical hymn
in honour of Christ for

educational purposes. An anonymous contemporary of Clement, who

has been identified for excellent reasons with Hippolytus, is quoted by
Eusebius {^H. E. v. 28) as referring to the 'numerous psalms and songs'

[if/aXfjiol
oaoL kol w8ai) written by believers in which Christ is spoken of
as God. Again; in the fourth century the notorious Thalia of Arius,
which was sung in the streets and taverns of Alexandria, will occur to
us on the one side, and the poems of the elder and younger ApoUinaris
on the other. More especially, where a meinoria technica was needed, as
in the list of the Canon, veTse was naturally employed as a medium.
In the quarter of the fourth century we have two such metrical
last

lists of the Scriptures the one by Amphilochius, the other by Gregory

Nazianzen.
The Muraforian Canon was discovered and published by Muratori
in 1740 from a MS in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, originally taken
from the ancient monastery of Bobbio. It contains a canon of the
New Testament. mutilated at the beginning so that it commences
It is

in the middle of the second Gospel ; and it ends in the midst of an

account of certain apocryphal books. Muratori himself attributed it to

Gaius, the contemporary of Hippolytus, who flourished under Zephyri-

nus. All the necessary information respecting the text will be found
in Tregelles's Canon Muratorianus (Oxford, 1867), and in Westcott's

History of the Cafton Appx C.

It is generally allowed that this catalogue emanated from Rome, as

indeed the mention of the city implies. Of its date we may say that
' '

it is ascribed by different critics to various epochs between about a.d.

160 and A.D. 220. The general opinion also is that the document was
written in Greek and that we possess only a not very skilful, though
literal, translation, greatly corrupted however in the course of transmis-
sion. On the other hand Hesse in his important monograph {Das
Muraiorische Fragment, Giessen 1873) maintains that Latin was the
original language; and he has succeeded in convincing Caspari {Tauf-
symbol in. p. 410) and one or two others. His reasons however seem
to me to be wholly inadequate. Thus he lays stress on such forms as
Spania, catholica, etc., maintaining that these are admissible in Latin,
4o8 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
This may be perfectly true, but proves nothing. I cannot doubt that
the usual view is correct. The literature of the Roman Church was
still Greek, as we see from the example of Hippolytus ;
even though
Victor, being an African, may have written in Latin. Moreover I

am quite unable to explain the phenomena of the document, if it is

preserved to us in its original language. The whole cast and connexion
of the sentences are Greek. In answer to this view, it is
urged that on
this hypothesis thedocument ought to lend itself easily for retranslation
into Greek, and that the Greek reproduction ought to throw back light
on the meaning of the Latin. To this objection the following pages
will, I trust, be a sufficient answer.

But it does not seem to have occurred to anyone that the original
document was ivritten in verse, like the corresponding lists of Amphilo-

chius and Gregory Nazianzen. Yet the more I study the work, the
stronger does this conviction grow. Neither in phraseology nor in
substance does it resemble a prose dociiment. There is an absence
of freedom and equability in the treatment. This is the more remark-
able where the writer is dealing with a mere list pure and simple. It is

obvious that he has to grapple with a medium which constrains him

and determines what form any particular statement shall take.
The Muratorian Fragment has been translated into Greek prose by
Lagarde for Bunsen {Anakcta Antenicena i.
p. 142 sq), and by Hilgen-
feld {Einleitung in das N. T. p. 97 sq). Either of these translations
would, as it seems to me, justify the contention that Greek was the
original language of the fragment, for it reads so much more naturally
than in the Latin. I had not read either of these when I made my own
verse renderings; but I note with satisfaction that the last words of the

fragment,
Asianum Cataphrygum constitutorem,
are translated unconsciously by Hilgenfeld into an iambic line,

ToV Twv 'Acriavwv K.aTa(j)pvyu)v KaTacToiTrjv,

as I had it, except that I should substitute

translated Kara ^pvya<; for

Karacftpvyixiv,
since the Montanists are always (so far as I have noticed)
called in Greek ot $jOvyes or 01 Kara ^pvyas, never ol Kardcfipvyc?, at
all events for some centuries'. But would not 'constitutor' be a strange
^
They are oi ^p^yes in Clem. Alex. Omn. Haer. 7 'qui dicuntur secundum
Strom, iv. 13, p. 605; ib. vii. 17, p. 605; Phrygas,' Euseb. H. E. ii.
25, v. 16,

Hippol. Haer. viii. prsef., 19, x. 25; vi. Epiphan. j^^t. xlviii. 12, 14, pp.
20 ;

Euseb. H. E. iv. 27, v. 16; but [ot] 413,416. In the title of Epiphanius we
Kara $pi57as Ps-Tertull. [Hippol.] adv, have /cara^pyYao-TtDj', but this is probably
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 409
word for a founder in an original Latin prose document ?
' '

Why also
should these Cataphrygians be called Asiatic, except that an epithet was
wanting to fill up a line ?
Again: the author of Supernatural Religion, p. 385, accuses the 11.
'
writer of this Canon the words of S. John's
of going so far as to '

falsify
First Epistle in his zeal to get evidence for the apostolic authorship of
the Fourth Gospel. He was a clumsy blunderer, if this were his design;
for his abridgment has considerably weakened the force of the original.
But his motive, I believe, was much more innocent. He had to

squeeze the language of the epistle into his own verse ;

and accordingly
he wrote (as represented by his translator),

dicens in semetipsum quae vidimus oculis

nostris et auribus audivimus et manus
nostrae palpaverunt haec scripsimus vobis,

which may have run in the Greek ;

Xeycov
cs eauTov o^OaXfJiolcnv a & ewpaKafxcv,
KOLK-qKoafxev Tois wcriV, at 0' rjjxwv X^P^'*

l\py]Xa<^r]<Tav, vfXLv auT iypa\l/afxcv.

Now let us see what can be made of some longer passages ;

(i)
acta autem omnium apostolorum
sub uno libro scripta sunt Lucas obtimo Theophi-
lo comprendit quia sub praesentia ejus singula

gerebantur sicuti et semote passionem Petri

evidenter declarat sed et profectionem Pauli ab ur-
be ad Spaniam proficiscentis. Epistulae autem
Pauli quae a quo loco vel qua ex causa directae
sint volentibus intelligere ipsae declarant.

Primum omnium Corinthiis scysma heresis in-

terdicens deinceps Galatis circumcisionem
Romanis autem ordinem scripturarum sed et

principium earum esse Christum intimans.

aXX aTTOtTToXoiV

Trpa.^L<i airavTOiv /3t/3A.i'ov V(j> tv ycypa/x/xeVas

Aou/cas KpaTLOTTO) ocf)LX.(jt} av\\a[xf3dvi,

avTOv TrapovTos cos eKatrr' lirpaTTtro'

a corruption for tuv Kara ^pvyai, though Monk, Serm. 130 (p. 1845, Migne).
this error is older than Antiochus the
4IO EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
cos Kol jxaKpav \y aTrdvTOS t] cty?] t'o-&o<;

Jlirpov 7rpo(f)aiVL kcIk ttoXcws S' ets STrartav

Ilav\ov TTopeiav iKTropevop^evov o"a<^ajs.

Ti.av\ov S' 7ricrToXai rtVe?, ck Ttvo9 tottov,

7r0'TaXijo"ai/, ^ Trotas cf airias,

STjXoCcrtv avrai TOicrt ^ovXo/Ae'vois voeiV

TTpwToV yc TravTtov atpeVcMS Koptv^tots

CTT^iCTjU,' aTrayopevwv, clra FaXaTats TrepLTOjxrjv,

ypa(f}<jiv
Se 'Pw/xaiotcrt ra^tv, aXXa Kai

dp-)(yjv
Imivwv Xpio-Tov ovra SctKVuwv.

For the form and quantity of this last word there is good Attic authority
(Menander in Fragm. Coimn. Graec. iv. pp. 93, 245). As regards the
martyrdom of S. Peter and the journey of S. Paul to Spain, there can be
little doubt, I think, as to the meaning. As S. Luke only records what
took place within his own cognisance, his silence about these two

important facts is evidence that they happened in his

regarded as
absence. But whether or not some words have fallen out in the Latin,
such as I have given in the Greek, 'semote [quum esset, silentium

ejus] evidenter declarat,' I will not venture to say.

(2)
fertur etiam ad
Laudicenses aHa ad Alexandrinos Pauli no-
mine finctae ad haeresim Marcionis et alia plu-

ra quae ad catholicam ecclesiam recipi non

potest fel enim cum melle misceri

non con-
gruit.

cf>epTai Sk Kol
8'
q AaoStKeucrti', rj 'AXe^avSpeiJcriv au,

Trpos MapKtcovos atpeo-tv 7r7rXao-/xevai

ovo'/xari TlaijXov TroXXa t aXX' a KaOoXiKrjv

ovK dvaSex^o'Oai Swarov eis iKK\y](rtav'
ov (rv[JL(}>epL yap /te'XiTi {xiyvvaOai -)(oXiqv,

which last line reminds us of the language of the earlier poet who wrote
against the heretic Marcus.

(3)
pastorem vero
nuperrime temporibus nostris in urbe
Roma Herma conscripsit sedente cathe-
dram urbis Romae ecclesiae Pio eps fratre
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 41 1

ejus et ideo legi eum quidem oportet se pu-

blicare vero in ecclesia populo neque inter

prophetas completum numero neque inter

apostolos in finem temporum potest.

vewcrrl Kaipots Tyjuerepots iv ry TroXet

'Vi^firj (Tweypaif/ev irnKad-qfJiivov Hlov
'Ep/xas KaOiSpav rrjaSe Pa)/x,ata)v ttoXcws

CKKXTjcrias aSe/\<^os wv iinaKoTrov'

wctt' ovv avaytvojcTKeiv jnev, iv 8' iKKXrjcrui
ov Sr]fJL0(TiVa6aL cr<^e tw Aaw ^pcwv'
ov8' V Trpo^Ty'rats Suvarov ovSe (rwi/TeAcrv
ctTrocrToXcjv es dpiOixov il<s reXos xpoi'toi/,

where I am disposed to think that

'

completum numero
'
is a clumsy
translation, perhaps corrupted by transcription, of the idiomatic Greek
'
avvreXelv es apid^ov, to be classed among the number ; but it would
'

not be difficult to substitute a more literal rendering of the Latin. In

'
this passage the repetitions 'in urbe roma,' 'urbis romae,' sedente
cathedram,'
'
ecclesiae episcopus,' lead me to suspect that we have here
some surplusage introduced for the sake of foreigners, when the original
document was translated into Latin for the use of (say) the African

churches; but I have given them the benefit of the doubt, and

retranslated them.
But if this catalogue was originally written in Greek verse, who was
the poet ? In a paper written some time ago {Herjnathena i. p. 82 sq)
on the 'Chronology of Hippolytus' Salmon (p. 122 sq) discussed at
length the notice of the authorship of Hermas, which the Muratorian
Canon has in common with the Liberian Catalogue, of which the earlier
portion is attributed on fairly satisfactory grounds to Hippolytus. He
'
there maintains that the writer's nuperrime temporibus nostris cannot
'

be too strictly pressed that a change came over the Church after the
;

age of Irenseus and Clement of Alexandria, who both quote the

Shepherd with deference that this change took place in the interval
;

between the two treatises of TertuUian, De Oratione and De Pudicitla,

the work being treated with respect in the former and rejected in the

having been classed

'

latter, as by every council of your churches among

'

and apocryphal books

false and that the statement in the Muratorian
\

Canon was the great instrument in effecting this change. The

Muratorian Canon on this showing therefore may be placed at the
close of the first century or the beginning of the second, so that there
 412 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
is no difficulty in ascribing it to Hippolytus, or at least in assuming it
to have been known to him, and thus to have suggested the note which
we find in the Liberian Catalogue. As however I do not see that
Salmon elsewhere (Smith and Wace, Did. of Christ. Biogr. ss. vv.
'
'Hippolytus,' Muratorian Canon') has so ascribed it, though he still

maintains the later date, I presume that he has changed his mind.
Now
I should not be prepared to attribute an influence so great to

this document, especially if it came from Hippolytus, who was at

daggers drawn with the heads of the Roman Church. But nevertheless
I am ready to accept the Hippolytean authorship. To this view I am
predisposed by the fact that there was no one else in Rome at this
time, so far as we know, competent to produce it. It agrees in all

respects with the Canon of Hippolytus both in its ; rejection of the

Pauline authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and its accept-
ance of the genuineness of the Apocalypse. Moreover the language
used of the Shepherd of Hermas is strongly in favour of the
attribution to Hippolytus. But I seem also to see elsewhere direct
evidence of the Hippolytean authorship. Among the works of

Hippolytus, whose titles are

Chair, inscribed on his we read
If corrcctly copied, this represents wSal
cjC)AAiicnACACTAcrpA4><>'C.
' '
ci9 TTttoras Tas ypa^tts, odes or 'verses on all the Scriptures.' This
might represent two titles; (i) wSat, and (2) ets Trao-as ras y/3a(j!>as. In
this case the w8at would only be available as showing that Hippolytus
wrote metrical compositions, of which these verses on the Canon might
be one and eis Trao-as Ta.'^i ^pa^o.% would represent his exegetical works
;

which, as we learn from Jerome, were numerous, though it would be an

exaggeration. But against this separation two objections lie (i) In no :

other case in this inscription are titles of two works run together in one line

(see above, pp. 325, 395). Thus XpoNiKooN has a line to itself, though
only one word. (2) The inscriber has already
commentary named the
'
On the Psalms,' not to mention the treatise on the Witch of Endor ' '

{rr^v eyyaa-T(jLfxvOov) and the Defence of the Gospel and Apocalypse

'

of John,' which might all have been dispensed with, if ds Wcras ras

ypa^as were a comprehensive description of his commentaries and other

exegetical works. What then were these '
odes referring to all the
'

Scriptures ? Might they not describe two metrical compositions

relating to the Canon of the Old and New Testament respectively, of
which the latter only is preserved, being itself mutilated at the

beginning? If this were not sufficient to account for the expression,

the collection might, like Gregory Nazianzen's, have included poems
'
On the Patriarchs,' On the Plagues of Egypt,' On the Decalogue,'
' '
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 413
*
On Elijah and Elisha,' On the Miracles of Christ,' On the Parables
' '

of Christ,' etc. But this seems to me unnecessary. Before the extant

leaves in the MS, which begin abruptly in the middle of the description
of S. Mark, a sheet or sheets are wanting, and these may have contained
the Canon of the Old Testament. This was at least as important as
the Canon of the New in the eyes of the early fathers, and" precedes it
in almost every ancient list, e.g. in Athanasius and Epiphanius, in

Amphilochius and Gregory Nazianzen. The fragment on the Canon is

followed in the MS by a passage from S. Ambrose {De Abrah. i. 3,

15, 16, Op. I.

p. 289)- and Jerome tells us {Epist. Ixxxiv. 7) of
'
S. x\mbrose that he sic Hexaemero?i illius
[Origenis] compilavit, ut

inagis Hippolyti se?itettttas Basiliique seqtieretur.^ IfJerome does not

treat the two works of Hippolytus is Ty]v i^ayjfjiepov and ets ra /xera TT]v
e|a77/xpov as one, at all events Ambrose would use the second as freely
as he used the first. May we
not then have here possibly (I will not

say more) a passage from a Latin translation of Hippolytus, which

Ambrose borrowed verbatim ?
Hippolytus be the author of this Canon, it was probably one of
If
his earUest works. He seems to have died about a.d. 236, being then
in advanced age. Thus his birth may be placed about a.d. 155 160.
His literary activity began early ; for his Compendhun on Heresies for
various reasons which I will explain presently cannot well be placed
after about a.d. 185 or 190. In this case he might say with only a
'
natural exaggeration that Hernias wrote the
Shepherd temporibus
according to his
nostris,' own view of the authorship, which may or may
not have been correct.
I may add that in the above translations I have avoided many
metrical licenses which Hippolytus might have used. My task would
have been much easier if I had indulged in such monstrosities as we
find even in cultured writers like Amphilochius and Gregory Nazianzen,
writing on the same theme.

7.

THE COMPENDIUM AGAINST ALL THE HERESIES.

A work by Hippolytus '

against all the Heresies

'
was widely known
among early mentioned by Eusebius and Jerome,
writers. It is it

supplied Epiphanius and Philaster largely with materials, and it is

probably quoted by the Roman Bishop Gelasius. Photius {AR. 32. b)

has described this work, which he calls o-vvray/ia a compendium,'
'

rather fully.
414 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
He speaks of it as a little book (/St/3Ai8aptov). It comprised thirty-
two heresies, beginning with the Dositheans and ending with Noetus
and the Noetians. It was founded on some lectures of Irenseus (ofxt-
X0VVT09 Elp-qvaiov), in which these heresies were submitted to refu-

tations (eXeyxcts vTvofSXrjOrjvaL). It was clear, grave, and terse in style;

though it fell short of the Attic diction. It was not absolutely accurate
in some respects, as for instance in stating that the Epistle to the
Hebrews was not written by S. Paul.
When the great work of Hippolytus the so-called Philosophu-
mena was discovered and published for the first time by Miller, who
however ascribed it to
Origen, several critics, who discerned the true
authorship, believed that this was the identical work described by Photius.

Bunsen for instance was very positive on this point though in his ;

later edition he speaks more circumspectly. But a careful inspection

showed that the identification was impossible. In the first place Photius
calls the work which he describes a little book.' Now the Philosophu-
'

7nena a large book, even in its present mutilated condition, and when
is

it
comprised the whole ten books of which two are lost^ could not by
any figure of language be called /8tj8Xi8apiov. Least of all, would it be
designated a 'Synopsis,' or 'Compendium'; for it is even diffuse in the
treatment of most heresies of which it treats at all. Secondly; by no
feat of arithmetic can the number of heresies which it includes be
summed up as thirty-two. Thirdly; it neither begins nor ends like the
work described by Photius. The first heresy dealt with is not the
Dosithean, but the Naassene and the last is not the Noetian, but the
;

Elchesaite. Of its relation to Irenseus I shall have to speak presently.

But though the Philosophiimena is not the identical treatise men-
tioned by Photius, it recognises the existence of that treatise ; and it
does so in such a way as to show that the two were the work of the
same author. At the commencement of this longer work the writer
states {^AR. i. a) that long ago (ivaXai) he had written to expose
and refute the doctrines of the heretics, not minutely (KaTo. Xctttov),
but roughly and in their broad features (dSpofxepm); that they had failed
by his moderation, and that now he must speak more plainly
to profit
and warn them of their eternal peril. Here then we have a description,
as having been written at a much earlier date, of the
'

Compendium
'

seen by Photius.
'
But is this Compendium' still extant in any form or other? At
the close of the Praescriptio Haereticorum of Tertullian is added, as a
sort of appendix, a brief summary of heresies, which has long been

recognised as the work of some other author besides Tertullian. As

 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 415
this list begins with the Dositheans, it was a somewhat obvious con-
jecture that we have here a Latin translation or abridgement of Hip-

poly tus' work. This conjecture is as old as Allix Fathers vindicated

to7ichifig the Trinity p. 99, who is quoted by Waterland (Works v.

p. 227); but to Lipsius {Qiielletikritik des Epiphanios^ Wien 1865) the

merit is due of rescuing the theory from the region of conjecture and
placing it on a solid scientific basis.
The hst of the Pseudo-Tertullian contains about thirty-two heresies,
one or two more or less, for it isnot possible in every case to determine
v/hether a particular designation is intended to specify a separate
heresy or not. Moreover it
begins, as I have said, with the Dositheans,
as Photius describes the Syntagma of Hippolytus as beginning but ;

instead of ending with Noetus, it substitutes another monarchian,

Praxeas. How this came to pass I shall explain presently.
But the great testimony to the identity of the Pseudo-Tertullian with
Hippolytus is derived from a different source. Two later writers on
Epiphanius and Philaster, have very much in common. They
heresies,
wrote about the same time. Epiphanius commenced his work in the
year 374, and the 66th of the 80 sections was written in 376. The date
of Philaster' s work cannot be decided with absolute certainty, but it
seems to have been written about 380. Thus there is no chronological
impossibility in the common
parts having been derived by Philaster
from Epiphanius. But the independence of the two is shown incon-
testably by the two following considerations.
(i) The same thirty-two heresies which appear in the Pseudo-
Tertullian run like a back-bone through the works of Epiphanius and

Philaster, being supplemented in different ways by the two writers at

divers points, as far as the close of the second century when Hip-

polytus wrote.
(2) After the close of the second century, they have nothing in

common, which suggests any plagiarism on either side.

The following list of heresies in the three writers, carried down as

far as the Arians, will make these phenomena plain :

EPIPHANIUS PSEUDO-TERTULLIAN PHILASTER

Ophites
Cainites
Sethites
Barbarism
Scythism
4i6 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
EriPHANIUS PSEUDO-TERTULLIAN PHILASTER
Hellenism :

Platonists
Pythagoreans
Stoics
Epicureans
Samaritans :

Gortheni
Sebuaei
Essenes
Dositheus Dositheus Dositheus
Judaism :

Scribes
Pharisees Sadducees Sadducees
Sadducees Pharisees Pharisees
Hemerobaptists Samaritans
Ossenes
Nazarenes Nazarenes
(Naacrapaioi) (Nazaraei)
Essenes
Heliognosti
Frog-worshippers
(Ranarum cul tores)
Musorites
Musca-accaronites
Troglodytes
De Fortuna Caeli
Baalites
Astarites
Moloch-worshippers
De Ara Tophet
Puteorites
Worshippers of the Brazen
Serpent
Worshippers in subterranean
caves
Thammuz-mourners
Baalites (or Belites)
Baal- worshippers
de Pythonissa
Astar and Astaroth-worship-
pers
Herodians Herodians Herodians
Simon Magus Simon Magus Simon Magus
Menander Menander Menander
Saturninus Saturninus Saturninus
Basilides Basilides Basilides
Nicolaitans Nicolaitans Nicolaitans
Gnostici (isti Barbelo venerantur)
Borborians
(Barbelites)
Judaites
Ophites
Cainites
Sethites
Carpocrates Carpocrates Carpocrates
Cerinthus Cerinthus Cerinthus
Nazarenes
(Nafwpaiot)
Ebionites Ebionites Ebionites
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 417
EPIPHANIUS PSEUDO-TERTULLIAN PHILASTER
Valentinus Valentinus Valentinus
Secundus ) Ptolemaeus ) Ptolemaeus )

Ptolemaeus )
Secundus )
Secundus \

Marcosians j
Heracleon ) Heracleon )

Colarbasus > Marcus > Marcus >

Heracleon )
Colarbasus 1 Colarbasus 1

Ophites
Cainites
Sethites
Archontici
Cerdon Cerdon
Marcion Marcion
Apelles Lucan )

Lucian Apelles \
Severians
Tatian
Encratites
Cataphrygians :

Montanists
Tascodrugites
Pepuzians
Quintillians
Artotyrites
Quartodecimans
Alogi
Adamians
Sampsaeans
(Elkesaeans)
Blastus
Theodotus Theodotus

Melchizedekites Melchizedekites
(Theodotus II)
Bardesanes
Noetians Praxeas
(end)
Valesians
Cathari
Angelici
Apostolici
Sabellians
Origenaeans
Paul of Samosata
Manichaeans
Hierakites
Meletians
41 8 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
The original treatise of Hippolytus closed with the heresy of Noetus.
In place of Noetus, the Latin abridgement substitutes another mon-
archian, Praxeas. With this Praxeas we are chiefly acquainted through
the tract of Tertullian directed against him'. He came to Rome
during the pontificate of Zephyrinus (c. a.d. 199 217), with whom his
doctrines found favour, as we learn from Hippolytus that he embraced
monarchian views. This is the pontiff respecting whom Tertullian
writes (c. i) *Duo negotia diaboli Praxeas Romae procuravit, prophetiam
expulit et haeresim intulit, paracletum fugavit et patrem crucifixit.'
He moreover says that Praxeas had influenced this bishop by repre-
senting his predecessors as having maintained the orthodox doctrine
(praecessorum ejus auctoritates defendendo), just as the same charge is
brought against the contemporary monarchian s, Artemon and others,
by the author of the treatise directed against them, presumably
Hippolytus. There can be little doubt therefore that Tertullian
writes during the episcopate of Zephyrinus". It seems clear also that
Tertullian borrows from Hippolytus, and not conversely.

[This section was never finished I]

8.

THE REFUTATION OF ALL HERESIES.

[See above, p. 403. Not written.]

*
^
See the article Tertullimi wider I have stated elsewhere that Victor

Praxta% by Noedechen in Jahrb. f. was the bishop attacked l)y Tertullian :

Protest. Theol. xiv. p. 576 sq (1S88), in but I am now convinced that Zephyrinus
which the relations of Tertullian to is meant.
^
Hippolytus are traced, showing that the [For the approximate date of the
African father is indebted to the Roman, Coi/>endiiifn see below, p. 426.]
and not conversely.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 419

9.

TABLE OF THE LITERARY WORKS OF HIPPOLYTUS,

We are a position to tabulate the various writings of

noAV in
Hippolytus by the aid of our chief authorities Eusebius, Jerome,
Georgius SynceUus, Ebed-Jesu, Photius and Theodoret and to com- :

pare the table thus obtained with the list of works inscribed on the
Chair. It will be noticed that the results are fairly satisfactory. If we
may consider ourselves justified in supposing that we have in the
Muratorian Ca/ioji and in the Liber Ge^ierationis translations of the
wSai et? Trao-as ra? ypa(fia<;
and the
respectively (see above,
xpo''"^<^
I.
p. 258 sq, II.
pp. 399, 405 almost every other case we can
sq), in

identify the works mentioned on the Chair with the help of the several
lists of Hippolytus' writings, as
they occur in the patristic notices of the
saint. Of these lists that of Jerome is the most complete. Again,
extracts of some of the works themselves survive in the pages of

Photius, Theodoret, etc., and throw much light on the scope and
contents of the several treatises. It would be premature to conclude

that an absolute identification has in every instance been established.

Doubtless in the light of fresh discoveries our present results will
require modification. But it is fair to say that the table given below
has been worked out at an expenditure of considerable care and
attention.
The writings of Hippolytus are arranged and numbered in the order

given in 5 of this chapter (see above, p. 388 sci), where the arguments
for the identification of the various writings will be found stated at

greater length.

27 2
 a.

'^ c
O
V 2 S
X .2 3
H '3 cq

o
0)

'3
-CI?
X I-
00 00 /<
o
H
8

O
S S e
s c c o c O
o o u\
'8 ' o 5: 1^
(~ , u
2, Kffi
 IS
" <"

o
2 o
<u

H
I- .
42 2 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

lO.

EARL V AND MIDDLE LTFE OF HIPPOL YTUS.

At different points in his life Hippolytus was brought into personal
contact with two great fathers of the Church, in youth or early manhood
with Irenaeus, and in middle age with Origen. If we are able approxi-

mately to fix these dates, we shall obtain chronological landmarks of

some value, where all is uncertain.
I. The connexion of Hippolytus with Iren^eus is obvious on all
hands. To Iren^us he was largely indebted in both of his general
heresiologicalworks in his early Compendium, which was avowedly
founded upon the lectures of Irenseus, and in his later PhilosGp/m?nena, in
which he borrows large passages, sometimes with and sometimes without
the name, from the written work of his master. Moreover it is hardly
possible to read any considerable fragment of his other extant works
without stumbling upon some thought or mode of expression which
reminds us of Irenseus or the Asiatic elders.
When and where then was this personal communication held ? Hip-
polytus might himself have migrated, like Irengeus, from Asia Minor in
early life ; and thus the instructions which he received from his master
may have been given in his original Asiatic home. But his extant
writings contain no indication that he was ever in the East, and we
therefore look to Rome itself, or at all events not farther than the South
of Gaul, for the place of his Christian schooling. We are thus led to

enquire when Irenseus is known to have settled in the West, and more
especially when he is known to have visited Rome.
If the story in the Appendix to the Moscow ms of the Letter of the

Smyrnceans be correct, Irenseus was teaching in Rome at the time of

Polycarp's death a.d. 155'. At all events he paid a visit of longer or
shorter duration to the metropolis about a.d. 177, at the time of the

persecutions in Vienne and Lyons, after which he himself became

bishop of Lyons in succession to the martyred Pothinus'. But there is
no reason for supposing that these two occasions exhausted his
residence at Rome.
On
which occasion can Hippolytus have attended his lectures?
Irenceus' extant work on Heresies was written as far as the 3rd book

(iii. 3. 3) during the episcopate of Eleutherus (c. a.d. 177 190) and as

^
Ignat. and Polyc. I.
p. 432 ed. 1
(! ed. 2).
-
448 ed. 2) ; II. p. (;86 ed. i
(ill. p. 402 Euseb. H.E. v. 4, 5.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 423
he leaves the reference to this episcopate untouched (pvv...T6y Ty<;
iiTLa-KOTvrj^...KaTiyi.i KXrjpov 'EXeu^cpo?), it is a reasonable,
though not an
was still living when the work was
absolute, conclusion that Eleutherus
finally published. The
work however of Hippolytus, the
earlier

Compendiiun, was founded on the lectures, and (as we may infer from
the notice) betrayed no knowledge of any published work of his
master. On the other hand the later treatise, the F/iilosop/mmena,
quotes large passages, sometimes by name, from the extant work of
Irenseus. These facts seem to show that the Compendium of Hippolytus
was written before the publication of the latter, i.e. at all events before
A.D. 190. And we should probably be right in assuming that the
lectures were held not later than a.d. 177, and before Irenseus became

bishop of Lyons.
2. We Jerome {AR. 8. b) that Hippolytus held in
are told by

presence of Origen who was then at Rome a homily on the Praise of '

the Lord (TrpocrojatXta de Laude Domini Salvaioris^).^ Of Origen we

are told in his own language that he had 'desired to see the ancient
Church of the Romans' (cv'^a/xevos ttjv ap^aioTari/v Vaifiaioiv iKKX-qa-iav
iSctv), and that accordingly he went there in the time of Zephyrinus
(c. A.D. 199 217), and after staying a short time {ov ttoXv Siarpti/zas) he
returned to Alexandria (Euseb. H. E. vi. 14). It would seem from
this language that only it was his visit to the capital of the world.

Considering the chronology of Origen's life, who was born about

A.D. 185 or 186, this visit would probably be paid towards the close
of Zephyrinus' episcopate.
At time Hippolytus must have been at the height of his
this

activity. Before the close of the previous century, as we shall see, he

was probably consecrated by his patron Victor to the episcopate with
the charge of the miscellaneous population at the Harbour of Rome ;
and, when Origen visited the metropolis, his feud with the heads of the
Roman hierarchy must have been raging.
It will be observed that, in repeating this incident, Photius {Bibl.

121) by a strange blunder has ascribed to Hippolytus i^AR. 31. b) what

Jerome {AR. 8. b) tells us of Ambrosius, and thus makes Hippolytus
the '
'

task-master (epyoStw/cTTjs) of Origen. He must have misunderstood

Jerome's words 'in hujus aemulationem.'
1
On the possible identity of this in the list of Hippolytus' writings on the
homily with a work (Trept oiKovonlas) Chair, see above, p. 398.
mentioned by Ebed-Jesu, and included
424 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

11-

J'FAS HirPOLVrUS A NOVATIAN?

About the year 407 the Spanish poet Prudentius paid a visit to
Rome. Among other sanctuaries which he visited were the basilica
and cemetery of Hippolytus on the north side of the Tiburtine Road,
just beyond the walls of the city, of which he has left us an elaborate
description in one of his poems {AR. 10). Among other statements
he tells us distinctly (ver, 19 sq) that Hippolytus 'had once dalUed
with (attigerat) the schism of Novatus'; that he was afterwards con-
demned to be executed; that on
way martyrdom the crowds
his to
of Christian friends who accompanied him enquired of him, 'which
was the better party' ('quaenam secta foret melior'), the Novatians
or the Cathohcs; and that he replied, 'Flee from the accursed schism of

Novatus; restore yourselves to the Catholic people; let one only

faith flourish, the faith that resides in the ancient temple which Paul
claims and the chair of Peter. I repent me that I taught what I

did; I discern as a martyr that reverence is due to that which I once

thought alien to the service of God.' It is unnecessary to
enquire
at present whether Prudentius in his description confuses two con-
temporaries bearing the same name, Hippolytus the soldier and
Hippolytus the presbyter. Recent archaeological discovery has shown
that this charge of Novatianism belongs to Hippolytus 'the presbyter'.

Among the archaeological gains which we owe to De Rossi,

many
not the the restoration of the inscription placed by pope
least is

Damasus [a.d. 366 384] in this sanctuary of Hippolytus and read

by Prudentius. Though he has amplified the words of Damasus (as
the exigencies of his poem suggested) the close resemblances between
the two forbid us to doubt about the source of his information. Now
Damasus us {AR. 7. a), Hkewise in verse, that 'Hippolytus ihe
tells

presbyter, when the commands of the tyrant pressed upon him, is

reported (fertur) to have remained all along (semper) in the schism

of Novatus, what time the sword wounded the vitals of our Mother

(the Church)'; but that 'when as a martyr of Christ he was journeying

to the realms of the saints, the people asked him whither they might
betake themselves (procedere posset), he replied that they ought all to

follow the Catholicfaith.' So he concludes

Noster meruit confessus martyr ut asset ;

Haec audita refert Damasus. Probat omnia Christus;
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 425
'
Our saint by his confession won the crown of martyrdom. Uamasus
tells the tale as he heard it. All things are tested and proved by
Christ.'
was very natural that the discoverer and restorer of the in-
It

scription, which was the sole foundation (so far as we can see) of
the story in Prudentius, should claim undue authority for its statements.
To De Rossi it seems incredible that Damasus could have been mis-
taken about some 120 or 150 years
events which occurred at least
before he wrote (according as the schism of Hippolytus was Novatianism
or not, i.e. according as it dated from the age of CorneUus or from
that of Zephyrinus and Callistus), especially as he had been reared
from childhood amidst the services of the Church. ^Vi\. first it must be
observed that Damasus simply reports hearsay, emphasizing this as

this fact by reiteration and leaving the conclusion to the judgment

of Christ for there is no ground for the inference that the 'hearsay'
refers not to the lapse into Novatianism but only to the subsequent
repudiation it; and secondly we must remember that the whole
of

history of Hippolytus was shrouded in obscurity to the Roman Christians

in the age of Damasus; so much so that his much more learned

but somewhat younger contemporary Jerome {AR. 8. b), though in

possession of a large number of works by Hippolytus, confesses
his ignorance respecting the name of the writer's see. Tliis is a

startling fact, and must be taken into account. Indeed the discovery
of the inscription of Damasus is the more valuable, because it justifies
the solution, which many had proposed on
publication of the the

Fhilosophumena to explain the account of Prudentius, namely that the

Spanish poet had confused together an earUer outbreak of puritanism at
Rome under Zephyrinus and Callistus with a later outbreak thirty years
afterwards leading the
appointment of the schismatical bishop
to
Novatian. The Novatianism of Hippolytus was a mere rumour which
was circulated in Rome some four generations after his death. We
are therefore entitled to weigh it on its own merits. Here two im-
portant considerations must be taken into account.
(i) The Novatian schism broke out in Rome in a.d. 250 and led
immediately to of Novatian as anti-pope.
the consecration A full
blaze of light is suddenly poured upon this chapter in the internal

politics of the Roman Church by the correspondence between Rome

and Carthage preservedin the Cyprianic letters. The minor vicissitudes
of the schism are there revealed; names are freely mentioned; the
defections and recantations are recorded; and in short there is no

period in the history of the Roman Church, until we are well advanced
426 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
in the fourth century, of which we know so much. Even the Eastern
Churches of Alexandria and Antioch took an active part in the contro-
versy, and are represented in the extant literature of the schism. Yet
from first to last there is not a mention of Hippolytus, the most learned
man in the Roman Church before the time of Jerome whose lapse and
;

repentance, emphasized still further by his martyrdom, would accentuate

his position with respect to the schism. Who can believe it ? Is the
error of Damasus, who frankly acknowledges mere rumour as his
informant, a difficulty at all commensurate to this ?
But besides the documents bearing directly on the Novatian schism,
there is another place where we should almost certainly have found a
reference to this passage in Hippolytus' life, if it had ever occurred.
The earliest western list of the bishops of Rome (given above,
I.
p. 253 sq) was drawn up
either by Hippolytus himself or by some

contemporary, and ended with the death of Urbanus and accession of

Pontianus [a.d. 230, 231]. Its first continuator extends the record

from Pontianus [a.d, 231 235] to Lucius [a.d. 253, 254] and must
have written immediately after the death of Lucius (see i. p. 263). He
starts with a notice of the deportation of Pontianus the bishop and

Hippolytus 'the presbyter' to the 'unhealthy island of Sardinia,'

men-
tioning the divestiture or resignation of the former. In
the interregnum
between Fabius (Fabianus) and Cornelius [a.d. 250 251] he states
that 'Moyses and Maximus the presbyters and Nicostratus the deacon
were apprehended and sent to prison,' and that at that time Novatus
'

arrived from Africa and separated Novatian and certain confessors from
'

the Church Moyses had died in prison after a captivity of

after that

nearly twelve months. Again under Cornelius [a.d. 251253], he

mentions that during his episcopate 'Novatus outside the Church
city of Rome and Nicostratus in Africa,'
ordained Novatian in the and
that thereupon the confessors who separated themselves from Cornelius
with Maximus the presbyter returned to the Church. These are nearly
all the notes which this continuator inserts in the period for which he is

responsible, besides dates and numbers ; and they

have reference either
to Hippolytus or to Novatianism (see i. p. 255 sq ;comp. p. 286 sq).
Why does not this contemporary writer connect the one with the other,
if history had connected them by the signal fact of Hippolytus' adhesion
and recantation ?

(2) But secondly ; the extension of the Hfe of Hippolytus beyond

the middle of the second century which would be required if his
Novatianism were true, introduces a serious difficulty into his chronology.
I have already shown (11. p. 413 sq) that his early work, the Com-
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 427
pe)idmm on Heresies, was probably written at all events before a. d. i
90.
But, if the Novatianism be accepted as true, he must have lived more
than sixty years after this work was published. Moreover the last
notice, which we have of any event connected with his life, is the state-

ment given above from the Papal Chronicle, which belongs to the year
A. D. 235. Yet, if he were really a Novatian and perished in the Decian
persecution (a. d. 250 252), he must have been alive some sixteen

years afterwards. Not to mention, that the notice itself, by dwelling

'
on the unhealthiness of the island, suggests that he perished, as
'

Pontianus also perished, an exile in Sardinia a too probable result

of such banishment to an octogenarian.
I should add also that, though history does repeat itself, we need

something more than a hearsay of the age of Damasus to convince us

that the same Hippolytus should have hvice been in schism with the
rulers of the Roman Church on the same ground of puritanism, and
have hvice suffered cruel persecution from the heathen rulers, whether
as a confessor or as martyr.
We may therefore safely accept the conclusion of those critics,

Bunsen, Dollinger, and others, who

explained the story of Prudentius
by the facts related in the PJiilosophiiineiia^ confirmed as this conclu-
sion has subsequently been by the discovery since made that the story
had no better foundation than a late rumour.

8 12.

THE SEE OF HIPPOLYTUS.

Hippolytus speaks of himself as a bishop. He is so designated by

others. What then was his see ? Rome was the sphere of his activity
while living. At Rome he was commemorated after death. All his
recorded actions are connected with Rome or at least with Italy.
Whether history or legend be interrogated, the answer is the same. We
are not asked to travel beyond Italian ground, nor for the most part

beyond the immediate neighbourhood of the world's metropolis itself

Hippolytus was by far the most learned man and the most prolific
writer which the Roman Church produced before Jerome. It is there-

fore the more remarkable that any uncertainty should rest upon the
name of his see. It is still more strange that the writers who lived

^Wordsworth however (p. 158 sq) obliged to prolong the Hfe of Hippolytus
strives tomaintain the accuracy of Pru- accordingly,
dentius on this and other points, and is
428 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
nearest to his own time and locality should most frankly confess their

ignorance.
Yet this is so. Eusebius {AR. 3. d), who wrote within some eighty
years of his death and was acquainted with several of his writings, tells
us that he was a bishop somewhere or other (erepas 7rou...7rpocrTcos

lKK\r](Xia<i). Jerome, who wrote a little more than half a century later
than Eusebius, is equally at a loss {AR. 8. b). He is not dependent
on this occasion, as on so many others, on his predecessor ; he shows a
larger acquaintance with the works of Hippolytus ; he had habitually
trodden the same ground, which Hippolytus trod when living. Yet he
frankly confesses that he has not been able to find out the name of the
'

city' of which Hippolytus was bishop. Bunsen indeed (i. p. 420)

suggests that he could not tell, because he would not tell, and that his
reticence in fact means 'Non mi ricordo.' For this imputation how-
ever there no ground. The one man of all others, whose antecedents
is

placed him in the most favourable position for ascertaining the details
of the earlier history of the Roman Church and who took special pains
to preserve memorials of the martyrs among others of Hippolytus
himself Pope Damasus, the older contemporary of Jerome, says
nothing about his see, but calls him simply the 'presbyter' {AR. 7. a),
a term of which I shall have to speak presently (see below, p. 435 sq).
At length when this silence about the see of its most illustrious
writer is Roman Church, the notice betrays the grossest
broken by the
ignorance. Gelasius followed Damasus in the papacy after a lapse of
about a century (a.d. 492 496). He refers to the Treatise on Heresies
'
as written by Hippolytus bishop and martyr of the metropolis of the

Arabians,' i.e. of Bostra {AR. 13). But this notice, though blundering,
is explicable and highly instructive. Eusebius, describing the chief
writers of a particular period, mentions that Beryllus was bishop of the
Arabians in Bostra, adding 'in like manner Hippolytus presided (as
'

bishop) over some other church (ercpa? irov). In translating this

passage Rufinus {AR. 9) drops the erepas and renders vaguely,

ttov

apud Bostram Arabiae urbem maximam.

'
episcopus hie [Beryllus] fuit
Erat nihilominus et Hippolytus, qui et ipse aliquanta scripta dereliquit

episcopus.' This might imply to a casual reader who had not the
original before him that Hippolytus was a predecessor or successor of
Beryllus in the same see of Bostra.
The origin of this curious blunder has thus been satisfactorily
explained, and it need not therefore give us any further trouble.
Nevertheless it has given rise to some modern speculation, which
cannot be passed by without a mention. Le Moyne ( Vari'a Sacra i.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 429

prol. p. 28 sq, ed. 2) with much learning and ingenuity maintained that
the see of Hippolytus was not the Port at the mouth of the Tiber,
which he calls Portus Ostiensis ', but Portus Roniafwrum or Eiporii/m
Romanum, the modern Aden, on the Red Sea^; and he succeeded in

persuading several writers of great repute such as Cave, Spanheim^, and

others*. Latterly this view has found no supporters. Of a recent
attempt by Erbes to utilise this supposed connexion with Bostra
though shown to be a blunder in support of his own chronological
theories, I have had occasion to speak already. The real value of the
notice of Gelasius is the evidence which it affords, that even in his
time nothing was known at Rome of the see of Hippolytus.
The general opinion however makes him bishop of Portus the
haven of Rome. This view prevailed before Le Moyne attempted to
transfer him from the mouth of the Tiber to the mouth of the Red
Sea. But Le Moyne's attempt called forth a vigorous championship of
the received view. At the instigation of Card. Ottoboni, bishop of
Portus, his librarian Ruggieri, a man of learning and ability, addressed
himself to the subject in a treatise De Portuejisi S. Hippolyti Episcopi et

Martyris Sede, which after many vicissitudes appeared at length as a

posthumous work (Romae, i77i)\ This work has given its direction to
later opinion on the question and in our own generation, when the
;

interest in Hippolytus was revived by the publication of the Philoso-

phiuneiia, there was a very general acquiescence on this point among
those who differed most widely in other respects.
Nevertheless it must be confessed that the ancient evidence is very
defective. We cannot overcome our surprise that, if his see had
been within fifteen or twenty miles of Rome
itself, the popes Damasus

and Gelasius should have been ignorant of the fact. But the difficulty
culminates in the case of Jerome. He was well acquainted with the
various works of Hippolytus. His own friend Pammachius built at
this very Portus a 'xenodochium^' or 'hospital for foreigners,' which

^
lie does not however confuse Portus Mem. III. p. 239, 672 sq.
and Ostia (see p. 29 sq), as Wordsworth ^
The circumstances attending the his-

seems to think (p. 259, note 7). tory of the composition and appearance
^
There is however, so far as I have of this work will be found in Words-
worth, p. 260 sq. It is inserted in Lum-
seen, no evidence produced to show that
the place was called Partus Romaniis, per, Hist. Sanct. Patr. Tom. viii, and
its common name being Empoi-min Ro- again in Migne, Patrol. Grace, x. p. 395
marfiim. sq).
8 Hieron. Epist. Ixvi. 11
Lugd. Bat. 1701.
''

Op. I. p. 777, (i. p. 410)

*
Not however Tillemont (as Words- '
Audio te [Pammachium] xenodochium
worth says, p. 259), at least in my edition, in Porlu fecisse Romano,' Epist. Ixxvii.
 430 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
became known far and wide and in which Jerome expresses the greatest
interest. Did Portus retain no memorial of its most famous bishop, who
died a martyr only a century and a half before ?
Indeed the earliest authority for placing his see at Portus appears
not at Rome nor in Italy, but in Constantinople and the East, two
centuries and a half later than Jerome's Catalogus. In the Chro?ucon
'
Paschale [c.
a.d, 630] he is described as bishop of the place called
Portus near Rome' {AR. 21)'. From this time forward he is

occasionally so called, as for instance by Anastasius the Apocrisiarius

or Papal Nuncio at Constantinople a.d. 665 {AR. 23); by Georgius

Syncellus c. A. D. 792 {AR. 28) ; by Nicephorus of Constantinople

tA. D. 828 {AR. 29); and other later writers. The statements of
Anastasius and of Nicephorus seem to be founded on the heading to a MS
of the spurious treatise Against Vera, which they both quote (see above,

p. 403 sq). We may indeed suspect that this Constantinopolitan ms

containing an often quoted and highly important dogmatic treatise
(if it had only been genuine) was the single source of the story
of the
Portuensian episcopate, which seems to have been derived solely
through Byzantine channels. The statement is found also in catenst
and in other manuscripts containing extracts from Hippolytus.
It should be added also that, besides the defective evidence, the

argument which placed Hippolytus in the see of Portus was weighted

with another serious objection, which was urged with fatal effect by

Dollinger. Bunsen
(i. p. 422 sq, 468 sq) projected
into the times of

Hippolytus an arrangement of the later cardinalate, by which the

bishops of the suburban sees presided as titulars of the principal
churches in the City itself. Thus Hippolytus, according to Bunsen's
view, while bishop of Portus, would have been likewise a member of the
Roman presbytery. This solution was highly tempting for it seemed ;

to explain how Hippolytus, having a diocese of his own, should inter-

fere actively in the affairs of the Church of Rome in the manner
described in the Philosophumena. It is sufficient to say that Bunsen's
view involves an anachronism of many centuries. The development
in the relations between the suburban sees and the papacy is traced

10 (i. p. 465), Ixvii. 10 (I. p. 466) di Archeol. Crist. IV. p. 50 sq, p. 99 sq

'
Xenochium in Portu Romano situm (1866).
totus pariter mundus audivit ;
sub una ^
On the mistaken supposition that we
aestate didicit Britannia quod ^gyptus have here the words of Peter of Alex-
et Parthus noverat vere.' For an in- andria, who flourished more than three
teresting account of the extant remains centuries earlier, see above, p. 344.
of this xenodochium see De Rossi Bull.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 431

by Dollinger (p. 105 sq) ;

and the late growth and character of these
relations are fatal to Bunsen's theory.
Here Dollinger was treading on solid ground. But, when he
maintained that Portus was not at this time and did not become for
many generations a place of any importance (p. 77 sq), he took up a
position which it is impossible to hold. The rapid growth of Portus,
from the time of its foundation, is sufficiently shown by the excavations
of the present generation^, even if the extant notices had been in-
sufficient. There is no a priori reason why it might not have been
an episcopal see in the age of Hippolytus if there had been a tittle of
evidence to the fact.

On hand Dollinger had his own solution of the difficulty,

the other
not less tempting but even less tenable. He supposed Hippolytus to
have been not bishop of Portus, but of Rome itself This was in fact
the first papal schism, and Hippolytus was the first antipope.

Against this solution three serious and indeed fatal objections lie.
(i) It is not justified by anything in the language of Hippolytus himself
If he had put forward these definite claims, he must have expressed

them in definite terms. On the contrary he only mentions vaguely his

obligation, as a bishop, to stand forward as the champion of the truth.

Of his adversaries he never says that they are not the lawfully con-
stituted bishops of Rome, but implies that by their doctrinal and
practical they have shown themselves no true bishops.
irregularities
His very vagueness the refutation to this solution of a rival papacy.
is

(2) The entire absence of evidence especially in Rome and the West
is the supposition.
fatal to There were several papal schisms in the
third and fourth centuries one more especially within less than twenty
years of his death. Yet in none of these controversies is there any
reference to this one which (if it had existed) must have set the deadly

precedent. Moreover we have several lists of the popes dating from

the third, fourth, and fifth centuries, but in not one of these is there a
hint of Hippolytus as an antipope. (3) The evidence, when it does
come, is hardly less conclusive than the silence. It is late it comes ;

from the East; and it means nothing or next to nothing. The first
witness quoted is Apollinaris about a.d. 370 {^AR. 6). It is a passage

in a catena, ascribed, and perhaps rightly ascribed, to this father. But

we should require evidence than we possess, to justify the
far stronger

improbable supposition that one who had the papal lists of Eusebius
before him would have called Hippolytus eTrt'o-KOTros 'Pwyaiy?, meaning

thereby that he was bishop of the metropolis of the world. We must

1
See esp. De Rossi Bitll. di Archeol. Crist, iv. pp. 37 sq, O3, 99 (1866).
432 EPISTLES OF 8. CLEMENT.
therefore suppose that part of the heading at all events is a later
addition. After this we have no earlier witnesses than Eustratius
c. A.D. 578 {AR. 18) and Leontius c. a.d. 620 {AR. 20). Consider-
ing the late date of these writers, we must regard them as absolutely
valueless to prove such a conclusion ; more especially as the writers
would know that Hippolytus was a bishop and that he lived in or near
Rome, so that eTrto-KOTros 'Pw/at^s would occur as a loose designation,
if they did not take the pains to see whether his name was actually
in the papal lists.

But, though the testimony which makes Hippolytus bishop of Portus

is and valueless, the evidence connecting him with Portus is of a
late

very different quality and much earlier in time. Prudentius, who visited
the shrine of S. Hippolytus on the Tiburtine Way as we have seen soon
after a.d. 400, and gives an account (doubtless imaginary in its main
features) of the martyrdom, speaks of the persecutor as leaving Rome
to trouble the suburban population and as harassing the Christians at
the mouth of the Tiber ('
Christicolas tunc Ostia vexanti per Tiberina

viros'). The tyrant, he continues, '

extended his rage to the coast of
the Tyrrhene shore and the regions close to sea- washed Tortus.' After

devoting some thirty lines to describing the punishments inflicted there,

he says that an old man (' senior') was brought before the tribunal and
denounced by the bystanders as the chief of the Christian folk ('Christi-
colis esse caput populis'). If this does not distinctly name him the

bishop of Portus, it implies that he held a leading position in the Church,

and that this was the scene of his clerical activity. Again after the
martyrdom we are told of the disposal of his reliques ;

Metando eligitur tumulo locus

Ostia linquunt
;
:

Roma placet, sanctos quae teneat cineres.

Of his later connexion with Portus a few words

will be necessary here-

after. say here, that for many centuries his memory

It is sufficient to

has been intimately connected with this town.

If then the see of Hippolytus was neither Portus nor Rome, what
was it ? But before seeking the answer, we are confronted with a pre-
vious question. Had he any see at all, in the common acceptance of
the term ? It is now the received theory of the Christian Church, that

a settled Christian land should be covered with sees, conterminous but

not overlapping one another; that each is independent of its neighbour;

and that an imperiuin in irnperio in an intolerable anomaly. The diffi-

by this theory are great. The Roman Church
culties created at times
overcomes them by consecrating bishops in partihus. The Roman con-
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 433

gregations in England in our own time were ruled (owing to legal

many years, much to the amusement of Englishmen, by
difficulties) for
a great Cardinal who was bishop of Melipotamus a place of which

they had never heard. The Anglican Church solves this difficulty in
another way. exigencies require that there should be a bishop to
Its

superintend English congregations of Asia and Africa; he is

the
'
Anglican bishop in Jerusalem and the East,' but Jerusalem is not his
see. Still more necessary is it that the congregations on the conti-

nent of Europe should have episcopal supervision. This is committed

'
to the bishop of Gibraltar.' Here indeed Gibraltar is properly a see ;

but the theoretical diocese consists of a garrison and its belongings, a

harbour, two or three miles of rock, and whole troops of rabbits and
monkeys. The main body of the human flock, which the bishop
shepherds, is scattered about Europe and the Mediterranean, and would
not be found more in Gibraltar itself than in the moon. When the

bishop some years ago went to Rome to confirm the English residents
there, Pio Nono is reported to have said humorously that he did not
know till then that he was in the diocese of Gibraltar. No doubt
when Hippolytus lived, the practice of the later Church had already
become general, but it cannot have been universal. Indeed from the
very nature of the case, the development of the system must have been
more or less gradual though it was the ideal at which the Church
;

would aim. Less than a century had elapsed, when Hippolytus was
born, since Timothy exercised episcopal functions in Ephesus, and
Titus in Crete ;
but they were itinerant, not diocesan bishops. Even at
the close of the second century exceptional cases would be treated in
an exceptional way. The harbour of Portus, now fast supplanting Ostia,
was thronged with a numerous and fluctuating population, consisting
largely of foreigners sailors, warehousemen, custom-house officers,
dock-police, porters, and the like. A bishop was needed who should
take charge of this miscellaneous and disorderly flock. He must be-
fore all things be conversant in the manners and language of Greece,
the lingua franca of the East and indeed of the civilized world. Hippo-

lytus was just the man for the place. He was probably appointed by
bishop Victor (c. a.d. 190 200); for his relations to Victor's successors,
Zephyrinus and Callistus, forbid us to suppose that he owed any pro-
motion to them, and indeed his account of Victor generally leads us to
look upon this bishop as his patron. This hypothesis accords with his
own language speaking of his position. He distinctly designates himself
as holding the high-priestly or in other words the episcopal office ; he
was described either by himself or by another' as having been appointed
'
Photius AR. 32. .1 ; see above, p. 348.

CLEM. II. 28
434 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

bishop of the Gentiles (tViWoTro? lOvoiv), thus indicating that he had

charge of the various nationaUties represented at Portus. This is

obviously an archaic expression and may have originated in the time of
Hippolytus. At all events in his extant great work, the so-called Philo-
sophumefia, he appeals in his concluding address {AR. i. 1) to 'Greeks
and Barbarians, Chaldaeans and Assyrians, Aegyptians and Libyans,
Indians and Aethiopians, Celts and Latins on foreign service (oi a-Tparr}-

yovvT<i AaTLvoi), and all those who dwell in Europe, Asia and Libya*
as their counsellor; where the limitation of the Latins seems to suggest
that planted at Portus as his head-quarters, he regarded himself by
virtue of his commission as a sort of episcopal Chaplain-general of the
Forces. Moreover my theory harmonizes very well with another fact.
The earliest bishop, connected with Portus after the age of Hippolytus,
was present at the Council of Aries (a.d. 313); but unlike the other
bishops mentioned in the same list (de civitate Eboracensi, de civitate Utica,
etc.) he is called not de civitate Portuensi, but G?-egorius episcopus de loco

qui est in Portu Romae^ , as if the same arrangement still prevailed,

Portus being the residence of this Gregorius, but not strictly speaking
his see.

Occupying this ground, Hippolytus needed nothing more. Here

was a sufficient fulcrum for his ecclesiastical lever. He was senior as
bishop even to his ecclesiastical superiors Zephyrinus and Callistus. He
held that, as a successor of the Apostles, he had a special gift of the

Holy Spirit. By virtue of his office, he was an appointed 'guardian

of the Church' (({>povpo<; t^<: e/cKXi^o-ta?). He was a man of fiery dogmatic
and moral zeal ; and, when he saw, or fancied that he saw, the occupants
of the Roman see swerving both from the one and from the other, he
let fly at them at once. His position is quite intelligible. There is no
evidence that he regarded them as deposed and, from his puritanical
point of view, himself substituted in their place. But his language
implies that in some sense he looked upon them as no true bishops.
Probably, if he formulated his views at all, he would have said that
their doctrinal and moral obliquities had placed their episcopal office

and functions in abeyance for the time.

If such was his position, we can well understand why Jerome could
not discover his see. In fact he had no see to be discovered. But on
the supposition that he was either a schismatical bishop of Rome or the
lawful bishop of Portus, no explanation of this ignorance can be given.

^
Labb. Cone. i.
p. 1454 (ed. Coleti). which bishops of Terracina, Praeneste,
The previous year a Roman synod was Tres Tabernae, and Ostia are present, but
held under Miltiades (id. i.
p. 1427), in no bishop of Portus; see Dollinger, p. go.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 435

13.

HIPPOLYTUS THE PRESBYTER.

Hippolytus, the famous writer, unmistakeably describes himself as

a bishop. He is so called also by all those from Eusebius and Jerome
downward, who were acquainted with his writings. Yet in the only
contemporary Latin document indeed the only contemporary document
he is called
'
the presbyter.' This is the designation which he bears
also in Damasus, the next Latin writer who mentions him ; and from
Damasus it is adopted by Prudentius. What does this title mean ?
The contemporary document indeed seems to accentuate the appellation.
The compiler of this portion of the Liberian Chronicle (c. a.d. 255)
speaks of Pontianus the bishop and Hippolytus the presbyter.'
'

The position and influence of Hippolytus were unique among the

Roman Christians of his age. He linked together the learning and the
traditions of the East, the original home of Christianity, with the
marvellous practical energy of the West, the scene of his own life's
labours. Not only was he by far the most learned man in the Western
Church, but his spiritual and intellectual ancestry was quite exceptional.
Though he lived till within a few years of the middle of the third

century, he could trace his pedigree back by only three steps, literary
as well as ministerial, to the life and teaching of the Saviour Himself.

Irenseus, Polycarp, S.John this was his direct ancestry. No wonder

if him exceptional honour in his own generation.
these facts secured to
'
The meaning of the word irpeafivTpo<;, the presbyter or elder,' ' '

must be explained by the language of the school in which he was brought

up. It does not represent ojice, but it expresses venerable dignity such

as is accorded to those who are depositaries of the wisdom of the past.

When Papias speaks of elders', he means the Apostles and immediate
Lord those who were fathers of the Church,' as we
disciples of the
'

should say, to his own generation. When Irenaeus speaks of the '

blessed elder,' he means Papias or his own master Polycarp or others

belonging to the generation of Polycarp and Papias, albeit their younger

contemporaries. When descending a generation lower still, we arrive
at Hippolytus himself, we find that his favourite designation of his
master Irenreus is o /AaKapto? irp^ajivTepo'i. In the fragment against
Noetiis (p. 43, Lagarde) again Hippolytus uses the same language '
the

presbyters,' 'the blessed presbyters.' The idea of clerical office, if

involved at all (which I very much doubt) in this use of the term, is

^
See Essays on Supcrnahiral Religion, p. 145.

282
 436 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
certainly not prominent. Assuredly Hippolytus does not confuse the
presbyterate with the episcopate still less does he deny that Irenasus
;

was a bishop, which everyone allowed him to be. This leading con-
' '

ception of then seems to have been inherited by

venerable authority
Hippolytus' own and
scholars
younger contemporaries in their use of
the term. There was no man of his own age and surroundings who had
the same claims to this title of distinction. An octogenarian, a widely
learned divine, and a most laborious and influential writer, with such
a spiritual pedigree what member of the Roman Church, nay what
Christian throughout the world, could compete with him ?
When therefore the chronographer, who wrote less than twenty
'
years after his death, states that in the year 235 Pontianus the bishop
and Hippolytus the presbyter were banished together,' he does not
directly or indirectly disparage the latter in comparison with the former.
Pontianus is 'the bishop' simply, for there was
only one bishop of
Rome. But Hippolytus has a title of his own, more honorable than
any conferred by any office; just as Bede is called the Venerable.
There are many bishops and many archdeacons, but there was only one
Hippolytus and only one Bede.
But, though this was the meaning of Hippolytus' contemporaries, it
does not follow that later generations understood the terms in the same
sense. When nearly a century and a half later Damasus speaks of
'presbyter Hippolytus,' he probably accepted the designation as he
found it, but understood it according to the usage of his own time, of

the priestly office or second order of the ministry and Prudentius

;

followed Damasus. Neither the one nor the other knew anything,
except vaguely, about the history of Hippolytus, as their statements
show.
Thus therefore the use of the term in the Liberian Chronicle does
not imply, as we might suspect (see i. p. 262), a denial of Hippolytus'
claims to the papacy, thus supporting Bollinger's view that he was the
first antipope. Still less does it imply that, though a bishop of a

suburban see, he was a member of the Roman presbytery, according to

Bunsen's view.

14-

LATER YEARS, BANISHMENT, AND DEATH.

The episcopate of Victor was conterminous, roughly speaking, with
the last decade of the first century. Dying towards the close of the
century, he was succeeded by Zephyrinus. Zephyrinus held the
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 437
episcopate for eighteen years or thereabouts ; Callistus for five. After
Callistus succeeded Urbanus about a.d. 230. Victor had been the
friend and patron of Hippolytus. With his successors Zephyrinus and
Callistus, our saint had a deadly feud. What may have been his
relations to Urbanus we know not ; but, as his quarrel was not with the
pontificate but with the pontiffs, we may presume that harmony was at
length restored. If any formal reconciliation was needed, it would now

take place; and hence would arise the story of his exhorting all
Christian people to unity, which afterwards was connected (as we have

already seen) with his supposed lapse into Novatianism. From the
accession of Urbanus we may suppose that there was a cessation of
those dissensions within the Church of which Hippolytus had been the

champion and ringleader.

At the same time the Church of Rome enjoyed peace from external
persecution. Early in the year 222 Alexander Severus succeeded to
the throne. If he was not a convert himself, he was favourably disposed
towards Christianity. The ladies of his family more especially held
close relations with the great Christian teachers. Not only Origen in
Alexandria, but Hippolytus in Rome, corresponded with one or other
of the princesses. The thirteen years of the reign of Alexander marked
an epoch of progress and development for the Christian Church. With
Hippolytus himself it seems to have been the most fertile period of his
literary life. The peace of the Church within and without left him more
leisure for literary pursuits ;
and the growing physical infirmities of age
would direct him towards his intellectual resources, which he would be
eager to turn to account for the instruction of the Church. In the first

year of Alexander was published his famous work, the Paschal Cycle,
which was afterwards chosen to decorate the Chair of his Statue, as his
greatest claim to the recognition of posterity. In the thirteenth and
last year of this same emperor was finished his almost equally famous

Chronicle of the World (see i. p. 259), which must have been about the
latest literary product of its author. During this same period also he
must have written his now famous
Refutation of all the Heresies, which
has laid these latest generations of Christian students under the deepest
debt of gratitude and which perhaps remained incomplete when he was
overtaken by banishment and death. To this same time belongs also
the correspondence with Mammsea.
At length this and troubled life was closed by banish-
long, laborious,
ment and death. In the year 230 or thereabouts Urbanus had been
succeeded by Pontianus as bishop of Rome. In February 235 the
emperor Alexander was slain at Mayence together with his mother and
43^ EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
chief adviser Mammsea, the correspondent of Hippolytus and Origen.
His successor Maximin adopted a wholly different policy towards the
Christians. The Roman bishop was banished to Sardinia; and with
him was sent the venerable Christian father Hippolytus. This was in
the consulship of Severus and Quintianus, a,d. 235. Those modern
critics who assign the position of antipope to Hippolytus give a plau-
sible reason for this companionship in exile. They infer that the new
emperor desired at once to rid the metropolis of the two rival leaders
of the Roman Church, and so to restore peace in the city. No such
explanation is needed. The pre-eminent
influence of Hippolytus as a
Christian teacher in the Western world would alone have singled him out
conferred by the persecuting tyrant'.
for this exceptional distinction
We should do too great honour to Maximin, if we were to attribute to
him any policy of statecraft. He was a fierce, blood-thirsty soldier,
whose only idea of government was coercion". Against the friends and
adherents of Alexander and his mother Mammgea he waged an
implacable war. To have been a friend of Mammaea was to be the
unpardonable foe of Maximin. But Hippolytus was known to have
corresponded with, and been trusted by, the deceased empress-mother.
To Maximin, or to his adherents anxious to secure his favour in Rome,
this would be sufficient to convict him^. was not necessary that the
It

emperor himself should have visited Rome. There were friends at

hand ready to execute, or to anticipate, his commands in this matter.

In the Liber Pontificalis (i. pp. 64, 145, Duchesne) the banishment
of the two exiles is attributed to Alexander, the names of the same
consuls being given as in the contemporary record. This is unques-
tionably a mistake. Maximin became emperor in March this year
(a.d. 235); and the banishment was the result of the reversal of his pre-

decessor's policy (see i.

p. xciv).
Our contemporary chronicler says nothing of the subsequent fate of
Hippolytus. He was concerned only with the Roman episcopate, and
the mention of Hippolytus is incidental. Of Pontianus he states, that in
Sardinia he divested himself of the episcopate at the close of September
in this same year (iv Kal. Oct.), and that Anteros was consecrated two
months later (xi Kal. Dec.) in his place. Of his subsequent fate he

*
'
the persecution of Maximin see
Of ib. 9, 'Omnes Alexandri ministros
Allard Les Chretiens dans rEtiipire etc. variis modis interemit :
dispositionibus
p. 4i8sq. eius invidit : et dutn suspectos habet
"
Capitolin. Maximin enim ci
8 'Erat amicos et ministros eius crudelior factus

persuasum nisi crudelitate imperium non est.'

'
teneri.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 439
'

says nothing; but by describing the place of banishment as insula

nociva',' he implies that it was fatal to both exiles.

Sardinia was to Rome, what Portland is to England a station of

convicts who were condemned to hard labour in the quarries. By the
irony of history, only a few years before, it had been the place of exile
of Callistus, the great enemy of Hippolytus ; but Callistus had been

pardoned, and returned to Rome, to succeed to the papacy {AR. i. f).

Sardinia had been a favourite place of deportation for the tumultuous

Jews who troubled the peace of the city. On one occasion Tiberius
had banished no fewer than 4000 to this island^ When the displeasure
of the Romans was transferred from the Jews to the Christians, the

place of exile remained the same. Hence Jewish and Christian Sibyllists
alike denounce this dread island. With the freedom of unverifiable
prophecy they foretell that it shall be overwhelmed in the sea, shall be
extinguished in ashes, and so forth, at the great retribution^;

2apSw, vvv (TV (iap^Za fxeTaWa^r) is T(j)pr]v.

The ' '

old Greek proverb of sardonic laughter whether originating in
the hideous grin produced by the bitter herbs of Sardinia or in some
other way* receives a new force and significance on the lips of these
doleful prophets. Sardinia, the exultant persecutor, shall laugh
'
on the
wrong side of her mouth,' when the day of vengeance comes ^

The same collection (a.d. 354), which contains the notice of the
banishment of the two exiles, comprises another document (see i. p.

249 sq), certainly not later than a.d. 335, and perhaps (so far as regards
the particular notice) contemporary with the reference to the exile. This
latterdocument deals with the depositions of the popes and martyrs.
From we learn that Hippolytus was buried on the Tiburtine Way and
it

Pontianus in the Cemetery of Callistus on the same day, the Ides of

August. The close of the episcopate of Pontianus, whether by depri-
vation or by resignation (see i. p. 286), was Sept. 28, 235. The Zi'/'cr
Pontificalis (i. pp. 64, 145, Duchesne) places his death on Oct. 30,
A.D. 236. If this date be accepted, the translation of the bones of the
1 ^
This might be true of the convict Orac. Sibyll. vii. 96 sq ; conip. also
stations, but of the island generally very iii.
477.
*
different language is held; Pausan. vii. Virg. Eel. vii. 41 'Sardois amarior
17. 1 SapSuj 7ap Tr\v vrjcrov els to. fidXicxTa herbis'; see Pape-Benseler Griech. War-
eiidal/jLova avrl 'EXXdSos <r(f)i(nv dwidojKeu, terb. s. v. SapSai.
^
said of an exchange of provinces which Orac. Sibyll. i. 182 SapSicioc /j,eidr]ixa

Nero made with the Senate; see Mar- 7e\d<r(rTe oTroraf ij^rj touto k.t.X. The
quardt J\oru. Staatsvcrw. I.
p. 97. words are put into the mouth of Noah.
1
Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 3. 5.
440 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
two confessors must be deferred. As an imperial rescript was necessary
before removing the body of an exile (see i. p. 287), the day of deposi-
tion could not be before the Ides of Rossi places it.
August 237, as De
But on the other hand, as I
(1. c),
the date of Pon-
have pointed out
tianus' death in the Liber Poiitificalis is open to the suspicion of
confusion ; and prudential reasons might have led the friends of the
exiles from applying for the necessary permission during the tyrant's
lifetime. Maximin was slain in April or May 238 (Clinton's Fast.
Ro))i. I.
p. 252). On the whole therefore Aug. 238 seems more probable
than Aug. 237. The death of Hippolytus may have occurred at any
time from a,d. 235 to a.d. 238.

15.

THE STATUE OF HIPPOLYTUS.

In the year 1551 a mutilated statue of a sitting figure was discovered
in the Ager Veranus. The head and upper part of the body were
wanting, and there was no name to identify it. Nevertheless its iden-
tification as a figure of Hippolytus was undeniable, and has never been

seriously questioned. It was found in the very place where Hippolytus

had it was
his chief sanctuary; evidently the representation of an eccle-
siastic and a and (as the chair suggested) probably of a bishop;
divine,
it presented on the back and sides of the chair a list of theological

writings, most of them known to be the works of Hippolytus; more

especially there was a Paschal Canon constructed in the first year of
Alexander. This completed the identification.
This statue is now in the Lateran Museum, the upper part
being
restored. It is figured in several works relating to Plippolytus (e.g.

Fabricius Op. i.
p. 36 sq ;
Bunsen i.
frontispiece, see pp. 4^3 sq,
TiZ'h')

460; Wordsworth, frontispiece, see p. 29 sq; and in other books (e.g.

Kraus Die Christliche Kunst p. in, 187; Real-EncycL der Christl.
Alterth. i.
p. 660). The inscription so far as it bears on our investiga-
tions has been given above {AR. 2).
But what is the date of this erection? It has been variously assigned
to different epochs from the third to the sixth century. I cannot doubt

however that DoUinger (p. 291) and Funk {Theolog. Qiiartalschr. 1884,
p. 104 sq) and Salmon {Did. of Christ. Biogr. s.v. Hippolytus Roma-
nus III. p. 96) are right in giving the earliest date. The phenomena
indeed are quite inexplicable in any later century. For
(i) The statue is strictly historical. So far as it gives information,
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 441
this isborne out by what we know from other sources. But the notices
of Damasus and Jerome and Prudentius show that the historical Plip-
polytus had disappeared in the fourth century. Those twin giants
Ignorance and Myth had piled their Pelion on Ossa, and stormed the
citadel of the Truth with only too deadly effect on this occasion. The
inscription on the statue would be possible in Hippolytus' time or in
the next generation ;
but we can hardly conceive it at a later date.

(2) The details of the inscription point to a contemporary record.

The Paschal given the chief place, being evidently regarded
Chronicle is

as the chef d'ceuvre of the author his great claim to posthumous fame.

The cycle is calculated for the years a.d. 222 333. But long before
this latter date the Romans had been obliged to abandon this cycle, if
they ever adopted it, for a more correct system of calculation. Even
as early as the year 243 there is evidence that its erroneousness had
become too patent to be overlooked, and that a different cycle was
calculated in order to take its place. In the year 236, the probable

year of its author's death, the full moon, as calculated by Hippolytus,

ought to have on April 5 th, whereas it really took place very early
fallen
in the morning of the 9th. In the course of eighty years Hippolytus' full
moon would coincide with the actual new moon. See the calculations
of Salmon Chronology of Hippolytus in HennatJiena i. p. 82 sq.

(3) These arguments seem conclusive. If any archaeological con-

siderations should appear to point in the opposite direction, they must
be very strong to produce conviction. But in fact none such have been
alleged. Some again have supposed that an older statue intended for
some one else had been utilised and transformed into Hippolytus.
For this there is no ground. But even, if it had been so, the fact
would not affect the questions with which we are concerned. The
arguments remain as strong as ever for the conclusion, that it could not
have been transformed into Hippolytus and set up in the Ager Veranus

to represent him after the third century, and probably not after the
middle of the century.
As I shall have occasion to show presently (p. 443), this parcel of
ground on the Tiburtine Way, which became the Cemetery of Hippoly-
tus was probably his own property. Thus his friends would be able to
set up the statue without interference ;
so that there was nothing to pre-
vent its erection during his own life-time, though probably it
belongs to
some date immediately after his death.

By a curious coincidence we have a contemporary representation

not only of Hippolytus, but also of his great enemy Callistus. De Rossi
[Bull, di Archcol. Crist. 1866, pp. 17, 33) gives a contemporary pic-
442 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
ture on glass which figures this pope's head. If any reliance can be
placed on the likeness, he was a person of grave and venerable appear-
ance. At all events it is a singular phenomenon that the two earliest
whom contemporary representations are preserved are
ecclesiastics of

deadly enemies. We only regret the more that the head

these two of

the Hippolytean statue is lost; but perhaps future excavations may

disinter it.

i6.

POSTHUMOUS HONOURS AND SANCTUARIES.

We have seen that the bodies of the two martyrs who had died in
Sardinia Pontianus and Hippolytus were brought back to find a
life and work.
resting place amidst the scenes of their former They
were companions in their burial, as they had been companions in their
banishment. The same Ides of August, presumably in the year 237 or
238, saw them both deposited with all honours in the
suburban Ceme-
teries. But, though the day was the same, the place was different.
Pontianus, the pope, was laid in the papal crypt then recently con-
structed in connexion with the Cemetery of Callistus on the Appian

Way, but already occupied by his successor Anteros who died after

occupying the papal throne a few months (a.d. 236) and thus preceded
him to his grave. His companion in exile Hippolytus found his grave
on another of the roads which stretch across the Campagna the
great
Tiburtine Way. He
was laid in a catacomb constructed on the Ager
Veranus an estate doubtless so called from some former owner.
On this way to Tivoli, not far from the Praetorian camp and less

than a mile from the City gate, we are confronted, at least as early as
the fourth century, with two famous cemeteries standing almost face to
face, each with proper sanctuary, on either side of the road, which
its

here runs roughly speaking from West to East. On the southern or

right side is the more famous of the two, the Cemetery of S. Cyriace
connected with which stands the Basilica of S. Laurentius selected by
the latest of the popes, whose long tenure of oftice and notable career
alike single him out from the long line of his predecessors, as his last

resting-place by the side of the famous deacon of Rome. On the left

hand of the same road and therefore to the North, between this Via
Tibtirtina and the Via Nomeniana, is the site of the Cemetery and Basi-
Hca of S. Hippolytus. The two Cemeteries with their respective sanc-
tuaries are quite distinct in ancient authorities; but owing to the fact
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 443
that the shrine and Cemetery of S. Hippolytus were ruined and obscured
or obliterated at a comparatively early date, and that many monuments
were transferred from it to the larger and more distinguished sanctuary
on the south side of the road, its memory was absorbed in the fame of
the Basilica of S. Laurentius, and modern writers have inextricably
fused and confused the two. The discoveries of recent years, inter-

preted by the arch?eological genius of De Rossi, have corrected the

error, and established the distinction beyond dispute.
The sanctuary and cemetery of Hippolytus therefore, with which we
are directly concerned, had no connexion originally with the famous
basilica of S. Laurentius. Its site is on the sloping ground or 'mons,'

as it is called on the left of the road, and therefore between the

Cemeteries of S. Agnese on the Via Novientajia to the North and
that of S. Laurentius (or more properly of S. Cyriace) on the Via
Tiburtina to the South. Dated inscriptions have been found in these

catacombs, ranging from the close of the third century to the beginning
of the fifth \ As it appears to be called the Coevieteritim Hippolyti,
and as the genitive in such cases generally denotes the owner or
founder of the place of sepulture, not the principal saint whose
De Rossi reasonably conjectures that this
cultus was celebrated there,

cemetery was Hippolytus' own possession ^ This seems highly pro-

bable for many reasons. It would account for the selection of the

spot for his own grave ;

whereas the circumstances of his burial would
have suggested some other locality, in closer proximity to Pontianus
his companion alike in exile and in death. would account, as I
It

have already pointed out, also for the unique honour which was done
to him in the erection of a statue on the spot, whether soon after his

death or even during his life time, for it would be erected on his

own estate. Considering his hostile relations to the heads of the

Roman hierarchy during his life time on the one hand, and the
persecutions towhich he was subjected from the civil powers on the
other, the circumstances must have been very favourable in other

'
^
See Bull, di Archeol. Crist. Ser. iv. terio after Ypoliti.' De Rossi gives
'

I. p. 49. other notices indicating that the proper

2
See Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1. c. p. nameof these catacombs was C^t7f/t;;-i;
15 sq (1882); comp. Rom. Sott. i.
p. S. Hippolyti. In the Martyr. Ilieron.
116 sq. The earliest notice of his burial xiii Kal. Jul. the reading of the Bcrnc

(see above, i.
p. 251) in the Depositio ms is 'Rome, in cimiterio
Yppoliti via
Martyricm of Liberian Catalogue
the Tiburtina,' where the common text has
'
gives Ypoliti in Tiburtina et Pontiani in
'
Romae
Hippolyti,' thus substituting an-
Calisti,' where according to De Rossi wc other martyr Hippolytus for the place of
'
should understand in cjusdem coemc- burial.
444 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
respects to enable his friends to do him this honour. However great
their zeal, they must have been secure from molestation on either
side; and only the absolute possession of the ground could have given
them this security.
Here then he was deposited on the Ides of August the same day on
which he was commemorated in after ages for some centuries. But
evil days soon overtook the Church of Rome. The next century was
crowded with other cares and interests, and the past was forgotten. A
sponge passed over the records of Hippolytus and his times; and only
the confused smear remained of a once exceptionally vivid and character-
istic portraiture. There were the schisms and feuds within the Roman
Church itself popes and antipopes; there were the persecutions which
assailed the Christians from without, and bred endless perplexities
of discipline within; there were the great dogmatic controversies which
harried the universal Church from one end to the other; last, but not

least, there were the first rumblings of the dark thunder-cloud in

the Northern sky, the earliest inroads of those barbarian hordes who
were destined before long to sweep away old Rome in desolation
and ruin. At length towards the close of the fourth century on the
accession of Damasus came a respite; when men could breathe again,
and their interest in the past revived.

Damasus (a.d. 366 384) was a great restorer of the sanctuaries of

Rome. The catacombs more especially, as the resting places of the
martyrs, received his attention. In this pious work he was ably
seconded by the famous calligrapher Furius Dionisius Filocalus, who
describes himself as the 'cultor atque amator' of Damasus. Rarely
if ever, in the history of the Church, has a great leader been fired

with such zeal for recording the Christian heroism of the past and
found so accomplished an artificer to carry out his designs. Rarely, if

ever, has history stood in sorer need of such a Our only

chronicler'.

regret is that the knowledge of Damasus was not commensurate to his

enthusiasm.
Among the many saints of the past whose memory profited by his
reverential zeal, was the martyred father of the Church, the venerable
Hippolytus. Already a sanctuary enclosed the remains of the saint;
but it was enlarged and beautified by Damasus, when on the defeat
of the rival faction which had supported the antipope Ursicinus he
received the allegiance of the whole Roman Church. The inscription
commemorating the event runs as follows
1
For an account of the inscriptions of graphy see De Rossi in Bull, di Archeol.
Damasus their composition and calh- Crist, Ser. iv, ill. p. 7 sq.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 445
LAETA DEO PLEBS SANCTA CANAT QVOD MOENIA CRESCVNT
ET RENOVATA DOMVS MARTYRIS HIPPOLITI ^

It is conjectured that he received the submission of the opposite

There would be a singular appropriateness
party in this very building.
in its selection for this purpose; since he supposed that
Hippolytus
had at one time favoured the antipapal schism of Novatian a fore-
runner of Ursicinus and afterwards by an opportune recantation had
recalled the people from the paths of error to the unity of the Church.
This supposed incident in the saint's career he commemorated in
another inscription set up in the same building, to do honour to
'Hippolytus the elder^.'
But Damasus knew little or nothing beyond the fame of Hippolytus
as a martyr, and probably as a writer. A confused rumour had reached
his ears that Hippolytus had not been always on friendly terms with
the popes his predecessors. He concluded therefore, being ignorant
of the chronology of the saint'slife, that he must have been an adherent

of the Novatian party (see above, p. 424 sq), the chief precedent,
which history recorded of rival claimants to the papal throne, before the
papal schism which amidst disgraceful and murderous riots had ushered
in his own elevation to the see of S. Peter.

At the beginning of the next century occurred the visit of the

Spanish poet Prudentius to this shrine.
His collection of hymns entitled Peri Stephanon or De Coronis,
'
the crowns of the martyrs,' consists of fifteen poems. Most of these
commemorate Spanish martyrs like Vincentius and Eulalia, or martyrs

already celebrated by festivals in the Spanish Church. But the largest

space (2152 verses out of 3875) is devoted to four martyrs especially
honoured Rome, Laurentius, Romanus, Hippolytus, and Agnes,
in

poem (66 lines) on the passion of S. Peter and S. Paul.

besides a short
Rome therefore may be said to have inspired the collection. But it
will be observed that all the four were celebrated in the catacombs

lying on the Tiburtine Way or near it. The celebration of the three
former moreover took place at the same time of the year within five
days of each other (Aug. 9, Aug. 10, and Aug. 13) and in the same
locality, in the twin sanctuaries which stood ms a vis on the Tiburtine
Way.
Of the connexion between the cultus of S. Laurence and S. Hippo-

lytus I shall have much to say hereafter. But who was the other member

^ -
A/i. 7. 1); see above, p. ^2g. AJ\. 7. a; see above, p. 328.
44^ EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
of the trio ? Romanus is a strictly historical person. He was a deacon
and exorcist who suffered
in the persecution of Diocletian (a.d. 303),
a native of Caesarea in Palestine or the neighbourhood, but actually

martyred in Antioch and therefore unconnected originally with Rome.

His fame is especially associated with a miracle, which (whatever may
be the foundation of fact) is recorded by his contemporary and fellow-
countryman, the historian Eusebius ; he astounded the bystanders by
speaking distinctly after his tongue had been cut out'.
This was unquestionably the Romanus who is celebrated in the poem
of Prudentius. The poet dwells at great length on this very miracle,
embellishing it with many hideous accessories. Moreover he adds the
incident of a little child a mere infant being summoned by Romanus
from among the Christian bystanders and invited by the saint to bear
testimony to Christ. The child did this to the edification of the by-

standers, though at the cost of its own life. The incident of this
infant martyr has no place in the contemporary record of Eusebius ;

but it was attached to the story of Romanus at a very early date. I

think I see the origin of this edifying appendage to the contemporary

account of Eusebius. Some eulogist of Romanus, when he described
the constancy of the saint under the threats of the tyrant, would apply
to him, perhaps would put into his own mouth, the scriptural words
Ps. viii. 2 'Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast Thou
ordained strength because of Thine enemies, that Thou mightest still

the enemy and the avenger.' As a matter of fact S. Chrysostom, who

nevertheless betrays no knowledge of the infant-martyr, uses this very
text in his extant orationon Romanus'. It was only a single step to
go from the abstract to the concrete, and to produce the babe in

person. Accordingly another orator, apparently a younger contem-

^
Euseb. Mart. Palaest. 9, in the form transformation I shall have to speak pre-
of this work attached to the Ecclesiastical sently. Nevertheless it was written ori-
History. See also the other recension, ginally in Greek, as it shows again and
preserved only in the Syriac which is
'

again ; e.g. forte proferentium Judaeorum

translated by Cureton (pp. 6, 54). The tres pueros ', a literal translation of the

story of Romanus is told likewise in the genitive absolute (Trpo(pep6vTwv tQiv 'Ion-

spurious work de Resurrectione, preserved Satwr,

'
the Jews alleging the case of the

only in Latin and ascribed to Eusebius, Three Children '), but utterly without
Op. VI. p. 1097 sq (Migne). The part sense in the Latin. It betrays the influ-

relating to Romanus is given also in ence of S. Chrysostom's genuine oration

Ruinart Act. Sine. Mart. p. 392. Evi- (see the next note),
dently this is not a genuine work of Theodoret {Epist. 130, iv. p. 1218
Eusebius, as apparent (if for no other
is Schulze) mentions the name of the

reason) from the fact that Romanus is martyr, but nothing more,
^
made not a cleric, but a soldier; of which Chiysost. Op. Ii. p. 616 (ed. Bened.).
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 447

porary of the golden-mouthed, preaching likewise at Antioch on

the Day of S. Romanus in a sermon which is wrongly ascribed to
S. Chrysostom himself, makes Romanus ask that a babe (/Spe'^os)
shall be brought in from the market-place, taken (it would appear)
at hap-hazard and a child is brought, testifies, and suffers accord-
;

ingly'. At all events this addition to the original story must have

been circulated before the age of Prudentius. Prudentius however

knows nothing, or at least says nothing, about the infant's name. By
later martyrologists it is called Barulas or Baralas. This name appears
in the Latin Martyrologies of Ado and others.
Of the connexion of this Romanus a Palestinian by birth and an
Antiochene by martyrdom not only with Rome but with the sanc-
tuaries on the Tiburtine Way, we have ample proof, even if it might
not have been inferred from his prominence in the collection of
Prudentius. In the inscription, which was put up in the 13th century
in the basilica of S. Laurence, we read
CONTINET HOC TEMPLVM SANCTORVM CORPORA PLVRA
A QVIBVS AVXILIVM SVPPLEX HIC POSCERE CVRA.

Then, after mentioning Xystus and Laurentius with the first martyr

Stephen, the inscription enumerates Hippolytus with his nurse Concor-

dia and his family. Then follows next in order
ROMANVS MILES.

Of this inscription I shall have to say more presently ^ For my

immediate purpose this mention is sufficient. The time also of the
festival of S. Romanus nearly coincided with those of S. Laurence
and S. Hippolytus as appears from this notice in the Old Roman

Martyrology {AR. 40. g), where we have in juxta-position

v Id Aug. Romae, Romani militis

Vigiha sancti Laurentii.

ivId Aug. Romae Laurentii archidiacon. martyris et militum clxv.
Idus Aug. Romae, Hippolyti martyris cum familia sua, et
S. Concordiae nutricis ejus ;

1
Op. 11. p. 618. The festival of S. of style ; but the Benedictine editor adds
Romanus was evidently a great day at (for reasons given)
'
crediderem...esse
Antioch and would give occasion to cujusdam presbyteri Antiocheni, qui sub
flights of Christian oratory which influ- Flaviano allcrnas cum Chrysostomo cun-
enced the transmission and embellish- cionandi partes ageret'; see also Tille-
ment of the story. The oration of our mont Mein. v. p. 206.
pseudo-Chrysostom one of these. Its
is
''
See below, p. 461 sq, 469 sq.

genuineness is condemned on the ground

44^ EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
and we meet with similar notices in Florus-Beda and in Ado and
the later Roman Martyrologists.
There can be no doubt therefore that the Romanus of Prudentius and
of theRoman Martyrologists is the same person with the Romanus of
Eusebius and Chrysostom. But, if so, how do we explain two dif-
ferences? The Romanus of Eusebius is a cleric, a 'deacon and
(i)
Romanus of the Roman Martyrologists is a soldier:
exorcist'; but the
(2) The Romanus martyred at Antioch was commemorated on Nov. 18,
but the Romanus of the Tiburtine way and of the Latin Church
generally on Aug. 9, the eve of S. Laurence.

(i) As regards the profession of Romanus the testimony of Eusebius

is quite distinct. This martyr was a deacon in one of the villages in the
neighbourhood of his own C?esarea ;
but in all authors after Eusebius
his clerical status has disappeared. Even Chrysostom, who was most
favourably situated as to time and place for ascertaining the truth, seems to
have regarded him as a soldier. He tells how Romanus kept together
the army (o-TparoVcSoi/) of Christ and shifted the shame of defeat from
the Christians to the heads of the foes (ra? twv TroXefXiMv Kc^aXa^,

p. 613). He represents the devil as desiring, by cutting out the

martyr's tongue rather than depriving him of life outright, to make him
a witness of 'the lapses and the disaster of his own soldiers' (twv
TTTCOjLtaTWV Kttl T'*;? CTV/A^OpaS TWV OIKCIWV (TTpaT IWT<J)V, p. 6 1 4). The SeCOUd
passage at all events does not look like a metaphor, though we might
be inclined so to interpret the first. But whatever may have been
Chrysostom's own meaning, this figure of Christian warfare was doubt-
less the bridge of passage from Romanus the cleric to Romanus the
soldier. This appears in the development of the story, when we arrive
at the pseudo-Eusebius, who may not improbably have written before
the of the fourth century and whose account appears to be
close
influenced by the eulogium of S. Chrysostom. We are there told that
Romanus arriving at Antioch, and finding that 'many soldiers belonging
to the Church had lapsed' (multos milites cecidisse ecclesiae), pre-
sented himself before the judge, and said Thou shalt not depart
;
'

exulting, for God has soldiers who cannot be forced to submit (habet
'

enim Deus milites qui superari non possunt). This 'soldier of the
Lord' (Domini miles) accordingly resolves to show his own constancy
by resistance. Though Romanus is not distinctly called 'a soldier'
here, the language implies his military profession. To this account of
the pseudo-Eusebius, which we have only in a Latin translation, the
Latin Martyrologists seem from several indications to have been
indebted. AVith them at all events he is
unmistakeably a soldier.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 449
Of the profession of Romanus the Spanish poet tells us nothing.
So far as his directlanguage goes he might have been either a cleric or
a soldier, but he describes him as a noble of ancient lineage (vetusta
nobilem prosapia) who by his many services had won the first rank
among the citizens (meritisque multis esse primum civem); and at
the suggestion of the attendants, the offensive crowd (noxialem
stipitem) are removed by the judge, that a man of illustrious rank

might not be condemned by a plebeian sentence a description which

ill assorts with a simple deacon ministering in an obscure village of

Palestine. We may reasonably assume therefore, that Prudentius too

regarded Romanus as a soldier, if he had any distinct conception at all
on this point. The poem on Romanus is the piece de resistance of the
collection. It occupies not fewer than 1140 lines, nearly a third of the
whole number. It is made the vehicle for an elaborate attack on the

absurdities of idolatry, after the names of the apologists, with an

accompanying defence of Christianity neither the attack nor the
defence wanting in vigour and eloquence of a certain kind. We may
suspect that Prudentius, having little to tell of the saint himself, poured
into this poem the contents of his poetical common-place book. But
the immediate impulse to the poem seems to have been given by the
festival which he witnessed on the Tiburtine Way.
(2) But what shall we say of the time of the festival, Aug. 9th?
Eusebius again quite explicit as to the day of the martyrdom.
is His
Romanus suffered at Antioch in the first year of Diocletian's persecution
on the 1 6th Dius,
equivalent to xv Kal. Dec. (Nov. 18), or the 7 th (it
should be the 17 th) later Teshri, as given in the Syriac recension,
the same day on which his fellow-countrymen Alphseus and Zacchseus
were martyred at Csesarea. Accordingly we find this day assigned to
him in the ancient Syriac Calendar, which must date from the latter

half of the century (the extant MS bearing date 412).

fourth The
festival therefore, as celebrated at Rome, must be the commemoration

of some translation probably the deposition of the reliques in this

Roman sanctuary on the Tiburtine way. But the Roman Martyrologies,
from the Marty rologitim Hieronymianum onward, preserve elsewhere
the record of the true day of martyrdom. The fact is that the contents
of the Syriac Martyrology, or of some allied Calendar, or both, were
shovelled into this valuable refuse-heap of martyrological records which
bears the name of Jerome, and so we find :

XV Kal. Dec. In Caesarea natalis sanctorum... Alphaei, Zacchaei,

Romani.
xiv Kal. Dec. In Antiochia civitate, Romani monachi, Baralae ;

CLEM. 11. 29
450 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT. ,

where we have a double entry of the same person. The corresponding

notice in the Veius Romanujn is

xiv Kal. Dec. Antiochiae Romani monachi et martyris,

where the clerical character of Romanus is still preserved in 'mo-

nachus.' Again in the later Martyrologists, Ado and his companions,
the notice of Romanus of Antioch appears on one of these two days in

December, where he is correctly described as a martyr in the persecution

of Diocletian, where the prefect's name Asclepiades is given (after
Prudentius), and where the story of the child Baralas is likewise told.

We are in a position to say something more generally about

now
this journey of Prudentius to Rome, so fertile in its poetical results;

and the investigation is not uninstructive. On his way from Spain to

the eternal city he stops at Forum Cornelii or Forutn Syllae, the modern
Imola and there he pays his devotions at the shrine of the local saint,
;

to which the cathedral of Imola is still dedicated Cassianus the

school-master martyr who was beaten to death with the tablets and
stabbed with the stiles of the ungrateful urchins whom he had taught.
Here he saw a picture not less vivid and doubtless not less truthful
than the representation of Hippolytus' sanctuary of the Tiburtine Way
which he describes afterwards of the pedagogue done to death by the
beardless monsters in revenge for the castigations of the rod which they
must have richly deserved. This is the only poem in the whole
collection which commemorates a martyr not connected either with his
native Spain or with Rome the object of his visit. At Rome he would
arrive before the festival of the Passion of S. Peter and S. Paul
probably
(June 29th). This indeed might have been the immediate aim of his
journey, and would determine the time of his arrival in the city. He
describes the unwonted stir among the Roman people.

Plus solito coeunt ad gaudia; die, amice, quid sit

Roniam per omnem cursitant ovantque.

He pictures, though briefly, yet notwithstanding some difficulties with

the vividness of an eye-witness, the two basilicas of S. Peter and S. Paul
on either side of the river their position and features ; he describes the
'sacerdos,' probably the Roman bishop, as busied from morning to

night (so we may perhaps paraphrase the word 'pervigil'), celebrating

the sacred rites, first at the one and then at the other; he speaks of
himself with the rest of the crowd as hurrying from the one to the other

Nos ad utrumque tamen gressu properemus incitato,

Et his et illis
perfruamur hymnis;
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 45 1

and he concludes by appealing to all strangers, visitors like himself in

the holy city, to profit by the occasion ;

Haec didicisse sat est Romae tibi tu, domum ; reversus,

Diem bifestum sic colas memento.
This poem was, it would almost seem, written for the occasion. But
his chief interest gathers about the three festivals celebrated in the
middle of August on the Tiburtine way those of S. Romanus, S.

Laurentius, and S. Hippolytus. The poem on S. Agnes was suggested

probably by its proximity ; for her martyrdom was celebrated at a

different time of the year in January. The eulogy of S. Cyprian may
also have been prompted by this Roman visit for his commemoration ;

was celebrated in the cemetery of S. Callistus on xviii Kal. Oct. (Sept.

15); but, as Prudentius himself says, Cyprian was celebrated all the

world round,

Praesidet Hesperiae, Christum serit ultimis Iberis.

He was, writes the poet, though

'

proprius patriae martyr,' yet

'
ore et
amore noster.'

From this long digression on the hymns of Prudentius and more

especially on Romanus, of wliich the motive appear presently, will

I return to Hippolytus.Prudentius gives us a minute and accurate

description of what he saw at the commemoration on the Tiburtine

Way. There was the picture of the martyrdom over the tomb of the
martyr, painted in vivid colours; the mangled limbs scattered here and
there; the thorns and thickets stained with the vermilion blood; the
weeping friends, following in the rear and gathering the remains into
their bosom ;
one fondling his snow-white head, others his mutilated
arms and legs; others wiping up with their clothes or with sponges
the blood-bespattered ground, that nothing might be lost of the precious
remains. He then describes the sanctuary itself; the crypt with its
dark galleries, not far from the city walls; the subterranean recesses
lighted here and there with windows in the roof, so that the sun's

rays poured Thither the martyr's body was brought from Ostia,
in.

where the martyrdom took place, and there deposited in a shrine

gleaming with solid silver. Lining the recess were slabs of smooth
Parian marble adorned with gold. From morning to night the tide
of worshippers flowed in constant succession, Romans and foreigners ;

kissing the precious metal and pouring fragrant ointment on it, their
faces bedewed with tears. Nobles and common-folk jostled each other
shoulder to shoulder ; visitors,clad in festive white, thronged from all

29 2
452 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

parts ;
the roads poured in their contingent from every side from
Picenum and Etruria, the rude Samnite, the Campanian from lofty

Capua, the citizens of Nola husbands, wives, and children. Wide

though the space, it was all too little for the dense multitudes. But
hard by there is another temple ready to receive the crowds, towering
upward with its lofty walls a double range of columns supports
;

the gilded beams of the roof; the

aisles end in curved recesses; the

central nave rises to a greater height; in front is a lofty tribunal

approached by steps, whence the chief priest preaches God. With

difficulty does even this larger edifice receive the surging and heaving
crowds, thus opening a mother's bosom to gather and cherish her
children. my memory serves me aright,' the poet adds, 'beautiful
'If

Rome worships this saint on the Ides of August'; and he urges his
bishop, Valerianus of Zaragoza, to whom the poem is addressed, to
give a place among the annual festivals to Hippolytus, as places were
already given to Cyprian, to Chelidonius, to Eulalia. 'So,' he con-
cludes, 'when thou shalt have filled the folds with milk-white lambs,
mayest thou be borne aloft and join the company of holy Hippolytus.'
Evidently the cult of S. Hippolytus was at its zenith, when Prudentius
visited the shrine; as it naturally would be after the recent architectural
and decorative splendours lavished upon it by Damasus.
Of the scene of this multifarious gathering no question can now be
entertained. Recent excavations have laid open the subterranean basilica
of S. Hippolytus on the north of the Tiburtine Way the specus excep-

tionally spacious underground sanctuaries of this kind, Ht from

for

windows in the roof, substantially as it was seen by the eyes of Pruden-

tius. Of this however I shall have to speak presently. But what was
the larger edifice which received the throngs too great for the cavern
beneath? Was
it another basilica of S.
Hippolytus above ground on
or near same site? Or was it the more famous sanctuary of
the
S. Laurence on the south side of the road ? Not unnaturally critics
have inclined to this latter view. The excavations in the cemetery of

Hippolytus have not proceeded enough hitherto to enable us to

far

form a confident opinion. But it must be remembered that at that

remote age only the Constantinian basilica of S. Laurence existed

not a very spacious building on any showing. The churches of Xystus
III (a.d. 440), of Pelagius II (a.d. 578), and of Honorius III (a.d,
1 2 16), were still unbuilt. The actual condition of the basilica of
S. Laurence in the eye of Prudentius
a subject beset with considerable
difficulties will demand
a few words of explanation presently.
But what was this picture of the martyrdom so vivid in its details
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 453
which Prudentius saw and described ? The most improbable supposi-
'
tion of all is that
represented theit actual event. It is more like a

poet's or a painter's than a prefect's deed,' it has been truly said', 'to
tear an old Christian with horses, whether because of his own un-

luckily suggestive name or because of the tale of his namesake the '-

hero of the ancient Greek myth. Some have supposed therefore that a
classical sculpture or painting of the son of Theseus, the hero of Greek

tragedy, torn to pieces by horses, was discovered in the neighbourhood

(DoUinger, p. 39 sq), or removed from elsewhere and placed in the
chapel of his namesake. This is a tempting explanation ; but unless
Prudentius has far exceeded the license of poets in his description,
it will not suit the details. What are we to say of the collection
of the reliques? What of the 'venerable white head' fondled in
the lap of the disciples? What of the sopping and sponging up
the blood ? Obviously we have here not a work of Greek or Grseco-
roman art, but a product of Christian piety, resembling in its gross
realism and bad taste, as well as its intensity and devotion, the pictures

of martyrdom with which we are familiar a few centuries later. Cer-

it was not a unless it had been painted over by some
tainly sculpture,
Christian artist; for Prudentius speaks of the vivid colouring, the purple
and vermilion, of the scene. Moreover, though we should accept this
explanation of the picture on the Tiburtine Way, we have still to account
for the similar painting which the poet saw on this same journey at
Imola martyrdom of Cassianus not less realistic and described with
the

equal vividness. The martyrdom of Cassianus at all events had no coun-

terpart in ancient Greek legend. De Rossi thinks and gives reason for
thinking', that this representation of Hippolytus' martyrdom was painted
on a very small scale like a miniature or a Dutch work of art. This
seems not improbable ; though no stress can be laid on the fact that
recent explorations have not as yet brought to light any traces of its
existence. Even if it had been a large fresco, we could not hope to
discover any vestiges remaining in a place which has passed through so

many vicissitudes as the sanctuary of S. Hippolytus. The most pro-

bable explanation seems to be that, the manner of Hippolytus' death
being unknown and some concrete representation being necessary, this
painter selected the fate of his mystical namesake as a
'

early Christian

pictorial mode of writing above tlie shrine hippolytus martyr ^'

^
Benson Joiirn. of Class, and Sacr. this article On the Martyrdom and Com-
Philol. I.
p. \()i. meliorations of S. Hippolytus, which I
^
Bull, di Archcol. Crist. 1882, p. 73 sq. have more than once quoted, was written
^
Benson p. 210. I should say that without the knowledge of recent dis-
454 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
After the visit of Prudentius we find no notice of this cemetery and
crypt of S. Hippolytus for nearly a century and a half. Then, during
the papacy of Vigilius (a. d. 537 555) a record is preserved of its

restorationby one Andreas a presbyter, in an inscription of which

fragments have been found on the spot itself and of which the con-
'

cluding lines are

PRAESVLE VIGILIO SVMp[sERVNt] ANTRA DECOREM
PRAESBYTERI ANDREAE CVr[a] PEREGIT OPVS.

was a season of great trouble and disaster to the Roman Church

It

in many ways. Rome stood two sieges from the barbarians during
this single episcopate, the one from Witiges in a.d. 537, 538, the other

from Totila in a. d. 546, 547. The suburban churches and cemeteries

were devastated and must have been on one of these
laid in ruins. It

occasions that the renovation of which the inscription speaks took

place.
As the writer apparently speaks of a 'second' devastation (itervm),
it would seem to have been after the invasion of Totila that these

repairswere undertaken ^ This accords with the language above quoted

which gives only the name of Vigilius as dating the epoch {' praesule
Vigiho'); whereas in another case, when the restoration took place
presumably after the former siege by Witiges, we are told that pope
Vigilius himself 'hostibus expulsis omne novavit opus^' Vigilius was
absent from Rome during the last years of his life. The writer in his
account of these restorations under Vigilius mentions the skylights in
the roof admitting the sun, which were a special feature of this sub-
terranean church and which Prudentius had described a century and
a half before here specified as three in number 'trinum stupuit per
specula lumen.'
Connected with this group of saints commemorated in August on

the Tiburtine Way was the cultus of S. Genesius, the Roman actor of
pantomimes who is said to have suffered in the persecution of Diocletian.
He is mentioned in the medieval itineraries in the entourage of

Hippolytus as lying near Concordia, between Triphonia and Cyrilla.

He must therefore have been buried in the cemetery of Hippolytus \
coveries, when it was still possible to rectly suiDplied in an earlier number, /l>.

maintain that the original Hippolytus of 1881, p. 40.

^
the Ager Veranus was not a cleric, but a See Bu/i. di Archcol. Crist. 1882, p.
soldier. 61 sq.
1 ^
Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1882, p. 59 Comp. ib, 1873, p. 46 sq ; 1876, p.
sq, where the inscription is
given in its 125.
*
correct form. The lacuncc were incor- Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1882, p. 23
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 455
His day was viii Kal. Sept. (Aug. 25th). Nearly two centuries later
than the above mentioned restorations of Vigilius, we find a successor
of Vigilius, Gregory III [a. d. 731 741], restoring the roof of the
Church of S. Genesius, and erecting an altar of the Saviour there
{AR. 15 A b). This was presumably some above-ground building erected
in honor of Genesius within the precincts of the cemetery of Hippolytus,
but we have no adequate information.
Again there is silence for some centuries respecting the basilica of
S. Hippolytus but meanwhile important works were carried out on the
;

opposite side of the Tiburtine Way in the more famous sanctuary of

S. Laurentius, which in course of tune had a fatal influence on the

decadence and obliteration of the humbler cemetery and shrine. As

the fate of the two is ultimately connected together, and as some
account of the history of the Church of S. Laurence is therefore

necessary for the appreciation of my particular subject, this will be a

convenient point for a very few words of explanation.

The honour paid to S. Laurence, the deacon of Sixtus HI, who

perished with his master in the Decian persecution, dates from the
earliest times. He was the Stephen of the Western Church. Quam
'

non potest abscondi Roma,' says Augustine, 'tam non potest abscondi
Laurentii corona'.' 'De beati solemnitate Laurentii,' says the prayer
in the oldest Roman sacramentary, 'peculiarius prae caeteris Roma
laetatur; cujus nascendo civis, sacer minister, dedicatum nomini Tuo
munus est proprium' {Liturg. Rom. Vet. i.
p. 398, Muratori). His
festival had a special vigil, which was celebrated from the earliest times

a peculiar honour bestowed on few saints besides. His name appears

in calendars which can hardly date more than a generation after his

death. It is no marvel then that the aureole which encircled the

sq; comp. Rom. Soft. i.

p. 178. There tyrologium f^/j- both the two are named
were two martyrs of this name; (i) A on the same day Aug. 25, 'Genesius mi-
notary of Aries who suffered under Dio- mus' and 'Genesius Arelatensis ; in the '

cletian, A.D. 303 ; A

pantomime
(2) actor old Carthaginian Calendar only the
of Rome who same year
suffered in this former. In Prudentius {Peristeph. 4),
or (as some think) A.i). 285 or 286. They who was fresh from the Ager Veranus,
are both celebrated on the same day viii Genesius of Aries is mentioned (ver. 36)
Kal. Sept. (Aug. 25) in Ado and the among other martyrs at Csesaraugusta
Latin Martyrologists ; or on successive (Zaragoza). Was there only one Gene-
days, Aug. 24 and Aug. 25. De Rossi sius after all first notary and then actor ;

(1. c.) says

that the Genesius of the Ager just as there was only one Romanus and
Veranus was the actor. It would seem only one Hippolytus (see p. 462 sq,
to me difficult to say that there was no p. 460 sq)?
confusion between the two. In the Mar- *
Serin. 303, Op.v. p. 1233, ed. Bened,
456 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
heads of other neighbouring saints and martyrs even of the famous
Hippolytus himself should have paled in the light of his unique
splendour.
How much truth there may be in the current story about the mode
of Laurence's martyrdom, we need not stop to enquire.
S. His day
was the fourth before the Ides of August, three days before the com-
memoration of S. Hippolytus. As the deposition of Hippolytus on the
opposite side of the Tiburtine Way probably took place some years
before his death, we must regard the circumstance which brought them
into close connexion in time as well as place, as a mere coincidence.
But it was fraught with momentous consequences to his posthumous
fame.
The Laurence is strangely
architectural history of the basiHca of S.

compHcated and the problems

; have only been solved (not yet com-
pletely) in our own generation. The accounts given by Bunsen' and
older writers are altogether erroneous. The excavations of recent

years, interpreted by the archaeological knowledge of De Rossi and

others, have gone far to solve the problem-.
The original basilica of Constantine stood over the tomb of the

martyr. occupied, roughly speaking, the same site as the present

It

chancel, i.e. as the basilica of Pelagius II. It was orientated in the

same way the apse being at the West end, and the narthex at the East.
At the same time that this pope built this church over the tomb, he
adorned the crypt itself, in which the body lay, with exceptional splen-
dours and endowed it with costly gifts. Damasus adorned his altar
with gifts which he commemorated in an inscription on the spot

HAEC DAMASVS CVMVLAT SVPPLEX ALTARIA BONIS

MARTYRIS AEGREGII SVSCIPIENS MERITVM^
Before the close of the century [c. a.d. 400] we read of some works
executed by one Leopardus, a priest not unknown to us for his zeal
on behalf of other sanctuaries and commemorated by an inscription*.
Towards the middle of the next century, the reigning pope Sixtus III

^
Beschreibung der Stadt iii. Pt ii.
p. cheol.Crist. 1864, p. 42 sq ; 1876, p. 11

312 sq. The error of these older writers sq and the important notes of Duchesne,
:

in connecting this basilica with the name Lib. Pont. i. p. 197 sq, 235 sq, 310.
^ Inscr.
of Galla Placidia and thus throwing the Christ. Urb. Rom. II. pp. 82,
architectural chronology into confusion is 117.
explained by De Rossi, Bull, di Archeol.
*
Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1867, p. 53
Crist. 1864, p. 43; Inscr. Christ. Urb. sq; comp. Inscr. Christ. Urb. Rom. 11.
Rom. II.
p. 105. p. 155,
2
See especially De Rossi Bull, di Ar-
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 457

(a. d.432 440) made a highly important addition to the buildings on

thisground [AR. 15 Bb). He not only adorned the existing confession
of S. Laurentius with columns of porphyry and in other ways, the

previous work of Constantine having probably suffered in the pillage of

A. D. 410 under Alaric; but he an entirely new and more spacious
built

West of the Constantinian church, so that the apses of

basilica to the
the two buildings the old and the new stood back to back. This
building of Sixtus corresponds with the nave of the existing basilica.
Its apse was at the East end, and its narthex at the West. This
basilica was termed 'Deigenetricis,' 'of the Mother of God'; a

designation which would seem especially appropriate at a time when

the Nestorian controversy was agitating the Church. This is the
basilica major,' which in the Itineraries of the seventh century is
'

distinguished from the 'basiUca ubi ipse modo requiescit' {AR. 38 b).
It bears this name in two inscriptions of the fifth century found on the

spot [in bJassilica maxio[re], in basilica maiore ad domnv

lavrentivm\
Again Pelagius II [a.d. 579 590] enlarged, raised, and generally
rebuilt, the smaller basilica to the East, which rose over the body. The
Liber Pontificalis i. p. 309 (Duchesne) speaks of this work as 'basilicam
a fundament constructam,' and the existing building shows this
language to be hardly an exaggeration. Owing to its superior splendour,
'
when thus renovated by Pelagius, this building is described as basilica
speciosior,' 'basilica nova mirae pulchritudinis,' in the Itineraries

i^AR. 38 a b) to distinguish it from the larger basiUca the erection of

Sixtus III to the West. We are told moreover that Pelagius dedicated
his building to S. Sixtus, S. Laurentius, and S. Hippolytus. But there
is reason to think that this threefold dedication isearlier than Pelagius.

When Sixtus III built his new basilica

'
Dei Genetricis,' he would
naturally turn his attention to the dedication of the older building,
which likewise owed new splendours to his munificence, and in which
he himself was ultimately buried. What more natural then than that
he should have associated in the dedication his martyred predecessor
and namesake Sixtus II, who had been associated with S. Laurentius
in his hfe and in his death? If so, Pelagius only accepted the triple
dedication as he found it. But he commemorated it in a remarkable
way. Over the arch of the apse he placed a mosaic representing the
Saviour seated in the centre, while right and left of him were the two
Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul, and the three saints of the dedication,
with himself pelagivs episc. the builder of the church somewhat in the
^
Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1876, p. 22 sq.
458 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

background. The point to be observed is that scs ypolit, as here

represented, has not yet lost his proper personaHty. Though associated
with S. Laurence, he still remains the priest with the clerical tonsure,
not the soldier with the military cloak ; the doctor of the Church, not
the warder and convert of S. Laurence.
The and greatest change was yet to come. Hitherto there were
last

two basilicas, back to back the larger the building of Xystus

; facing
westward, and the smaller the original erection of Constantine as
rebuilt facing eastward.
by Pelagius In 1216 Honorius III broke
through the apses and fused the two. Thus the building of Sixtus
became the nave, and the building of Pelagius the chancel, of the
combined basilica, as it still exists. The orientation therefore now
conforms to our northern type, the chancel being at the East end and
the vestibule at the West. Accordingly the mosaic set up by Pelagius,
though undisturbed in its main features, no longer looks down the
church according to the original design, but looks inward towards the
east end.

But, while the basilica of S. Laurence thus grew to greater magnifi-

cence, the basilica of S. Hippolytus dwindled from small to less. In
the middle of the eighth century the Lombards under Astolph swept
over the land, extinguished the exarchate of Ravenna, and besieged
Rome itself. The invader dug up and carried off the bodies of the
saintsand martyrs, as trophies, into his own country. What could the
Romans do to meet these successive desecrations of the sanctuaries?
The siege of Astolph was in a.d. 756. Of the succeeding popes some,
like Paul I (a.d. 756 767) and Paschal I (a.d. 817 824) and
Leo IV 847 855) pursued the more timorous, but safer course
(a.d.
of removing the sacred reliques from the suburban cemeteries to the
churches within the city. This was only a more respectable form of
body-snatchuig than the Lombard plundering itself. On the other hand
Hadrian I (a.d. 772 795) and Leo III (a.d. 795 816) adopted the
bolder policy of restoring the extra-mural sanctuaries. Of Nicolas I
it is recorded that he made a visitation of the churches
(a.d. 858 867)
and cemeteries ('sanctorum ecclesias ac coemeteria circuibat')'; but
whether this resulted in
any definite policy with respect of the smaller
suburban sanctuaries, we have not, so far as I know, any information.
We read of this same pope as making certain gifts to the church of
S. Laurence without the walls ^
These vicissitudes of the papal policy were felt in the cemetery of

^ "
See Rovi. Sott. I.
p. 221. Lib. Pont. Ii. p. 166 (Duchesne).
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 459
S. Hippolytus. Paul I, between a.d. 757 and a.d. 761, founded the
church and monastery of S. Silvester in Capite, so called from the head
of S. John the Baptist which was its most precious relique opened
several suburban tombs, and transferred to his new foundation the
bodies of the saints and martyrs'. In the portico of the church he
affixedtwo tablets containing respectively the names of the male and
female saints thus translated ; among whom are several from the
cemetery of Hippolytus, more especially the body of Hippolytus him-
self. Those parts of the inscriptions which refer to the saints buried
in the Ager Veranus, will be found above {AR. 37 b).
On the other hand in the Life of Hadrian I (a.d. 772 795) we are
informed that this pontiff 'restored the parts of the cemetery of
S.Hippolytus which had fallen into decay from ancient times', and
' '
likewisethe church of S. Stephen close to the aforesaid cemetery

{AR. 15 A c). It is not clear what building is meant by this last

designation whether the basilica of S. Hippolytus itself called the
church of S. Stephen for some unknown reason or some chapel annexed
to this basilica and dedicated to S. Stephen'. At all events it must
be distinguished from the church of S. Stephen in the cemetery of
S. Cyriaca on the opposite side of the Tiburtine way; for the
restorations of the two several churches of S. Stephen are mentioned
separately in the Life of Hadrian [Lib. Font. i.
p. 508, 511), and the
situation of each is described ^

Again; under Leo IV (a.d. 847 855) the policy of translation is

substituted for the policy of restoration. This pontiff, having restored,
enlarged, and beautified the basilica of the Quatuor Coronati on the
it with
Coelian, in order to invest greater honour, deposited under the
altar thebody of Hippolytus and his family with others {AR. 15 A e).
This is the second body of S. Hippolytus, the first having already been
translated by Paul I to S. Silvester.

Lastly; at some later date, whether when Honorius III carried out
his in the basilica of S. Laurentius (a.d. 12 16) or at some earlier
works
point of time, the reliques in the cemetery of S. Hippolytus seem to
have been swept wholesale into the church of S. Laurentius, probably
because their own proper resting-place had now fallen hopelessly into
ruin. An inscription, though probably a later (13th cent.) copy of the

1
Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1882, p. 37 [A.D. 468483] Lib. Pont. I. p. 249. On
the two churches of S. Stephen SQeBnll.
sq.
* di Archeol. Crist. 1882, p. 43 sq, p. 52
ib. 1882, p. 23 sq, p. 53.
^
The church of S. Stephen connected sq.
with S. Laurence was built bySimplicius
 4^0 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
earlier monument, was read by the pilgrims of the 13th and 14th cen-
turies {AR. 37 a), which enumerates these precious treasures and among
them is a third body of Hippolytus.
Thus our saint and doctor appears as

forma tricorporis umbrae

even in Rome itself; while, as we shall see presently, other bodies of

Hippolytus were laid in other cities of Europe. I need not stop to

enquire how far this multiplication of bodies was due to the practice of
any limb of a saint the
'

calling body,' even though it might be only a

small portion, and how arose from the zeal which led to the eager
far it

identification of any remains which lay near the supposed place of sepul-
ture with the saint who was the object of search.

But, while the Hippolytus was undergoing this process of

body of S.

multiplication, his personaUty also was being subjected to a transfor-

mation. Baronius accused even an early writer like Prudentius of
confusing together the personahties of three distinct namesakes (p. 412):
(i) the divine and father of the Church; (2) the martyr of Antioch ;

(3) the soldier and gaoler of S. Laurence. He supposed that the Spanish
poet had borrowed the Novatianism from the second, and the con-
nexion with the Ager Veranus from the third, and had falsely attributed
both the one and the other to the first, thus rolling the three into
one. Other have adopted this view, with or without
later writers also

modifications. Possessing information which was not within the reach

of Baronius, we are able to exculpate Prudentius from both these
robberies. The attribution of Novatianism, as we now find (p. 424 sq), is
mucholder than Prudentius; and, as a matter of fact, is attributed to the
Roman divine some centuries before it is attached to the Antiochene
martyr, so that the robbery is on the other side. Again, the supposed
appropriation of the sepulchre in the Ager Veranus has arisen from
an entire mistake; which it will be worth while now to explain.
De Rossi has shown satisfactorily that the supposed confusion of
Hippolytus the doctor and divine with Hippolytus the gaoler and
convert of S. Laurence is not a confusion at all but a substitution.
In fact they do not co-exist. We
find no traces of Hippolytus the

gaoler in connexion with the Ager Veranus or indeed, any traces of

his existence at all till the 7th
century at least. With Damasus and
Prudentius the Hippolytus of the Ager Veranus is a priest. On the sar-
cophagus of Apt (see below, p. 467), which may date from the fourth or
fifth century, though connected with S. Sixtus, he is not only a
priest,
but a writer. He is a priest still in the mosaics put up by Pelagius,
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 461
when pope restored the basilica of S. Laurentius (c. a.d. 580); for
this

he clad in priestly robes.

is He is so represented likewise in other
contemporary works of art, for instance in the mosaic in S. ApoUinaris
at Ravenna. The earhest work of art to which De Rossi can point as
departing from this mode of representation is the Celimontane picture
of the time of Formosus (a.d. 891 896), where he is clad in the
military chlamys'.
What is the meaning of all this ? As the basilica of S. Hippolytus
dwindled into insignificance and fell into ultimate ruin, the cultus con-
nected with it was transferred to the imposing church of S. Laurence
on the opposite side of the way, while the bodies of the saints and
martyrs, or such as still remained in the cemetery of Hippolytus,
were transferred thither. Hence the desire to connect with S. Laurence
historically those who were connected with him locally; and the various
Acts of the Laurentinian Cycle started into being. Of these the most
famous was Hippolytus himself, who had the chief place assigned to him
in these Acts; while the other members of his entourage, such as Con-
cordia, though originally they may have had no historical connexion
even with Hippol3'tus himself, yet were woven into the story, owing to
the fact that they were buried in the same cemetery. In the Martyr-

ology of Ado (t A.D. 874) we have embedded great part of the Passion
of S. Sixtus, S. Laurentius, and S. Hippolytus, which included likewise
the martyrdoms of these minor saints grouped around them, and seems
to have served as a guide book for the pilgrims to this Ager Veranus^
But how was this transformation from the cleric to the soldier
effected ? What was the main instrumentality which brought it about ?
I seem to myself to be able to answer this question with a reasonable

degree of probability.
At an earlier point in this investigation (p. 446 sq) I discussed the
honours paid to the martyr Romanus in the Ager Veranus, though him-
self connected with Csesarea and Antioch. I there pointed out that?

though known to have been a cleric on contemporary authority, he was

transformed into a soldier within two or three generations of his death;
that some reliques were possessed or supposed to be possessed in the
basilica or cemetery of S. Laurence; and that he was one of the group
of martyrs celebrated in the Ager Veranus in August. His day was the
eve of S. Laurence, as it appears in the Martyrologium Vetus {AJi. 40 g);

V Id. Aug. Romae, Romani militis

Vigilia sancti Laurentii,

1
Bull, dl Arched. Crist, 1S82, p. 34. "-
AR. 38; see below, p. 473.
462 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
but in a list of the reliques on an ancient tablet found in S. Laurence

{AR. 37 a), we read

POST HOS IPOLITUS COLLIS RE

LIGATUS EQUORVM
CUM NUTRICE SUA CUM CUNC
TA PLEBE SUORVM
ROMANUS MILES,

where the proper name would be easily overlooked and explained

'
a Roman soldier
'
as descriptive of Hippolytus. Though this actual
tablet is probably not older than the 13th century, it is apparently a

copy of an earlier inscription ; and at all events the same connexion of

names would appear in other documents relating to these martyrs.
Thus, having himself been transmuted from a cleric into a soldier,
Romanus handed on the same transmutation to Hippolytus.
I am the more encouraged to believe that this is the real account of
the change, because I find that in all essential respects Hippolytus the
soldier is the mere double of Romanus the soldier. Both the one and
the other suffer under Decius both the one and the other belong to the
band guarding Laurence; both the one and the other are cut to the
quick by the good confession of the martyr-deacon, and seek baptism at
his hands; both the one and the other are put to death; both the one
and the other are buried by Justinus in the Ager Veranus. Only in
the manner of their death there is a difference. While Romanus suffers
in a common-place way, being beheaded, Hippolytus in accordance
with the picture of the martyrdom seen by Prudentius is torn to pieces

by horses.

Moreover, there is much confusion about the day. The day of

Romanus is first given by Ado as the eve of S. Laurence (p. 322), and
he is mentioned in direct connexion with Hippolytus in the scenes

immediately preceding the martyrdom of S. Laurence (p. 324). Then

again he is stated (p. 325) to have suffered 'on the very day (ipso die)
on which the blessed Laurence suffered.' This confusion is not insigni-
ficant.

Then again; there is a notice in the account of Hippolytus' martyr-

dom, which seems to be a faint echo of the transformation undergone

by Hippolytus. Decius orders him to be 'stripped of the dress which
he wore as a Christian' ('veste qua induebatur habitu Christiano.') and
'to be clothed in the soldier's dress which he wore as a Gentile' ('vestiri

militari veste qua gentilis utebatur'). 'Be our friend,' says the emperor
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 463
to him, 'and in our presence resume the profession of a soldier which
thou didst always follow' (in conspectu nostro utere militia pristina
quam semper habuisti)'. These Acts seem to have been written as I
have use of pilgrims to the Ager Veranus; but in
said, specially for the
the church of Laurence the mosaic of Pelagius might still be seen,
S.

where Hippolytus was represented as a tonsured priest. Did not this

discrepancy need some such reconciliation as the words here ascribed
to Decius suggest ?

Connected with the transformation of the priest into the soldier is

the 'familia,' notably his nurse Concordia, who were martyred with him
in the later form of the legend. The earlier calendars and liturgies
speak of Hippolytus alone. In later documents and in later mss of
the older documents, he is surrounded by his companion martyrs^

After the close of the ninth century we read nothing more of the
basilica or cemetery of S. Hippolytus. Mention indeed is made of the
'
Mount of S. Hippolytus^,' the hill at the back of the cemetery in the
nth century; but it is mentioned simply as a locality, without any re-
ference to the sanctuary which once existed there. When Martin in V
1425 gave permission for the removal of slabs and stones from the
desolate suburban catacombs to construct the pavement of S. John
Lateran^ the cemetery of S. Hippolytus was one of those rifled for this
purpose, as the stones now embedded in the Lateran pavement show
(see above, p. 329); not mentioned by name.
though it is Yet the
rifling was not complete; for the lower part of the statue of Hippolytus
was discovered on the spot in 155 1. At the revival of learning the
individuahty of the cemetery of Hippolytus had so entirely disappeared,
that the basilicas and cemeteries on the two sides of the Tiburtine Way
were hopelessly confused by historians and archseologists under the
general name of the 'Ager Veranus'; and so long as this confusion
existed, no were possible. This hopeless state of
satisfactory results
things continued for more than Only in our own gene-
three centuries.
ration was this confusion dissipated
by the archaeological discoveries,
interpreted by the antiquarian penetration and learning of De Rossi.
The excavations more especially, which have been made since the year
1880, have furnished a final answer to the main questions.
On this Ager Veranus, to the left side of the Tiburtine Way, to one
journeying from Rome to Tivoli, had been discovered three centuries

1 3
See above, p. 358 sq. j^^n^ di Archeol. Crist. 1882, p. 42 ;
2
See the illustrations given by De Rossi comp. Rom. Sott. i.
p. 161 sq.
*
Bull, di Archeol. Crist, 1882, p. 31 sq. ib. i88i, p. 39 sq; 1882, p. 42.
464 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

ago, as we have seen, the actual statue of Hippolytus. Here also, at a

later date, was found an inscription refr[i]geri[o] tibi domnvs ippo- . . .

LiTvs SID .
(sit)
\ Hence also probably came later still a sepulchral stone

bearing the words at ippolitv svper arcosoliv, which found its way
. . .

into the Vatican Museum^. At length in 1881 the excavations were

commenced on this site in right earnest^, and resulted not only in the

discovery of the inscriptions recording the works of Damasus (a.d, 366

384) and of Vigilius (a.d. 537 555), as mentioned already (pp. 328 sq,
424, 454), but in the actual disinterment of the subterranean basilica
of Hippolytus, as described by Prudentius and as repaired by Vigilius.
It is much larger than such subterranean chapels to the Catacombs

generally, as the description of Prudentius would lead us to expect. It

on the bema of the apse, as described by this

exhibits the isolated altar
same shows traces of the three windows overhead 'trinum per
poet. It

specula lumen,' as specified by Vigilius, so as to throw a flood of light

into this under-ground church, a feature which impressed Prudentius,

though he does not mention the actual number of these lights. It

is obviously however not in the state in which it was left by Damasus,

but bears traces of the subsequent repairs of Vigilius. Thus inscrip-

tions of the age of Damasus, and later, no longer stand in their original
position, but have been displaced, so that in some instances they are
partly concealed. One such Damasian inscription timotevs presbyter .

in the true Filocalian character (see above, p. 444) must have stood
originally in the front of an 'arcosolium.' It is now used to construct
one of the steps to the bema'*. Again the walls, as seen by Prudentius,
were lined with glistening white marble; they are now covered with
plaster*.

Three other sanctuaries of S. Hippolytus in Rome and Italy deserve

a passing notice.

(i) During the papacy of Siricius (a.d. 384 399) one Ilicius a
presbyter erected allthe buildings which were to be seen in connexion
with the church and monastery of S. Pudentiana along the Vicus
Patricius (now the Via Urbana), beginning with the memoria sancti
^
Bzt/l. di Archeol. Crist. 1882, p. 45. identifyhim with the Timotheus of Ostia,
^
ib. p. 48. whose 'depositio' is Aug. 22 (xi Kal. Sept.)
^
ib. p.56 sq. in the Liberian list. He would thus add
*
See Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1882, p. another to the saints of the AgerVeranus
68, Tav. I, ii. celebrated in August. This Timotheus
.
^ This Timotheus must have been a however is stated by Ado (and the same

person of some importance in the history is implied in the Liberian list) to have
of the Church. Our first impulse is to been buried in the Cemetery of Ostia.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 465
MARTYRis iPPOLYTi\ This was the period, as we have seen (p. 452),
when the fame of Hippolytus reached its zenith owing to the devotion
of Damasus and Siricius, the next successor of Damasus, was the very-
;

man to give further encouragement to it, since it is

especially recorded
in his honour on his tomb that the malcontents of the anti-Damasian
faction were at length united under him". The same reason therefore
which had led Damasus to show his reverence for Hippolytus in the
sanctuary on the Tiburtine Way, as the champion of unity in the Church
in the midst of schism, would lead Siricius also to heap additional
honours upon him. But why the selection of the Vicus Patricius and
the church of S. Pudentiana for this memorial De Rossi {Bull, di
Archeol. Crist. 1882, p. 16) answers that Hippolytus probably lived in
the Vicus Patricius or gathered a Christian congregation there for
worship. This must be taken as a mere conjecture, like the similar
conjecture respecting the house and memoria of Clement which I have
dealt with elsewhere (i. p. 94). But the connexion of the suburban
cemeteries on the Tiburtine way with the priests of the 'title' of this (the
third ecclesiastical) region on the Esquiline including S. Pudentiana
and S. Praxedis from the fifth century at least is a matter of certainty.
These priests seem to have served these cemeteries, and grants of
graves were made by them or their prior. Thus we have mention in a
sepulchral inscription dated a. d. 491 of a grave acquired by one Fausta
in the cemetery of Hippolytus a. prb. tit. [p]rax[sedis]^ Elsewhere
in thissame cemetery was found belonging to the year 528 the grave
of one HILARYS. LICTOR (lector). TT. pvDENTis"; and again another of

one PB. prior\ whose name iswho doubtless belonged

mutilated and
to this same region and title. probable therefore that the presbyter
It is

Andreas, who under Vigilius (see above, p. 454) repaired the basilica of
S. Hippolytus, was the prior of this title ".
(2) The next Italian sanctuary, which claims a mention in con-
nexion with Hippolytus, is Portus, the haven of Rome. From what I

1
Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1877, p. 15 Of pope Simplicius (a.D. 468 483) we
are told that he arranged respecting the
sq; 1882, p. 15 sq.
regio in ad sanctum Lauren-
- '

See Duchesne Lib. Poiit. i.

p. 217. service at
'
3 tium other similar arrangements
Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1882, p. 65 among
sq.
in other 'regiones'. On the tituli 'Prax-
Resoconto dei Cultori di A7-cheologia
*
edis'and 'Pudentis' (or Tudentianae')see
Cristiana 1883, April i, (Roma 1888). 7l\s.q 'Dwch&s.nt Notes sur la Topographie de

5
Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1. c. Rome an Moyen Age p. 22 sq (Rome 1887),
"
On the connexion of the cemeteries extracted from the Melanges d'Archeo-
'

on the Tiburtine Way \\ hli the 'tituli of logie.

this region see Rom. Sott. in. p. 516 sq.
*

CLEM. II. 30
466 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
have said already and shall have to say hereafter, it will be apparent that,
whether he was actually bishop of Portus or not, no other place hardly
even the Ager Veranus is more closely identified with his name by
history and tradition alike. The tower of a ruined church in Portus
a landmark seen afar over the surrounding waste still bears his name.

Of Leo III (a. d. 795 8i6) we are told that he gave certain cloths to
the 'basilica beati Yppoliti martyris in civitate Portuense,' one to cover
his body (super corpus ejus), and another for the great altar {Lib. Fo?it.
II. p. 12, Duchesne). Whether it is mentioned at an earlier date, I
know not. The
ruins are said to belong to the eighth century. The
well is also shown, in which according to the Portuensian version of the

legend his body was drowned. It is in the Isola Sacra^, the island

made by the original mouth of the Tiber and by the channel cut for
the works of Claudius and Trajan at the new Port. Of the identification
of Hippolytus with an early Portuensian martyr Nonnus, and of his
association with the virgin Chryse in the spurious Acts of the latter, I
shall have to speak presently (see below, p. 474 sq).

Though events were preparing the way, as I have shown, for a

bishopric at Portus in the age of Hippolytus, the permanent see seems

not to have been established till the next century. In the middle ages
and afterwards it ranked second of the suburbicarian sees, Ostia taking
the precedence.

(3) At the ancient Forum Semproiii, the modern Fossonibrofte, in

the valley of the Metaurus on the Flaminian Way about 165 miles from
Rome, there exist to the present day two castles called respectively by
the names of S. Hippolytus and S. Laurence the same two saints who
were celebrated on the Tiburtine Way in the middle of August. Now
we find in the Hieronymian Martyrology^ under Feb. 2nd
iv Non. Feb. Romae Foro Sinfronii, via Flaminia, miliario ab urbe
centum septuaginta quatuor Laurentii, Hippolyti,
and again under Aug. 6
viii Id. Aug. Laurentii, Hippolyti, et militum centum sexaginta
duorum,
in the common text, or as it is otherwise read 'militum clxv.' Com-
paring these notices one with another and with the actual fact relating
1
For the ancient works at Portus see medieval and later condition comp. Nibby
Lanciani Ancient Rome in the light of Aualisi II. p. 602 sq, and see Benson
Recent Discoveries p. 231 sq. For the Joiirn. of Class, and Sacr. Philol. I.
p.
Christian remains esp. De Rossi Bull, di 101 sq.
"
Archeol. Crist. 1866, p. 37 sq. For the See above, p. 356.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 467
to Fossombrone, we cannot doubt that De Rossi is right in reading
'milliario' for 'militum' in the second passage, the word having been
contracted into 'mil"; and in the first passage we should probably
substitute clxiiiii Indeed the 165 soldiers cannot be ex-
for clxiiii.

plained otherwise for they have no relation to the more modest

;

'familia' of 18 or 19 persons which forms the entourage of our

S.
Hippolytus in the later form of the legend. With this correction
the earlier notice (Feb. 2) will in all likelihood represent the anniversary
of the dedication of the sanctuary of these two saints at Fossombrone,
whither probably the oil or some other relique of them was taken,
while the latter (Aug. 6) represents the annual celebration of their

proper festival in the Ides of August celebrated likewise at Fossombrone,

as it was celebrated at Rome. In fact both these notices seem to have
been introduced into the Hieronymian hodge-podge from some Umbrian
or North Italian document.

The reverence paid to this saint outside of Italy need not occupy us
long. We have seen (p. 452) that Prudentius recommended his own

superior, the Archbishop of Zaragoza, to introduce the cultus of Hippo-

lytus; but whether the advice was taken we do not know. At all events
he has a place in a Carthaginian Calendar of the fifth or sixth century,
Avhere the usage was closely allied to that of the Spanish Church and ;

in the Gothic Missal, which exhibits the liturgical practice of the Visigoths
in Spain in the seventh or eighth centuries {AR. 39, 40). In France the
remarkable sarcophagus at Apt near Avignon is proof of the spread of
his fame^ in the fifth (?) century. Again we find at Aries an early
church dedicated to him. In the year 973 one Theucinda petitions the
' '

Archbishop of Aries to be allowed to rebuild and restore ecclesiam

IN HONORE BEATi
VPOLITI DEDICATAM, which must therefore have been
in existence long before ^ But his greatest fame in this country is
connected with the great Abbey of S. Denis near Paris. About the
year 764 Fulrad Abbot of S. Denis brought the bones of S. Hippolytus
from the Ager Veranus and laid them for a time in his newly founded
Abbey Fulrado-Villiers, thence called St Hippolyte or St Bilt whence ;

they were translated shortly after his death (c. 785) to S. Denis.
Hippolytus was here celebrated as at Rome on the Ides of August, and
his martyrdom was represented as in the picture seen by Prudentius in

the Ager Veranus. But he was no longer the cleric, but the soldier,

^
BiiN. di /lir/ieo/. Crist. 1HH2, p. ^6. See De Rossi /;/sa: Christ. Urb.
^
ib. i866, p. 33 sq; 1882, p. 35. Rom, n. p. '267.

302
468 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
no longer the doctor of the Church but the convert of S. Laurence;
for the transformation had already been made. About the year 1159
pope Alexander III visited S. Denis and, on enquiring whose bones a
certain reliquary contained, was told those of Hippolytus. 'I don't
'
believe it, I don't believe it,' said the pope bluntly, I supposed that
he lay still in the City.' He had only too much reason for his scepti-

cism ; he might have known that Rome itself contained no less

for

than three bodies of S. Hippolytus, one in S. Silvester, a second in

the Quatuor Coronati, and a third in S. Laurence. The saint himself
however would stand no trifling. His bones rattled and rum.bled in
the reliquary, like the roar of thunder, till the pope cried out in terror,
'
I believe it, my lord, I believe it, my lord do keep quiet.' The ;

pope made his peace by erecting a marble altar in the oratory of the
saint \
Nor was this the only body of Hippolytus outside Rome. There
was, or is, another in the church of S. Julia at Brescia ; and another
in S. Ursula at Cologne; besides heads and limbs here and there
elsewhere.

17-

SPURIOUS ACTS OF HIPPOLYTUS.

Theonly Acts of Hippolytus which can pretend to retain even a

faint echo of genuine history are those given in the poem of Prudentius
(see p. 332 sq); and even at this early date as we have seen fact is
choked by fiction. The later Acts have no historical value at all ; but
they throw some light on the legendary Hippolytus.
These later Acts belong to two separate cycles (i) The Laure?itiaji; ;

(2) The Portuensian. The connexion with the true Hippolytus is in

both cases local, not historical. In the former the link is the Ager

Veranus, the site of Hippolytus' burial place in the latter ;

it is the
Port of Rome, the site of his practical activity while living.

(i) Acts of the Laurentiaii Cycle.

We
have seen already (p. 458 sq) that owing to the decadence and
and cemetery of S. Hippolytus the chief memorials
ruin of the basilica
of the saints and martyrs once existing there were transferred to the

^
Ada Sand. Bolland. Aug. in. p. 9; i.
p. 191.

comp. Journ. of Class, and Sacr. Philol.

 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 469

neighbouring sanctuary of S. Laurentius. The eiTect of this trans-

ference made on the legend.
itself felt Henceforward Hippolytus
became more than ever a companion and attendant of S. Laurentius,
while at the same time he was gradually transformed from a cleric into
a soldier.
The extant inscription in the Church of S. Laurentius {AR. 37) is

an instructive comment on this developement. The enumeration of

the sacred reliques there deposited begins with the names of the three

persons to whom the church was dedicated by Pelagius (see above,

p. 457) together with S. Stephen the first deacon and prototype of
S. Laurence. It ends with the popes who were buried there, Hilarus,

Zosimus and Sixtus III,' together with Pelagius who built the enlarged
basilica. Of these not necessary to
it is say anything more. Our
concern is with the intermediate names ;

Ipolitus coUis religatus equorum ;

Cum nutrice sua cum cuncta plebe suorum

Romanus miles, Triphonia, Virgo Cirilla,
Et quadraginta quos passio continet ilia,

Justinusque sacer defunctos qui tumulabat,

Ciriace vidua quae sanctos clam recreabat,

Cujus matronae fuit haec possessio cara,

Ipsius nomen specialiter optinet ara,
Martir Ireneus qui tecum, martir Abundi,
Decedens sprevit fallacis gaudia mundi.

The ancient itineraries show us that of the persons here named,

Concordia and the supposed 'familia' the 'cuncta plebs suorum' were
originally buried in the crypt of Hippolytus, as were also Tryphonia
and Cyrilla, the reputed wife and daughter of Decius Caesar {AR. 38 b).
On the other hand, Romanus and Justinus, Abundius and Iren^eus, lay
in the cemetery on the opposite side of the way in which stood the
basilica of S. Laurence, as did also Cyriace who, as here stated, was
probably the original possessor of the ground and gave her name to

this cemetery.
those buried in the cemetery of Hippolytus, Concordia, as we
Of
learn from the itineraries, lay 'ante fores,' i.e. of the crypt or chamber
where Hippolytus himself lay. In another chamber ('altero cubiculo'),
lay the two martyrs, Tryphonia the wife and Cyrilla the virgin daughter
of Decius both done to death by this tyrant's command. Thus the
sepulchre of Concordia was between the vault of Hippolytus and that

'
Bull, di .Anhcol. Crist. 1881, p. 86 s({.
470 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
of the two royal martyrs 'between the two,' as one of the itineraries
says {AR. 38 b, where read 'inter utrosque'). Concordia is commonly
called the nurse ('nutrix'), but in the earliest of the itineraries the wife

('mulier') of Hippolytus. These date from the 8th century. As no

record is found in history of any wife and daughter of Decius (whichever
Decius is meant), who bore the names Tryphonia and Cyrilla, it has
been proposed to read 'ancillae muHeris' for 'mulieris' in the Martyro-

logies: so as to bring the statement within the range of probabiHty;

but we are dealing with romance, not with history, and in romance such
conjectures are futile as well as unnecessary. Who Concordia may
have been, we have no means of ascertaining. It is not probable that

she had any other connexion with Hippolytus except the double proxi-
mity of the place of sepulture and the time of celebration. This local
and temporal neighbourhood would be sufficient to suggest the historical
connexion, of which there seem to be no traces before the eighth cen-
tury. But what shall we say of the 'familia' xviiii (or xviii) in number?
The attachment of this 'famiHa' to Hippolytus seems to be later

though probably not much later than his connexion with Concordia
herself; for it occurs in the Old Roman Martyrology. In the earliest
of the itineraries, where she is the 'mulier' of Hippolytus, the 'familia'
is not mentioned at all. Even in the Hieronymian Martyrology the
great storehouse of martyrological notices, historical and legendary,

early and late it has not

yet found a place. The number was origin-
ally xviiii (= xix) and not xviii, as appears not only from the oldest of
the itineraries in which it is mentioned, but also from Ado and others.
A figure would be easily dropped by transcribers. I believe that I

see the origin of this number xviiii (xix). The next day to Id. Aug. is
xix Kal. Sept. But the Ides of August is the day of Concordia, as well
as of Hippolytus. What if the 'familia' of Hippolytus has originated
in some calendar for August set up either in the Ager Veranus or else-

where, which ran thus

ID. AVG. HIPPOLYTI ET CONCORDIAE ET FAMILIAE EIVS . XIX.
KAL. SEPT. EVSEBII PRESBYTERI ET CONFESSORIS CtC.

the next important celebration being the festival of Eusebius on xix

Kal. Sept. at least in some calendars, e.g. the Old Roman {Patrol. Lat.
cxxiii. p. 166, Migne), and the xix has got detached from the following
words and appended to the preceding? I should add that I cannot
lay the same stress as De Rossi on the notice in the Hieronymian
Martyrology, which gives under viii Kal. Mart.

Romae via Tiburtina ad sanctum Laurentium natalis sanctae Con-

cordiae,
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 47 1
as though this gave the original day of S. Concordia '. It seems to me

that the confusion of the cemetery of S. Laurence with that of S. Hip-

polytus shows the comparatively late date of this notice and therefore
deprives it of any special value. Whoever she may have been, her
originalconnexion seems to have been with the Hippolytean cemetery
on the Tiburtine Way; and there she was celebrated on the Ides of
August. I suppose therefore that we have in the Hieronymian Mar-

tyrology a confused notice of some translation of Concordia similar to

those which we have already considered in the case of Romanus (p. 449)
and of Hippolytus himself Even if De Rossi were right
(p. 439 sq).
about her proper 'natal day,' my explanation would hold equally well:
since it depends solely on the date of her celebration on the Tiburtine

Way, about which there can be no doubt.

Whoever Tryphonia and Cyrilla were, they need give us no trouble.
Their days are respectively xv Kal. Nov. (Oct. 18) and v Kal. Nov.
(Oct. 28) in the Calendars and Martyrologies, e.g. Ado. They may
perhaps have suffered in the Decian persecution about the same time
with S. Laurence; though there is some confusion between Decius and
Claudius (Gothicus) in the notices of the persecuting tyrant (as for
instance in Ado); but their connexion with the Hippolytean legend is
due to the fact of their graves being situated near the chambers of
Hippolytus and Concordia.
Nor need I spend any time on investigating whether the saints
buried on the right side of the Tiburtine Way in the cemetery of
Cyriace were historically connected with S. Laurence. Of Romanus
I have spoken already (p. 446 sq).
The full-blown legend of S. Laurence and S. Hippolytus is found
in Ado, and runs as follows :

On the loth of August (iv Id. Aug.) S. Laurence suffered. Sixtus

on his
way martyrdom had entrusted all the treasures of the Church
to
to him. A certain widow Cyriace, living on the Coelian, had hidden
several clerics and others in her house from the persecution and with
her he deposited the treasures, at the same time healing her miraculously
of many pains in the head. In the Vicus Canarius he found many
Christians congregated in the house of Narcissus; he distributed money
among them ;
and he restored his sight to one Crescentio who was
blind. Decius, hearing of these hidden treasures in the keeping of
Laurence the archdeacon of Sixtus, hands him over to Valerian the
prefect, who puts him in charge of one Hippolytus as warder.
Hippolytus, seeing him work a miracle on another blind man, one

^
Bull, di Archcol. Crist. 1SS2, p. 24 sq, p. 32.
472 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Lucillius, is converted and baptized. Meanwhile Valerian presses
Laurence to give up the treasures. Asking for time, he gathers
together the almsmen and almswomen of the Church, and tells Valerian
that these are the treasures. He is beaten and otherwise tortured byDecius
for his effrontery. Then he is restored to the keeping of Hippolytus.
One of the soldiers, Romanus by name, seeing the conduct of S. Laurence,
believes and baptized. He is beaten and beheaded by order of Decius
is

on v Id. Aug., the day before S. Laurence. S. Laurence himself is

then brought before Decius ; and after suffering the most excruciating
tortures is roasted to death on a gridiron. In early morning Hippolytus
carries off the body, wraps it with linen cloths and spices, and delivers
it to Justinus the presbyter. The two go by night to the Tiburtine
Way to the farm of Cyriace in the Ager Veranus the same widow with
whom Laurence had been at night and lay him there on iv Id. Aug,
The same day at Rome one hundred and sixty-five soldiers suffered.
Then were martyred Claudius, Severus, Crescentio, and Romanus, on the
same day as Laurence, the third day after the passion of S. Sixtus.
S.

On the Ides of August suffered Hippolytus under Decius the emperor

'

and Valerian the This Hippolytus the vicarius had been

prefect.
'

baptized as already stated by S, Laurence, Returning home after the

burial he was seized and carried before Decius, Here he was com-
pelled to strip off his Christian garment and put on 'the military dress
which he wore as a Gentile,' Then Valerian rifled his house of its
treasures and dragged out '
all his Christian family.' He and his house-

hold were led outside the walls on the Tiburtine Way. The latter v^^ere
beheaded male and female nineteen in number. Hippolytus himself
was yoked to untamed horses and thus dismembered. They were all

buried by Justinus the presbyter in the same plain "'juxta nympham"

by the side of the Ager Veranus.
At the same time perished Concordia, the nurse of Hippolytus. She
was put to death by the same Valerian, and her body thrown into the
sewer. Thirteen days after her death a soldier. Porphyrins by name,
came to Irenaeus the sewer-keeper (' cloacarius '), who was secretly a
Christian, and told him where the body might be found having jewels
or gold concealed about it, as he supposed. No such treasure however
was discovered but Irenaeus, assisted by a Christian Abundius, took
;

the body to Justinus, who buried it by Hippolytus and the others,

^
'Juxta nympham' refers to the springs p. 190. They were near the Nomentan
of waters in the neighbourhood, which Way and were called S. Petri, because
were found infiltrating the soil in the S. Peter was reported to have baptized
recent excavations; &et Bull, di Archeol. there,
Crist. ]i. 19, p. 52; comp, Kotn. Sott. I.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 473
On vii Kal. Sept. (Aug. 26) Irenseus and Abundius were ordered by
Valerian to be themselves enclosed in a sewer (' incloacari ') and so
'
perished. They were buried by Justinus in the crypt near S. Laurence.'
On XV Kal. Nov. (Oct. 18) died Tryphonia the wife of Decius
Cfesar. Overawed by the divine vengeance which had overtaken her
husband after his murder of S. Sixtus and S. Hippolytus, she with her
daughter Cyrilla had sought baptism at the hands of Justinus. She was
'
buried near Hippolytus in the crypt.'
On viii Kal. Nov. (Oct. 25) 48 soldiers were baptized together by
pope Dionysius [the successor of Sixtus, a.d, 259 268]. They were
beheaded by command of the emperor Claudius [a.d. 268 270] and
buried by Justinus the presbyter and John on the Salarian Way in '

clivum Cucumeris' also other 121 martyrs. Among these were Theo-
;

dosius, Lucius, Marcus, and Petrus, who asked the honour of being
beheaded first. The record is found, adds Ado, in the
'
Passio sanc-
torum martyrum, Sixti, Laurentii, et Hippolyti.'
On v Kal. Nov. (Oct. 28) perished Cyrilla the daughter of Decius
by order of the emperor Claudius. She was buried by Justin the pres-
byter with her mother near S. Hippolytus.
On XV Kal. Oct. (Sept. 17) died Justinus, who had buried so many
martyrs. His place of sepulture was on the Tiburtine Way near
Laurence had come to him to the ' '
S. Laurence. crypta Nepotiana
in the Vicus Patricius, and asked him to distribute the treasures com-
mitted to him by S. Sixtus to the poor. He won renown by the glory
of his confession in the persecutions of Decius, Gallus, and Volu-
sianus.
It is clear that Ado takes this account of these martyrs from a
written document, the Passion of S. Sixtus, S. Laurentius, and S. Hip-
polytus, to which he refers. contained not only the Acts of the three
It

principal martyrs, and of others belonging to the Tiburtine Way but ;

also of others who perished and were buried on the Salarian Way.
These seem to have been added, simply because they were reputed
latter

to have been buried by the same Justinus.

These Acts quoted and probably abridged by Ado are doubtless the
document which is called passio illa in the inscription of the 13th

century found in the basilica of S. Laurence {Ali. 37). It seems to

have served as a sort of guide book to the pilgrims in the Ager

Veranus.
The Acts, printed by Lagarde (p. xiii sq) from the ms Brit. Mus.
11880 of the ninth century and bearing the same name, are much
briefer. An abstract of them is given above {AR. 45). The two seem
474 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
not to have anything in common except the main outHnes of the story
of the connexion of Laurence with Sixtus and of Hippolytus with
Laurence. Perhaps however they may both have been founded on
some very simple earher Acts ;
but the characteristic of the Adonian
account the working up of the history of the saints and martyrs
buried in the Ager Veranus into a single narrative is entirely wanting.

(2) Acls of the Portuensian Cycle.

These Acts are quite independent of the Laurentian, and centre

about the person of one Chryse or Aurea, a virgin martyr and prin-
cess of royal blood. Hippolytus only plays a very subordinate
part, and (as we shall see presently) his name seems to have been
introduced as an afterthought. So far as there is any historical back-
ground at all, it consists of a group of Portuensian
martyrs. No longer
the Ager Veranus, but the Port of Rome, is the centre of interest.
Moreover the personal surroundings of Hippolytus are all different,

being largely clerics.

The persecutors are Claudius,

'
the impious tyrant,' and the vi- '

carius' Ulpius Romulus. Our first impulse is to identify the perse-

cuting emperor with Claudius Gothicus (a.d. 268 270), because this
identification reduces the anachronism to a minimum. But this sovereign
is not known
to have been guilty of any persecution. Moreover Cen-
surinus, one of his victims, is represented as saying that Jesus Christ
'
condescended to come from the Father in his own times (ev rots
tjfxeTepoi^ KaipoLs) and to be born of a virgin's womb.' It would appear
therefore that Dollinger (p. 42) is right in supposing that the hagiologist
intended the first emperor of this name; or that, if he did not, he con-
fused the earlier Claudius with the later. The name Alexander in place
of Claudius in some recensions of the Latin copies seems to be a substi-
tution to conform to the tradition of the more popular Laurentian Acts.
Censurinus, a leading man of the magistracy (t^s tov fxayifnopiov

e^ouo-tas), is apprehended and imprisoned at Ostia. There he is

first

fed and cared for by Chryse; and receives the ministrations of the pres-

byter Maximus. Several of his guards, whose names are given among
these Taurinus and Herculianus -seek baptism. Then the bishop
comes by night, seals,' and anoints them. We have then the
'

Cyriacus
story of a certain shoe-maker (o-KUTeus), whose son is raised from the
dead, baptized under the name Faustinus, and carefully tended by
Chryse. For this offence she is accused of magic, and subjected to the
wheel and other tortures. Then Archelaus the deacon, Maximus the
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 475

priest, and Cyriacus the bishop suffer. At this point of the narrative
we hear again of the soldiers, who had been converted by the ministra-
tions of Maximus. They are condemned to death and suffer. Of all
the rest, who are not here again mentioned by name, we are told that their
bodies were laid near the sea on the Ostian Way on vi Id. Aug.; but of
Taurinus and Herculianus we are informed that they were buried in
the Port of Rome.' Chryse's turn comes at length.
'
After being
beaten to no effect, as she only received fresh accessions of strength,
she was drowned in the sea with a heavy stone about her neck.
At this point, when the narrative is more than three-fourths over, the
name of Hippolytus first occurs. Her body floated to the shore, was
'

gathered up by the blessed Nonus, also surnamed Hippolytus (NoVos

'

d Kol /ATovo/Aao-^ets 'IttttoXutos), and buried on her own estate, where also
'

she lived, outside the walls of the city of Ostia, on the ix Kal. Sept.'
Then the torture of Sabinianus the procurator is related for not revealing
her concealed treasure whereupon Hippolytus provokes the wrath of
;

the persecutor by his denunciations, and is condemned to death for

thisinopportune interference. He is sunk in the pit of the haven called
Portus (cts Tov /366vvov Troprov tov a.vayopv6fji.vov Hoprov) on xi Kal.
Sept. At heard for the space of a
his death the voices of infants are

whole hour giving thanks to God.

The remaining paragraphs of the story recount the martyrdom of
Sabinianus and his burial by Cordius (Concordius).
Now in the earhest extant Western Martyrology, which is embedded
in the work of the Liberian Chronographer (a. d. 354) and which itself
cannot be later than a.d. 335 (see above, i. pp. 248, 250), we have this

notice, which throws a flood of light on the Acts of Chryse:

Non. Sept. (Sept. 5 th)

Aconti, in Porto, et Nonni et Herculani et Taurini.

These were doubtless genuine martyrs of Portus, though whether

they suffered in the Decian persecution or later we cannot tell. But
the notice had lost the first name by mutilation before it reached our

hagiologist ;
and the three other names only are utihzed. Whence the
story of Chryse herself was derived, I need not stop to enquire nor ;

is it worth my while to spend time on the other adornments of these

Acts.
The real interest gathers round Nonnus. Whether thiswas the
Latin word Nonus (like Septimus, Decimus, etc.) or the Greek word
Nonnus or Nunnus, we may (juestion. Probably it was the latter, but

anyhow the meaning of the Greek word would attach itself to it, and it
476 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
would suggest a cleric. Originally, as is quite evident, the notice had
nothing to do with Hippolytus, and the connexion required some ex-
planation o Kol it is in the
fjiTovofjLacr6L<: or (as
corresponding Latin) 'qui
et iam Ypolitus nuncupatur.' But the great cleric connected with
Portus, the patron saint of the place, was Hippolytus the theologian.
Hence Nonnus must be Hippolytus. Moreover he is o Trpeo-ySurepos 3
for Portus knew nothing of Hippolytus the soldier, but only of
Hippolytus 'the elder.'
The remains of an ancient sarcophagus, ascribed to the fourth or
fifth century and commemorating Taurinus and Herculanus without any

mention of Nonnus' have been found, which seems to show that these
two were buried in a separate locality as indeed the Acts might lead
;

us to expect.
Of the other martyrs mentioned in these Acts some are recognized
in the Martyrium Hieronymimmm, where we have the notices

xi Kal. Sept. Et in portu Romano peregrinorum martyrum.

X Kal. Sept. In portu urbis Romae natalis sancti Hippolyti qui
dicitur Nunnus cum sociis suis. In Ostia natalis
sancti Quiriaci, Archelai,

Hippolytus himself having Ukewise been mentioned on a previous day

Kal. Sept.), but without the description 'qui dicitur Nunnus' (see
(xiii
AR. 40 f).

The Greek Acts were first published by S. de Magistris, from whom

Lagarde has taken them. The Latin Acts will be found in Act. Sand.
Bolland. Augustus IV. p. 757 sq. The Greek seems certainly to be
the original the story
;
would probably be compiled in this language
for the sake of the foreigners frequenting Ostia and Portus. In the
Latin the exordium more especially is expanded, so as to give Chryse
the principal place on the canvas.

The Mencea borrowed some features from the Laurentian Acts;

others from the Portuensian. They are brief, but they show a late

development of the legend.

We may growth of the legend a step further. In

follow the
the middle of the century there lived a more famous Nonnus,
fifth

or of both, to whom is due the

bishop of Edessa or of Heliopolis
credit of having converted the courtesan Pelagia. S. Peter Damianus

(c. 1060) fuses this Nonnus with Hippolytus {AR. 45).

A, D. He
makes this conversion of Pelagia the crowning feat of Nonnus-Hip-

1
Bull, di Archeol. Crist. 1866, p. 49.
 HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS. 47/

polytus after bringing 30,000 Saracens over to the faith of Christ.

Then he resigns his bishopric, leavesAntioch his native country, and
retires to the mouth of the Tiber. His glorious martyrdom there
consummated, and the miraculous voices of the infants giving thanks to
God, are a proof that the resignation of the episcopate may on
occasions be possible without offending God.
The caprices of tradition would not be complete, unless supplemented
by the conceits of criticism. Baronius (p. 411) surmised that Callistus
would not suffer so valuable a man as Hippolytus to return to Arabia,
but created him bishop of Tortus, that he 'might have him ever close

by his side as an adviser in perplexities', thus bestowing upon him

'a see of no great labour (modicae curae) but of amplest
dignity.'
Strange irony of fate !

I have thus attempted to trace the marvellous vicissitudes of this

strange eventful career marvellous in life, and still more marvellous

after death. The appearances of this one personality in history and in
legend are as manifold and varied as the transformations of his name ;
Hippolytus with the Greeks and Romans, Iflites with the Syrians and
Chaldasans, Abulides with the Copts and Ethiopians, Polto with the
Itahans, Bilt with the French.
APPENDIX
 A. SAINT PETER IN ROME.

[This excursus is
printed in the incomplete state, in which it was left at Bishop
Lightfoot's death.]

B. THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS.

[Found among the Bishop's miscellaneous papers. The essay is undated, but it

was apparently written l^efore the publication of Gebhardt and Harnack's edition.]
 A.

SAINT PETER IN ROME.

'
I
"*HE subject which I purpose discussing in the present Appendix is

essentially mixed up with controversy; but I hope to treat it as

little controversially as possible. It would be impossible to overlook the
momentous inferences which depend, or have been thought to depend,
on the results of the investigation
;
but I shall pursue it, as far as pos-
sible, as a historical study. Where it is not a question of history it is
a question of exegesis. The purely theological aspects, however im-
portant, have no place here. The first section, which has the closest
bearing on theological controversy, seemed necessary as an introduction
to the rest, because it sets forth the incidents which form the basis of
discussion.

I-

THE PROMISE AND THE FULFILMENT.

Even a cursory glance at the history of the Apostles, so far as it

appears Gospel records, reveals a certain primacy of S. Peter

in the

among the twelve. He holds the first place in all the lists; he has a
precedence of responsibiUty and of temptation; he sets the example of
moral courage and of moral lapse. Above all he receives special pas-
toral charges.
The latest of these is the threefold injunction to feed the flock of

Christ. He is appealed to by his patronymic the son of Johanan, the

son of God's grace (S. John xxi. 15, 16, 17). In the other evangelists
his father's name appears under its more familiar abridgement Jonas or

Jona, thus being commonly confused with the ancient prophet's name
CLEM. II. 3 I
482 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
'the dove'; but in this latest command, as given by S. John, the name
appears in full, Johanan, the grace of God, because our Lord would
remind him that he bears about with him in his very name the obliga-
tion to the pastoral charge and the promise of grace to fulfil the same,
though here again transcribers have substituted the more usual form,
thus obscuring the significance.
The case is somewhat similar in the earlier charge to S. Peter, with
which I am directly concerned,
'
Thou art Cephas, and upon this rock
will I build My Church.' Here also the Apostle's name involves a

prophecy, which should be unfolded in the future history of the Church.

It is important therefore to enquire in what sense the Church of Christ

shall be built upon the rock.

Patristic interpretations of the earliest and last ages are mainly
twofold.

(i) The rock is Christ Himself. This was the opinion to which
S. Augustine, the
great theologian of the Latin Church, inclined.

Having as he confesses, explained the 'rock' of S. Peter

frequently,
himself, as his master S. Ambrose had done before him in a well-known

hymn, he took occasion in his after-thoughts to express his misgivings

as to this explanation. The passage is sufficiently important to deserve

quotation in full {Retract, i. 21, Op. i.
p. 32).

In quo dixi in quodam loco de Apostolo Petro quod in illo

tamquam in petra fundata sit ecclesia; qui sensus etiam cantatur

ore multorum in versibus beatissimi Ambrosii ubi de gallo galli-
naceo ait

Hoc ipsa petra ecclesiae

Canente culpam diluet;

sed scio me postea saepissime sic exposuisse quod a Domino

dictum est Tu es Pefrics...iiieain, ut super hunc intelligeretur quem
confessus est Petrus dicens, 7u es Christus filiiis Dei vivi; ac sic
Petrus ab hac petra appellatus personam ecclesiae figuraret, quae
super banc petram aedificatur, et accepit claves regni caelorum.
Non enim dictum est illi Tu cs petra, sed Tu es Petrus; petra
autem erat Christus quem confessus Simon, sicut eum tota ecclesia

confitetur, dictus est Petrus. Harum autem duarum sententiarum,

quae sit probabilior, eligat lector.

Here, though he gives the alternative, he himself evidently leans to

the interpretation which explains the rock of Christ Himself This is
likewise the view of Cyril of Alexandria, who commenting upon Isaiah
xxxiii. 16,
'
His place of defence shall be the munitions of rocks; bread
 SAINT PETER IN ROME. 483
shall his waters shall be sure,' writes, 'And it is probable
be given him;
that our Lord Jesus Christ is named a rock for us in these words; in
Whom like a cave or like some sheepfold the Church is meant, which
has its permanence in prosperity sure and unshaken; for Thou art
Peter, says the Saviour, and on this rock I will found My Church'' etc.,
the bread and the water being spiritual sustenance'.

(2) The rock is connected with S. Peter, being either his confes-
sion or his faith or some other moral or spiritual qualification, capable
of being shared by others.
This alternative has already appeared in the exposition of S. Augus-
tine. The most explicit declaration of it, however, is found in the
typical passage of Origen Coinni. in Matt. [xvi. 13] Tom. xii. 10. 'But

ifwe also, like Peter, say, Thoii art the Christ the Son of the living God,
flesh and blood not having revealed it to us, but the Spirit from heaven

having illumined our heart, we become a Peter and it would be said to

us by the Word, Thoii art Peter and so forth. For every disciple of
Christ is a rock, from whom
they that partake of the spiritual rock
all

which follows did drink; and upon every such rock the whole doctrine
of the Church and the polity in accordance therewith is built... But if
thou supposest that the whole Church is built by God on that one
Peter alone, what wouldest thou say concerning John the Son of
Thunder, or any one of the Apostles? Otherwise shall we dare to
say that against Peter especially the gates of hell shall not prevail, but
that they shall prevail against the remaining Apostles?... Are then the
keys of the kingdom of heaven given by the Lord to Peter alone and
shall none other of the blessed Apostles receive them?. ..Many there-
fore shall say to the Saviour, Tho2t art the Christ the Son of the livifig
God .. .Sixxdi if any one saith this to Him, flesh and blood not reveahng
it, but the Father which is in heaven, he shall obtain the promises (twj/

(.Ip-qfxivwv), as the letter of the Gospel says, to that particular Peter, but
as the Spirit teaches, to every one who becomes like that Peter. For
all become namesakes (7rapojKu/xot) of the rock who are imitators of
Christ the spiritual rock, etc. ...and so forth as far as shall not prmail

against it. What is 'it'? Is it the rock on which Christ builds His

^
Cyril. Alex. In Isai. Lib. iii. Tom. yap el Herpos k.t.X. Yet only a little later

III., p. 460 e:V-(is 5^ St; ttov kuI w^rpav in the same work he
gives a somewhat clif-
rifuv Lbv6ij.aff9ai 8ia tovtuu rhv }\.vpLov ferent interpretation, 'the unshaken faith

y)fx.Q3v '\y)aodv rbv Xpiarbu, kv y Kaddinp of the disciple', / Isai. Lib. iv. Tom.
Ti cnrrjKaiov yj Kal Trpo^aruv ctt^kos t) tK- II., p. 593 eVt ra^rri rfj irirpq. ^e/xeXtwtrw

KKyjala vouTai. dcr(f>a.\rj Kal OLKpaSavTov /j-ov Tr\v iKKKrjcrlav irirpav ol/xai X^yuv to
^XO''(^ft TT]!' fh rh ed elvai Siafxovrjv. Zv aKpaoarTou (is irlarLv rod fiaOriTod.

T,l 2
484 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

Church; or the Church itself, for the expression is ambiguous; or

the
rock and the Church, being one and the same thing?'
With more to the same effect; where nothing could be fuller or
more explicit than the language.
This with some modification the universal interpretation of the
is

fathers for many centuries with those few exceptions represented by

S. Augustine's after-thoughts, who explain it of Christ the rock. They
understand it to mean S. Peter's confession or S. Peter's faith or
S. Peter's firmness. In other words it is some quality or action in the

Apostle at this crisis, which calls forth the Lord's promise, and to which
the same promise attaches wherever it is found in others. Thus Chry-
sostom says {/n Matth. Horn. liv. p. 548 a, ii. p. 108, Field) l-m. Tavr-Q
iridTf.i Tyj<;
TYJ irerpa oiKoSo/Aiycrw /xov rrjv iKKXyjaiav, TOurecrTt, rjj o/AoXoytas.
Thus again Cyril of Alexandria, as we have seen, explains irirpav...

Aeywv TO (iKpaSavTOv eh ttIcttlv tov fxaOrjTOv.

The lesson which the great Alexandrian father, Origen, draws from
the Lord's promise to Peter is recognised also by his contemporary,
the great African father, Cyprian. He too distinctly states that nothing
is given to Peter here which is not given to all the Apostles ; but
he superadds another inference. From the fact that a single Apostle
is the recipient of the general promise he derives the further lesson
of the unity of the Church. Writing on this special subject {Z)e Unit.
EccL 4, p. 212 ed. Hartel), he explains
'
The Lord speaketh to Peter : / say unto thee that thou art Peter,
and upon this rock I Chtirch, and the gates of hell shall
will build My
not prevail against it .1 ivill give thee
. . the keys of the kifigdom of heaven ;

and whatsoever thou shall bifid on earth shall be bound also in heaven.
He builds His Church on one, and although He gives equal authority
to all His Apostles after (et quamvis apostolis omnibus
His resurrection
post resurrectionem suam parem potestatem tribuat) and says, As My
Father sent Me, so send I you. Receive the Holy Spirit ; whosesoever sins
ye remit they shall be remitted, and whosesoever sins ye
retaiti they shall be

retained ; yet, that might declare the unity. He arranged the origin
He
of the same unity from one by His authority (tamen ut uni-
to begin
tatem manifestaret, unitatis ejusdem originem ab uno incipient em sua
auctoritate The rest of the Apostles verily were what Peter
disposuit).
was, endowed with an equal partnershipof honour and power (pari
consortio praediti et honoris et potestatis), but the beginning pro-
ceeds from unity (exordium ab unitate proficiscitur) that the Church
of Christ may be shown to be one, which one Church also the Holy

Spirit in the Song of Songs defines and says My dove is one, etc'
 SAINT PETER IN ROME. 485
This statement however was very unsatisfactory to a later age;
and the sentence '

quamvis apostolis etc' is interpolated thus

et

et quamvis apostolis omnibus parem tribuat potestatem, unani

tamen cathedram constituit et unitatis originem [atque] orationis suae

auctoritate disposuit hoc erant utique et ceteri quod Petrus, sed
;

primatus Petro datur ut una ecclesia et cathedra una monstretur :

et pastores omnes, sed grex unus ostenditur, qui ab apostolis

sunt
omnibus unanimi consensione pascatur etc.
'

Again after the words

'
exordium ab unitate proficiscitur comes
another interpolation
et primatus Petro datur, ut una Christi ecclesia et cathedra una

monstretur, et pastores sunt omnes, sed grex unus ostenditur, qui ab

apostolis omnibus consensione pascatur.
Cyprian also elsewhere {Epist. Ixxv. 16, p. 820, ed. Hartel) has recourse
to the same argument.
Qualis vero error sit et quanta caecitas ejus qui remissionem
peccatorum dicit apud synagogas haereticorum dari posse nee permanet
in fundamento unius ecclesiae, quae semel a Christo super petram

sohdata est, hinc intellegi potest quod soh Petro Christus dixerit :

quaecumque ligaveris super terrain eriint ligata et in caelis, et quaecuniqtie

solverissuper terram erunt soluta et in caelis, et iterum in evangelio
[quando] in solos apostolos insufflavit Christus dicens: Accipite Spiritum
sanctum ; si cujus remiseritis peccata reniittentur illi; et si ciijus tenue-

ritis, tenebimtur. Potestas ergo peccatorum remittendorum apostolis

data est quas illi a Christo missi constituerunt et episcopis
et ecclesiis

qui eis ordinatione vicaria successerunt.

But, though for controversial aims there is little to choose between

the two interpretations which divided j^atristic opinion for many
centuries, we cannot let the matter rest here. An essential difference
lies at the root of the two explanations. We are fain to ask. Is Christ
the rock, or is Peter the rock, on which the Church is built
(however
we may explain the latter alternative)? Exegetically they have nothing
in common.
Now there are two arguments which mainly weigh with those who
explain the rock of Christ, (i) the one from the etymology ; (2) the other
from the imagery.
(i) The etymological argument is based on the different form of
the words irirpa, TreVpo?, the rock, the stone. The one should signify
the whole mass; the other the detached piece. Hence the one
appropriately denotes Christ the body ; the other Peter the member.
486 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
The force of this argument however is altogether shattered on two
considerations; (i)
S. Peter's name was Aramaic NQ''3, before it was
Greek Uerpos, and in the Aramaic form the one word serves for 'a rock'
and 'a stone'; (ii) When Grecized, the proper name became perforce
neV/jos, a mascuUne form being necessary, just as it would have been

neVpa, if a woman's name had been wanted.

(2) The imagery
supplies, or seems to supply, another potent
argument. In the Old Testament the Lord Jehovah is the rock on
which His people Israel is built. In the New, Christ is in like manner
the solid basis on which the Christian Church rests. More especially
is this the case when
the image takes the definite form of a building.
Should we not expect, that the same application of the image would
be carried out here ?
As a question of fact, however. Scriptural analogy does not subject
us to the tyranny of one application of the image. The relation of
Christ to His Church, regarded as a building, is represented in two
different ways.

(i)
He is iht foundation (^e/AcXtos i Cor. iii.
12). The Evangelist
is the architect who must erect his building on this, that it may stand.
In this sense He is not only the foundation, but the only palpable
foundation.

(ii)
He is the chief-corner stone (aKjooyojvtatos Ephes. ii. 20) which
binds the parts of the building together (eV w ira-aa olKodo/j-ri avvap
fjLoXoyovfxevT] K.T.X.). In thc latter sense the Apostles and prophets of the
Christian ministry are themselves regarded as the ^e/^eXtos on which
the edifice is built (eTrotKoSo/XT/^eVres ettI tw ^/x,eXt'w twv ctTrocrroXwv Koi

Trpo^TjTwi/).
This latter is the application in the Apocalypse (xxi. 14) where the
Church is not a house, but a city, and its twelve foundations are the
twelve Apostles. It appears also in S. Peter (i Pet. ii. 4 sq) where stress
is laid on Christ as the chief corner-stone,
though the corresponding
function of the Apostles as ^e/xeXtot is not mentioned.
be seen then that Scriptural analogy leaves us quite free in
It will

the application of the image ; and our only guide is the logical
connexion of the passage. But here there can be little doubt that
the sense points not to Christ the speaker, but to Peter the person
addressed, as the rock. After the opening sentence, 'Blessed art thou,
Simon Bar-jona, for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee,
but My Father which is in heaven,' which only then obtains its full
significance, when we remember (as I have already pointed out) that

Barjona, as interpreted by the form in the parallel passage in S. John

 SAINT PETER IN ROME. 487
means Bar-johanan, Son of the Grace of God, the words which follow
are directed with all the force which repetition can give them to the

person addressed. 'And I say unto thee (Kayw 8e crot Xe'yw) that thou
art Peter {on a-v et Ilerjoos), and upon f/ii's rock (eVi ravrr) rfj TreVpa)
I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against

and I will give t/iee (Scoo-w crol) the keys of the kingdom of heaven;
it,

and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven,'

etc.

The promise must therefore, as I understand it, describe some

which sprang from S. Peter himself, not from
historical i)ianifestatio7i
'

a confession or a faith or a constancy such as thine, but from thy

confession, thy faith, thy constancy.' As a matter of exegesis, it seems
to be more explained not of Peter himself; for then we should
strictly

expect tTTt rather than liA TavTy rrj Trerpa ; but on this constancy,
(joi
'

this firmness of thine, to which thy name bears witness, and which has

just evinced itself in thy confession.'

Though it denotes a certain primacy given to S. Peter, yet the
promise is the same in kind so far Origen is right as pertains to
all the faithful disciples, more especially to all the Apostles. It is

said of Peter here ;

but it
might be said, and is said elsewhere, of the
other Apostles. They too are the ^e/Ae'Atot (Ephes. ii. 20, Rev. xxi. 14);

they too have the power of the keys (John xx. 22 sq).
But still it is a primacy, a preeminence. There is a historical,
as well as a numerical value, in the order Trpwros Si/awv d Xeydyitevos

TTerpos {Matt. x. 2) in the list of the Apostles. In what does this

primacy consist ?
Obviously Peter cannot be the rock, in any sense, which trenches
upon the prerogative of Christ Himself. His primacy cannot be the
primacy of absolute sovereignty : it must be the primacy of historical
inauguration. When we turn to the Apostolic records, we find that
this work of initiation is assigned to him in a remarkable way in each
successive stage in the progress of the Church. The same faith, the
same courage, which prompted the confession and called forth the

promise of Christ, follows him all along, leading him to new ventures
of faith.

But, lest we should

misinterpret the position thus assigned to him
and attribute toa continuity and permanence which does not belong
it

to it, he vanishes suddenly out of sight another more striking person- ;

ality assumes the chief place, and achieves conquests which lie could
not have achieved his name is hardly ever mentioned.
; He has
fulfilled his special mission, and his primacy is at an end.
488 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
I ventured to say above (p. 481) that the primacy of S. Peter was

manifested not only in the preeminence of his faith and courage, but
in the preeminence of his lapse and fall. Of the eleven faithful Apostles
he exhibited the most disastrous failure of faith, a failure which was
aggravated by the circumstance that it followed immediately upon his
confident assertion of fidelity (Matt. xxvi. 35).
In the Christian dispensation the redemption is the sequel to the

fall. In the individual believer the sense of weakness must precede

the gift of strength. When I am weak, then am I strong.' Strength
'

is made perfect out of weakness. Peter is warned by the Master

beforehand (Luke xxii. 31) that he must 'be sifted as wheat' by
temptation. This is the price to be paid, that when at length con-
TTore eTrtcTTpei/'as) and not till then, he
'
verted (cru may strengthen the
brethren.' Hence his fall. Not till after his fall the threefold charge
is given him (John xxi. 15 17) to feed the sheep and lambs of Christ's
flock. The charge is given specially to him, because he bears a special
love to Christ.
Then comes the resurrection. The Lord is removed, the Apostles
meet together with Peter at their head (Acts i. 13). At the first
meeting of the general body of disciples he takes the initiative, and the
vacant place in the college of the Apostles is filled up (i. 15 sq).
On the day of Pentecost he addresses the multitudes of Jews and
strangers, but it is especially mentioned that he was not alone re-
sponsible (crvv Tots eVSeKa, ii. 14). As with the appeal, so with the
response. The conviction and the conversion of the assembled crowd
is communicated not to Peter alone, but to Peter and the rest of
the Apostles (ii. 37, tt/do? tov IXeVpov koL tovs Xoittous aTTotTToAovs), though
Peter is necessarily the spokesman.
So Peter
asserts his primacy in the foundation of the Christian
Church. For a long period it remains a strictly Hebrew Church, as
the Israelites were a strictly Hebrew people. Here not unnaturally
Peter takes the initiative at all the great crises of its development.

The first occasion when it exercises its miraculous power of grace and
healing Peter is the chief agent (iii.
i
sq). Yet even here he is not
allowed to act alone. The soHdarity of the Apostolate is vindicated in
the Apostolic record. The association of John with him is emphasized
with almost irksome reiteration at each successive stage in the incident

(iii.
ver. i IleTjQOS 8e koL 'Iwdv-qs dve^aivov, ver. 3 tScov IleTpov koI 'iMoivqv,

ver. 4 areviVas Se IleT/DOS cts avTov aw tuJ Icoavr/ etTrev BXe'i/zov ets '/A'-as, ver.

Be. avTOv tov

II KpaTovvTO<s Herpov kol tov jg o 8e Ilerpos
'lujdvrjv, iv. ver.

KOL 'Icuav7;s d-iroKpi6ivT(.<;). After the first gift of grace, comes the first
 SAINT PETER IN ROME. 489

punishment of Ananias and Sapphira. Peter

visitation of anger in the
asserts his (v. 3 sq); and the guilt
primacy here also is punished.

Between Judaism and Heathendom is a great border-land. There

are the Samaritans, who can hardly be classified with the one or the
other. These must be drawn within the fold. It is a fresh venture of
faith,and Peter has the courage to push the frontier forward into the
enemy's country. But here again he does not act alone. The mission
to Samaria, which gives its sanction to Philip's action, is the mission of
the whole apostolate, and here again John is associated with him (viii.

14 ol iv 'Iepo(ToXvfJiot<; a7roo-ToXot...a7re'crTetAav Trpos aiiToi;s XleVpov /cat

'lwavr]v). But this new conquest involves a new difficulty. The

Christian Church in the early centuries was assailed by two opposite
forms of heresy in diverse modifications, Ebionism and Gnosticism,
the aberrations of Judaic and Gentile thought respectively. The first
beginnings of both these conflicts are discerned in the infant Church ;
and in both Peter stands in the van of the fight as the champion of the
Church. He had confronted the leaders of the Jewish hierarchy (iv.
18 sq, V. 28 sq); and he was now brought face to face with Gnosticism
in the person of Simon Magus, '
the father of the Gnostics.' Thus his

primacy was vindicated in the conflict with heresy also.

But the great conquest of all still awaited him. The Church must
become a world-wide Church. A thousand religious fences must be
broken down; a thousand prejudices of convention and tradition must
be sacrificed a thousand cherished safeguards, which had hitherto
;

been the and the purity of the nation, must be abandoned. Who
life

would have the courage to face a change so mighty ? By virtue of his

primacy Peter is chosen as the recipient of this revelation of revela-
tions. He
taught by a special vision to regard nothing as common
is

or unclean, whereas the law divinely imposed on his country had re-

garded very many things as common and unclean. Yet unhesitatingly

he obeys the command. Cornelius the heathen is baptized and at ;

one stroke the privileges of the Christian Church are laid before the
all

whole heathen world. Do we marvel that this vision, which was at-
tended by consequences so momentous, was emphasized at the time by
a triple repetition 16 tovto Se eyeVcro eVt rpts), and that the recorded
(x.
vision itself is enforced upon ourselves in the reiteration of the historian

(x.
10 sq, xi. 4 sq) ?

Thusthe Lord's promise is fulfilled the primacy is completed ; the

:

foundations are laid on the rock, whether of Peter's confession or of

Peter's courage or of Peter's steadfastness. From this time forward the
work passes into other hands. The '
wise master-builder
'

piles up the
490 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
later storeys of the edifice, for which his manifold gifts and opportunities
had fitted him his Hebraic elementary training, his Greek academic
culture, his Roman political privileges. Paul completes what Peter had
begun. The
silence of the later ApostoHc history is not less significant
than the eloquence of the earlier as to the meaning of Peter's primacy.
In the first part he is everything ; in the subsequent record he is no-
where at all. He is only once again mentioned in the Acts (xv. 7), and
even here he does not bear the chief part. Where the Church at large,
as an expansive missionary Church,
is concerned, Paul, not Peter, is the

prominent personage: where the Church of Jerusalem appears as the

visible centre of unity, James, not Peter, is the chief agent (Acts xii. 17,
XV. 13, xxi. 18, Gal. ii.
9, 12). Peter retains the first place, as mis-
sionary evangelist to the Hebrew Christians, but nothing more.
Moreover, when S. Paul appears on the scene, he is careful to
declare emphatically his independence and equality with the other
Apostles. 'I reckon,' he says in one place, 'that I fall short in no

whit of the very chiefest Apostles' (2 Cor. xi. 5 fxrjhev vareo-qKivai rwv

vTTepXiav diroarToXtiiv) then again while devoting two whole chapters to

;

recording the achievements of his Apostleship, he repeats almost the

same words, I am become a fool ye have compelled me for
'
; ;
I fall

short in no whit of the very chiefest Apostles, even though I am

nothing' (2 Cor. xii. 11). Accordingly he claims all the privileges of
an Apostle (i Cor. ix. 5). Moreover especially, he asserts his absolute
equality with Peter (Gal. ii.
7 sq) ; and he gives practical proof of his
independence by openly rebuking Peter, when Peter's timidity en-
dangered the freedom and universality of the Church. If there was any
primacy at this time, it was the primacy not of Peter, but of Paul.

TJI ROMAN VISIT OF PETER.

The work of the primacy being completed as I have described it in

the last section, and S. Peter being miraculously delivered from prison,
we are told that having sent a message to James and the brethren he
went out and departed to another place (Acts xii. 17 i$e\6wv liropevdy]
is hepov TOTTov). This has been supposed to mark the crisis when he
transferred his residence to Rome and his labours to the far west.

There is nothing in the language itself, except its mysterious vague-

ness, which could suggest such an inference, which is quite inconsistent
with known facts. The simple interpretation is doubtless the correct
 SAINT PETER IN ROME. 49 1

one, that he retired out of the way of Herod. Indeed so important a

fact as his visit to the metropolis of the world would not have been
slurred over in this way. When we meet with him again he is still in
the East; at the Council of Jerusalem about a.d. 51 (Acts xv. 7); and
at Antioch a little later (Gal. ii. 11). Indeed his recognised position
as the Apostle of the Circumcision would suggest Palestine as his head-
quarters and the East
as his sphere of action. Whether within the next
few years he paid a visit to Corinth or not (i Cor, i. 12, 2 Cor. i. 19,
X. 1 2 sq) I need not stop to enquire. A personal visit is not required
to explain the power of his name with a certain party at Corinth; and
the silence of S. Paul, though not conclusive, is unfavourable to any
visit to Greece.
One thing seems quite certain. The departure from Jerusalem
during the persecution of Plerod took place about a.d. 42 the Epistle ;

to the Romans was written about a.d. 58. During this period no
Apostle had visited the metropoUs of the world. If silence can ever be

regarded as decisive, its verdict must be accepted in this case. S. Paul

could not have written as he writes to the Romans (i. 11 sq, xv. 20 24),
if they had received even a short visit from an Apostle, more especially
if that Apostle were S. Peter.
Nevertheless reasons exist to my own mind conclusive reasons
for postulating a visit of S. Peter to Rome at a later date, on which
occasion he suffered martyrdom there. If these reasons are not each

singly decisive, the combination yields a body of proof, which it is

difficult to resist.

(i) In S. Peter's First Epistle, he sends a salutation at the close

(v. 13) to his distant correspondents

in Asia Minor; 'The fellow-elect
(lady) in Babylon greeteth you, and so doth Marcus my son.' Who or
what is meant by 'the fellow-elect'? On turning to the opening of the
Epistle, we find that it is addressed '
to the elect sojourners of the

dispersion (cKXeKTots TrapeTrtSv/jUots 8iao-7ropas) in Pontus, Galatia, etc' and

'
the fellow-elect at the close is the Church from
'
this suggests that

which he writes. Indeed there is no individual woman, for whom we

can suppose such a salutation appropriate, for we can hardly imagine
S. Peter's wife, if she were still living, placed in this prominent position.

Nor again is the context 7;

iv Ba/SvXwin a-weKXeKTrj natural as the

description of a person. I should add also that several early authorities

(including &;) add iKKXrjo-la; and that the figurative expressions in this

epistle (i.
i
7rapeTri8-t][xoLs 8tacnropa<;, comp. ii. 1 1
)
are in character with
this interpretation.

The Second Epistle of S. John presents a close parallel. A saluta-

492 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
tion is sent in the opening verse to the elect lady (iKXeKry Kvpta) at ;

the close is a message 'the children of thine elect sister (-njs a8eA<^^s aov

TTJs eKXcKT-fj?) salute thee.' The intermediate language shows that we

have here the personification of the communities. It is not an inter-
change of greetings between individuals, but between Churches; see
for instance ver. 4, 'I have found some of thy children walking in the
truth;' ver. 6, 'this is the commandment which ye heard from the

beginning;' ver. 8, 'look to yourselves' after the warning of Antichrist ;

ver. 10, 'if any one cometh to you and bringeth not this doctrine.'
But what is this fellow-elect congregation in Babylon ? Can we doubt
that it is the Church in Rome ? It cannot be the Egyptian Babylon,
which was a mere fortress (Strabo xvii. p. 807). If therefore it was not
the Great Babylon, it must have been Rome. To this latter more
especially the mention of Mark points; for Mark is designated by
a very early tradition as companion and interpreter in
S. Peter's

Rome. This appears from Papias and the Elders, whose traditions are
reported by him (Euseb. JI. E. iii. 39) from Irenaeus {Haer. iii. i. i)
; ;

from Clement of Alexandria (Euseb. H. E. ii. 15), and from Origen

III. p. 440 Delarue; comp. Euseb. H. E. vi. 25), the writing of his
{Oj).

Gospel being connected with the preaching of Peter in Rome. This

tradition is in full accordance with the latest notices in the New
Testament (Col. iv. 10, Philem. 24, 2 Tim. iv. 11), which represent
him Rome or journeying towards Rome.
either as staying in
Nor was Babylon a new name for Rome, dating from the Neronian
persecution. It had been a mystical name for this world-wide power

with the Jews before it was inherited by the Christians. As such it

appears even in the early Sibylline Oracles (v. 158).

Kai (fiXe^ei ttovtov jSaOvv avTYjv TC Ba/3vXwva

TraXtas yaiai/ 6' vys ttVcKa ttoXXoi oXovto

E^paicov aytot ttlcttoI kol vaos aXrjOrjs.

(2) The prophecy John xxi. 18 in

'
JV/icfi thou shall grow old,

thou shall stretch out thy hands and another shall gird thee, this He
said signifying by what death he should die,' has always been explained
of the crucifixion of S. Peter; and it is difficult to see what other

explanation can be given. Nothing, it is true, is here said about the

place of martyrdom. But the crucifixion of S. Peter is always con-
nected by tradition with Rome, and with no other place. It would

be arbitrary therefore to separate the locality from the manner of

martyrdom. Unless we accept the Roman residence of S. Peter, we
know nothing about his later years and death.
 SAINT PETER IN ROME. 493

(3) The reference in the Second Epistle of S. Peter (i. 14) has
much the same bearing as the last; 'Knowing that the putting-off of this
tabernacle is at hand, as the Lord Jesus Christ also declared unto me.'
It may be said indeed that grave doubts are thrown on the genuineness
of this document. If it were otherwise than genuine it would
express
from another quarter the belief of the early Church respecting S. Peter's
death ; for it certainly belongs to the primitive ages.

(4) The Epistle of the Roman Church to the Corinthians, by the

hand of Clement of Rome, belongs to the year 95 or 96. The writer,
turning aside from the Old Testament worthies, of whose heroism he had
spoken, directs the attention of his readers (c. 5) to the examples of
Christian athletes who 'lived very near to our own times'. He reminds
them of the Apostles who were persecuted and carried the struggle to
death (ews Oavdrov rjOXyjcrav). There was Peter, who after undergoing
many sufferings became a martyr and went to his appointed place
of glory. There was Paul, who, after enduring chains, imprisonments,
stonings again and again, and sufferings of all kinds, preached the
Gospel in the extreme West, likewise endured martyrdom and so
departed from this world. If the use of the word /xaprupyfo-a? in both

cases leave any doubt that they suffered death for the faith,
could
the context decisive.
is But why are these two Apostles, and these
only, mentioned? Why not James the son of Zebedee? Why not
James the Lord's brother? Both these were martyrs. The latter
was essentially a pillar,' and his death was even more recent. Obviously
'

because Clement was appealing to examples which they themselves had

witnessed. Paul was martyred in Rome, as is allowed on all hands.
Is not the overwhelming inference that Peter suffered in this same city
also ? This inference is all the more certain, when we find that outside
this testimony of Clement tradition is constant in placing his death at
Rome.
(5) Some ten or twenty years later, in the early decades of the
second century, Ignatius {Rom. 4) on his way to martyrdom writes to
the Roman Church I do not command you, like Peter and Paul ;
'
:

they were Apostles, I am a condemned criminal ; they were free ;

I am

a slave until now.' Why should he single out Peter and Paul? He is
writing from Asia Minor ; and the locality therefore would suggest John.
He was a guest of a disciple of John at the time. He was sojourning
in the country where John was the one prominent name. The only
conceivable reason is, that Peter and Paul had been in a position to

directions to the Romans, that they both alike had visited Rome
give
and were remembered by the Roman Church.
494 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

(6) Papias of Hierapolis may have been born about a.d. 6o 70,
and probably wrote about a.d. 130 140. He related on the authority
of the presbyter John, a personal disciple of the Lord (Euseb. H. E.
iii.
39) that Mark, not being a personal disciple of the Lord,
became a
companion and interpreter {kpix.y]V(.vTr\i) of S. Peter, that he wrote down
what he heard from his master's oral teaching, and that then he
composed this record.

I have no concern here whether this is or is not the Second Gospel,

as we possess it. Formy immediate purpose this notice suggests

three remarks; (i)

When Mark is called epfji-rjvevTy}^ 'the interpreter'
of Peter, the reference must be to the Latin, not to the Greek language.
The evidence that Greek was spoken commonly in the towns bordering
on the Sea of Galilee, and that S. Peter must therefore have been well
acquainted with it, is ample; even if this had not been the necessary
inference from the whole tenour of the New Testament, (ii)
This
notice seems to have been connected by Papias with i Pet. v, 13,
where Mark is mentioned in connexion with the fellow-elect in

Babylon, presumably the Church of Rome. Papias was acquainted

with, and quoted from, this Epistle of S. Peter ; for Eusebius tells
'

us that he employs testimonies from it and plain also from the

'
: it is

context of the passage by Eusebius that Papias had spoken

cited

at greater length about the connexion of Mark with Peter, 'as I said

(ws (fy7]v)'; (iii) Papias was so understood by writers like Irenasus, who
had his book before them. It seems a tolerably safe inference there-

fore that Papias represented S. Peter as being in Rome, that he stated

Mark to have been with him there, and that he assigned to the latter
a Gospel record which was committed to writing for the instruction of
the Romans.

(7) DioNYSius OF Corinth, from whom Eusebius gives an extract

{H. E. ii. 25), writes as follows:
'
Herein ye also by such instructions (to us) have united the trees
of the Romans and Corinthians, planted by Peter and Paul (tv;)'
aTro

Xlerpov /<ai IlauXoi; (fivretav yevrjOeLO'av 'Pwyaatojv re kol Kopiv^twv avue-

Kipda-are). For they both alike came also to our Corinth and taught
us and both alike came together to Italy, and having taught there
;

suffered martyrdom at the same time (Kara tov avrov Kaipov) '.

This letter was written about a.d. 170 in answer to a communi-

cation from the Romans under his contemporary bishop Soter (see
I.
p. 369). I need not stop to enquire whether the correct reading is
(fiVTcv(TavT<; or </)0iT77(javTes. The Statement may be taken as repre-
senting the belief of both Churches. The expression Kara. toV avrov
Kaipor need not be pressed to mean the same day or the same year.
 SAINT PETER IN ROME. 495
IreN/T:us about a.d. 190 is still more explicit [Haer. iii. i. i):
(8)
Matthew published also a written Gospel (ypa(f>r}v euayyeklov)
'

among the Hebrews in their own language while Peter and Paul were
preaching and founding the Church in Rome. Again after their
departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, himself also
handed down to us in writing the lessons preached by Peter.'
A little later he says {Haer. iii. 3, 2, 3); 'The greatest and most
ancient Churches, well known to all men, the Churches of Rome
founded and established by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and
Paul [hand down] announced to mankind that tradition and faith,
which it has from the Apostles reaching to our own
day through its
successions of bishops. So having founded and built up the Church
the blessed Apostles entrusted the ministration of the bishopric to
Linus.'
Irenaeus spent some time in Rome about a.d. 177, and appears to
have paid repeated visits.

(9) The MuRATORiAN Canon is

generally placed about a.d. 170. I

have given reasons already (11. p. 405 sq) for surmising that it may have
been an early work of Hippolytus, the pupil of Iren^us, in which case
it
may date twenty years later. The writer explains that S. Luke in
the Acts of the Apostles only records incidents which took place in
his presence, and that therefore his silence about the Martyrdom of

S. Peter, or the journey of S. Paul to Spain, evidently shows that

he was not present on either occasion. Though the actual text is not
certain in all points, there can be no reasonable doubt that this is the

meaning of the words.

(10) The testimony of Clement of Alexandria (a.d. 193 217)
in the Hypotyposeis appears from Eusebius {H. E. vi. 14). He stated
that 'when Peter had preached the word publicly in Rome and
declared the Gospel by the Spirit, the bystanders being many in
number exhorted Mark, as having accompanied him for a long time
and remembering what he had said, to write out his statements, and
having thus composed his Gospel, to communicate it to them and ;

that, when Peter learnt this, he used no pressure either to prevent him
or urge him forwards.' See also Adu/iibr. p. 1007 (Potter).
(11) The testimony of Tertullian is chiefly of value as showing
the prevalence of the tradition in another important branch of the
Church at the close of the second and the beginning of the third
century. The passages need no comment.
Scorpiace 15.
'
We read in the lives of the Caisars, Nero was the first to slain tlie
496 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
rising faith with blood. Then Peter is girt by another, when he is

bound to the cross ;

then Paul obtains his birth-right (consequitur
nativitatem) of Roman citizenship, when he is born again there by
the nobility of martyrdom.'
De Baptisvw 4.
'
matter whether they are among those whom John bap-
Nor does it

tized in the Jordan or those whom Peter baptized in the Tiber.'

De Praescriptione 32.
'
The Church of the Romans reports that Clement was ordained by
Peter.'
De Praescriptio7ie 36.
*
If thou art near to Italy, thou hast Rome, whence our authority
also is near at hand. How happy is that Church on whom the
Apostles shed teaching with their blood; where Peter is
all their
conformed to the passion of the Lord, where Paul is crowned with
the death of John, where the Apostle John, after being plunged in

boiling oil without suffering any harm, is banished into an island.'

(12) Gaius the Roman presbyter, of whom I have had something to
say already (see above, p. 377 sq), lived under Zephyrinus and was a
11.

contemporary of Hippolytus [c. a.d. 200 220] if not actually identical

with him. Arguing against the Montanists of Asia Minor, who asserted
the precedent of Philip's daughters for their special views about pro-

phecy, he claims for his own Church the authority of the Apostles
S. Peter andS. Paul, whose martyred bodies repose in Rome :

'
can show you the trophies (the reliques) of the Apostles.
But I

For if thou wilt go to the Vatican or to the Ostian Way, thou wilt find
the trophies of those who founded this Church.'

This shows that at least at this early date the sites of the graves of
the two Apostles were reputed to have been the localities where now
stand the basilicas of S. Peter and S. Paul.

(13) Origen in the 3rd volume of his Explanation of Genesis (as

reported by Eusebius H. E. iii. i ; comp. Orig. Op. 11. p. 24 Delarue)
related that Peter 'appears to have preached in Pontus and Galatia and

Bithynia, in Cappadocia and Asia; when at last he went to Rome and

there was gibbeted head downward, having himself asked to suffer so';
and that Paul 'having fully preached the Gospel of Christ from Jerusalem
as far as lUyricum, afterwards suffered martyrdom in Rome in the time
of Nero.'

(14) Lactantius.
Instit. Div. iv. 21.
'
He disclosed to them all things which Peter and Paul preached at
 SAINT PETER IN ROME. 497
Rome, and this preaching remained in writing for a record : wherein
among many other marvellous things, this also etc'

But when shall we suppose that this visit to Rome took place ? We
have seen (see above, 11. p. 491) that as late as a.d. 58, when S. Paul
wrote to the Romans, his claim to Rome as virgin soil so far as regards
any Apostolic ministrations is fatal to a prior date for the visit. For
the next four or five years we have sufficiently precise information in
the Apostolic records to preclude this period also. S. Paul spends

two years in captivity at Cassarea, and in the autumn of a.d. 60 he

sets sail for Rome, arriving there in the spring of 61. In Rome he
is detained two whole years a captive, and then presumably in 6;^ he is
released.
His release is not dependent on any one consideration, but is
inferred from several, (i) Early tradition speaks of his paying the
intended Spain, of which he speaks in the Epistle to the
visit to
Romans 28); (ii) He tells the Philippians that he looks forward
(xv.
to being released shortly (i. 25, ii. 24), and he is so hopeful that he
bids Philemon prepare a lodging for him (ver. 22); (iii) The phenomena
in the Pastoral Epistles cannot in most instances be placed during the
period included in the Acts; (iv) The date given for his martyrdom by
the best authorities is the last year of Nero, which was three or four

years after the fire which led immediately to the persecution of the
Christians.

But, if he was released, it must have been before the outbreak of the
persecution, since so prominent a leader of the Christians could hardly
have escaped, if he had still been in the hands of his Roman masters.
During the period then of his first and second captivities, i.e. between
A.D. 63 we
are led to find a place for S. Peter's visit.
67, Thus it will
not clash with S. Paul's relations to the Romans, and might well have
taken place without our finding any notice of it either in the narrative

of the Acts or in the letters of this Apostle.

S. Peter would then arrive in Rome in the latter part of 63 or the

beginning of 64. The Neronian persecutions broke out soon afterwards,

and he would be one of the most prominent victims. This accords
with the ancient tradition of the different places of sepulture of the two

Apostles. Gaius the Roman tells us, that whereas Peter was buried in
the Vatican, Paul found his resting-place on the Ostian Way. The
Vatican were the scene of the hideous festivities, in which the
gardens
victims of the fire suffered, and among these (we may assume) was
S. Peter (a.d. 64). On the other hand an isolated victimwho was put
CLEM. II. 33
498 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
to death some years later (say a.d. 67), as was presumably S. Paul's case,

might meet his death anywhere.

On the occasion of this visit to Rome, as we have seen, S. Peter
wrote his Epistles. As am
desirous of avoiding controverted docu-
I

ments, I shall say nothing about the Second nor indeed is it necessary
for my purpose but confine my attention to the First. Do we find
then in this First Epistle any confirmation of the view here suggested of
the date of S. Peter's visit ?

(i) Itwas written during a season of persecution. No other book

of the New Testament, except the Apocalypse, is so burdened with the
subject. The leading purport of the letter is to console and encourage
his distant correspondents under the fiery trial which awaited them.
Nothing in the previous history of the Church answers to the conditions.
It was no isolated, capricious attack, but a systematic onslaught. Though
it
raged chiefly at Rome, its effects were felt in the provinces also. More

especially was this the case in Asia Minor, which S. Peter had in view.
The letters to the Seven Churches in the Apocalypse are evidence of
this; and the mention of the martyr Antipas (ii. 13) emphasizes the
fact. The emperor's example had let loose the dogs.
Now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness by reason of mani-
'

fold temptations, that the trial of your faith being more precious than of

gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto
praise and honour and glory
at the appearing of Jesus Christ' (i. 6, 7).
'
Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles, that whereas

they speak against you as evil doers, they may by your good works, which

they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation' (ii. 12).

If ye suffer for righteousness sake, happy are ye

'
and be not afraid ;

of their terror, neither be troubled having a good conscience, that

whereas they speak evil of you as of evil doers, they may be ashamed
that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ ; for it is better, if
'

the will of God be so, that ye suffer for well doing than for evil doing
(iii. 14, 16, 17).
'
Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to

try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you ;

but rejoice
inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings' (iv, 12, 13).
If ye be reproached for the Name of Christ, happy are ye for the
*
;

Spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you on their part He;
is evil

spoken of, but on your part He is

glorified... If any man suffer as a

Christian let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this
behalf (iv. 14, 16).
Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God'
'

(v. 6).
 SAINT PETER IN ROME. 499
'Whomresist, stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions

accompHshed in your brethren which are in the world (v. 9).

'
are
These passages point to the crisis, when the persecution had already-
broken out, or was imminent, and therefore were probably written not
earlier than the summer of 64.

(2) The
date thus suggested agrees with other indications. With
two Epistles of S. Paul more especially the writer shows a familiar
acquaintance the Epistle to the Romans and the Epistle to the
Ephesians. The one was written to Rome; the other from Rome.
They both partake of the character of circular letters. They are there-
fore just the two Epistles which would be most accessible to a person in
S. Peter's position. The Epistle to the Romans was written in a.d. 58,
but the Epistle to the Ephesians not till a.d. 63.
The following are the parallels to the Epistle to the Romans, and
the reader may satisfy himself as to their pertinence.
iv. 24
500 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Now at one time the bodies of the two Apostles were lying in the

Cemetery on the Appian Way, properly called *Ad Catacumbas,' in a

'loculum bisomum,' which may be seen to this day and over which
Damasus (a.d. 366 384) placed the inscription
Hie habitasse prius sanctos cognoscere debes,
nomina [limina?] quique Petri pariter Paulique requiris;
discipulos Oriens misit, quod sponte fatemur :

sanguinis ob meritum Christumque per astra secuti

aetherios petiere sinus et regna piorum.
Roma suos potius meruit defendere cives ;
by which he simply meant that the East gave these two Apostles to
Rome, where they became Roman citizens. It is in fact the same which
TertuUian expresses in a passage quoted above {Sco?'J>. 15). 'Paulus
civitatis Romanae
consequitur nativitatem, martyrii renascitur cum illic

generositate.' But being strangely misunderstood it gave rise to the

legend that the Greeks attempted to carry off the bodies of the two
Apostles, but being pursued threw them down in the Catacombs'.
Plainly however the day, the 29th of June, was not originally regarded
as the day of martyrdom of the two Apostles, but the day of their depo-
sition on some occasion. What then was this occasion ?
The mention of the consulship happily fixes the year. This must
refer to the temporary deposition of the bodies in the catacombs of
S. Sebastian ; and the notice probably ran originally
iii Kal. Jul. Petri et Pauli ad Catacumbas Tusco
et Basso cons,

but the chronographer of 354 or some intermediate copyist knowing

that S. Paul's body lay in his time on the Ostian Way altered it accord-

ingly, inserting
'
Ostense
'
after the name of this Apostle'^. This was a
few weeks before the martyrdom of Xystus II, who suffered Aug. 6,
A.D. 258. The two bodies, we may suppose, were deposited in S. Sebas-
tian for a time, while their permanent memoriae were being erected,
which were afterwards developed into the basilicas of S. Peter's at the
Vatican and S. Paul's on the Ostian Way. But this temporary deposi-
tion fixed the festival of their common celebration in Rome and gave
rise to the story that they were martyred on the same day^ On the
^
See a good article Das Alter der Apocr. Apostelgesch. II. i. p. 392 sq.
^
Grdher u. Kirchen des Paulus u. Petrus It is actually entered in Ado, under

in Rom by Erbes in Brieger's Zeitschr. June -29, 'Romae natalis bcatorum Apo-
f. Kirchengesch. y\\. sq (1885).
'^,
i stolorum Petri et Pauli, qui passi sunt
^
This is the explanation of Erbes, sub Nerone, Basso et Tusco consulibus,'
p. 2 8, and it is
accepted by Lipsius See Erbes, I.e.
p. 30,
 SAINT PETER IN ROME. 501
other hand the true tradition of their suffering in different years survived
to the time of Prudentius, albeit he assumed that it referred to succes-
sive years. In connexion with this temporary deposition we may place
the notice said to be found with exceptional uniformity in all the mss
of the Hieronymian Martyrology on Jan. 25

Romae translatio Pauli Apostoli

which would probably be the day of the restoration to his permanent

resting-place, but which was ordered at a later date to be celebrated as
the day of his conversion,

3.

THE TWENTY-FIVE YEARS' EPISCOPATE.

The twenty-five years of S. Peter's episcopate had at one time a
sentimental and might almost be said to have a dogmatic value. It

was unique in the history of the papacy. Though the records of certain
periods in its career, more especially its earlier career, are scanty, we
know enough to say with certainty that no later bishops of Rome held
the see for a quarter of a century until our own day. Now however all
is
changed. The papacy of Pio Nono has been unique in many ways.
It has seen the declaration of papal infallibility: it has witnessed the

extinction of the temporal power; and, last of all, it has exceeded by

more than a year the reputed term of S. Peter. The twenty-five years
therefore have ceased to have any dogmatic or sentimental importance ;

and, in dealing with them critically, we need have no fear lest we

should be doing violence to any feelings which deserve respect.
But there is a still prior question to be settled before we discuss the

length of S. Peter's episcopate. Was he bishop of Rome at all ? He

might have been founder or joint founder of the Church there, without
having been regarded as its bishop. No one reckons S. Paul as first
bishop of Thessalonica or Philippi, of Corinth or of Athens, though
these Churches owe their first evangelization to him.
Now I cannot find that any writers for the first two centuries and
more speak of S. Peter as bishop of Rome. Indeed their language is
inconsistent with the assignment of this position to him. When Dionysius
of Corinth speaks of the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul as jointly planting
the two Churches of Corinth and of Rome, he obviously cannot mean
this; for otherwise he would point to a divided episcopate. The language
of Irengeus (iii. 3. 3) again is still more explicit. He describes the
Church of Rome as founded by the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul, who
502 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.

appointed Linus bishop. After him came Linus j

after Linus, Anencletus;

after Anencletus 'in the t/u'rd place from the Apostles Clement is elected
to the bishopric,'and the others, when any numbers are given, are
numbered accordingly, so that Xystus' is 'the sixth from the Apostles,'
and Eleutherus the contemporary of Irenseus 'holds the office of the
episcopate in the twelfth place from the Apostles.' This is likewise the
enumeration in the anonymous author of the treatise against Artemon
(Euseb. H. E. v. 28) probably Hippolytus, who numbers Victor *the
thirteenth from Peter.'

* * *

^
See on this passage the remarks in in the text of Irenreus see the note on I.

I.
pp. 271, 284. For the discrepancies p. 204.
 B.

THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS.

'

"pHE Ep istle^ which bears JJie^arae of Barnabas, .stands. aloa-in-4h

--
-hterature of the-early^ Churc hi. The writer is an nnrnrnprnmysing
.,
Af.-Av
-
anfagnni'^t nf Judaism ;
hut, hpynnri this
nntagnm'sm. he has notJimg m.__^$^
common with the A ntiiudaic heresies of the seronri rpntnry. These
CO^V
later heretijcs^_^iLQStic, and^Iarcionite, tooL their stand ^kii-a4ualism in -^,a^^-
some form or other. They postulated an op position be tween the. Old "> .

.
Testament and the New, In Marcionism. which flourished about, the
juiddle of the s.eond ^century, this, doctrine assumes its extreme form.
The__01d_ Testam ent so Marcion affirmed was the w ork of the.
JQniiiir^>whose tyrnnny^-O^er, mankind Jesus Christ, the son of the^.
Good God came^to
, destroy. The^ antagonism was jLb&olute and com*.
plete the _\yarfare was internecine. _ Of such a doctrine the Epistle of
;
,

^arn^l^pc^ pvhibjf; pnl; the faintest frnrf^, On tlie contrary, the writer
sees Christianity everyw here in the Lawgiver and the PrQjDhets^ E[e
treats them with a degree^ of respect, which would ha^^e satisfied th^
most devout rabbi. ,
He quo tes them profusely-, as-niithnritnti,v.e^ Only
Jie accuses the Jews misnnrlerstnnHing them frnm beginning tr> fw^
v>{

He even in timatesJhat-tIie-jordinances., of circumci s ion of the Sabbath,

,

nf_<']l^i5til2iiQn "f meats clean and unclean, as having a

spiritual or
mystical significance, were never intended to be literally observ-ed,- -

though on this point he is not quite explicit

Who then was the writer of this Epistle? At the close of the
second century Clement of Alexandria quotes it profusely, ascribing it
to 'tbe Apostle Barnabas' or 'the Apostolic Barnabas' or 't he Prnp het-
Barnabas' ; and, lest- any doubt should be entertained as to the identity
of the person bearing this name, he in one passage describes the author
 504 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
as
'
Barnabas who himself also preached in company with the Apostle
(i.e. S. Paul) in the ministry of the Gentiles'.' Yet elsewhere^ Clement
himself refers anonymously to the explanation which our Barnabas gives
'
of the prohibition against eating the flesh of the hare and the hyena,'
and criticizes
freely. He declares his acquiescence in fj^e symbo lical
it

hnt h^ rli<;1-inrl-1y rppnriiatpc; thp c;tgf-pmpn1- jQ^x which-OlAr

jnter pret3 tinn,
author founds it as a physical im possibility.- It seems clear therefore
that notwithstanding his profuse and deferential quotations he does not
treat the book
as final and authoritative. A few years later, Origen
also cites this work with the introductory words, It is written in the '

Catholic (i.e. General) Epistle of Barnabas.' The earliest notices how-

ever are confined to the Alexandrian fathers ; and elsewhere it does not

appear to have been received with any very special consideration.

Altogether the position, which it occupies in the Codex Sinaiticus, may
be taken to represent the highest distinction to which it ever attained.
It is there placed, not with the Catholic Epistles, which would have
been itsproper rank, if it had been regarded as strictly canonical, but
after the Apocalypse, in company with the Shepherd of Hernias, as a
sort of Appendix to the sacred volume.
This prominence it doubtless owed to the belief that it was written
by Barnabas the Levite of Cyprus, the companion of S. Paul. Later
criticism however, with very few exceptions, has pronounced decidedly

against this view, which indeed is beset with many difficulties. But on
the other hand this work is in no sense apocryphal, if by apocryphal we
mean fictitious. There is no indication, direct or indirect, that the
writer desired to be taken for the Apostle Barnabas. On the contrary,
when he speaks of the Apostles, his language is such as to suggest that
he was wholly unconnected with them ; and he merely addresses his
'sons and daughters.', as a teacher who had i mportant trusts-to^nmr..
municate. How the name of Barnabas came to be attached to the

Epistle, it is impossible to say. An early tradition, or fiction, represents

Barnabas as residing at Alexandria ;
but this story might have been the
consequence, rather than the cause, of the name attached to the letter.

Possibly its author was some unknown namesake of this

'
Son of
Consolation.'
At all events we can hardly be wrong in ascribing to it an Alevandnan
>^A^-
^'^ origin. Its mode of interpretation is Alexandrian throughout; and ijj^

'
Clem. Alex. Strom, ii. 7 (p. 447 ed. is not beyond the reach of doubt. See
Potter), 20 (p. 489), V. 10 (p. 683). also Strom, ii. 15, p. 464, where Bar-
^
Clem. Alex. Paed. ii. 10 (p. 220, 221 nabas is mentioned by name.
ed. Potter). It is true that the reference
 THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS. 505

earliest receptioji^^as. we ha ve_seen ,

is connected with this Church.
The beginnings of Christianity at Alexandria are wrapped in obscurity.
It would be as rash to reject confidently, as to adopt confidently, the

tradition which represents Mark, the 'cousin' of Barnabas, as its

evangelist. But on the other hand it seems certain that the Alexandrian
Church was a flourishing community at an early date. Doubtless
Apollos was not the only learned Jew of Alexandria,' who was brought
*

to the knowledge of the Gospel during the lifetime of S. Paul. The

Epistle to the steeped in the learning of Alexandria, and
Hebrews is

was probably written by a member of this Church. When Hadrian

visited this city in the autumn of a.d. 130, he found the Christian
Church an appreciable influence in society, extending itself and pros-
I have become famiUar with Egypt, which
'

elytizing in all directions.

you praised to me,' he writes to his brother-in-law Servianus afterwards ;

'
fickle, uncertain, blown about by every gust of rumour.
it is Those
who worship Serapis are Christians, and those are devoted to Serapis
who call themselves bishops of Christ. There is no ruler of a synagogue
there,no Samaritan, no Christian presbyter, who is not an astrologer,
a soothsayer, a quack. The patriarch himself, whenever he comes to
Egypt, compelled by some to worship Serapis, by others to worship
is

Christ
'

(Vopiscus Vita Saturnini 8). No stronger testimony to the

growing power of the Christian Church could be desired than these
sarcasms of the sceptical emperor. Xllfi tJpistlp "f Barnnhas may.Lp-
jegarde d as a product of these conflicts bet ween. J ews; and Christians,
.which Hadri an her e describes^ Th e antagonism b e.tv
pipmpnt whirh mndp up the population of AlexanHrin., i^^ n
';
]

hist ory ; and gener al melee the fe uds betwppn Jpws; nnd Chrititmn^
in the

f(^l_s ome generatio ns bore no insi gnificant p art. ^

The birthpl ace of this Epistle then seem s tolerably certain ;

but its

Hatp pinrp nppn tn flis^piig

ic;
It^was-Certajnly \mtten after the first v-^s^
d estruction of Jerusalem und er Ti tu^ tr> whirh it nllndpt;, and it was
alniost as certainl y written hpfnrp thp war nndpr Hadrian end ing in the -

^
second d^evastation,_about which it is silent, but to which it cauld hardly
have Jailed to refer, if w ritten aften^Qi-during-the conflict Th e po ssib e l

Jimits therefore are A.n. yn and A.r^ 13A: It would be mere waste of

time to discuss any theories which go beyond these boundaries. But

within this period of sixty years various dates have been assigned to it.

Among the advocates of an earlier date we may single out Weizsacker,

who places it under
Vespasian (a.d. 69 79); while Volkmar, who
throws it forward to the time of Hadrian (a.d. 119 138), may be
taken to represent the champions of the late date. Of the intermediate
506 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
position, occupied by several critics of reputation, Hilgenfeld may be
regarded as a typical champion, who dates it during the reign of Nerva
(a.d. 96 98).
The conclusion depends mainly on the interpretation of two pas-
sages in the Epistle itself.
The first is the more important. The writer warns his readers that
*
the last scandal, or offence, is at hand/ in other words that the great
and final conflict, which
destined to try the faith of the believers,
is

is fast approaching, and he calls their attention to the signs of the last

days, as foretold in Daniel, in the following words :

'And so also says the prophet; Ten kingdoms shall reign tipon the
earthy a?id after them shall rise up a little king, who shall lay low three of
the kings in one (rpcis v^ %v tcSv /3acrtXeW). In like manner Daniel saith
concerning the same; Aiid I saw the fourth beast wicked and strong and
untoward beyond all the beasts of the earth, and how that ten horns sprang

up out of it, and out of them a little horn {as) an offshoot (7rapa<f>vd8Lov),
and how that it laid low three of the great horns in one (vcf> tv rpia tQv

fieydXiDv KepctTcov). Ye ought therefore to understand

'

( 4).
The first passage is taken from Daniel vii. 24: the second from an
earher verse in the same chapter. But, like the Old Testament citations
in this writer generally, they are quoted with a degree of freedom which

is, or ought to be, highly suggestive when we come to deal with

evangelical quotations in the earHest fathers.
Of the interpretation the so-called Barnabas says nothing. He is
evidently referring to the Roman emperors, and common prudence
therefore gags his lips, when he would speak of their overthrow. He
leaves the solution to the intelligence of his hearers.
When we attempt to read the enigma, we must remember that the
writer applies to his own times language which was intended to describe
something wholly different. We may therefore expect to find some
wresting of the imagery to adapt it to contemporary events. But on
the other hand it must have exhibited coincidences sufficiently patent to
strike the ordinary mind. Otherwise the writer would not have ventured
to leave the appHcation of the prophecy to his readers. He must have
discarded the prophecy as unfit for his purpose unless it had told
its own tale, if he did not venture to expand it. And again ; we may
lonk for the key tn thp p-ypnsition in those mndificatiQ.ns- o the. original -
words whi rh flip wrifpr intrnrlnrpc:.. ..The most important of these-JS-lhe.-

twice-repeated expression v<f> h

'in one' or 'at onc.'_ Ihe.originaL

PI"-Phf^y contains nn hint that thp fhrpp JdngS shall suffer at-jOnce-XiE..
are closely connec ted_tQgtlir Lastly > iheJittle JiorilJlj Jhe origipal .^
 THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS. 507

.prQp.heQ:_-is_plainly- the Antichrist ; for he. is riesr rihpri as maVjng

war against the. Saints and prpvailing ag ainst l-h/rn,^ until th<?.Anrii?n^..^^
J3ays_came>. an.d iiidgin.ent_ffias_given to the Saints nf the Mn,st High ^
and the time came that the Saints possessed the Jdngdoni. .(vii. 21, 22).
This fact was too patent to be overlooked, and is recognised in all
patristic interpretations of the
prophecy. It is impossible therefore to

suppose that our Barnabas could have interpreted the little horn in any
other way. Bearing these conditions of the problem in mind, we may
proceed to investigate three solutions of the enigma which have been
offered.
1, In the first place then Weizsiicker reckons the ten Csesars from
Julius to Vespasian continuously, Vespasian being the tenth. So far he
adopts the simple and natural reckoning. But he supposes Vespasian
to be the little horn, and the three kings humbled by him to be Galba,

Otho, Vitellius. These identifications must be discarded for several

reasons. In the first place Vespasian is made the little horn, while at
the same time he is one of the great horns. Next; Vespasian, though
he humbled Vitellius, can in no sense be said to have humbled Galba
and Otho. Indeed, so far was this from being the case, that Vespasian
throughout identified himself with the cause of Galba, and the first
measure of his reign was the vindication of the memory of this prince

(Tac. H/sf. ii. 6, iv. 40). Lastly; this interpretation altogether sets
aside the distinctive character of the little horn as the Antichrist.

Vespasian was never so regarded by the Christians. During his reign

they had an entire immunity from persecution, and so rapidly did their
influence grow that they even made converts in the imperial family
itself. To a strongly Antijudaic writer, like Barnabas, more e specially
the srmirgp nf the J ews and the instriiment .of God's
Vespasian,
vengeance pnja.rebeLliQus_peQple, must have been regarded in a directly
"Opposite light.
2. Hilgenfeld reckons Domitian as the tenth king. He omits

Julius as not having been an emperor strictly so called, and Vitellius as

never having been recognised in Egypt. The little horn according to

his solution is Nerva, a feeble and insignificant prince, who subverted
the dynasty of the three great emperors of the Flavian family
Vespasian, Titus, Domitian. But this theory again is open to very
serious and (as it seems to me) fatal objections. In the first place
there is no parallel elsewhere to this mode of reckoning, which makes
Domitian the tenth, and not the twelfth of the Caesars. Whatever
might be said in favour of excluding Julius from the enumeration, the
exclusion of Vitellius is indefensible. It is a mistake to maintain that
5o8 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
he was never recognised by the Alexandrians. True, his name does not
occur, or at least has not yet been discovered, on the hieroglyphic
monuments of Egypt ; but, as his reign only lasted a few months, this

proves nothing. His name is equally conspicuous by its absence in the

Latin Inscriptions of Asia, of Greece, of Thrace and Illyricum, of
Cisalpine Gaul, of Spain, of Britain, and throughout the whole collection
of Greek Inscriptions. On the other hand, as an evidence that he was
recognised in Egypt, we have coins of this reign struck at Alexandria.
And in the SibylUne Oracles, which in some cases at least emanated
from he has his proper place \ The Hsts of the Roman
this country,

'kings' which they give begin with Julius and include Vitelhus, ac-
cording to the ordinary practice. As Vitellius, like Otho, was duly ac-
knowledged by the Senate, and took possession of the Capital, no one at
a subsequent period would have disputed his claim to appear in the list.
This sanction gave to Otho and Vitellius a position in history which was
never accorded to pretenders like Civilis.
Moreover this theory fails, Hke the last, in not recognising the little
horn as the Antichrist. The
persecution, which had harassed the
Christians under Domitian, ceased under Nerva, for whose memory in

consequence they always had a kindly regard, as their benefactor.

Hilgenfeld therefore obliged altogether to ignore the Antichrist in
is

his interpretation. Nor again could Nerva be said without excessive

straining of language to destroy the three kings 'in one' or 'at
once.' Vespasian, the earliest, and Titus the next of the Flavii, died in
their beds seventeen and fifteen years
respectively before the accession
of Nerva.

3. The solution of Volkmar is exposed to still greater ob-

jections than the two theories which have been considered hitherto.
Like Hilgenfeld, he omits Julius and Vitellius, so as to reckon
Domitian the loth king; but he takes the three kings to be the three
successors of this last-named emperor, Nerva, Trajan, and Hadrian.
They are said to be three in one, because Trajan was adopted by
Nerva, and Hadrian by Trajan. The writer therefore, living in the
time of Hadrian, looks forward to the appearance of the Antichrist in
the person of Nero or Domitian redivivus, who shall crush Hadrian
and end the dynasty. This theory has the merit of seeing the Anti-
christ in the little horn ;
but this is its only advantage. Its enumeration
of the Cffisars is exposed to the same objection as the last ; and its
explanation of the three kings in one seems altogether impossible.
Nerva had been already dead for twenty or thirty years on this

^
Orac. Sibyl, v. 35, viii. 50, xij. 95.
 THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS. 509

hypothesis, and yet the writer is looking forward to the advent of a

conqueror who shall smite and humiliate him. Again ; the connexion
of these three emperors was very slight, the adoption of the successor
in each case having been made shortly before the death of the pre-
decessor. And though this seems to be a less serious objection than
the preceding, the three kings are enumerated over and above the ten,
whereas the language suggests that they were in some sense comprised
in the ten.
The solution, which I venture to offer, has not, so far as I am aware,
been given before. We enumerate the ten Caesars in their natural
sequence with Weizsacker, and we arrive at Vespasian as the tenth. We
regard the three Flavii as the three kings destined to be humiliated,
with Hilgenfeld. We do not however with him contemplate them as
three separate emperors, but we explain the language as referring to
the reigning sovereign, Vespasian, associating his two sons Titus and
Domitian with himself in the exercise of the supreme power. At no
other point in the history of the imperial household do we find so close
a connexion of three in one, until a date too late to enter into
consideration. And lastly ; we interpret the little horn as symbolising
the Antichrist with Volkmar,and we explain it by the expectation of
Nero's reappearance which we know to have been rife during the reign
of Vespasian. No other epoch in the history of the Cassars presents
this coincidence of the three elements in the image the ten kings, the
three kings, and the Antichrist so appropriately. For these reasons
we are led to place the so-called Barnabas during the reign of
Vespasian (a.d. 70 79).
The enumeration of the ten kings speaks for itself; but the
significance of the three kings requires some illustration. When Ves-
pasian assumed the supreme dignity, the power of the empire was
sustained by Titus among the legions, while it was represented by
Domitian in the capital (Tac. Hist, iii, 84, iv. 2, 3). The three were
thus associated together in the public mind, as no three persons
had been associated before in the history of the Empire. Immediately
on the accession of their father the two young men were created
Caesars by the Senate and invested with the title of 'Principes Juven-
tutis.' The first act of Vespasian was to associate Titus with himself as
colleague in the consulship, while Domitian was made praetor with
consular power. Several types of coin, struck during this reign,
exhibit the effigy of the reigning emperor on the obverse with figures
of Titus and Domitian on the reverse in various attitudes and with
various legends. An extant inscription, on a marble (Eckhel Dodr,
 5IO EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
Num. VI. p. which has apparently served as a base for three
320 sq),
busts, commemorates the emperor and his two sons in parallel
columns, Vespasian's name and titles occupying the central column.
'Along this path (to glory)', says the elder Pliny {N. H. ii. 5) 'now
advances with godlike step, accompanied by his sons, Vespasianus
Augustus the greatest ruler of any age.' The association of Titus with
his father's honours was close and continuous. He was seven times
colleague to the emperor in the consulate during the ten years of
Vespasian's reign. He was associated in the Pontificate, the Censor-
ship, and the Tribunician Power, which represented respectively the
religious, the moral, and the political authority of the sovereign. From
the moment of his return to Rome after his Eastern victories '
he never
ceased,' we '
to act the part of colleague and even guardian of
are told,
the empire^' The title Imperator itself was conferred upon him^, so
that the language of the elder Pliny is perfectly correct, when he speaks
of 'imperatores Caesares Vespasiani, pater filiusque' during the life-
time of the father^. On the other hand the
relations of Vespasian
towards his younger son were never cordial. But the good nature and
generosity of Titus interposed to prevent any open breach between the
two. He represented to his father that the safety of the empire was
dependent on the harmony of the imperial household and the ;

baseness of Domitian was in consequence overlooked. Coins were

struck, which had on the obverse the two sons of Vespasian, with the
legend tvtela avgvsti*.
. At the triumph after the close of the Judaic
war, 'Vespasian,' says one who witnessed it, 'preceded in a chariot, and
Titus followed, while Domitian rode on horseback by the side, himself

splendidly habited and mounted on a horse which was a sight to see^'

Here then were the very three kings of whom the prophecy spoke.
It is true that the obvious interpretation of the words pointed to three

several kings belonging to the ten who are mentioned just before, whereas
the so-called Barnabas found the three combined in one of the ten
together with his sons and colleagues in the kingship. But this mani-
pulation was forced upon him by the stubbornness of contemporary
facts ; and he calls attention to it by repeating the expression three in '

one,' which has no place in the original.

But what will be the end of this threefold kingship ? It would be

^
Suet. Tit. 6 neque ex eo destitit pare JV. H. ii. to.
3 gg Titus himself is called Titus Im-
participem atque [etiam] tutorem imperii
agere. Compare Plin. Paneg. 2. perator Caesar, JV. H. ii. 22.
2 *
But not as a prsenomen, Eckhel vi. Eckhel vi. 329.
361 sq. See Pliny N. ff. vii. 50; com-
^
Joseph. B.J. vii. 5. 5.
 THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS. 511

treason to give utterance to the thought which was passing through his
mind. He therefore leaves the riddle to the intelHgence of his readers.
And he might safely do. Ever since the reported death of Nero,
this

expectation had been rife on the subject of his reappearance. He was

thought to live retired beyond the Euphrates, where he was watching
his opportunity to swoop down upon the Roman Empire and avenge
himself on his enemies'. The wish was father to the thought. For
Nero, monster though he was, possessed some popular qualities which
made him a favourite with the masses. One after another pretender
took advantage of this expectation. One false Nero started up im-
mediately under Galba. He was caught at Cythnus and put to death ;

but it was thought necessary to take his body to Rome that the public
mind might be disabused". A second appeared about a.d. 80 under
Titus, gathered followers on the banks of the Euphrates, and ultimately
fled for refuge to the Parthians^. A
third, if he be not the same with
the last mentioned, threatened the peace of the Roman Empire under
Domitian about a.d. 88*. Even in the early years of the second cen-
tury Dion Chrysostom could still write, To the present time all men
'

desire him to be alive, and the majority even trust that he is\' This
belief chimed in with the Christian expectation of the speedy coming
of Antichrist and the end of all things. This persecutor of the dis-
prodigy of wickedness and audacity who outraged humanity
ciples, this
and defied nature, the son who murdered his mother, the engineer
who would sever the Isthmus and join the two seas who could he be
but the very man of sin, the Antichrist, or the forerunner of the Anti-
christ? Accordingly in an early apocryphal writing, the Ascension of
'
Isaiah, it is said that in the last days Belial shall appear in the form of
a man, of the king of unrighteousness, of the matricide,' and shall per- '

secute the Church^' In this respect Christian anticipation only kept

pace with Jewish. Two Sibylline Oracles, which date about a.d. 80
both apparently Jewish, and one of them written in Egypt dwell on
this expected return of the matricide, this final scourge of the human
race, which shall precede the advent of Messiah's reign ; and from these
earlier Sibylline Oracles it is transmitted to the later. The belief in-
deed lingered on for several centuries. In the age of Jerome and
Augustine some were still found to entertain this opinion. Even S.
Martin of Tours himself is credited with it by a contemporary and
'
Suet. Ner. 57. Dion. Chrysost. Orat. xxi (p. 504 ed.
2 Tac. Hist. ii. 8, 9. Reiske).
Zonaras xi. 18 (p. 578). iv. z ed. Dillmann, 1877).
sq (p. 17
4
Suet. Ner. 57.
512 EPISTLES OF S. CLEMENT.
friend. But it was during the continuance of the Flavian dynasty that
the expectation was at a white heat.
Here then was the little horn of Daniel. What more appropriate ?

The little horn is represented as springing up from the ten, and yet not
counting as one of the ten. It is in fact an offshoot, an excrescence.

Hence our Barnabas, with his own interpretation of the prophecy in

'
his mind, unconsciously quotes this word '
excrescence {napa^vaBiov),
as if it were part of the text.
 INDICES.

CLEM. II. 33
 I. INDEX OF SCRIPTURAL PASSAGES.

II. INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER.

 INDEX OF SCRIPTURAL PASSAGES.

The asterisks mark the passages in which the resemblance is close, and
which therefore are printed in the text as quotations.

(i) The Epistle of S. Clement of Rome.

Genesis i-
9 20 Job 'V. II 59
*i. 26, 27, 28 3.^ *v. I7sq 57
*" 23 6 *xi. 2, 3 26
*iv. 3 sq 4 *xiv. 4, 5 17
xn. I
sq 10 *xv. 15 39
xiii. 14 10 *xix. 26 26
*xiii. i4sq 10 xxviii. 25 20
*xv. 6, 6 lo, y- *xxxviii. 10, II 20
*xviii. 27 17 Psalms n. 7 36
xxii. 2 10 *iii. 5 26
xxii. 17 32 *xi (xii). 3 sq 15
xxvi. 4 32 *xvii (xviii). 25, 26 46
Exodus *ii. 14 4 *xviii (xix). i sq 27
*iii. II 17 *xxi (xxii). 6sq r6
*iv. 10 17 *xxii (xxiii). 4 26
*vi. I 60 *xxiii (xxiv). i
54
*xiv. 23, 26, 28 51 *xxvii (xxviii). 7 26
*xxxii. 10, 31, 32 53 *xxx (xxxi). 19 15
Leviticus xvin. 3 r xxxi (xxxii). 1,2 50
XX. 23 I *xxxi (xxxii). 10 22
Numbers *xii. 7 ^/) 43 *xxxii (xxxiii). 13 59
xvi. 22 59 *xxxii (xxxiii). 10 59
xviii. 27 29 *xxxiii (xxxiv). 20 22
xxvii. 16 59 *xxxiii (xxxiv). 11 sq 22
Deuteronomy *iv. 34 ...
29 *xxxvi (xxxvii). 36 sq 14
*vii. 9 60 *xxxix (xl). 3 60
*ix. 12 sq 53 *xlviii (xlix). 14 51
*xiii. 18 60 *xlix (1). 14, 15 52
*xiv. 2 64 *xlix (1). 16 sq 35
*xxxii. 8, 9 ... 29 *1 (li). isq 18
*xxxii. 14, 15 3 *lxi(lxii). ^ 15
*xxxii. 39 59 Ixvi (Ixvii). I 60
Joshua ii.
3sq 12 *lxviii (Ixix). 31, 32 52
I Samuel *ii. 10 13 *lxxvii (Ixxviii). 36, 37 ..
15
*xiii. 14 18 *lxxxviii (Ixxxix). 21 .. .. 18
1
Kings *ix. 4 60 *xcix (c). 2 59
2 Kings *xix. 19 59 *cii (ciii). 10, 11 8
Job *i. I
17 *ciii (civ). 4 36
*iv. i6sq 30 *cix (ex). I 36
*v. I sq 30 *cxvii (cxviii). 18

332
5i6 INDEX OF SCRIPTURAL PASSAGES.
Psalms *cxvii (cxviii). 19,20 48 S. Mark *vii. 6 15
*cxviii (cxix). 114 59 *ix. 42 46
*cxviii (cxix). 133 60 *xiv. 21 46
*cxxx (cxxxi). I 7 S. Luke i.
14 63
*cxxxviii (cxxxix). 7 sq ... ?8 *vi. 36sq 13
*cxxxix (cxl). 15 38 xii. 14 4
*cxl(cxli). 5 57 *xiii. 5 24
*cxliv (cxlv). 8 60 S. John X. 9 48
Proverbs *i. 23sq 57 xiv. 15 49
*ii. 21, 22 14 xvii. 3 59
*iii. 12 56 xvii.17 60
*iii. 34 30 Acts *xiii. 22 18
*vii. 3 2 *xx. 35 2
*x. 12 49 XX. 35 13
*xx. 27 21 xxiii. I
41
*xxiv. 12 34 Romans i. 21 36, 51
Isaiah *i. i6sq 8 i-
29sq 35
*iii- 5 3 " 24 47
*vi. 3 34 IV. 7sq 50
*xiii. II 59 vi. isq 33
*xiii. 32 23 1 Cor. i. I, 2 pref.
*xxvi. 20 50 i.
losq 47
*xxix. 13 15 *" 9 34
*xl. 10 34 ii. 10 40
xli. 8 10, 17 ix. 24 5
li. 16 60 X. 24, 33 48
*lvii. 15 59 xii. 8, 9 48
*lix. 14 3 xii. i2sq 37
*lx. 17 42 xii. 30 37
29,
*lxii. II 34 xiii. 4, 7 49
*lxiii. I
sq 16 XV. 23 37
*lxiv- 4 34 XV. 36 24
*lxvi. 2 13 xvi. II 65
Ixvi. 16 II xvi. 17 38
Jeremiah *iii.
19, 22 8 2 Cor. X. 13, 14 41
*ix. 23, 24 13 xi. 23sq 5
xviii.
14 20 Galatians iii. i 2
*xxi. ro 60 Ephesians i. 1
7 sq 59
Ezekiel *xviii. 30sq 8 iv. 4sq 46
*xxxiii. sq I 8 iv. 18 36
xxxiv. 16 59 V. 21 38
*xxxvii. 12 50 Philippians i.
27 3
xlviii. 12 29 i- 30 7
Daniel *vii. 10 34 ii- 30 38
Malachi *iii. i 23 iii.
9 50
Judith *ix. II 59 iii- 14 5
xiii. 15 55 jv. 15 47
xvi. 5 55 Colcssians ii. i 2
Wisdom *ii. 24 3 1
Timothy i.
17 61
*xii. 12 27 ii-
3 7
Ecclus. *xvi. 18, 19 59 ii.
7 60
xxviii. 14 6 ii. 8.. 29
S. Matthew *v. 7 13 iii-
9 45
*vii. I, 2 13 iii. 10 42
vii. 13, 14 48 v. 21 21
*xiii. 3 24 2 Timothy i.
3 45
*xv. 8 13 iv. 6 44
*xviii. 6, 7 46 Titus ii. 5 I

*xxvi. 24 46 *iii. I 2
S. Mark *iv. 3 24 Hebi-ews i.
3 27
*iv. 26 sq 23 *i- 3> 4, 5' 7. 13 36
 517
INDEX OF SCRIPTURAL PASSAGES.
"v. 20 49
16 James
Hebrews i. 8 2 P>V-
17 I Peter i.
iii. 1 ... 7
i-
43 19
*iii. 5 ii. I
... 30
21
iv. 12 ii- 36, 59
27 9
vi. 18 61
12 ii. 13. 15
ix. 19 2
..
^7
ii. 17
X. 23 iv. 8 ....
... 49
xi. 5 9 ... 38
20 iv. 10 ....
xi. 10 ....
2
iv. 19
17
xi. 37 *v. 5 ... 30
xii. I 13. 19. 63 .... 38
V. 5
xii. 6, 7 .... 56
V- 9
xii. 64
9 2 Peter i. 2 prej.
xii. 7
17 i. 17 ... 9
1
10
xiii. 7
I ii^
5
xiii. 7 iii. 2 .. 44
I
xiii. i7i 24' iv. 18 49> 50
21 I John
xiii. 21 ... 34
21 Revelation *xxii. 12
iv. 16 '

James 30

(2)
An Ancient Homily.

S. Luke *viii. 21 ....

*i.
14
Genesis 27 *x. 3
VI. 9
4
Psalms xii. 4, 5
Ixxi (Ixxii). 5, 17 17
*xiii. ...
16 27
Proverbs *x. 12 *xvi. 10 ...

*xxix. 13 3
Isaiah 16 *xvi. 13
*xxxiv. 4 xix. 10 ...

xl. II
4
13 Acts iii- 19
*lu- 5 iv.
2 19
*liv. I
V.
15 29
*lviii. 9 V. 31
17
*lxvi. i8sq Romans iv. i?
*lxvi. /> 17
24 vii. 8, II..
8
Jeremiah
xviii. 4sq 6 ix. 21
Ezekiel *xiv. Hsq I I Cor. ii-
9
Hosea ii- i
16 ix. 24, 25
Malachi *iv. i
vi. 10
17 Galatians
S. Matthew iii. 12
6 Ephesians*i. 23
*vi.24 *iv. 17, 18
'vu. 21 vi. 6
*ix. 13 iii. 22
5 Colossians
x. 28
3 I Timothy i.
17 .

*x. 32 iv. 16 ....

*xii. 9
49 6 Hebrews
*xvi. 26 ....
8
XXV. 21, 23.
6
XXV. 46 ....
S. Mark *ii. 17
6
*viii. 36 ..

ix. 17
43
17
S. Luke iii. 17
*vi. 32, 13
35
 II.

INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER.

Abbreviations employed, 4 Alcibiades and the Book of Elchasai,

Abdo and Sennes, martyrs, 363 3?3 sq
Abraham; in Clement's Epistle, 43 sq; Alcinous, heretic, 347, 396
his title 6 (piXos, 43, 6^ Alexander HI at S. Denis, 468
Abulides, Egyptian name for Hippoly- Alexandrian Church, its origin and early
tus, 401, 477 character, 504 sq
Abundius, Abundus; in the Laurentian Alexandrian MS, Clementine matter in
Acts, 353, 469 sq, 472 sq; his burial- the; title, 191, 198 sq; mutilations
place, 469 ; Ado of Vienne on, 360 ; and lacunos, 240, 263 sq; corruptions,
inscription relating to, 351 57, no, 124, 138, 232 sq; first ex-
Acontus, a martyr of Portus, depositio of, plicit mention of 2 [Clement] as the
355' 475 work of Clement of Rome in, 193, 200
Aden ;
never called Portus Romanus, Almsgiving, its importance in 2 [Clement],
429; its usual name, 429; not the 251
see of Hippolytus, 429 Alogi, the name perhaps traceable to
Ado of Vienne ; on the martyrdom of Hippolytus, 394
Laurence and Hippolytus, 357 sq, Ambrose (S.), his literary obligations to
448, 450, 471 sq; source of his in- Hippolytus, 413
formation, 473 Ambrosius, Origen's 'task-master', 330;
Agapitus, in the Laurentian Acts, 353, confused by Photius with Hippolytus,
354. 357 348,423.
Ager Veranus its position, 442
; the ; Amphilochius, metrical list of the scrip-
name, 442 sq; cemeteries at, 442 sq ; tures by, 407, 408, 413
burial-place of Hippolytus, 440, 442 ; Anacolutha in Clement's Epistle, 11
probably on his property there, 441, Anastasius Apocrisiarius, on a spurious
443; his statue discovered in, 463 sq; Hippolytean work, 344, 403 sq
other martyrs buried there, 462 con- ; Anastasius of Sinai ; quotes Hippolytus,
fused medieval use of the term, 443, 345, 421 on the Eternal Church, 245 sq
;

463; De Rossi's excavations, 443, 453, Ancient Homily; see Cormthians, Second
463 inscriptions found at, 464 history
; ;
Clementine Epistle to the
of Hippolytus' basilica there, 444 sq, Andreas of Caesarea, mentions Hippo-
451 sq, 459 the basilica disinterred, 452,
; lytus, 340
464 Hippolytus' bones translated from,
; Andreas the presbyter; restored Hippo-
35 1 sq, 459, 467 sq other reliques trans-
;
lytus' basilica, 454, 465 perhaps prior
;

ferred and the cemetery riiled, 351 sq, of the title of the third ecclesiastical
459 sq, 463, 468 sq commemorative in-
; region, 465
scription, 351, 459, 462, 469; inedieval Antichrist, treatise of Hippolytus on ;
acts and guide books written for pil- notices, 330, 345, 348, 349; extant,
grims to, 463, 473; the Laurentian 398, 405 character, 398 ; date, 398 ;
;

Acts linked with, 468 ; the expression
juxta Nympham, 359, 472
Agnes (S.); her cemetery, 443, 445, 451
her day, 451; Prudentius' poem on,
-445, 451; her connexion with other
martyrs commemorated by Prudentius,
445. 451
Nero as Antichrist in Barnabas, 507,
508, 509; in other documents, 511 sq
; Antipodes, early fathers on the, 73
Apocalypse of Elias, xo6
Apocalypse of S. John; not considered
by the Gaius of Proclus the work of
Cerinthus, 381 ; hence no argument
 INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER. 519
against the identification of Gains and ddpavcTTOi, 171
Hippolytus, 386 sq ; Hippolytus' view, aifMara, plur., 68
394 ; Dionysius of Alexandria mistaken, dlvov aiihvLOv, 231
386; how far Gwynn's discovery modi- aiperl^eiv, 244
fies this argument, 388 dKovri^eiv, 66
Apocryphal quotations in Clement, 39, aKpoywviaios, of Christ, 486
52, 64, 80, 95, 139, 141; in 2 dXrjOeia(i]), 195, 216, 257, 260

[Clement], 218, 219, 227, 235, 236 sq dWdrpios, d\\6<pv\os, 38

Apocryphal writings ascribed to O. T. dXl'TTT/TOJ, 2^g

prophets, 39 sq invented by Gnostics,

; d/xp\vciJTreiv , d/xjiXvuTTeiv, 21
106 d/xeTafieXriros, d/j.eTa/xe\T^TUs, 19, 169
Apollinarian expressions anticipated in d/xv-qa-iKaKos, 16, 182
early orthodox writings, 1 4 sq &IJ.u}/j.os, 102, III, 126
Apollinaris, a notice of Hippolytus wrong- dvayvos, 96
ly ascribed to, 328, 431 sq dvaypa(pri, 89
Apollonius on the character of Domitian, 7 dva'gwirvpelv, intrans., 90
Apollos, not reckoned an apostle by dvdXvdis, 135
Clement, 144 dvar^XXeiv, trans., 71
Apostolical Constitutions imitates Cle- ; dvarvXirreiv, 97
ment's Epistle, 5, 70, 71, 125, 134, 171, dfeXei, form, 78
172, 173, 174, 176; Hippolytus' name dvrjKeii', constr., 108, 136, i8i
attached to a form of, 401 sq illustrates ; dvOpuTrapecTKos, 241
2 [Clement], 222, 249; and cites it as dvTLKei/xevos (6), 153
genuine and canonical, 193 dvTi/j,i.crdia, 212, 213, 231, 236
Apt, the sarcophagus at, a testimony to dvTLTrapiXKeiv, 254
Hippolytus' fame, 467 avrlrvTrov, 247
Arabic Catena on the Pentateuch ascribed di/TocpdaX/iieiv, 104
to Hippolytus, 348, 423 d^iovv, constr., 162
Archelaus the deacon, in the Portuensian dbpyrjTos, 69
Acts, 356, 364, 474, 476 direparos, direpavros, 72
Arsis, Assis, the island at Portus, 341 diroKTvveiv, form, 220
Artemon, the treatise against assigned ; dTToXa/jilBdveiv, 228
to Gains, 348, 377; identical with the dwoXiiTpuais, 254
Little Labyrinth, 378, 380, 385, 421; dnovOLa, 9
and the work of Hippolytus, 380 sq; an drroaToXoi. (oi), of writings in N. T., 202,
objection of Salmon's considered, 400 ;

see Little Labyrinth aTrpocrderjs, 155

Ascension of Isaiah ; date, 106; probably dirpoaKOTTU's, 74
extant, 107 not quoted by S. Paul,
; dTrpoauTroXrifiTTTUs, 10
106; makes Nero Antichrist, 511 dpKSTos, 148
Assumption of Moses; an alleged quota- dpaevbdrjXvs, 239
tion in Clement from, 65, 81, 86; on dpx^ybvos, accent, 172
the phoenix, 85 ; minor reference to. dpx^ Tov evayyeXiov, 143
dpxi-epevs, of Christ, iii, 123
Athletic metaphors in 2 [Clement], 223 sq dcre^rjs, 174
Atlantis, 73 dcro(pos, 258
Augustine (S.), on S. Matt. xvi. 18, 19, acTTrtXos, 228
482, 483 daroxel^'', 256
Aurea, in the Portuensian Acts, 362, 474; drr)p.eXeiv, i r6
see Chryse avdevTiKov, 247
avTeiraLveTo^., 97
d^avavcrus, 134 d<t)y]Keiv, 93
dyadoTTOua, dyaOoTroidu, 17, 232 d(f>iXo^evia, 109
dyaOoTrjs, 243 d<popiJ.r]v bi.b6vai., Xafi^dveiv, 250
dyi6ypa(pa, titles applied to the, 92, 167
ayioi. (ol), 163 Babylon; in S. Peter's Epistle, 491 sq;
dyLOTTp^irrj^, 52 as a name for Rome, 492
dyvuiala, 171 Balaam, the Blessings o(, 343, 389, 400,
dyuiy-q, 144, 145 402
dy<l>v and alihv confused in MSS, 223 Baptism, called cnppayis, 201, 226
d5e\(f>6Tris, 18 Baralas, Barulas, in the story of Roma-
ddXeiv with ace, 259 nus, 446 sq, 449 sq
520 INDEX. OF SUBJECT-MATTER.
Bardenhewer, 366, 391, 393
Barnabas, the Epistle of; its character,
503 ; author, 503 sq ; canonicity, 504 ;
country, 504 sq date, 55 ^^. 5 t^^^t
;
passages as to date, 506 theory of
Weizsacker, 505, 507; Hilgenfeld, 506,
507 Volkmar, 505, 508 sq
;
the theories
criticised and date suggested, 509 the
threefold kingship and the coming of
Antichrist explained, 509 sq
Baronius, 373, 477
Basil (S.) quotes Clement, 140, 169
Bensly and the Syriac Version of the
Clementine Epistles, 36, 47, 69, 147,
158, 176, 215, 255, 257
_
437. 439;. his cemetery, 328, 442, 451;
his portrait extant, 441
Canon; in the time of Clement, 205 sq ;
of 2 [Clement], 202, 204, 205 sq, 242,
; 245 sq
Canons ascribed to Hippolytus, 401 sq
; Carpophorus, Callistus' master, 320 sq
; Caspari, 367, 401 sq, 403, 407
Cassianus, picture seen by Prudentius
representing the martyrdom of, 450,
453
Cassianus, Julius; quotes the Gospel of
the Egyptians, 207, 236 sq, 238, 239;
his controversy with Clement of Alex-
andria thereon, 207, 236, 239

Benson, Archbishop, on Hippolytus, 367, Cemeteries; (i) of S. Agnes, 443, 445,

453' 466 451; (2) of Callistus, position, burials
Bero, a spurious Hippolytean work a- and commemorations, 328, 442, 451;
gainst, 345, 346, 403 sq (3) of Cyriace, name, 469, 472; posi-
Bianchini, 367, 399 tion, 442 sq, 469; called the Cemetery
Bilt (S.); French name for Hippolytus, of S. Laurence, 442 sq; basilica of S.
477 ;
the Abbey of, 467 Laurence at, 442 sq; the church of S.
Bishops, itinerant and extra-diocesan, 432 Stephen at, 341, 459; saints and popes
sq ; illustrated by the episcopate of buried in, 442, 469, 471 ; reliques trans-
Hippolytus, 432 sq ferred from the cemetery of Hippolytus
Bito, 185, 187, 305 to, 351 sq, 459, 468; commemorative
Book of Jubilees, 44, 94 inscription, 351, 459, 469; (4) of Hip-
Bostra; Hippolytus associated by Gela- polytus see Ager Veranus
;

sius with the see of, 340, 428; the error Censurianus,in the Portuensian Acts, 361,
traced, 327, 331, 428 364, 474 sq
bravium, 28 Cerinthus as author of the Apocalypse of
Brescia, i-eliques of Hippolytus in S. Julia S. John, 381, 386 sq
at,468 Chair of Hippolytus, 324 sq, 395, 400,
Bryennios ;
his edition of Clement, 47, 412, 419 sq, 440, 463 sq; see further
172, 178, 181, 234, 243, 244, 257; Hippolytus of Partus
criticised, 14, 21, 30, 38, 77, 78, 90, 96, Chiliasm in Hippolytus and other early
129, 148, 158, 172, 177, 182, 224, 233, writers, 387 sq
245, 260; assigns 2 [Clement] to Cle- Christology; of Clement, 13 sq, 57, 91,
ment of Rome, 204 sq 102, 205; of 2 [Clement], 200, 205,
Bucher, 399 211, 230, 248; of other early writers,
Bucina; mentioned in the Liber Pontifi- T3 sq
calis, 340; its position, 340; the read- Chronica of Hippolytus; notices of, 325,
ing of the passage, 340 395, 421; identification of, 399, 419;
Bunsen, 34, 132, 134, 367, 378, 385, 395, date of, 437
397, 402, 403, 404, 427, 428, 430I Chronicon Paschale; quotes Hippolytus,
344, 403, 421; a passage wrongly
ascribed in, 344
^dvavcros, 149
to iepojaijvT], 179
Chronology of our Lord's life in Hippoly-
/SacrtXeia, opposed tus' system, 391 sq
jSacrtXetoj', 222
180 Chryse, in the Poiluensian Acts, 361,
j3acn\e{)s tGiv aluivinv,
364 sq, 4/4 sq
^dros, gender, 64
Chrysostom on Romanus, 446, 448
j8tj8\ia (rot) of O. T., 202, 245 Claudius Ephebus, 185, 187, 305
/3tos, 213 Claudius Gothicus, in the spurious Acts
^Xdwreiv, 260 of Hippolytus, 471, 474
pXacrcpri/xeiv, 9
Claudius, in the Laurentian Acts, 358,

Cain, meanings given to the name, 22
Callinicus the tribune, in the Acts of
Laurence, 362
Callistus, bishop of Rome; his life and
relations to Hippolytus, 320 sq, 431 sq,
Clemens, Flavins, his relations to Clement
of Rome, 8
Clement of Alexandria; quotes Clement
of Rome, 4, 9, 39, 42, 52, 54, 55, 56,
62, 65, 72, 75, 77, 93, 104, III, 116,
 INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER. 521
I2T, 127, 140, 141, 145, 146 sq, 149, Corinthians, Second Clementine Epistle
164, 168, 172; his use of the Gospel of to the the title in mss, and deduc-
;

the Egyptians, 207; does not know tions, 191, 198, 211; not the work of
2 [Clement], 192 ; is not its author, 204, Clement, 191 sq, 204 sq; external evi-
206 sq; on S. Peter at Rome, 495 dence, 192 sq; accepted by the Mono-
Clement of Rome see Clement, Epistle
; physites, 193; the appellation 'Epistle
to the Corinthians,' 193 sq; from in-
Clement, mentioned in Ilermas; according ternal evidence a homily, 194 sq, 253;
to Harnack distinct from Clement of probably delivered in Corinth, 197,
Rome, and author of 2 [Clement], 207 sq 224; extempore or from manuscript?
Clement, Epistle of; Mss and Versions, 197; then read publicly and attached
3, 13; other sources of evidence for, to Clement's Epistle, 197 sq; not So-
4; titles, 5; date, 8, 25, 125, 134, 144, ter's letter, nor Dionysius' reply, 196

185; the writer a Hellenist Jew, 23, sq; not by a layman, 195, 253; Har-
205 ; his personal relation to the nack's theory of its Roman origin, 199
Apostles, 25 ;
his mention of S. Peter, sq ; the resemblances to the Shepherd
493; his comprehensiveness, 121 com- ;
of Hermas, 200 sq; date, 201 sq; its
bines the teaching of S. Peter, S. Paul evidence to the canon, 202 sq ortho- ;

and S. James, 47, 97, 100, 149; his doxy of the writer, 202 the form of
;

tolerance, 149, 170; christology, his Gnosticism attacked in, 203 ; acquaint-
'3 sq, 57, 91, 102, 205; the Epistle ance of the author with the writings
known to the author of 2 [Clement], of S. Paul and S. John, 204, 222 with ;

235; the styles compared, 205; the
opening words imitated, 5; translation,
271 sq
Clement, Spurious Epistle of, see Cor-
inthians, Second Clementine Epistle to
the
Clementine Plomilies; imitates Clement,
Clement's Epistle, 235; the author, not
Clement of Rome (Biyennios' view),
204 sq ; not Clement of Alexandria
(Hilgenfeld's view), 206; not the Cle-
ment of Hermas (Harnack's view), 207
sq; a Gentile Christian, 205, 213, 214;
its literary merit, 208; lacunis in the

52; and 2 [Clement], 217, 219; relative archetype of our MS real and supposed,
positions of S. Peter and S. Paul in, 30 233 sq, 245; analysis, 208 sq; transla-
Cleomenes, the Noetian, at Rome, 319 sq tion, 306 sq
Cologne, reliques of Hippolytus at, 468 Cotelier, 143, 215, 216
Compendium against all Heresies an ; Cotterill, 115
early work
of Hippolytus, 414; its Crescentio, Crescentius, Crescentianus,
date, 426 sq not the Philosophumena,
;
in the Laurentian Acts, 353, 358, 471
414; probably survives in a Latin sq
summary in the Praescriptio of ps- Cureton, 193
Tertullian, 386, 414 sq; references to, Cyprian on S. Matt. xvi. 18, 19, 484
400, 413 sq sq; interpolations in the passage, 484
' '

Concordia, the nurse of Hippolytus ; sq

in the Laurentian Acts, 353, 354; in Cyriace ; in the Laurentian Acts, 353,
Ado of Vienne, 359 sq; in Floras- 358, 469 sq, 471 sq; inscription re-
Bede, 357; her burial-place, 351, 469 sq; lating to, 351; gave her name to the
her day, 356, 470; originally 'mulier,' cemetery of S. Laurence, 342, 459;
470 ;
when added to the story of Hip- probably owned the ground, 469; see
polytus, 463 ; her connexion with him Cemeteries
merely local, 470 Cyriacus, the bishop, m the Portuensian
Constantinopolitan corrigenda in the
M.s, Acts, 364, 475, 476 ; in Roman
collation for this edition, 268 martyrologies, 356; in Florus-Bede,
Cooper, B. H., 33 357
Corinth, as a halting-place between the Cyril of Alexandria, on S. Matt. xvi. 18,
East and Rome, 9 19, 482 sq
Corinth, Church at; feuds in the, 20 sq, Cyrilla; in the Laurentian Acts, 353,
43, 120 sq, 133, 143 sq, 158 354, 360, 473; inscriptions relating to,
Corinthians, Pauline Epistles to the ; 351. .352; references to, 353; her
allusions in Clement's Epistle to, 142 identity, 470; her burial-place, 469 sq;
sq; both Epistles known to Clement, date of her martyrdom, 471; her day,
142 sq source of a quotation in
; 471; her connexion with Hippolytus
I Cor. ii.
9, 106 sq local, 471
Corinthians, Epistle of Clement to the; Cyrillus of Scythopolis on Hippolytus,
see Clement, Epistle of 343. 4^1
522 INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER.
KaO^ dipav, 236 Dialogues, early Christian, real and
KULpos and oipa, 122 fictitious characters in, 38 1 sq
KaKo5i.5affKa\eiv, 234 Dionysius of Alexandria, on the Apoca-
Ka\aPpicr/j,6s, KoXa^pos, 120 lypse, 386
Kavwf, 1 1, 36 Dionysius of Corinth ; on the martyrdom
KaravTciv, 34 of S. Peter and S. Paul, 26, 27, 494;
KaTawXetv, 223 the Second Clementine Epistle un-
KaTOLKelu, irapoiKeiv, 5 known to, 192; and not his work, 197
KeKpdyeiv, 105 Dionysius Barsalibi, Hippolytean frag-
KTjpv^, accent and use, 29 ments discovered in, 388, 394
KLcrcrav, 66 Dodwell, 206
KoXa^pl^eiv, 120 Dollinger on Hippolytus of Portus, 368,
;

kottlSlv, 224 403, 427, 430 sq, 440; on Hippolytus

KOfffUKbs, 254 of Antioch, 371 ; on Severina, 397; on
reading, 71
Kpl/xara,, the Treatise against Bero, 404
Kvdpas, Kvdpivos, form, 65 Domitian ; his close association with Ves-
/euros, 71 pasian and Titus in the empire, 509 sq ;

character of the persecution under, 7,

XapiVydara, Hippolytus' treatise respecting, 175; allusions in Clement's Epistle to
400 sq, 421 this persecution, 7, 1 75

Xpaa-dai., form, 221 Donaldson, 133, 195

Xwpa, 128, 150 Domer, 403
Dorotheus the Archimandrite, quotes 2
Damasus, bishop of Rome; his episco- [Clement], 193, 225
pate, 444; inscription on Hippolytus Draseke, 404
by, 328 sq, 424 sq, 444 sq; read by Duobus Geminis Cons, as the date of the
Prudentius, 424; makes Hippolytus a Crucifixion probably due to Hippoly-
;

Novatian, 425, 445; the result of a tus, 391 sq; light thrown on this by
confusion, 425 sq; calls him 'pres- the treatise on Daniel, 391 sq
byter,' 424, 428, 435; other inscrip-
tions of, 375, 464, 500; beautifies the Aai'atSes koL AipKai, 32 sq
basilica of Hippolytus, 329, 444 sq Aavel8, form, 24
Daniel, commentary by Hippolytus on, dernroTT]^, of God the Father, 37
391 sq; patristic notices of, 343, 345, 8rj\os, fern., 239
346, 348, 349, 350 ; Bardenhewer on, dvfiiovpyds, 75, 89, 171
391; Georgiades' discovery of, 391; diavveiv, 88
Kennedy's edition of, 366, 39 1 dievdvveiv, 73, iSo, 181
Davies, 69, 70, 232 dioiKriais, 6
De Magistris, 365, 368, 394, 395, 476 diarayfjioi, 142
De Rossi ; his writings on Hippolytus, Si.ypvx^lv,difvxia, di^vxos, 46, 236, 258
366, 368; discovers inscriptions illus- 5wSeKaaK7}irTpov, 98
trating Hippolytus, 329, 351 sq, 374 5(j]ieKa(pv\ov 162 ,

sq, 443 sq; on the Paschal Tables of duKTU, form, 213

Hippolytus, 399 on his cemetery in the
;

Ager Veranus, 443, 453, 463; on his Ebedjesu, the catalogue of; Hippolytus'
memoria in the Vicus Patricius, 465 ; works 350, 393, 398, 419 sq, 423;
in,
on the picture of his martyrdom seen the Heads against Gaius mentioned in,
by Prudentius, 453; on the Acts of 350, 388; the Little Daniel, 393
Hippolytus, captain of brigands, 373 Ebionites ; attacked in 2 [Clement], 211,
sq; on the Cemetery of Callistus, 374 229; their name, 211 sq; their christo-
sq ; on the day of Concordia, 470 sq logy, 211 sq; their Gospel, 231
Decius; death of the emperor, 362, 364; Elchasai, the book of, 324
in the Laurentian Acts confused with Eldad and Modad ; history of the work.
Gothicus, 471; alleged his wife and So; relation to 2 Peter, 235; quoted
its

daughter martyred, 470 in Clement's Epistle, 65, 80; and in 2

Denis (S.), monastery of; bones of Hip- [Clement], 235
polytus brought to the, 467 ; Alexander Elkanah and Anna, treatise of Hippolytus
HI at the, 468 to, 338, 390, 420
Deuteronomy xxxii. 8, 9, reading of, 93 Encratites and the Gospel of the Egypt-
sq ians, 237 sq, 240
Dialogue with Proclus; see Proclus, Endor, the witch of, Hippolytus' work
Dialogue with on 325, iSO, 400, 412, 420
 INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER. 523
Enoch called 6 diKULOs, 42 e^eptjojcrei/, spelling, 34
Ephcbus, 185, 187, 305 i^eracTfjLos, 168
Epigonus, the pupil of Noetus, 319 e^oXedpeveiv, 54
Epiphanius an alleged allusion to Clem-
; eTTciWr/Xoy, 8
ent's Epistle explained, 62, 117; quotes iirapxos, 114
another passage second-hand probably iire^epyd^eaOai, 145
through Ilegesippus, 158; date of his eTridij/uiia, 220
work against heresies, 4 5 his indebted-
1 ; iwuiKeia, 10, 162, 169, 182
ness to Hippolytus, 413, 415 sq; quotes eTriKaraXXdcraeiv, 145
from the Ebionite Gospel, 231 iinfxovr}, 132
Episcopacy Corinth in Clement's time,
in ewLvofx-f), 132
120 sq, 123, 129, 133 eirt.Tr6d7]Tos, form, 188
Erbes, 372, 429 wi(XK07ros and irpea^^repos in Clement's
Eugenius, in the Laurentian Acts, 353 Epistle, 129
Euripides quoted in Clement's Epistle, in.cTToXr) (i]), where more than one Epistle
115, 116 exists, 142
Eusebius; on 2 [Clement], 192, 199 sq; sTncpdveia, 236
probably knew the work, 199 sq on ; iTrdiTTT]^, 173
Romanus, 446 ; on the works of Hip- epyoTrapeKTris, 104
polytus, 327, 389 sq, 419 sq ; on Hip- epis and kindred words, 20, 140
polytus himself, 326 sq ignorant of ; irepoyvicfjiuv, 46
the facts of Hippolytus' life, 428; on erepoKXivris, 45, 145
Gains, 326 sq, 377 sq, 380 sq, 384; on eiidoKTjais, 18, 123
Hippolytus the brigand, 373 eveiKTiKus, 113
Eusebius the presbyter, in the Portuen- evri/j.epe'iv, evrjfxepia, 232
sian Acts, 364 evdrjs, form, 66
Eustratius, on Hippolytus, 343, 420 evKToios, 188
; apocryphal works
Ezekiel ascribed to, 39, evirpayeiv, 255
40; perhaps quoted by Clement, 39; emrddeLo., 180, 1 88
bipartite division of the canonical book et'xaptcTTta, evxapi-cTTeiv , 124
of, 40 evxv, Trpocrevxv, 126
i(pbdLov, 12, 15
^yypa.<f)os, 139
eyKapdws, 231 r^yefiovLKOv, 66 sq
^yKapiros Kal r^Xeios, 135, 163 Tjyov/iievoL, Trporiyov/xevoi, of Church of-
eyKinrreiv , i2i, 156, 182 ficials, 10, 77, 113
lktlkQs, 113 qdvwddeia, 250, 256
eiXiKpLvQs, 98 Kal fvKTos, order, 17
Tjfjiipas
et's yeveau yeveQv, 180
elaiiKeiv, 236 Fabian, bishop of Rome, divides the city
tKKeKTri Kvpla, 490 sq among the seven deacons, 372
eKXeKrds, 169 familia of Hippolytus, 351, 354, 356, 357,
sKTev^s, 169, 182 359; 470.
KTIKU)S,113 Faustinus, in the Portuensian Acts, 474
eXedf, form, 52 Felicissimus the deacon, in the Lauren-
iWoyi/xos, 170, 182 tian Acts, 357
efJL(pv\aKij^'eiv, 137 Filocalus the calligrapher, 444, 464
eV x'P'. i6i ; iv x^/"'"'''! 223 Fock, 403, 404
eVdXXd^, 48 Fortunatns, 187, 305
eVdperos, 181 Fossombrone, cult of Hippolytus anil
ivdeXexio'fJ.os, 125 Laurence at, 466 sq
ivKardXei/x/xa, 55 Fulrad; brings bones of Hippolytus to
iuoTTTpi^ecrOai, ill France, 467; his abbey St Bilt, 467
ivcTTepvL'geddai, 16 Funk, 440
ivTsv^is, 257 Fuscianus, city prefect, 320, 321
e^aiperos, 120, 186
efd/cts, eV 5^ ti^ f/356/HCf), 165 Gaia, Gaius, in legal formulae, 382
Gains, the Roman presbyter ; Eusebius
i^eiweiv, 248 on, 326 sq; Jerome on, 329, 378; Pho-
i^eXicraeiv, 71 tius on, 347, 377 sq; treatises ascribed
i^eXoufiai, form, 156 to, especially the Dialogue against Pro-
t^epl^eiv, 138 clus, 377 sq, 407; all belong to Hip-
524 INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER.
polytns, 13, 377 sq Gaius perhaps
; 380,
Hippolytus' praenomen, 381 all par-
ticulars about Gaius and Hippolytus
identical, 382, 383; probably the same
as Hippolytus, 318, 496 ; the reference
in the Mss of the martyrdom of Poly-
carp, 383; on the Apocalypse, 386; on
the millennium, 387 sq; style and mat-
ter of the Dialogue, 386; his date, 496;
on the graves of S. Peter and S. Paul,
26, 496, 497, 499; the Heads against,
in Ebedjesu's catalogues, 350, 395
fragments discovered by Gwynn, 366,
380, 388
Games, Greek words adopted by the
Romans relating to, 35
Gass, 200
Gebhardt ; on Clement's Epistle, 172,
174, 176,177, 178, 184; on 2 [Clement],
195, 224, 240, 257
Gelasius; quotes Hippolytus, 340, 421;
confuses his see, 428
Geminus of Antioch, 331, 371
Genesis iv. 3 8 explained, 22 sq
Genesius, martyr, in the Laurentian Acts,
353 ;
buried in the cemetery of Hip-
polytus, 454 sq ; his church restored
by Gregory in, 340, 455; two martyrs
of the name mentioned, 455 ; but per-
haps only one person, 455
Geography, speculations of the ancients
in, 72 sq
Georgiades discovers Hippolytus' com-
mentary on Daniel, 391 sq
Georgius Hamartolus on Hippolytus, 347
Georgius Syncellus; list of Hippolytus'
works in, 346, 4 19 sq; does not accept
2 [Clement], 193
Germanus of Constantinople on Hip-
polytus, 345
Gnomic aorist, 260
Gnosticism; apocryphal works, 106;
its
itsexpressions anticipated by Clement,
121 ; the form attacked in 2 [Clement],
203, 228 sq
Gospel of the Egyptians; its character,
237 held in esteem by the Gnostics,
; 165, 178, i8^s, 186; its resemblances
237; quoted in 2 [Clement], 202, 207,
218, 219, 236 sq; and by Clement of
Alexandria, 207, 236; who had never
seen it, 237
Grabe on 2 [Clement], 194, 196
Greeks, Treatise against the, by Hip-
polytus, 325, 395
Gregory Nazianzen, metrical list of the
scriptures by, 407, 408, 413
Gregory of Tours, on Hippolytus, 343
Gregory HI restores the church of
Genesius, 340, 455
Gudius, 398
Gwynn ; discovers fragments of the Hip-
polytean Heads against Gaius, 366,
388; of the Hippolytean com-
; mentary on S. Matthew, 366, 394
yrjyiv-qs, 118
y-qpovs, y-^pei, form, 185
yvQia-is, 121, 147
yopyds, 147 ^
ypafpeiov, ypacpeia, of the Hagiographa,
92, 167
ypcKpri, ypa(pal, of N. T. writings, 202,
215, 242, 245
; ypa<pal iipai, of O. T. writings, 156
Hadrian I ; restores the cemetery of
Hippolytus, 341, 459 sq; the church of
S. Stephen, 341, 459; and the church
of S. Laurence, 342
Hadrias, in the story of Hippolytus the
brigand, 373, 374, 376
Hagemann, 133, 208
Haneberg, 401
Hamack ; on Clement's Epistle, 33, 49,
69, 90, 99, 117, 133. 136, i72> 175.
176, 185, 186; on the country of
2 [Clement], 199 sq; theories on its
authorship, 195, 196, 207 sq; on the
mode of its delivery, 198; on its date,
201, 204; on passages in it, 213, 230,
241, 244, 246, 249, 250, 254, 260
Hebrews, Epistle to the; imitated in
Clement's Epistle, 10, 18, 37, 42, 45,
50, 57, 62, 68, 75, 78, 91, 99; imitated
in 2 [Clement], 214, 236, 246, 252;
Gaius and Hippolytus on its authorship,
348, 378
Hegesippus ; shows no knov/ledge of
2 [Clement], 192 Epiphanius' in-
;
debtedness to, 158
Herculanus; in the Portuensian Acts, 474
sq; a genuine martyr of Portus, 475;
his day, 355, 475; depositio of, 355;
sarcophagus commemorating, 476
Herenius, in the Laurentian Acts, 353
Hermas, the Shepherd of; its date, 411,
413; illustrates Clement's Epistle, 46,
76, 81, 118, 140, 141, 142, 144, 146,
to 2 [Clement] considered, 200 sq ;
the doctrine of the heavenly Church in,
200, 244 ;
of the pre-incarnate Son, 200,
230; baptism a 'seal,' 201, 226;
calls
its teaching on marriage, 201 ; on
Judaism, 201; the Clement mentioned
in, 107 sq; illustrates 2 [Clement], 214,
218
Hesse on the Muratorian Canon, 369, 407
Hexaemeron interpreted of Christ and
the Church, 245 sq
High-priesthood of Christ in Clement's
Epistle, 99, III, 123
Hilarus, inscription relating to, 35 1
Hilgenfeld; on Clement's Epistle, 15, 17,
 INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER.
41, 71, 81, 95, 99, 10^, 108, 117, T31,
i3'2, 136, 146, 147, 157, 160, 161, 172,
176, 177, 178, 187, 195; identifies 1
[Clement] with the Letter of Soter, 196 ;
on passages in 2 [Clement], 227, 228,
231, 232, 233, 234, 244, 250, 257, 260;
on the date of the Epistle of Barnabas,
506, 507 sq, 509
Hippolytus of Portus; interest in his
personality, 317 ; discovery of the Philo-
sophumena, 317, 378, 414; the earliest
papal catalogue probably drawn up by,
317; contemporary notice of him in
the Liberian Catalogue, 318; ancient
references to, 318 sq extracts from his
; Veranus, 444 sq enlarged by Damasus,
writings bearing on his history, 318 sq;
his relations with Zephyrinus and Callis-
tus, 320 sq, 370, 431 sq, 437; chair of,
324, 412, 440; its date, 324, 440; the
inscription on, 324 sq, 419 sq; the Pas-
chal Cycle on, 326; significance of the
discovery, 443 his early and middle life,
;
422 sq; a pupil of Irenseus at Rome,
383; his indebtedness to Ireneeus, 422;
date of their intercourse, 422 sq; his
connexion with Origen, 330, 423; not a
Novatian, 424 sq; the story traceable
to Damasus' extant inscription, 424 sq,
445 ignorance and conflicting state-
;
ments as to his see, 427 sq; his
association with Bostra based on an
error, 428 sq; evidence for Portus as
his see late and scanty, 430; yet his
connexion with Portus undeniable, 432
sq, 465 sq; character of his bishopric
there, 432 sq; Le Moyne's theory,
429; Bunsen's theory, 430; Bollinger's
theory of an antipope, 431 sq; evi-
dence of the Philosophumena here,
434 ^y whom appointed bishop, 433;
;
later years and literary activity, 436
sq; his banishment, 328, 427, 438;
its date, 438; died in banishment, 427,
439 sq date of his death, 440 his name-
; ;
sakes, (i) Hippolytus, the martyr of
Antioch, 370 sq (ii) Hippolytus the
;
Alexandrian, 372 (iii)
; Hippolytus,
Greek captain of brigands, 373 sq ^
(iv) Hippolytus the warder of S. Lau-
rence, no such person, 376 (v) Hip-;
polytus of Thebes, 377 his identity
; Hippolytus of Thebes, 377
with Gains considered, 377 sq his
literary works, {a) biblical and exe-
getical, 389 scj {b) theological and
; Portus, 370, 453
apologetic, 395 sq; (c) historical and
chronological, 399 sq; [d) heresio-
logical, 384 sq, 400 sq spurious Hip-
; that of Hippolytus of Portus, 376, 402,
polytean works, 403 sq; table of his
literary works, 419 sq editions of
; Hoeschel, 396
them, 365 scj his title 'the presbyter'
; Honorius
represents dignity, not office, 424, 428,
435 ^^5 "'1 ^'^''' theology of Clement,
525
13 sq; 2 [Clement] known to, 258; on
the authorship of the Apocalypse, 3S6,
394; his chronology of our Lord's life,
391 sq; perhaps invented the term
Alogi, 394; his depositio, 439, 442,
444; his day, in calendars, 355 sq;
in the Liberian Catalogue, 355 ; in
itineraries, 353 sq ; his burial-place in
the Ager Veranus, 442 sq ; probably
his own property, 441, 443; its proxim-
ity to the cemetery of S. Laurence, 442,
444 his cult in Damasus' time, 465 ;
;
as described by Prudentius, 332 sq, 445
sq, 45 1 sq his basilica in the Ager
;
;
445 sq described by Prudentius, 451 sq
; ;
verified by excavations, 452, 464 re- ;
stored by Andreas the presbyter, 454,
465; his reliques transferred to the
basilica of S. Laurence, 459 ; and else-
where, 459, 467 sq; inscriptions on
these translations, 351, 461 sq, 469;
his story attached to S. Laurence, and
he himself transferred from cleric to
soldier, 402,458 sq, 468 sq; becomes
Hippolytus the warder, 376, 468 sq ;
a confusion with the soldier Romanus,
462 evidence of this transference in
;
the Latin Acts, 462 sq; his sanctuary
in the Vicus Patricius, 464 sq; in
Portus, 465 sq; his well shown there,
466; in Fossombrone, 466 sq; outside
Italy, 467; especially in France, Aries,
S. Denis, 467; Spurious Acts of;
(i) the Laurentian Cycle, 468 sq; here
the warder, 471 sq; (ii) the Portuensian
Cycle, 474 sq here the presbyter and
;
his personality grafted on to Nonnus,
476; confused by Peter Damian with
the bishop of Edessa, 476; his names
in different countries, 477
Hippolytus, bearer of a letter from
Dionysius of Alexandria, 372
Hippolytus, Greek captain of brigands;
his story and companions, 373 sq acts ;
and inscriptions relating to, 373 sq
Hippolytus, martyr of Antioch; Dollin-
ger's theory of a confusion untenable,
371 ; a real person, but invested with
attributes of Hippolytus of Portus, 372
; Hippolytus, son of Theseus, his story
adapted to his Christian namesake of
Hippolytus, warder of S. Laurence; no
such person, the story a growth out of
458 scj, 46s scj ; see Ilippolyliis of Por/iis
HI transfers Hippolytus'
reliques to the cemetery of S. Laurence,
4r9
 526 INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER.
Hort, 117, 133, 179, 369
Iflites, the name of Hippolytus among
the Syrians and Chaldreans, 477
Ignatius; shows coincidences with
Clement's Epistle, 91, 99, 117, 186;
his alhision to S. Peter an
argument
for S. Peter's Roman visit, 26, 493
Ilicius the presbyter ; erects a
sanctuary
to Hippolytus in the Vicus Patricius,
464; reason for the choice of this
locality, 465
Irenosus; at Rome,
422, 495; Hippolytus
his pupil there, 383, 422 ;
Hippolytus'
literary obligations to, 422; imitates
Clement, 149, 150; does not accept
2 [Clement], 192; the title 'presbyter'
as used by, and as applied to, 435 ; on
the Roman visit of S. Peter, 495 ;
fragments of poetry embedded in the
works of, 405 sq
Irenreus the cloacarius, in the Laurentian
Acts, 359, 360, 472 sq
Irenseus a martyr, inscription to, 35 1
Isaac, a willing sacrifice, 98
Isaiah liii, notes on, 58 sq
Isthmian games alluded to in 2 [Clement],
; 353 sq, 471 sq; inscription relating to
197, 223 sq ; their importance at that
time, 224
Itineraries illustrating Hippolytus and
Laurence, 352 sq, 469 sq
iepwavvT], opposed to ^ajiXela,
adverb, 17
tXe'cos,
IvSdWeaOai, tvdaXfxa, 79 sq
Jacobson, 27, 28, 41, 46, 71, 146, 156, 236
James v. 20 explained, 251
Jerome; on 2 [Clement], 192; on Hip-
polytus, 329 sq, 389 sq, 419 sq; his
ignorance of the facts, 425, 428, 429 sq
Jews, treatise against the, by Hippolytus,
325. 395.. 421
Joannes Philoponus, a mistake of, 394
Job iv. 16 V. 5, notes on, ii8sq
John (S.), the Gospel according
known to 2 [Clement], 204, 222
John the Deacon quotes Clement's Epi-
stle, 133
John of Ephesus, source of his infonnation
about Clement's Epistle, 158
Josephus; 38, 39 sq, 98, 125, 130, 161,
184; a work of Hippolytus assigned to,
395
Judith ; reference in Clement's Epistle to,
161; date of the book of, 161; Volk-
mar on this, 161
Julianus, in the Laurentian Acts, 353
Justin Martyr; passages illustrating Cle-
ment's Epistle, 49, 55, 57, 58 sq, 178;
illustrating 2 [Clement], 214, 215, 217,
218, 221; his description of Christian
services supported by 2
[Clement], 195
Justina, in the Laurentian Acts, 353
Justinus; in the Laurentian Acts, 353,
354) 462, 472; in Ado of Vienne, ^358
q. 473; his burial-place, 351, 469; "in-
scription naming, 351
Kennedy's edition of the Hippolytean
fragments on Daniel, 366, 391
Labyrinth; mentioned by Photius, 347 sq,
377. 378 sq, 382; not the Little Laby-
rinth, but by the same author, 377, 378
sq ; identical with the summary in Phi-
losophumena Book x, 379 sq, 396, 421 ;
see Lit^/e Labyrinth
Lagarde; on Clement's Epistle, 34; on
Hippolytus, 363, 364, 366, 401, 421,
; on the Muratorian Canon,
473i 476 408
laicus,124
Lateran Council quotes Hippolytus, 334,
421
Laurence (S.); his story in Florus-Bede,
in the Menasa,
357. sq ;
361 sq in the ;
Latin Acts, 363 sq ; his companions,
his reliques, 351
sq; their position in
itineraries, 352 sq ; his cemetery (see
Cemeteries) honours paid him in Rome,
;
455 sq; his day, 355 sq, 456; basilicas
to, 452, 456; notices of them in the
Liber Pontificalis, 341 sq, 4.S7; that
1
79 seen by Prudentius, 456
sq ; their archi-
tectural history, 456 sq
Laurent on Clement's Epistle, 28, 33,
69,
116, 139, 187
Laurentian Cycle of the Acts of Hippoly-
tus, 468 sq ; documents and inscriptions
illustrating, 3.^1, 352 sq, 357 sq, 361 sq,
363 sq; mutual relation of the docu-
ments, 473
Laymen ; part played by, in early Chris-
tian services,
195 sq the case of Origen,
;
195 sq; 2 [Clement] not by a layman,
195. 253
to, Le Moyne; on Severina, 397; on the see
of Hippolytus, 429; his edition of
Hippolytus, 366
Leo III decorates the basilica of Hippo-
lytus in Portus, 341, 466
Leo IV transfers reliques of Hippolytus
to the Quatuor Coronati,
341, 459
Leontius and John quote Clement's
Epi-
stle, loi, 117
Leontius of Byzantium on Hippolytus,
343, 389, 420
Levi, our Lord's connexion with the tribe
of, 99
Liber Generationis, a translation of Hip-
polytus' Chronica, 399^ 419
Liber Pontificalis, notices of Hippolytus
 INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER. 527
in,340 sq in error as to his banish-
; Melito on the sacrifice of Isaac, 98
ment, 438 notices of S. Laurence in,
;
Mentea on the martyrdom of Hippolytus,
341 sq, 457 361, 372, 476
Liberian Catalogue; on Hippolytus, 318, Metrical ; passages embedded in Irenrous,
328 its silence on his Novatianism,
; 405 sq; doctrinal treatises, 407; lists
426; the word 'presbyter' in, 436 of Scripture, 407 sq
Liberian chronographer on the depositio Miller publishes the Philosophumena,
of S. Peter and S. Paul, 499 sq 317, 367, 414
Lipsius; on the lists of heresies in Epi- Molon, 44
phanius etc., 369, 415 sq; on Clement's Monophysite expressions anticipated in

Epistle, 71, 99, 108, 109, 132, 133, 160, the Apostolic Fathers, 14 sq
161, 176, 178, 196, 233 Moses, a title of, 154
Little Labyrinth ; Theodoret on the, 339, Muratorian Canon ; a translation, 407 ;
377 ;
is the Treatise
against Artemon, from Greek verse, 408 sq reasons for ;

378, 380, 385, 400, 421 not the Laby- ; assigning the original to Hippolytus,
rinth mentioned by Photius, 377, 378 sq ; 389, 411 sq, 495; on S. Peter and
by the same author, 379; the author S. Paul, 495 ; reference to the spiritus
Hippolytus, 380 sq; %t^ Labyrinth principalis in, 67 sq; date, 495
Liturgical expressions in Clement's Epi-
stle, 93, 9p. 105, 107, 170 sq jtta/cdptos, 143
Logos-doctrine ; see Christology fiaXXov fj-ei^iov, 148
Lot's wife, 46 ixaprvpdv, fxdpTV^, in Christian writings,
Lucillius, in the Laurentian Acts, 472 26 sq
Ludolf, 401 fiaffTiyovv, fiaariyocpopoi, /ji.a(TTiyov6/j.OL, in
athletic contests, 225
XciTJ'Tjs, XaTvos, 96 fiaTaionovia, 42
Xat\-6s, Xal/coCv, 124 fiya\oirpTrr}s, 42
Xa^7rp6rr;s, 107 /xeXavdiTepos, form, 41
Xaos, 94, 124, 161; Trepioycrtos, 186 fxeTo. 8eovs, i^eading, 18

XeiToiip76s, of O. T. prophets, 38 IxeraKafilidveiv, with acc, 248

\ivoKa\dfiri, 48 fxera^v, 132, 134
XnTOTaKTeiv form, 76,
fieTairapadLdovai., 74
fi-rjXwTTi, 62
Macarius Magnes illustrates Clement's /u.6Xt/3os, fx.6\i^dos,251
Epistle, 26, 28, 57, 72, 178 /jLowoyevris, of the phoenix, 87
Mammffia ; Hippolytus' correspondence /xi'crepos, form, 52, 96
with, 338, 339, 397, 437; her death, /xw/xos, fiufj-oaKOTreiv, 126, 185
438
Marcellus the deacon, in the story of Hip- Narcissus, in the Laurentian Acts, 360,471
polytus the brigand, 373,374 Nemeseus, in the Laurentian Acts, 353
Marcia befriends the Christians, 321 sq Neon, in the story of Hippolytus the
Marcion ; later than 2 [Clement], 203 ; brigand, 373, 374, 376
treatise of Hippolytus against, 327, 330, Nero; character and date of the perse-
346, 421 cution under, 7, 32, 497; his popu-
Marcus the Valentinian, verses written 511; expectation of his reap-
larity,
against, 405, 410 pearance, J09 sq ; personifications of,
Maria, in the story of Hippolytus the 511; as Antichrist, 511 sq
brigand, 373 sq, 376 Nicephorus of Constantinople ; quotes
Mark Gospel traditionally con-
(S.); his Hippolytus, 346, 403 ; 2 [Clement] in
nected with S. Peter's preaching at the Stichometria of, 193, 233
Rome, 492, 494, 495; meaning o[ epixr)- Nicephorus Callistus on Hippolytus,
vevTrji as applied to, 494 349 sq
Martana, in the stoiy of Hippolytus the Nicolas I l>eautifies the basilica of S.
brigand, 373, 374 Laurence, 458
Martin of Tours on the reappearance of Nicon the Monk; quotes Clement's
Nero, 511 Epistle, 53, 140; and 2 [Clement],
Matthew xvi. 18, 19, patristic interpreta- 193, 216
tions of, 482 sq Noah preaches repentance, 37 sq
Maximin, the emperor ;
his character, Noedcchen, 418
438; his persecution, 438; his death, Noetus, Hii^polylus and, 319, 348, 400
440 Nonnus; the name, 475; in the Portu-
Maximus, in the Portuensian Acts, 364 ensian Acts originally distinct from
528 INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER.
Hippolytus, 476; a genuine martyr of 399, 403; their date, 437; when aban-
Portus, 475 ; mentioned in the Lihe- doned, 399, 441 significance of their
;

rian depositio, 355, 475; in Jerome, prominence on the Chair, 441

356; identified with Hippolytus, 466, Passioilla; references to, 352,469, 473; a
475 sq ; further confused by Peter guide-book for pilgrims to the Ager
Damian, 362, 476 Veranus, 473 quoted and abridged by
;

Nonnus, bishop of Edessa; his date, Ado, 473

476; his see, 476;
converts Pelagia, Paul (S.); in Rome, 29, 497; his release,
476; confused by Peter Damian with 497; his visit to Spain, 30; his subse-
Hippolytus, 362, 476 quent arrest and death, 497; not
notarii, 197 martyred with S. Peter, 497 sq, 499;
Notation employed in this edition, 4 origin of the conjunction of their names,
Novatianism of Hippolytus, alleged, 499 sq; buried in the Ostian Way,
357, 424 sq, 445 496, 497 sq; his reliques temporarily
deposited with S. Peter's in the cata-
vovdeaia, vovO^rrjcns, 163 combs of S. Sebastian, 500 festival of
;

vuOp6$, 104 his translation, 501 ; his relation to

S. Peter in the Church generally,
CEcumenius on Hippolytus, 349, 420 489 sq; in Rome particularly, 491,
Ophites, teaching of the as to marriage,
; 497 sq
237, ^SP j 3s to jealousy, 22 Paul I transfers reliques to S. Silvester
;

Origen; at Rome, 423; meets Hippo- in Capite, 351, 352, 459; commemo-
'
lytus there, 330, 423 his ;
taskmaster' rative inscriptions, 352, 459
Ambrosius, 330, 348, 423 preached as
; Paulina, in the story of Hippolytus the
a layman, 195 sq; employed shorthand- brigand, 373, 374, 376
writers, 197; on the Eternal Church, Pelagia converted by Nonnus, bishop of
244; on I Pet. iv. 8, 252; on S. Matt. Edessa, 362, 476
xvi. 18, 19, 483 sq; on S. Peter's visit Pelagius H; his basilica in honour of
to Rome, 496; mentions Clement's S. Laurence, 342, 456 sq; his dedi-
Epistle, 159 cation of it, 457, 469; commemorative
Ostia; its relation to Portus, 429, 433, inscription, 341 sq
466; in Prudentius associated with Peter (S.); character of his primacy,
Hippolytus, 333, 335, 432 481 sq; our Lord's promise, 481 sq;
Ostian Way, the traditional place of twofold patristic interpretation of the
S. Paul's burial, 496, 497, 499 sq word 'rock,' 482 sq; exegetical con-
Overbeck, 390, 398, 403 siderations, 485 sq; result, 486; his
primacy evidenced in action, 487 sq ;
oi ?|w, 241 his relations to S. Paul, 489 sq; his
oiofiai, olw/jLeda,221, 244, 249 visit to 26, 490 sq ; external
Rome,
ofioKoyyjT-qs, o/xoXoyos, in Christian writ- evidence for it conclusive, 409 sq,
ings, 27 491 sq; its date, 491, 497 sq; his rela-
6/j,6voia, 70 tions to S. Paul there, 491, 497 sq ; his
wofxa, 9, 112, 130, 131, 241 First Epistle written during persecution,
opyavov, 256 498 sq ; date of his martyrdom, 26 sq,
opyq and Ovfids, 151 497 sq; not martyred with S. Paul,
offia, ocrios, 212; Kal
17, S'lKaia, 146, 213, 497 sq, 499; origin of the conjunction
220, 223, 249 of their names, 499 sq buried in the
;

08;', 217, 241 Vatican Way, 498, 499 his reliques

;

temporarily deposited with S. Paul's

(2 w, accent, 157 in the catacombs of S. Sebastian, 500 ;

wpa and Kaipos, 122 his traditional twenty-five years' epis-

ws, (lis ovv, 116, 244, 249
Palladius on Hippolytus, 338, 402, 404
Pammachius, xenodochium at Portus of,
429
Papias; on the Eternal Church, 245; on
the Roman visit of S. Peter, 492, 494;
the word 'presbyter' as applied to, 435
Paschal I. translations of reliques by,
458
Paschal Tables of Hippolytus, 324 sq,
copate, 501 sq; was he ever reckoned
a bishop of Rome ? 500
Peter (S.), First Epistle of; written in a
time of persecution, 498 sq ; its date,
499; its coincidence with S. Paul's
Epistles, 499 ; explanation of ch. iv. 8,
149, 251; the allusion to i) crweKXeKTri
in, 491 sq
Peter (S.), Second Epistle of; its authen-
ticity, 493, 498; an apparent coinci-
dence in Clement's Epistle with, 37;
 INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER. 529

perhaps not independent of the book martyrdom, 466 ;

the Isola Sacra, 466 ;
of Eldad and Modad, 235 giftsof Leo in to, 341, 466; date of
Peter Damian confuses Nonnus, bishop the foundation of a permanent see at,
of Edessa, with Hippolytus, 362, 476 466; its position among suburbicarian
Peter of Alexandria a passage in the
; sees, 466 ;
xenodochium at, 429
Chronicon Paschale wrongly ascribed Portus Romanus, as a name for Aden,
to, 344; imitates Clement's Epistle, 16 429
Philaster; date of his work on Heresies, Potter, 157
415; his indebtedness to Hippolytus, Praxedis (S.), connexion of this Church
4i3> 415 sq with Hippolytus explained, 465
Philo; illustrates Clement's Epistle, 44, Preaching in the early Church, 195 sq
45) 98, 130, 164, 183; illustrates Presbyter as'a designation of Hippolytus,
;

2 [Clement], 214 424, 428, 435 sq; a title of dignity,

Philosophical terms adopted by Clement 435 ; not of office, 435 to whom ap- ;

and others, 66 sq, 69, 75, 89, 155, 247 plied, 435
Philosophumena ; its discovery, 317, 414; Primitivus, in the Laurentian Acts, 353
editions, 365 sq ; the work of Hippo- Proclus, Dialogue with patristic notices
;

lytus, 377, 378 sq, 403, 421; extracts
and patristic notices, 318 sq, 327, 330,
346; passages from Iren^eus incorpo-
rated in, 422 ; the Summary in the
Tenth Book published separately and
called the Labyrinth, 379 sq, 396; its
evidence as to Hippolytus' see, 434;
see Labyrinth, Miller
Phoenix ; in the classics, 84 growth of ;
the story, 88; its general acceptance,
84 sq ; its adoption by Jewish and
Christian writers, 85 sq ; its explana-
tion, 86 ; chronology of its appearances,
83) 87, 89; in Christian art, 87; in
Egyptian hieroglyphics, 87
Photius; notices of Clement in, 13, 14,
72, 86, 139; rejects 2 [Clement], 193,
194, 211, 212, 219;
on works of Hip-
polytus, 347 sq, 396, 419 sq; on Gaius,
347 sq, 377; a blunder of, 423
Pitra, 133
Plato, Hippolytus' treatise against, 325,
347. 395 sq
Polto, Hippolytus name among the
Italians, 477
of, 326, 327, 329, 348, 379, 381; the
author Hippolytus, 377 sq; Gaius the
name of the orthodox disputant, 381
sq; argimient from matter, 384 sq;
from style, 386 sq
Proverbs, titles of the book of, i (i6 sq
Pmdentius; on Hippolytus, 332 sq ; his
visit to the basilica of Hippolytus, 424,
445 ; date and circumstances of this
visit,424, 450; the basilica described,
332 sq, 451 ; also the picture of Hip-
polytus' martyrdom, 451, 453 sq; de-
scription of the commemoration, 45 1 ;
of the basilica of S. Peter and S. Paul,
450; present at the feast of their
passion, 450; subjects commemorated
in his Hymns, 445, 449; the Roman
saints associated with the Tiburtine
Way, and the month of August, 445,
451 ; on the Novatianism of Hippolytus,
424; on Romanus, 445, 449
ps-Chrysostom on Hippolytus, 346
ps-John Damascene on Hippolytus, 345,
396, 419 sq
ps-Justin ; date and country, 200 perhaps ;

Polycarp, Martyrdom of; see Smyrnaans, refers to 2 [Clement], 193, 200, 233,
Letter of the '234> 250, 256
Polycarp, Epistle of, imitates Clement's ps-Tertullian, obligations of the Prae-
Epistle, 5, II, 27, 42, 52, 156, 162 scriptio to Hippolytus, 386, 414 sq
Pontianus, bishop of Rome; his episcopate, Pudentiana (S.), the church and mon-
437; banishment, death and depositio, astery of;its position, 464; date, 464;

Hippolytus' sanctuary at, 464 sq its

328, 438 sq, 443; burial-place, 442; ;

the notice in the Liber Pontificalis, 340 ; connexion with him explained, 465
date of the close of his episcopate, 439
Porphyrius in the Laurentian Acts, 472 7raXt77i'e(ria, 42
Portuensian Cycle of Acts of Hippolytus, irafx^dravov, 165
474 sq; documents illustrating it, 355, iravdyios, 108, 169
361, 364 sq; their m.utual relation, 476 TravdpeTos, 10, 19, 138, 166, 178
Portus, the harbour of Rome, 429 ; its TravdaiJ.apTij}\6^, TravOapLapTrjrds, 256
relation to Ostia, 429, 433 ; its growth TracTaStKOS, 256
in importance, 429, 431, 433 ; intimately TravTeirdiTTris, 162, 185
connected with Hippolytus' history, TravTo8vvafj,os, 7
466; in what sense his see, 430 sq, 432 iravTOKparopLKbs, TravTOKpariop, 7, 41
sq ; the ruined church bearing his wapayyeXla, 1 28
name, 466; the well of his traditional vapdyeiv, 234

CLEM. n. 34
530 INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER
Trapd/cX rjTos, 222 Richardson, E. C, 365
Trapa\oyi^a6at,, 255 'Rock' in S. Matthew xvi. 18, interpre-
wapaJTOielv, 137 tations of the word, 482 sq
irapairoW'uffOai, 253 Romanus, martyr; his story in the Lau-
TrapaTTTwcrts, 170 rentian Acts, 353, 354, 446, 448 sq,
Trapacpvadiov 506 sq, 512
, 472; in Ado of Vienne, 358, 448;
irapoiKecv, irapoiKia, 5, 2t8 associated with the Tiburtine Way and
TTttT^pes, of O. T. worthies, 23, 182 the month of August, 445, 447 ; com-
TTfTToidricns, 89, 108 memorated by Prudentius, 445 ; origin-

irepLotJCTLOs, 186 ally a deacon, 446, 448 ; transformed

Trerpos, Tr^rpa, 482 sq into a soldier, 446, 448 sq; ampli-
TTTJpOS, TTTIpOVV, TT'^pWCTtS, 21 3 fications of his story, 446, 448 sq ; day
TrXdros, TrXd^, 19 of his martyrdom at Antioch, 449; of
7rXaTii(Tja6s, 20 his festival, 356, 447, 448, 449 sq, 472;
TrXew, compounds of, used metaphorically, the commemoration in August a trans-
224 lation, 449; his burial-place, 469;
158
7r\r]po(popeiv, inscription relating to, 351, 447, 469;
wpoaLpeTv, 130 his connexion with Hippolytus, 462
irpoyvdj(rT7]s, 230 Rome, Church its
of;history in the
TrpodrfKos, 50 second obscure, 317 ; light
century
Trpoodoiwopos, 232 thrown on it by Hippolytus, 317 sq ;

7rp6(x8KTOs, 36 and by the Novatian schism, 425 sq ;

irpoaexeLV, with acc, 16 Sabellianism in the, 319 sq

Trpocr^pXeadai., 183 Rothe, 132, 133
wpoaKKiveadai, irpoaKXiffLS, 77, 143, 184 Routh, 379
TrpoaTdTTjs, ill Rufinus; on 2 [Clement], 192; on Hip-
TrpoffTLfxov, 127 polytus, 331
irpoatpeiyeiv, 75 Ruggieri, 370, 429
TrpoauTTov, 'ringleader,' 8, 144

not introducing a quotation, 240 pi'ipoKivdvvios, 53

(prjaiu,
(pdelpeiv, in athletic contests,
225
(pdopd, 221 Sabellianism; at Rome, 319 sq; favours
(piXo^euia, stress laid by Clement on, 45, the Gospel of the Egyptians, 237
109 Sabinianus, in the Portuensian Acts, 365,
(piKoirovdv, reading, 206, 258 475
0tXos Geou, the title, 43 Salmon on the chronology of Hippoly-
;

(poLVL^, 84 sq tus, 370, 389, 390, 392, 399, 440 sq ;

^uYttSeyetj/, 29 on the treatise against Artemon, 400 ;

(pvXXopoeiv, spelling, 81 on the treatise de Psalmis, 390; on

the Muratorian Canon, 411 sq
\j/rj\acpdi', 182 Salome in the Gospel of the Egyptians,
\p03fjil^eiv, 160 236 sq
Sardinia; Callistus banished to, 321 sq;
Quatuor Coronati, reliques of Hippolytus Hippolytus and Pontianus banished to,
transferred to the, 341, 459, 468 328, 427, 438 sq
Quotations in Clement's Epistle canon- ; Scaliger, 399
ical (see Index of Scriptural Passages) ; Scarlet thread, patristic interpretations
classical, 115, 116; apocryphal (see of the, 49 sq
Apocryphal); combined and loose, 51, Schneckenburger, 237
52, 65, 89, 92, 95, 99, 104, 106, 129, Schwegler, 229
141, 151, 156; leading words comment- Scriptures, designations in 2 [Clement] of
ed onin, 141 sq the, ypaipai, 202, 215; rd \6yia rod
Quotations in 2 [Clement] ; canonical (see Qeov, 203, 242 ; rd ^i^Xia /cat oi dwo-
Index of Scriptural Passages) ; apo- aroXoi, 202, 245; 6 Beds rrjs dXyjOeias,
cryphal (see Apocryphal) 195' 257
Severina, Hippolytus' treatise to, 325,
Rahab, 46 sq 397. 421
Refutation of All Heresies ;
see Philoso- Severus, in the Laurentian Acts, 353
phuinena Severus, Alexander; his reign, 437; kill-
Resurrection of the body denied by the ed by Maximin, 437 ; befriends the
Gnostics, 229 Christians, 437
 INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER. 531
Severus of Antioch quotes and accepts Temple sacrifices; classification of, 125;
2 [Clement], 193, 211, 212 Clement's Epistle on, 125
Shorthand writers employed by the TertuUian; quotes from and illustrates
fathers, 197 sq Clement's Epistle, 82, 128, 131; on
Sibylline Oracles; illustrate Clement's the phoenix, 85, 86; quotes from an
Epistle, 37 sq, 109, 162; designate apocryphal Ezekiel, 40 his christology, ;

Rome Babylon, 492; and Nero Anti- 15; on S. Peter and S. Paul in Rome,
christ, 5 1 1 26, 495 sq
Simferosa, in the Laurentian Acts, 353 Theodoret ; on Hippolytus and his works,
Simplicius, bishop of Rome, arrange- 338 sq, 377, 389 sq, 419 sq; on Gains,
ment of regiones by, 465 378 .
.

Siricius, bishop of Rome; honours to Theophilus of Antioch borrows from ;

Hippolytus in the time of, 464 sq Clement's Epistle, 54, 82 ; from 2

Sixtus III, basilica built to S. Laurence [Clement], 227; from Sibylline Oracles,
'uy, 341. 456 sq 38 .
.

Slaves, their liberation a Christian duty, Theophilus, addressed in Hippolytus'

160 on Antichrist, 398
treatise
Smyrnreans, Letter the; imitatesof Theucinda x^estores Hippolytus' church at
Clement's Epistle, 5, 188; the Gains Aries, 467
mentioned in the, 383 ; on Irenreus at Thompson, E. M., 152, 153
Rome, 422 Tiburtine Way; see Ager Vemnus
Sophocles perhaps quoted in Clement's Timotheus of quotes and
Alexandria
Epistle, 115 accepts 2 [Clement], 193, 211, 212, 218
Soter, bishop of Rome; his letter to Tischendorf on Clement's Epistle, 25,
Corinth read publicly, 192; not 2 27, 28, 45, 46, 48, 55, 109, 113, 114,
[Clement], 196 119, 122, 137, 146, 148, 150, 151,
Stephanus Gobarus, identification of Hip- .i53> 156
polytean treatises mentioned by, 343, Titus, the emperor, closely associated
385. 397 with Vespasian and Domitian in the
Stephen (S.), the two churches at Rome empire, 509 sq
to, 341. 459 Trinity, the doctrine in Clement's Epistle,
Stoic division of human nature, 66 140, 169
vSuidason Hippolytus, 349, 420 Triphonia, Tryphonia, in the Lauren-
Syriac version of Clement's Epistle, 3 sq tian Acts, 473; references to, 353,
Syriac writer, anonymous, quotes Cle- 354; inscriptions mentioning, 351,
ment's Epistle, 158 352, 469; her burial-place, 469; date of
her martyrdom, 471; her day, 471;
explanation of 'wife of Decius,' 470;
craKKOs, 41
her connexion with Hippolytus merely
aakeveadai, 70
local, 471
(n]fji,Lovv, 130
cr/cd/^^a,
35 _

'2io<pia (77), T/ 'Eo(j)La, as a title

TravdpeTos
73
of Proverbs, 166, 169; of apocryphal 7^^. ^
Ta/niov, Tafxieiov, 76, 151
books of Wisdom, 167
TaireLVOcppovelv, 6^, 69
aocpds, (TVveTos, 100
TaxvypdcpoL, 197
trfadfids, ardais, 74
T^yos, 49
(TTTjpLaov, crTTjpi^ov, form, 68, 101
Te\ei.0Kapirelv, 135
accent, 25
cTTi'/Xos,
ripixa TTjs Sucrewj, 30
avvaywyrj, 72
Ti.ixd.adai, constr., 136
(Tweld-qaLS, 18, 57, 124
ToTTOf, 27, 1^3' 182, 1S3
avveK.\eKT7), i] iv liajSuXuvi, 491 sq 37'^
Ti^TTOs and avTCTVirov 247 ,
(TwiXevais, 75
Tvcpos, form, 50
cr<ppayis, of baptism, 201, 226
dui'd/xevoL [oi), 170
doLTTov, form, 188
Tacteus, in the Laurentian Acts, 353 Oeeiv, with ace, 224
Taurinus; in the Portuensian Acts, 474; Oe/xi\Los, of Christ and His apostles, 486
a genuine martyr of Portus, 475 his ; Oe/jLLrSs, 183
day in the Liberian chronographer, Geos TTJs dXTjdtias (6), 195, 257, 260
355. 475; his depositio, 355; sar- Oeocr^^eM, 260
cophagus commemorating, 476 Orip.ijoi', Orjfxwi'id, 165
532 INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER.
Ulpius Romulus, in the Portuensian Acts, Vicus Patricius, sanctuary of Hippolytus
361, 362, 364501, 474 sq in the, 464 sq
Urbanus, bishop of Rome his episco- ; Vigilius, bishop of Rome sieges of
;

pate, 437; his relations with Hippo- Rome during his episcopate, 454; de-
lytus, 437 struction and restoration of Hippoly-
Ursicinus, antipope, and the basilica of tus' basilica in his time, 454, 465

Hippolytus, 444, 465 Volkmar; on the date of Clement's

Epistle, 8; of the book of Judith, t6j;
vyeia, form, 74 of the Epistle of Barnabas, 505, 508 sq
165
virepaaiTicrixbs,
virepMes {to), 69
Wansleb, 401
inrepfiaxos, 138 Weizsacker on the date of the Epistle of
viroypanp.b's, 31, 61, 103
28 Barnabas, 505, 507, 509
viroBeLKvvvai.,
vwoTidivaL Tpdxv^ov, 183 Westcott, 161, 218, 219, 223, 231
William of Malmesbury, Guide to Rome
Valentinian language found in the Ig- by, 353. 373
natian Epistles, 203; in 2 [Clement], Wocher, 197
Wordsworth, 331, 344, 367, 370, 396,
203, 243, 247 argument of date there-
:

427, 429
from, 203
Wotton on Clement's Epistle, 27, 117,
Valeria, in the story of Hippolytus the
127, 134, 149, 150, 152, 232
brigand, 373, 374, 376
Valerian the prefect, in the Laurentian
Acts, 357 sq, 471 sq; his death, 362, Xystus I, bishop of Rome, inscription
364 relating to, 351
Valerianus, bishop of Zaragoza, 452,
467
Valerius Bito, 185, 187, 305 Young, Patrick; on Clement's Epistle,
26, 28, 70, 81, 99, 103, 108, 143, 152
Vansittart, 185
Vatican Way, the traditional burial-place 157; on 2 [Clement], 212
of S. Peter, 496, 497, 499 sq
Vero see Bero
; Zahn on Clement's Epistle, 18, 176, 195.
Vespasian; his position in the list of 198
Cfesars, 507 sq ; associates Titus and Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome his episco-
;

Domitian with himself in the empire, pate, 436; his relations to Hippolytus.
509 sq 319 sq, 348, 431 sq, 437; Eusebius on,
Victor, bishop of Rome ;
his episcopate, 327; Jerome on, 329; attacked b)
436; probably appointed Hippolytus Tertullian, 418
to Portus, 433 ; Hippolytus' account of Zonaras on Hippolytus, 349
him, 321 Zosimus, inscription relating to, 351

CAMBRIDGE : PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

i
BINUINla ocw '^ W V "w is^wu

:vj

BR