P. 1
Lightfoot. The Apostolic Fathers : a revised text with introductions, notes, dissertations, and translations. 1889. Volume 1, Pt. 2.

Lightfoot. The Apostolic Fathers : a revised text with introductions, notes, dissertations, and translations. 1889. Volume 1, Pt. 2.

|Views: 120|Likes:
The Apostolic Fathers : a revised text with introductions, notes, dissertations, and translations (1889)


Author: Clement I, Pope; Ignatius, Saint, Bishop of Antioch, d. ca. 110; Polycarp, Saint, Bishop of Smyrna; Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, 1828-1889
Volume:
Subject: Christian literature, Early (Collections)
Publisher: London ; New York : Macmillan
Possible copyright status: NOT_IN_COPYRIGHT
Language: English
Call number: B15360520
Digitizing sponsor: Wellesley College Library
Book contributor: Wellesley College Library
Collection: Wellesley_College_Library; blc; americana
The Apostolic Fathers : a revised text with introductions, notes, dissertations, and translations (1889)


Author: Clement I, Pope; Ignatius, Saint, Bishop of Antioch, d. ca. 110; Polycarp, Saint, Bishop of Smyrna; Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, 1828-1889
Volume:
Subject: Christian literature, Early (Collections)
Publisher: London ; New York : Macmillan
Possible copyright status: NOT_IN_COPYRIGHT
Language: English
Call number: B15360520
Digitizing sponsor: Wellesley College Library
Book contributor: Wellesley College Library
Collection: Wellesley_College_Library; blc; americana

More info:

Published by: Patrologia Latina, Graeca et Orientalis on May 25, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

02/01/2013

pdf

text

original

-

-

-

i

-

-

-

-

-

-

.-•-,'

-

-

..

-

-

-

LIBRARY OF WELLESLEY COLLEGE

PRESENTED BY
Mrs. Hopes

IjWuuUt

(/b*A~J>

s/Lv-yt-CO

THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS
FIRST PART
VOL.
II.

©ambrtDge
PRINTED BY
C.
J.

:

CLAY, M.A.

AND SONS

AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS.
SECOND VOLUME.
THE EPISTLE OF
INTRODUCTION.
The
authorities for the text.
S.

CLEMENT.
PAGE

1—4
Other sources of evidence.

Symbols used.

TEXT AND NOTES.

5—188

THE SO-CALLED SECOND EPISTLE OF
INTRODUCTION.
The
attribution to

S.

CLEMENT.
191—210

Clement

in the manuscripts [191].

External evidence

against this [192,

193].

Internal evidence.

The designation 'to the Corinthians' [193, 194]. Not an Epistle, but a homily [194 — 197]. Probably

delivered in

considered [199
(i)

Harnack's theory of its Roman origin Corinth [197 199]. Limits of date [201 201]. 204]. Theories of authorship,

(ii) Bryennios' theory, Clement of Rome [204 206]. Hilgenfeld's Harnack's theory, the (iii) theory, Clement of Alexandria [206, 207].

Clement mentioned

in

Hermas

[207, 208].

Analysis [208

— 210].

TEXT AND NO TES.
The lacunae
Corrigenda
script.
in

the Alexandrian Manuscript.

— 261 — 263 267
21
1

in

the collation of the Constantinopolitan Manu268

I

TRANSLATIONS.
THE EPISTLE OF S. CLEMENT TO THE CORINTHIANS. AN A NCIEN T HOMIL Y.
271—305

1.

2.

306—3 1 6

VI

TABLE OF CONTENTS.
HIPPOLYTUS OF PORTUS.
PAGE

INTRODUCTION.
The disInteresting problems presented by his personality and life. His relation to our main subject through covery of the Philosophumena. his intimate connexion with (i) the early history of the Roman Church, (ii) the earliest western list of Roman bishops.
1.

317, 318

ANCIENT REFERENCES TO HIPPOLYTUS.
1

Hippolytus [318

— 324].

2

Chair of Hippolytus [324

— 326].

318—365
3

Eu-

4 Liberian Chronographer [328]. 5 Epiphanius [328]. 6 Apollinaris? [328]. 8 Hieronymus [329 331]. 7 Damasus [328, 329]. 11 Palladius [338]. 12 Theo9 Rufinus [331]. 10 Prudentius [332 338].

sebius [326, 327].

doret [338, 339]. 14 Andreas of Csesarea [340]. 13 Gelasius [340]. 15 Liber Pontificalis [340 342]. 16 Cyrillus of Scythopolis [343]. 17 Gregory of Tours [343]. 18 Eustratius of Constantinople [343]. 19 Stephanus Gobarus 2 ° Leontius of Byzantium [343]. 21 Chronicon Paschale [344]. [343]*

22

Concilium

Lateranense

[344].

23

Anastatius

Apocrisiarius

[344,
[345].

345].

24 Anastatius Sinaita [345].

25

Pseudo-John of Damascus

26

Germanus of Constantinople [345]. 27 Pseudo-Chrysostom [346]. 28 Georgius Syncellus [346]. 29 Nicephorus [346]. 30 Georgius Hamartolus [347]. 31 Photius [347 32 CEcumenius [349]. 349]. 33 Zonaras

[349]-

34 Suidas [349].

35 Nicephorus Callistus [349, 350].

36 Ebed-

Jesu [350].
[352

— 354].
— 360].

37 Inscriptions relating to reliques [351, 352]. 38 Itineraries 39 Western Service Books [354, 355]. 40 Calendars and

Martyrologies [355, 356].
[357

45

41 Florus-Beda [356, 357]. 42 Ado of Vienne 43 Mensea [361, 362]. 44 S. Petrus Damianus [362]. Passio Sancti Sixti Laurentii Hippolyti [363, 364]. 46 Acta SS.

Cyriaci Hippolyti Aureae etc. [364, 365].
2.

MODERN LITERATURE.
NAMESAKES OF S. HIPPOL YTUS.
Points of contact with the story of the son of Theseus [370].

365—370
370—377
Five other

3.

namesakes, real or imaginary persons [371]. (1) Hippolytus the martyr of Antioch [371, 372]. (2) Hippolytus the Alexandrian connected with
Dionysius [372].
of
4.

(3)

Hippolytus the Greek captain of brigands [373
(5)

— 376].

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

Hippolytus

Thebes

[377].

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

377— 388

The

Yet the author of the

Refutation

'

must have written

The 'Dialogue' to Gaius, except the 'Dialogue with Proclus' [378 380]. Gaius simply the name of the orthodox disputant, too by Hippolytus. All facts predicated of Gaius considered the author [381, 382].
wrongly
are predicable of Hippolytus [382, 383]. Testimony of the Letter of the The evidence of Eusebius [383, 384]. Presumption [383].

all

the works ascribed

Smyrnaeans

TABLE OF CONTENTS.
that Hippolytus wrote against
style [386].
5.

vn
PAGE

Montanism [384

— 386].

The argument from
against Gaius' [388].

Objections met [386, 387].

The Heads
'

THE LITERARY WORKS OF HIPPOLYTUS.
Introduction [388].
(1) Biblical

logical
(4)

6.

— — Heresiological [400 403]. Spurious Hippolytean works [403 405]. THE MURA TORIAN ERA GMENT. 405—4 Metrical passages embedded in Irenaeus [405 — 407]. Verse employed for
and
for lists of the scriptures [407].

and Apologetic [395

— 399]-

and Exegetical [389 395]. (2) Theo(3) Historical and Chronological [399].

388—405

1

3

theological teaching

The Muratorian
from a Greek
to the

Canon,
torian

history,

date and

treatise in verse [408

—411].
Its

country [407].

A

translation

The

notice of

Hennas common

Mura-

The

the Liberian Catalogue, and Salmon's inference [411, 412]. treatise probably by Hippolytus [412]. Included among the titles on

Canon and

the Chair [412, 413].
7.

date [413].

8.

9.

THE COMPENDIUM AGAINST ALL THE HERESIES. THE REFUTATION OF ALL HERESIES. TABLE OF THE LITERARY WORKS OF HIPPOLYTUS.

413—418
418

419—421
422, 423

10.

EARLY AND MIDDLE LIFE OF HIPPOLYTUS.
His connexion with Irenaeus [422].

With Origen

[423].

1 1

.

WAS HIPPOL YTUS A NO VA TIAN?
The
allegation of Prudentius derived from

424—427
inscription [424].

Damasus'

Damasus' statement avowedly based on hearsay [425]. Contemporary Considerations on the other side; ignorance of Hippolytus' history [425]. (i) the silence of Cyprian and the Liberian Catalogue, (ii) the chronology
[425—427].
12.

THE SEE OF HIPPOLYTUS.

427—434

His allocation to Ignorance of early writers on this point [427, 428]. Bostra based on a blunder [428]. Le Moyne's inference untenable [429].
His association
with the
see

of

Portus Eastern

Theories of Bunsen and Dollinger [430 432]. Most probably 'bishop of the Gentiles,' with Portus as head-quarters [433, 434].
13.

in

origin

[429,

430].

HIPPOLYTUS THE PRESBYTER.
Unique position of Hippolytus among contemporaries
[435]-

435,436

The

title

'presbyter' represents not office, but dignity [435].

To whom

applied [435].

Subsequently misunderstood [436
14.

].

LATER YEARS, BANISHMENT, AND DEATH.
The
pontificates of Zephyrinus

436—440

and Callistus [436]. Peace of the Church, internal and external, under Urbanus [437]. Literary activity of HippoDeath of Alexander Severus succeeded by the persecution lytus [437].
under Maximin
[437, 438].

Banishment of Pontianus and Hippolytus

to Sardinia [438, 439].

Their death, and deposition [439, 440].

vin

TABLE OF CONTENTS.
PAGE

15.

THE STATUE OF HIPPOLYTUS.

440—442

16.

POSTHUMOUS HONOURS AND SANCTUARIES.
(1)

442—468

The cemetery

sanctuary there [443

of Hippolytus in the Ager Veranus [442]. His Evidence of Prudentius [445]. The Romanus 445].

commemorated by Prudentius [446
described by Prudentius [451
455].

— 453].

— 451].

The

sanctuary and

festival

Gradual decadence of
Laurence [455]. Laurence [456

this shrine [454,

The adjacent cemetery

of S.

architectural history of the basilica of S.

—Importance 458]. Reliques

and

of Hippolytus transferred thither [459, 460]. Consequent transformation in the personality of Hippolytus [460]. Hippolytus the gaoler substituted for

Hippolytus the divine [460 Hippolytus [463, 464].
(3)

—463].
The

Subsequent history of the cemetery of
(4)

(2)

sanctuary on the Vicus Patricius [464, 465].

The sanctuary

at Portus [466].

The

castle

and commemoration

at

Fossombrone [466,

467].

Reverence paid

to

Hippolytus outside

Italy,

especially in France [467, 468].
1

7.

SPURIO US A CTS OF HIPPOL YTUS.
Acts of the Laurentian Cycle.
Acts of the Portuensian Cycle.
468

— 474

474—477

APPENDIX.
1.

S.

2.

PETER IN ROME. THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS.

481—502

503—512

INDICES.
1.

2.

INDEX OF SCRIPTURAL PASSAGES. INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER.

515—517
518—532

THE EPISTLE OF
TO

S.

CLEMENT

THE CORINTHIANS.

CLEM.

II.

THE
are
sq.

scripts

number, two Greek manuand a Syriac version. Codex Alexa?idrinus (A), where the Epistles of Clement (i) added to the New Testament; an uncial manuscript probably
authorities for the text are three in
fifth

belonging to the
It
is

much

It is fully described above, i. p. 116 century. blurred and worn, and a leaf has disappeared
§
it

towards the end of the First Epistle. Thus it omits from In the Second Epistle wv yap iJStKow to the end of § 63.
off at § 12 ovtc apaev ovre 6rj\v tovto, the

57 dvO'

breaks

end of the manuscript

The so-called v e^eAKwri/coi/ is almost uniformly inAll deviations from this authority in my text are noted in The lacunae in this manuscript are the apparatus criticus beneath.
being
lost.

serted.

not stated, except where a various reading is concerned complete list is given at the end of the Epistles.
(2)

;

but a

Codex Constantinopolitanus (C), a cursive manuscript dated It is 1056, and containing the whole of the Two Epistles. The v e^eX/cwTiKoV is systedescribed fully above, 1. p. 121 sq. All the matically omitted, though there are one or two exceptions.
a.d.

variations of this manuscript likewise are recorded beneath, with the exception of the v kfyzkKvmiKov which it seemed unnecessary to
notice.

Syriac Version (S), where the Epistles of Clement are found (3) incorporated among the Epistles of the New Testament in the Philoxenian (Harclean) version. The extant manuscript is dated a.d. 1 1 70. This authority also is described fully in the introduction,
1.

p.

129

sq.

How
to

far this version
it

for the text,

and

what extent

may be accepted as evidence seemed advisable to record

the variations from the Greek, I have there stated with sufficient
precision.

The
duction.

relations of our three authorities to each other,

and the value

to be assigned to each, are considered at length in the general intro-

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 quoting must be a matter of experience and we cannot even assume, where
;

there are variations, that the reading which agrees with the lxx text actual gives the actual words of our author, a tendency to restore the

form of the original being noticeable
self
is

in transcribers

;

(2)

Clement him-

frequently quoted by later fathers, especially by his namesake Clement of Alexandria. But here again discretion is needed, for the

fathers

—notably

the Alexandrian Clement

— often
it is

quote very loosely

and from memory.

Where our

chief authority (A) deserts us,

necessary to be espe-

On this account I have given cially careful in dealing with the others. the variations of the Syriac version in greater fulness in these parts
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 1§z\kv(jtikqv, though wanting in C, because it would certainly have had a place in A, and therefore presumably

than elsewhere

\

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
where
it

any word or words,
pressed by 'def.'
it is

this is signified

by
is

om.'

authority omits is defective by
is

mutilation or otherwise, so that

we cannot

Where

the reading

the reading, this doubtful, as for instance
tell

ex-

when

impossible to say what Greek text the Syriac version represents, the abbreviation is 'dub.' The abbreviations 'app.' and 'prob.' stand for
in the text imply apparently and 'probably'. The square brackets that it is doubtful whether the words or letters so enclosed ought to
' '

[

]

The word Clem in the textual stand as part of the original text. notes signifies Clement of Alexandria ; and, where necessary, the re' '

ference to the page of Potter's edition

is

added.

rrpoc
H 'GKKAHCIA
rrpoc KopiN0ioyc]
see
I.

kopingioyc.
tov Qeov
titles
*

y\

7rapoiKOvcra

Pcojurju

For the

of this epistle in the several authorities

pp. 117, 122, 131.

'The Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth, elect and congreeting in Christ Jesus.' On the form of the address, as connected with the question of the
secrate
;

inave^oov napotKel aocpia, ov KaroiKel,

de Conf ling. § 17
Krjcrav
cos

(1.

p. 416) /caro>-

iv Tvarpibi,

TTapaKrjcrav,

ovx ®S eVi tjivrjs Greg. Naz. Orat. xiv (i.
rrjv

p.

271) Tis
irohiv

KaT(o
;

aKrjvrjv

ical

rr/v

authorship, see the introduction,
p.

I.

ava>

(diaipijaei)
;

ris
(I.

352 sq.

KCU KCLTOIKLCLV

Orat.
els

VU

TvapoLKiav p. 200) €K

The

writer's
it

name

is

suppressed

ttJs

napoiKLas
:

ttjv

here, as

seems also

to

have been

<TK.€va£6p.evoi

comp.

KaroiKiav p,eraGen. xxxvi. 44

suppressed in another letter of the

Church of

Rome

to

the

Church of
a

(xxxvii. i) KarcoKei de 'la/cco/3 iv rrj yjj ov naptpKrjaev 6 Tvarhp avrov iv yrj X.avaav,

Corinth written more than half

Heb.

xi. 9,

Luke

xxiv. 18.

Thus

ixap-

century later during the episcopate of Soter see Dionys. Corinth, in Euseb. H. E. iv. 23. This address is imitated in the openings of three early Christian
;

olkos, na.poiK.elv, TrapoiKia,

are said of

the captivities of Egypt (Acts vii. 6 from LXX, xiii. 17) and of Babylon (Theoph. ad Aut. iii. 25, 28). See
especially the uses of napoiKelv, KaroiKelv, in reference to the migrations of
Israel, in Judith v. 7

documents

at least

;

(1)

The

Epistle

of Poly carp, see I. p. 149 ; (2) The Letter of the Smyrnceans, giving an

10.

Of

these

account
(3)

of

Polycarp's

martyrdom,
;

captivities the present earthly condition of the Christian people is the

see Ignat.

The

Polyc. I. p. 610 sq Apostolic Constitutions. For

and

antitype (Heb.
(2)

iv.

1).

Connected with
is

this

primary

other openingswhich it has influenced (though in a less degree), see the note

conception

the secondary idea of In the inscriptions non-citizenship.
'the sojourners' are opposed to 'the C. I. G. 3595 °* re iroXlrai

on irapoiKovaa below. 1. napoiKovcra] 'sojourning in? (1) The primary idea in this word is
transitoriness.

citizens,'

Kal 01 ndpoiKoi Tvdvres
1

(comp.

ib.

1625,

The

distinction be-

63 1, 2906, 3049).
citizens

The

Christians are

tween ndpoLKos a temporary and k6xoikos a permanent resident appears from Philo Sacr. Ab. et Cain § 10
(i.

no

on

earth.

They

dwell in

the world as aliens,
ndpoiKoi,
1

ijivoi, irap€7ridT}p.oi,
;

Pet.

p. 170) 6

yap

rots iyKvickiois p.6vois

Heb.

xi.

13.

i. comp. 17, ii. n So too Clem. Rom. ii.

6
Trj

THE EPISTLE OF
6KK.\r]cria

S.

CLEMENT
Kopivdov, kAj/Sid
I.

tov Oeov
ev

Tt]

wapOLKOvarj

Tohy
3

tiyiaar/uievois
iravTOKpaTopos]

6e\t]fiaTL

Oeov

tov
i).

Kvplov
5 ai<pvi-

A;

tov iravTOKparopos

C

(comp. Ap. Const.

§

5

KaTaXel^ravres

tt)v

7rapoiKiav

tov

tovtov (comp. C. I. G. 9474 TOV (SlOV TOVTOV Tt)v TTO.poiK.iav), Ep. ad
Kocrpiov

toIs euro tcov tvapoiKidv ev als erT/peiro, Apollon. in Euseb. H. E. v. 18 r] Ibia

napoiKia uvtov

o6ev

r)v

ovk ede^aro
It

'.

Diogn.
(os

naTpidas oiKovaiv idias aXX' ndpoiKoi' p,€T€)(Ovcn navTcov <os no5

whence parochia, parish.
Kia

seems

XTrai kcu TTavff VTrop.evovo'iv cos £evoi' tto.cra £;evr) iraTpis eaTiv avTcov kcu Tracra
TTciTpls £evt],

not strictly correct to say that irapoiwas equivalent to the later term
dioiKTjais
',

where the writer
Christians.

is

de-

scribing

the

A

good

illustration of this sense of napoiKeiv is Orig. c. Cels. iii. 29 ai 8e tov Xpio-Tov
eKKXrjcriai,

for napoiKia, though it is sometimes a synonyme for dioUrjais (e.g. Conc.Ancyr. Can. 18), appears to have been used much more generally.

avve^eTa^opevai Tats

cov 7rap-

oiKovai brjpcov €KKXr/o~iais, cos (pcocrn/pe's' elcriv ev Kocrpoo, ib. 30 eKKfoquias TOV

often given of irapoias though it denoted the aggregate of Christian communities in the
Kia,

The explanation

Oeov TrapoLKOvaas

eKKXrjo-iais tcov

Kaff

neighbourhood of a large town, receives no countenance from the earliest
usage of rrdpoiKos, etc. for the preposition is not local but temporal, and denotes not proximity but trausilo;

tKao-rqv ttoXiv br)ua>v.

Compare

also

the parable in Hennas Vis. I. 1. In the prologue to Ecclesiasticus ol ev
tji

TrapoLKia are the

Jews of the

dis-

riness.

that irapoiKia is almost equivalent to Siao-wopd; and, as the latter word is transferred to the Christian people, the spiritual Israel
(i is

persion, so

Kelv see the
1.

For the accusative after napoinote on Polyc. Phil, inscr. kXtjtoIs k.t.X.] Taken from the
1

salutation in
ev Xpio~Ta>

Cor.

i.

1, 2, rjyiao-pievois

'Itjo-ov, KXrjTo'is dy'iois.

Cle-

Pet.

i.

I

TTapeiribrjuois diaanopas),

SO

the former.

address

here, Polyc. Phil. Trj

Hence the form of which appears also
€KK.\T]cria

ment not unnaturally echoes the language of S. Paul's Epistle to the
Corinthians, even where he does not it. Similarly the Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians predirectly quote

tov Oeov

ttj

Mart. Polyc. rj napoLKovo-a 2pvpvav k.t.X., Dionys. Corinth, in Euseb. H. E. iv. 23 ttj napoikovo-t] Toprvvav, Epist. Gall, in Euseb.
irapoiKovarj QiXirnrovs,

sents parallels to S. Paul's Epistle to the same church, especially in the

H.E.

Buvvt) kcu Aovydovvco ttjs TaXXias napoiKovvTes dovXoi Xpio~Tov.
I

v.

ol iv

opening salutation. The same relation again exists between Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians and the
corresponding
the
letter of S. Paul.
tjyiao-uevois,

From
'

this the

substantive napoiKia

For

came to be used in a concrete sense, the body of aliens,' for the Christian
brotherhood in a town or district. The earliest instances which I have observed are Mart. Poly c.'mscr. naaais
Tals
koto.

meaning of

'conse-

crated to be God's people,' see the notes on toIs dyiois Phil. i. 1.
3.

X"P ls

K- r

-^-]

X^P ls

vpiiv Ka\ elpTjvrj

navTa tottov

ttjs

dyias kcu

KadoXLKfjs €KK.Xr)o-ias irapoiKiais,

Corinth. [?] in Euseb.

H. E.

Dionys. iv. 23

salutation in S. Paul, excepting the Pastoral Epistles. With the addition of nXr^OwOei^ however it
is

the

common

ap.a Tals Xonrais koto. Kprp~r)v TvapoiKiais, Iren. in Euseb. H. E. v. 24 elprjvevov

occurs only in the two Epistles of S. Peter, from whom probably Clement derived the form, as the First

i]
'

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
Irjcrov

7

rifjiiov

XpiCTOv.

X a P t£

^lu ^u

KaL zipviwi diro ttclvto.

5

KpaTOpos Oeov diet 'Irjcrou XpiCTOv 7rAt]6uv6eir] I. Aia t«5 ai<pvi&iovs kcli €7ra\\r\\ovs
diovs] at(ppr)diov<T

yevo/ULevas
§ 9.

A.

yevo/xtvas]

C

;

evcur

A.

S has a present; comp.

Epistle

is
1

frequently quoted by him.

were modest

;

your wives were quiet

In Jude
eipjjvT]

we have

e'Xtos

vpuv koI

and
5.

orderly.'

kcu dydnT] TrXrjQvvBeir].
'

Tas alcpvidiovs k.t.X.]

This lan-

navTOKparopos] The LXX rendering of JTI&QV in the expression the Lord of Hosts (see Stanley, Jewish Church
'

II. p. 87), apparently not a classical In the New Testament it word. occurs once only out of the Apoca-

where S. Paul is So again quoting from the LXX. §§ 2, 32 (LXX), 56, 60, 62 (comp. § 8
lypse, 2 Cor. vi. 18,

navTOKparopiKcp),

Polyc. Phil,

inscr.,

Herm.
sition

Vis.

Polyc. 14.

3 (Sim. v. 7), See also Pearson
iii.

Mart.

Exposigni-

of the Creed
its

p.

78 sq (ed.

guage accurately describes the persecution which the Roman Christians endured under Domitian. Theirtreatment by this emperor was capricious, and the attacks upon them were reWhile the persecution of peated. Nero was one fierce and wholesale onslaught in which the passions of the multitude were enlisted on the emperor's side, Domitian on the other hand made use of legal forms and arraigned the Christians from time to time on various paltry charges see
;

Chevallier) for ficance in the
'

position

and

Latin Creed. As a Latin translation of iravTOKpaTfop, 'om'

its
'

nipotens is the survival of the fittest, defunct rivals being omnitenens,' omnipollens,' etc. Conversely the Latin 'omnipotens' is sometimes

350 sq. Apollonius in Philostr. Vit. Apoll. vii. 4 distinguishes two kinds of tyrants of which Nero and Tiberius respectively are
I.

above,

p. 81, p.

the types the one passionate reckless (oppoicrrjs km o/cpirou),

and
the

translated by navTodvvapos for navTOKpdrcop Gesch. d.

204

sq,

comp. Caspari Qttellen z. Taufsymbols III. pp. vi, 24, 209—212. The two occur to;

other stealthy and treacherous (vnoKadrjpevrjs), the one acting with violence, the other using forms of
justice.

gether in the Liturgy of S. James, rravTodwapc €i, dyios 7ra.PT0Kpa.TQip, (Swainson's Greek Liturgies p. 270
sq).
'

Obviously he places the contemporary tyrant Domitian in this second class. Again Domitian
11)

I.

We should have written sooner,
own
troubles have hindered

but our
us.

We are grieved to hear that

one

described by Suetonius (Domit. in language closely resembling Clement's, 'non solum magnae sed et callidae inopinataeque saevitiae.' Compare the accounts in Euseb. H.E. iii. 17 sq, Chron. an. 95, Dion
is

or two headstrong ring-leaders have fanned the flame of discord among This was not your wont in you. former days. Your firm faith, your

Domit. 12, 15. speaks of ol noXXol tVi AopcTiavov duoypoi (though this
Cass,
lxvii.

14, Suet.
1

So Mart. Ign.

refers especially to Antioch).

sober piety, your large hospitality, your sound knowledge, were the admiration of all. Authority was duly
respected by you.

These and other passages referring to the persecution of Domitian are given in
In one of above, I. p. 104 sq. these attacks the writer's namesake,

full

Your young men

8

THE EPISTLE OF
(rujUL(popa^

S.

CLEMENT

[i

t)fjLiv

(^ofjiev

d$eA(pol, fipd^tov vopatvov £Tri<£if]TOv\ievwv €7TLG'Tpocj)r]u 7T€7roirj(rdai rrepl
7r€f>i7rT(oo'€is,

Kat

irap Kal

vfjuv

7rpa<yfJLaT(*iv,

dycnrrjTOi,

Ttjs

re

dWorpias
C
lapstts et

toIs ekXektoTs tov Oeov, juiapas Kal dvocriov ^evtjs
i

t)[uj>]

AS
;

;

Ka0'

7}ixQ>v

C.

7re/H7TTa><reis]

A

;

TrepiardcreLS

;

damna

which evidently represents irepnrTwveis (see I. p. 136). ade\(pol] A; om. C. See below § 4, where S makes the same change. dyaTrrjToi S fipadiov] (3pa5eiov A. 3 7ra/>' vpuv irp<xyp.aTi>3v~\ A ; Trpay/jL&Twv Trap vpuv C
S,
1

;

and patron

(as I venture to think), Flavius Clemens, a kinsman of the emperor, fell a victim; see I. 33 sq. Thus the notice here accords with external testimony which places the Corinthian feuds to which this letter see refers in the reign of Domitian
;

will

repeated

and and reverses which have befallen us, we consider we have been somewhat slow to pay

mean Owing to
'

the sudden

calamities

attention to the questions of dispute

among you?

the introduction, I. p. 347. Volkmar (Theol. Jahrb. 1856, p. 286 sq, and

The reader must be cautioned against the rendering adopted in some translations, English and Latin those things which you
' ;

who assigns a much later date to this epistle, is obliged to refer the notice here to the sufferings of the Christians under Trajan; but
elsewhere),

enquired of
fuerant

us,'

which you consulted

'the points respecting us,' 'ea quae

there is no evidence that this persecution extended to Rome. Our epistle therefore was probably written to-

wards the close of Domitian's reign or on the accession of Nerva (about A.D. 95 or 96). Other notices of time
agree with this result; see above, I. p. 348 sq. successive, repeated] enaXkrjXovs] 2l comparatively late but common word, e.g. Philo in Flacc. 14 (11. p.
in the

This quaesita a vobis.' rendering involves a historical misstatement. The expression contains no allusion to any letter or other application from the Corinthians to the Romans. Clement does not write trap vfxwv, but nap' vpuv; and ra eVtfyTovpeva means simply 'the matters of dispute,' not 'desiderata,' as it is

body of the
'

letter

534 M.) ras
KaKcoaeis,

(rvv(-)(ils

Kal inaXXrjXovs

sometimes rendered, eVt^Vq/xa being 'a question.' It would appear that the Roman Christians had not been directly consulted by the Church of Corinth, but having heard of the
feuds by
aKorj)

Plut.

Pomp.
;

enaXX-qXois Kal 7roXep,ois

25 see

tcivbvvois

Lobeck

Paral.

p. 471.

It is

restored indeed

by Hermann
restoration

Ant. 57, but this very doubtful, and the word there must have the sense rein Soph.
is
'

common report (§ 47 avrq wrote this letter unsolicited. 4. %€vt]s] Doubtless the right reading; comp. Clem. Horn. vi. 14 cos dXrjBeias aXXorpiav ovaav Kal £evr]V. No sense can be made of gevois. The
17

For enaXXrjXovs yevopevas ciprocal.' comp. Alciphr. Ep. i. 23 x i< v f vk*"7 Otherkol endXXrjXos (fie pofxevrj. wise we might read eVaXX^Xws, which
*>

$€vr]s)

doubling of epithets (dXXorpias Kal is after Clement's manner,
especially in this opening

chapter

;

e.g.

piapds Kal dvoaiov,
irpoawira]
'

TrpoTverr)

Kal

occurs Epist.

Gall. % 14 in Euseb.

avdddt], iravdptTov Kal ftefiaiav, etc.
5.

H. E.
1.

v.

I.

Not simply
'

'persons'
47,

vofxi£ofxev]

The whole passage

but 'ringleaders'

;

comp.

§

and

I]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
t\v

5

(rracecos,

oAiya

7rpocrco7ra

7rp07reTtj

kcli

avdddt]

virap-^ovra
crefjivov

eis

toctovtov dirovoias epeKavaav, wctte to
Kal
irdcriv

teal

7repi(56riTOv

dvdpioTrois

d^iaydtls

7Tf]T0v bvojua vfJLcov fxeyaXcos
7rape7TLSrj^Lr](ra^
dub. S.
<pr}/xr)dT]uai]

/3\a(r(priiuLtidrjvai.

yap

7rpos v/uds ty\v iravdpeTOv Kal (iefiaiav

dyavrjToi]

AC; om.
C;

S.

A;

pXao-firjpeTvdcu
$\a.<pQr\va.i.

4 ^evrjs] CS; ijevoia A. ut laederetur or laedatur (fliDDi)

8 jSXao -

S,

which

perhaps represents

see the note on Ign. Magn. 6. authors of these feuds are again

The
men-

ovopa
lute

tioned as few in number,
rj

§

47 SY ev

hvo Tvpoaa>Tva aTaaid^eiv npos rovs
6.

For this absoftXao-cprjpe'iTai. use of to ovopa, which is not infrequent in earlier Christian writers, see the note on Ign. Ephes. 3, and

irp eo~(3vTepovs.

els too-ovtov k.t.A.]

'

have kindled
;

to

such a pitch of recklessness''

comp.

§

46

els

Editors

Toaavrrjv dnovoiav ipxofxeda. have taken offence at the
its

comp. Phil. ii. 10 (with my note). It might be thought that to ovopa vpatv here would mean 'the name of Christ which you bear'; but this would have been expressed otherwise, e.g. James ii. 7 ^Xaacprjpovaiv to koXov bvopa to eniKXrjOev e'ef) vpas, Herm. Sim. viii. 6 enaio-xwOevTes to

expression, but

awkwardness

is

no

sufficient reason for altering the text ; comp. § 45 els tovovto e^rjpiaav

6vpov. Otherwise vno dirovo'ias might be read. In dnovoia shamelessuess rather than folly is the prominent
idea, so that the dnovevorjpevos
is described by Theophrastus (Char, xiii) as one wholly devoid of self-respect.

ovopa Kvpiov to eniKXrjdev err avTovs. It is hardly necessary to add that is fiXao-cpripe'iv frequently used of

calumniating or maligning human beings; e.g. Rom. xiv. 16 pr) /3Xao-(prjpe IcrOai vpwv to dyadov (comp. iii.
8).

to

aepvbv
Trjs

k.t.X.]
TtepifiorJTov

So

§

47

to
:

aepvov

<piXaheX<pias

comp. Ign. Eph. 8
fiorJTov Tols ala>o~iv.

eKKXr]<rias rijs hia-

The whole pastis yap k.t.X.] sage as far as enopeveo-Be is quoted by Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 17 (p. 610) val
ev Tjj npos KopivBiovs eiriaToXfj o dnoo-ToXos KXrjprjs Kal avTos r]plv tvttov Tivd tov yvoicrTiKov vnoypacpcov Xeyei,
pr)v

8. ovopa vpa>v\ 'your reputation' or 'character' or worth? See the note
'

on

Ign.

Ephes.

I

to

TroXvaydnrjTov

ovopa o KeKTt]o-0e cpvaei. The addition of the pronoun seems to require this sense, and the epithets as well as the whole context, suggest it. On
the other
(p-qpelv

Tis yap k.t.X.
9.
irapenih-qpr)o-as~\

This 'bimaris
natural

hand the expression
where there

/3Xao-is

halting place on the journey between Rome and the East, as we see in the case

Corinthus'

was

a

to ovopa,

no

pronoun or adjective, means 'to speak evil of,' 'to blaspheme the Name,' i.e. of Christ or of
qualifying

somewhat H. E. iv.
Oral.

companions, and Hegesippus (Eus. Diogenes is repre22). sented as visiting it (Dion Chrys.
of S. Paul
his later of
viii. p.
1

and

God
rjpas

;

e. g. 2
pr)

Clem.
6

1

3 iva to ovopa hi

5 1 ed.

Emper) on
Trjs

TrXelT)

(3Xao-<pr)prJTai,
iii.

Clem. Alex.
hi

CTTOl dvdpOiTTOl €Kel 0~VViaO~l. ..KOI OTl

Strom,

(p.

532)

ovs Kal to

noXis coa7rep ev Tpiohto

'iLXXahos

10
vjucov

THE EPISTLE OF
it'mttiv

S.

CLEMENT
Tr\v

[i

ovk

ehoKLfxaaev

;

re

caxppova

kcli

XpHTTio evaefieiav ovk edavfiaaev ; kcli to ovk eKrjpv^ev; /UL€ya\o7rp67T6£ rfjs (piXo^evias v/utov fjdos
€7rLeiKrj

ev

kcli

ty\v

TeXetav

kclI

dacpaXfj yvtotriv ovk
ttclvtcl

efj.ctKCLpio'ev

;

cL7rpoo-L07ro\YifA7rTU>s
/ulols

yap
Tl[XY\V

eTroieire, kcll to?? vo\xi- 5

tov Oeov
VfJLCOV

€7ropeveo-6e 9

v7roTaa'cr6fxevoL toIs r\yovKadr]KOVO~CLV
610.

fJL€VOLS
i

KCLL

Tt]V

CL7T0VejU0VT6^

vpQiv iriariv]

AC;
3 ovk]

k'kxtlv

vpwv Clem
oill.

2 eirieiKr) ev]

CS Clem;
5 airpoc-

€ttl€IK7]vv

A.

AC
;

;

S.

4 da<paXrj] a<7(pa\riv A.
(edd.).
;

UTroXrjfXTrTios]

A;

aTrpoaw7ro\r]TT0)S

C Clem

tiroie'ire] eTroieirai

A.

tois

A in lege (ND1D32) S iv rois vdfxots C ; ev rols approved by Wotton and others. The rendering of S shows nothing as regards the reading; for (1) the preposition would be required in any case; (2) the singular is explained by the accidental omission of ribiti;
vofj.ifj.ots]

ToiavofxoLois

vofii/xoLs

Clem, which

(3) v6fiLfxov is

elsewhere translated by
it

KD1D3

(vbfxos)

in this version (comp. §§ 3, 40).

eKftro.

So

also

is

called the

ivepL-

naros or 'lounge' of Greece ; see [Dion Chrys.] xxxvii. p. 522 with the context,
cos

eva tcov 7v6XXg>v
els

Kai kclt

iviavTov
77

For the more special sense see the note on § 48. For this ad5. a.7rpo(T(07roki]p,7rT(Ds] verb see 1 Pet. i. 17, Barnab. 4. For
the
forms,
-X^pnTcos,
-Xt/tttcos,

KaraipovroiV
6e<opbv
f)

Keyxpeasrj

epnopov

see

irpecrfievTrfv

biep^opevov.

Hence
on
or
§

there

mand for hospitality there
IO (piXo^eviav,
§

was an abundant desee below
;

Winer's Grammar p. 53(ed. Moulton). For an instance of the capricious orthography of both our MSS comp.
§

35 d<piXo£eviav.
either in

12

o-vXXr)[p]yl/op.evovs,

(TvXXr][p](p1

Travaperov]

Not found
:

LXX

Bevras.
toTs vopipois] § 3 ev rols

New

Testament, but a favourite
see §§
2, 45, 57,

'by the ordinances'
vopipois
tosv

\

word with Clement

so

irpocr-

He de60, with the note on § 57. lights in such compounds, e.g. Trapp.eyeOi]S,
TTOTTTrjS.

raypariou avrov nopeveadai, § 40 rots' vopipois tov deanoTov dicoXovdovvTes,

navdyios,

Tvap.irXr]6rjs i

navTe-

Hermas
vop.ip.ci

Vis.

i.

3 eav

T-qprjo-oacriv

ra

tov

Qeov.

2.

iirieuaft'forbeating?

This yield-

ing temper, this deference to the feelings of others, was the quality esFor pecially needed at such a time.
eirKiKeta

vopipois 7ropev€o-8ai xviii. 3, xx. 23, and ev toIs vopipois
iropeveo-Oai Jer. xxvi (xxxiii). 4, Ezek. For the dative, dev. 6, 7, xx. 18.

The phrase toIs occurs LXX Lev.

comp.

§§ 13, 56, 58, 62,
It

see Philippians iv. 5. nently a characteristic

and was emiof Clement

noting the rule or standard, see Galatians
6.

v. 16, 25, vi. 16.
i.

toIs r\yovpevois]

e.

the officers

himself; see

I.

p. 97.

of the Church, as § 21 tovs nporjyov-

For the to p.eyaXonpenes k.t.X.] reproof lurking under this allusion to their past hospitality, see the note
on
dcptXo^eviav § 35.
yvGxriv]
4.

comp. Heb. xiii. 7 pvrj-qpcov povevere tu>v i]yovp.ev(ov vp.a>v oirives tov Qeov, and e'XdXrjo-av vplv tov Xoyov
pevovs
:

Here used

generally.

iii.

again 9

xiii.

17,

24

;

Hermas
rrjs

Vis.

ii.

2,

oi TrporjyovpevoL

eKK.Xr)o~ias,

I]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
Trap
v/uLi/

I I

Toh
voeiv
10 Kai

TrpecrfiuTepois'

veois re /uerpia kcll (refjivd

yvvai^iv re ev djuco/uco teal (re/uivtj dyvfj cruveidr](TeL irdvTa eirLTeXeiv TrapryyyeWeTe,
67reTpe7r€Te'

(TTepyoucras KadtjKOVTtos tovs dvdpas eavTtcv ev T6 tw Kavovi Trjs viroTayt]^ virap^ovcras Ta KaTa tov oIkov
(renvois OLKOVpyeTv eSi$dcrK€T€,
I

irdw
ev is

craxppovovaras.
«

have adopted

vofj.ifj.oLs

from Clem, but

note)

and was probably

his

own

insertion.
;

not wanted (see the explanatory 6 eiropevecrde] CS Clem; iropev-

eadai A.

7 vfxwv]

AS

om. C.
9
dfjLW(jt.ii)

KaOrjKovaav] nadiKovaav
Kai
crefxvfj

A.
dyvrj

8 vfuv\
dfXLbfup

AS;

rffiiv

C.

Kai dyvrj]

AC;

Kai

S (certainly omitting Kai aefxpr), but the transposition of dyvrj and d/jubfxcp may be due to the convenience of translation see above, 1. p. 137. 13 olKovpyeTv] A ; oUovpeiv (but apparently 7 has been erased) C curam-geretites
;
;

operuvi {studiose agentes in operibus) S.

See the lower note.
accordingly. For the change from the dative (ywaigiv) to the accusative
(o-Tepyova-as)

v. 12.

Similarly ot7rpoto-ra'/Ltei/oti5/Lta5 1/, 1 Thess. The reference therefore is not to civil officers, as some take it and the rrpeo-ftvTepois in the next clause
;

comp. Mark

vi.

39 eV-

refers to age, not to office, as the The 'presfollowing veois shows. ' byters or elders,' properly so called,
'

era£ev avTois dvaK\i6rjvai irdvras, Acts XV. 22 e8o£ev rols a7roo-ro\oi? k.t.X.

are exhausted in rols rjyovp.evois, but these are not the only seniors to

€K\e^apivovs avdpas i§ avrdtv 7vepy\rat, and see Jelf's Gram. §§ 675, 676. ' e» re ra Kavovi k.t.X. 1 i. e. not over-

reverence is due, and Clement accordingly extends the statement so as to comprise all older men, thus preparing the way for the mention of 'the young' also as a class. Similarly

whom

stepping the line, not transgressing the limits, of obedience '; e.g. §41 pr)
TrapeK(3aiv(ov

tov

(opio-fxivov

rfjs

Aet-

On the meTovpyias avrov Kavova. taphor of Kavcjv, 'a measuring line] see Galatians vi. 16, and the note on
§ 7, below.
'

§21, where, as
7rp€(r{3vTepoi,
veoi,

here, 7rpor)yovp.€vot, yvvcuKes, occur in
is

1 3.

olKovpytlv]
1

to

succession.

There

the

same

diffi-

in the house.
vail

The

classical

ply their work forms

culty about the use of npeo-fivrepoi in connexion with veeorepoi in 1 Pet. v.
1

sq, Polyc. Phil. 5, 6.
9.

ineTpinere]
Plat.
vi. 5. 11

e.g. in

ye enjoined] as Legg. p. 784 c, Xen.
(see Kuhner's note).

'

are oiKovpos, olKovpelv, and these preeven at the Christian era and much later e. g. Philo de Spec. Leg. 31 (II. p. 327) 6r)\eiais (e(papp.6£et) olKovpla, de Execr. 4 (il. p. 431) yvval;

Anab.

Kas acoeppovas oiKovpovs Kai (pikdvdpovs,

yvvai^iv re k.t.A..] See Polyc. Phil. 4 eVetra Kai tcis yvvalKas k.t.A., where Polycarp follows Clement's language

and the illustrative passages in WetBut in Tit. ii. 5 stein on Tit. ii. 5.
o-ccxppovas,

here and in

§ 21.

v7roTao~o~op.evas

dyvds, oiKovpyovs, dyadds, ro7s Idiots dvdpdaiv,

11. arepyovaas] It should probably be taken with the foregoing clause, and I have altered the punctuation

which passage Clement may have had in his mind, the great preponderance of the best authorities have

12
II.
vevofxevoiy
olKovpyovs,

THE EPISTLE OF
Flavres

S.

CLEMENT
fxri^ev

T6

€T<x7reivo(ppoveiT6>

a'Aa£b-

vwoTaarcroiueuoi
;

/uaWov

rj

v7roTct(T(rovT€s,

reading

the

not oiKovpovs and this ablest recent editors
Tregelles,

The ordinanjoiced in doing good. ces of God were graven on your
hearts.'
2.

(Tischendorf,

Westcott

and Hort; have adopted. In this passage of Clement also A has olKovpyovs, and so apparently it was
read originally in C, but the y has been erased. Bryennios says veu>l

v7roTa.o~o-6p.evo1 k. T.A.J
ii.

See Ephes.

v. 21, Phil.
1

3,

Rom.

xii. 10, 16,

and

Pet. v.

5 (v.l.).

to y.' Bnt judgphotograph, I should imagine that it was impossible to say who erased the letter whether the

repa x 6i P

d-jrp\ei^re

3. rjdiou k.t.X.] Doubtless a reference to our Lord's words recorded Acts xx. 35, pa.Ka.pi6v icrTLV paXXov

ing by

the

dtdovai

?}

Xapftdveiv

;

see below, § 13,

where the context of the passage is It was no new commandechoed.

original
rector.

scribe
I

or

some

later

cor-

disposed to think that the original scribe wrote down oiKovp-

am

ment however, though instinct with Maxims similarly a new meaning. had been uttered by the expressed
two opposite schools of philosophy, starting from different principles and speaking with different motives. For the Epicureans see Plut. Mor. p.
778 C 'EniKovpos tov eu
-rdcrxeiv

an older MS which he had before him, and then after his wont (see above, I. p. 126 sq) corrected it into the more classical form. At
yovs, following
all

events there
scribes

is

a tendency in the

to ev

and correctors to return to the more classical form, as we see from the later corrections of AC
later
in Tit.
ii.

ttouIv ov povov koXXiov dXXa. kcu fjdiov -Ival (prjcri, a .d for the Stoics, Seneca

5.

The

Syriac here

is

Epist. lxxxi. § 17 'Errat si quis beneficium accipit libentius quam reddit'

pmain [SlftO*?, the same rendering being given in the Peshito and Harclean in Tit. ii. 5. It seems to represent oiKovpyovs rather than oltcovpovs, the first element of the word (olkos) having been already exhausted in the translation of the preceding ra Kara top oIkov and therefore not
needing repetition. Perhaps however it may be intended to combine
the ideas of -ovpyelv

(both quoted by Wetstein on Acts
I.e.).

toIs e(po8ioLs k.t.X.]

sion which

God has
life.'
'

journey of
Epist.
lxvii.

i. e. the provisupplied for the Similarly Seneca

'

§

3

Quia quantulumplus

cumque haberem, tamen
mihi superesset
Epictet.
€(f)66L0V

jam
viae,'
ti

viatici

quam
filOV,

Diss.

iii.

21.

9 exovras
p,6vov

TOIOVTOV

€IS

TOV

Plljt.
£fjv

same verb
II.

is

and -ovpelv. The more commonly a ren-

Mor.
dXXa
in

p.

160 B as

pr)

tov

Ka\ tov diroOvrjo-Keiv ttjv Tpo<prjv
;

dering of p,epipvav or empeXelaOai.

icpobiov ovo-av

'Submission and contentment
lives.

comp. Dionys. Corinth, Euseb. H. E. iv. 23 (KKXrjo-lais
It
is

were the rule of your

The
;

TroXXais raxs KaTa nao-av ttoXlv ecpodca
Txip-j-iv.

teaching of God was in your breasts the passion of Christ before your eyes. Peace and good-will reigned among Spiritual graces and incessant you. prayers distinguished you. You loved the brethren you bore no malice to you reany you loathed faction
;

the

same sentiment
8iaTpo(pds ko\
dpK€o~dr)o-6p.e0a.

as

I

Tim.
idea

vi. 8, e'xovTes

aKerrdo-paTa

tovtols

The
seems

of

spiritual

sustenance

;

;

ecpodia For this

to be out of place here, though not unfrequentlyhas this sense.

and other reasons the words

n]
h'Aion

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
AiAont6c h AamBanontgc, tois e(po$iois
3 rod Qeov]

13

tov

Qeov

A

;

tov Xpio~Tov CS.

to7s e<p. tov Q. apK.

must be connected

On

the other hand Gaius (or rather

with the preceding clauses, so that the new idea is introduced by kol
7rpoaex.ovT€s.

Hippolytus) early in the third century inthe Little Labyrmt/i(H. is. v. 28; see

The

Syriac version init

deed attaches
lates the

koi TrpoaexovTes to tne

Routh Rel. Sac?'. II. p. 129) mentions Clement with Justin, Miltiades, and
several others,' aTatian, besides mong those ev oh 8eo\oyelTat 6
Xpio-Tos.
'

preceding sentence, but

manipuif it

words following, as

had

read tovs t€ Xcryov$...eveaTepviap.evoi
(om, frc).
tov

Routh (p. 145) supposes Clement of Rome to be meant (as

The reading tov Xpiaaccepted by Bryennios and Hilgenfeld (ed. 2) on the authority
tov Qeov]
is

of C.

On

the other

hand Harnack

while Donaldson ; hesitates between the two readings. As regards external evidence, the balance is fairly even. If the view
retains tov Qeov
(1. pp. 124 sq, 139 142 sq) of the relative value of our authorities be correct, is entitled to as great weight as CS to-

maintained above
sq,

also does Bunsen, Hippol. I. p. 440), because the author of the Little Labyrinth refers distinctly to works written before the time of Victor who became bishop about A.D. 189 or 190, and indeed the whole argument turns on this point. To this it may be added that Hippolytus afterwards (p. 131) uses an expression re'

'

A

sembling the language of the Roman Clement here, 6 evcnrXayxvos Qeos
Kvpios ijpcov 'irjaovs Xpio-Tos ovk e(Sov\eTo ... a7ro\eo~6ai papTvpa tg>v lb Lav 77 a 6 do v, and that Clement of
Koi

gether.
trinal

Moreover the obvious docmotive, which in C has led to
another place
it

the deliberate substitution of Aoyoy
for irvevpa in

must deprive
it

of

much

§ 9), value in
(ii.

Alexandria (who is the alternative) can only have died a few years (ten
or at most twenty) before the passage was written. On the other side it

the present case.
is

On

the other

hand

urged with probability that, as (Bibl. 126) complains of Clement's language in this epistle
Photius
apxLepea koi
Ir]o~ovv
7rpoo~Ta.TT]v

may be urged
names,
ovcov,

that the order of the
kol

'lavorivov

M/XrtaSou

/cat

TaTLCivoi) koi KXr/pevTos kcu eTepcov nXei-

on

tov Kvpiov

qpoiv

XpiaTov

e£ >vopa£<ov ovbe

ment but
;

points to the Alexandrian Clethis is not conclusive, since

Tas OeoTTperrels teat vyJAi]XoTepas cicpfJKe nepl avTov epeovas, he cannot have had

in the very next sentence the

chrono-

logical order of Melito
is

tov Qeov in his text.

But, as the declaration of Christ's divinity lurks under the reference of the pronoun
avTov,
it might very easily have escaped the notice of Photius who in

inverted, to. MeXiTcovos kol tcov XolttoZv tis dypoel fii(3Xia ; The question therefore must

Irenaeus, yap ILlp-qvaiov re kol

and

remain undecided; though the reasons in favour of the Roman Clement

the course

of

this

single

embassy

seem

to preponderate.

As

it is

very

read as large a number of books as would have sufficed many a man not ill-informed for a life-time. Even
if

this

the inference were more certain, evidence would not go far, for Photius is a late writer.

improbable that so early a writer as Hippolytus should have recognised as genuine any other writings ascribed to Clement of Rome, his judgment must have been founded upon
this epistle.

H
The
far

THE EPISTLE OF
external evidence therefore
;

S.

CLEMENT

["

is

Xpio-Tov for rov Qeov.

The language

from conclusive and if any decision on the reading is possible, it must be founded upon internal eviBut here the considerations dence. which present themselves are numerous.
(i)

of Anastasius of Sinai (Hodeg. 12, x 3> P- 97 sq) shows that these passages of earlier writers (he mentions among others Ign. Rom. 6) were constantly alleged in favour of Mono-

As a question
;

of accidental

is

error in transcription, the probability evenly balanced for^u instead of

physite doctrine, and he himself has some trouble in explaining them away. Writing against these same
heretics Isidore of Pelusium (Ep. i. 124) says Qeov 7rd6os ov XeyeTai, Xpia-

Bv,

and Bv instead of
scribes.

xv, are equally

other hand, if we have a deliberate alteration, the chances that Xpia-rov would be substituted for Qeov are, I think, greater than the

common with On the (2)

tov yap to Trddos yeyove

k.t.A.

On

the

other hand,

might be said that the Monophysites themselves would be
it
;

under a temptation to alter x v i nt0 and accordingly Bryennios sup6v
poses that in this passage the reading of A is due to the Monophysites (or, as he adds, perhaps to the AlexanThis does not seem drian divines). very likely, (a) In the first place, it would be a roundabout and precarious way of getting a testimony in favour of their doctrine. If tov Xpicrtov (thus assumed to be the original
reading) had been in direct connexion with to. rraOrjpaTa, 3. change in this direction would not be improbable ; but it would never have occurred to any one to alter toIs ecpobtois tov
XpicrTov into toIs ecpodlois tov Qeov, because there happened to be the ex-

chances

of

the

converse

change.

Such language Qeov, and the
in the

as alpa Qeov,ira6r)p.aTa
like,

though common second and third centuries,

became highly distasteful in later ages and this from various motives. The great Athanasius himself pro;

tests against
ii.

such phrases,
758)
7T(os

c.

Apollin.

ovv yeypdcpare on Qeos 6 did aapKos iraBwv kcu dvaards ;...ovbapov 8e alpa Qeov St^a aap13, 14
(i.

p.

Kos napabebcoKao-iv ai ypacpal

rj

Qeov did

aapKos iraOovra Kaia.vao~Ta.vT a. And how liable to correction such expressions would be, we may infer from the long recension of the Ignatian Epistles, where the original language of the
writer
is deliberately altered by the interpolator, who appears to have lived in the latter half of the fourth
1 iv alpaTi Qeov, where XpicrTov is substituted for Qeov ; Rom. 6 tov irdBovs tov Qeov p,ov, where this

pression Ta naOrjpaTa avrov in the next sentence, so that avTov would naturally be referred to the genitive
It would have been much simpler to change avTov

after toIs eqbodiois.

century {Ephes.

into tov Qeov at once, (b) Secondly, the dates are not favourable to this

supposition.
is

interpolator
tov Qeov

softens

down

the lan-

The MS which has Qeov assigned by the most competent

guage by inserting Xpio-Tov before
p.ov,

while others substitute

authorities to the fifth century, and by some of them to the earlier half

TOV KvpLOV pOV Or TOV XpiO~TOv).

At

this time the heresy to which such expressions seemed to give countelater date,

of the century (see above, 1. p. 117); and, though not impossible, it is not probable that the Monophysite

nance was Apollinarianism. At a when the Monophysite controversy arose, there would be a still greater temptation on the part of an orthodox scribe to substitute tov

controversy would have influenced the transcription of the MS at this date. On the other hand Photius, our earliest authority for tov Xpio-Tov (supposing that his evidence be ac-

»]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

15

cepted), wrote four centuries later, when there had been ample time for such manipulation of the text. But,

It is more to the purpose to (4) urge that, though such language is not uncommon in other writers, it has

besides the doctrinal motive which might have suggested the change from Qeov to Xpiarov, there may also have been an exegetical reason. The

word efybhiov, viaticum, was used especially of the eucharistic elements (e.g. Lit. D. Marc. p. 29, Lit. D. Jacob, p.

75, Neale),

tural desire to fix this sense

and there would be a naon S.

no parallel in Clement that he elsewhere speaks of the blood of Christ (§§ 7, 21, 49) and describes itas precious to God His Father (§ 7) and that throughout this epistle he applies the term Qebs to the Father as distinguished from Christ. This argument has considerable weight, but must
;

'

'

'

'

;

Clement
(3)

here.

The

probability that such lan-

guage as ra naOijfJLara tov Qeov should have been used by an early Christian writer can hardly be questioned. These early writers occasionally used
language
so

not be overstrained. The Catholic doctrine of the Person of Christ admits both ways of speaking. Writers like Tertullian, who use the most extravagant and unguarded language on the other side, are commonly and even in the same context found speaking of Christ as distinct from God and the exact proportions which the one mode of speaking will bear to the other in any individual writer must be a matter of evidence. It is
;

strong

in

expressing
;

their belief of our Lord's divinity, as almost to verge on patripassianism

SO Ign. Ephes. I dva^convprjo-avTes iv aliiaTi Qeov, Ign. Rom. 6 enLTpe-^-are elvai tov nddovs tov Qeov fioL p.ip.t]TT]v
p.ov,

Melito (Routh Ret. Sacr. I. p. 122) 6 Qebs TverrovQev vnb hei-ias IcrLevi 4 parj\iTi8os, Test, xii Pat?\
eVi
to)

TraBet

tov
;

ancient writing
sq),
'

v^riaTov (a very see Galatians p. 307
ireirov-

from the newly discovered endQebs k.t.X.) that he ing (§ 58 Cfl y^p could have had no sympathy with Ebionite views of the Person of Christ. Moreover, in the passage
clear

Tatian ad Graec. 13 tov

Cam. Chr. 5 passiones Dei,' ad Uxor. ii. 3 sanguine Dei (and so elsewhere TerGod crucified, tullian speaks of God dead,' the flesh of God/ the murderers of God'; see de Cam. Chr. 5, adv. Marc. ii. 16, 27, v. 5), A?ic. Syr. Doc. p. 8 (ed. Cureton)
Sotos Qeov, Tertull. de
' ' '
3

especially quoted (§ 7) one authority, which probably preserves the right reading, omits Qecp. And after all the
alternative remains which Abbot is disposed to favour (p. 343), that Cle-

'

'

<

ment wrote avTov negligently, not remembering that tov Qeov had immediately preceded and referring it in his own mind to Christ.
It remains to enquire whether (5) the connexion is more favourable to This will tov Qeov or tov XpLo-Tov. depend partly on the connexion of If the punctuation the sentences.

God was crucified for all And similar passages from
'

men,'

etc.

writers of

these and the succeeding generations

might be multiplied. See Abbot 1. c. p. 340 sq, Otto Corp. Apol. C/irist.
IX. p. 445.

The

nearest parallel in
is

the
ttjv
o~clto

New
bid
if

Testament

Acts xx. 28,
rjv

eKKhrjcr'iav

tov Qeov

7repie7roir};

given in my text be retained, tov Qeov is almost necessary for ra e(pn81a then refers to the ordinary means of subsistence. Hilgenfeld reads and
;

even

tov aLfxaTos tov IBiov but tov Qeov be the correct readit is),

punctuates to7s
dpK.ovp.evoi

eqboBtois tov

koX

%poo-ixovres,
'

Xpiarov under-

ing (as possibly
is

the form of ex-

standing by the term
tenance.'

pression these patristic references.

far

less

strong than in

This seems

spiritual susto give to

me

an awkward sense

(for the

mention

i6
dpKOVfJievoC

THE EPISTLE OF
teal

S.

CLEMENT
avTOu
^>
K€tl

[n
eiri-

7rpo(T6xovTes
rjre

roik Xoyovs

/zeAws

evecTTepVLG-fjievoL

Toh <T7rAayX^

Ta

iradrifJiaTa
pr\vr]

avrov

y\v

irpd

(iadeia Kal Xiirapd

Ovtws ei6<pda\pu)v vpwv. eSedoro irdciv Kal aKOpearros
irXripns

7r66os

ek dyadowoil'av, Kal
C;
ecrrepvicr/AevoL
. .

Trvevfiaros

dyiov
.erant S,
ribui.

5

2 iveaTepviafihot]

A.
.
.

4 \nrapa edtdoro] \eiirapae8e-

§ eT0

A.

5 xX?7pr/s

?kxv<tis

iylvero]

AC;

plenae effusiones

.

.

as

if irXypeis

here cannot be explained eKX^eis...iylvopTO, for the plural
itive

by

of 'contentment' is then somewhat out of place) and an unnatural punctuation (for Kal Trpoaixovres then be-

ret Tra.6rjp.aTa

sense to the preposition. avrov k.t.A.] Compare
iii.
I

Gal.

ols

kut

oCpdaXpovs

*lr)o-ovs

comes a clumsy
1.

addition).

XpiaTos

TrpoeypcKprj

eo-Tavpoapevos,

of

tovs \6yovs] For the accusative after Trpoo-€x OVT€s compare e. g. Exod.
xxxiv.
1 1

ivreKXofiai

7rpoa€x € <™ navva ova eyco aoi, Is. i. 10 7rpoo-e'xere voix.

which Clement's expression is perhaps a reminiscence. In this passage it has been proposed to read pa6r)the confusion p.aTa for nadrjpaTa and
;

pov Qeov, Neh.
ras ivTokas
aov.
2.
(v. 1.)

34 ov npoo-eaxov

of padr]TT]s,
7,

crov Kal to. p,apTVpia

and

in Ign. Polyc. paBrjpara, TraBrjpaTa, in Ign.
TradrjTrjs,

evearepvia-peuoi] 'ye took

heart] i.e. accusative to iveo-repvio-pevoi as well SO § 12 elade^aas to irpoaexovTes For evo-Tepviuevr) avTovs tKpvyjsev. compare Clem. Alex. Paed. i. 6
;

them to rovs \6yovs, which is the

Smyrn. 5, shows that the interchange would be easy. This emendation was diffioriginally adopted to meet the
culty of the expression the sufferings of God.' Among others it found an advocate in the late Ezra Abbot
'

(eaOai
(p.

{Bibliotheca Sacra, April 1876, p. 313
sq) in a learned
28.

123)

rbv

aaiTTjpa

evarepvicraadai,
aoilb.

Euseb. Mart. Pal. 8 pziCpva tov
paros tov \oytapov iveo-Tepviapevrj,
1 1

But

it

paper on Acts xx. has obtained some favour

vio-to,

pvrjpas avTcov (tcov ypa(pa>v) eveo-repib. Laud. Const. 5 § 5 tg>v ckcI

(patToov

akeKTOV ttoOov

eveo-Tepvio~p,evos,

even since the discovery of the alternareading tov XpiaTov. Yet (1) The on tov parallels quoted in the note Qeov prove that no alteration is needtive
to. iraBrjpaTa avTov would be a natural expression to a writer of this age; (2) The reading paBrjpara would destroy the propriety of the expressions in the parallel clauses as

Apost. Const, procem. evforepvio-pevoi tov (pofiov cwtov, ib. V. 14 evo-Tepvio-dpevos
clvtov.

ed, since

There seems
o-Tepvi£ecr0ai,

to

be no
thereIf

such word as

and

fore hevTepvio-pivoi

must be

read.

eo-Tepviapevoi could stand, Cotelier's

explanation would probably be
'

cor-

rect,

Clementi

eo-Tepviapevoi

sunt,
lati

qui as

Latinis

pectorosi,

homines
Cor.
vi.

11), capacisque pectoris (2 the analogy of cmXayxviCcadai
;

read in the MS, iveo-Tepviapevoi referring to tovs Xoyovs and npo 6(p6a\p<ov the words in your to to. TraOrjpaTa, hearts,the sufferings before your eyes ; to. 7ra6r)paTa is a common (3) While
' 1

and later critics seem to suggests be wrong in making it equivalent to its transiveo-Tepvio-pevoi, which owes

New Testament, used especially to denote the being
expression in the
sufferings of Christ, the

word

paBrjpa

does not once occur either there or

"]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
fJiecTTOi

17

eK^vcris 67n TrdvTcts iyiveTO'
ev
ctyadrj
TrpodvfjLia /xer
v/ucou

Te

donas f3ov\rjs
e^ere/-

evcrefiovs
7rpos

7T67roidt]cr€iti$

vclt€

Tas xeTpas
clvtov
Y\V

tov TravroKpaTOpa Qeov,
eiTi

iK€T€vovT6$
[O

iAecos

yeveo-dai,

cucovres

r)ixdp-

T6T6.
6 daias]

CtytOV

VfJUV Y}fJiepaS
:

T€

KCtl

VVKTOS V7T6p 7TaCT^5
7 TreTroidrjcrew] ireiroL^d^crecocr

AS

;

delas

A.
note.

e^ereivare]

C A;

see the lower note.
e£eTeiVere
;

CS.

9

t\<fws]

A

;

'CXeiov

C: see the lower

anovres]

AC

endures S.

rifxaprere]

AC;

peccabatis (Tj/naprdveTe) S.

and in the in the Apostolic fathers only passage in the LXX where it is found (Jer. xiii. 21) there is a v.l.
;

of two authorities (including the best) and (2) the other inagainst one stances show that the tendency is to
;

padrjras

(for

pa8rjp.ara),

which

ap-

change oaios into Behs, and not conversely.

proaches more nearly to the original

Hebrew;

(4)

Though

ra padrjpara tov

Qeov might Stand, Still at SiSa^ai rov Qeov (or some similar expression)

would be more natural.
4 Mace. iii. 20 3. elprjvr) fiadela] {5a6e\av elpr)Vt)v b\a Trjv evvopiav rjpcov
elxov, Hegesipp.in Euseb. H. E. iii. 32 yevopevrjs elpijvrjs fiaBelas ev rrdar] €Kic\r]crLq,

adverb yeveaBai] The recognised by Hesychius, but no instances are given in the lexicons. As it appears only to occur in the expression IXecos yiveaBai {Bull, de Corr. Hellen. XI. p. 453 (1887) prj T e
9.

IXecos

IXecos is

01 Beol IXecos avrco yevoiVTo, 2

Mace.

ii.

22, vii.

yj, x.

26),

it

is

probably a
later lan-

Athenag. Stippi.
Trj

I

f\

a-vp.Tra.o-a

grammatical mistake of the

olnovp-evr]
elprjvrjs

vpeTepa avveaei ftadeias dnoXavovaiv, Liturg. S. Basil.

guage, the true construction being forgotten and the word being erro-

p.

elpijvrjv,

165 (Neale) (3a8elav ko.1 dvacpaipeTOV Euseb. Vit. Const, ii. 61.
'

5.

dyaOonouav]

just
iv.

below and §§
19,

33,

beneficence*; again 34 comp. 1 Pet.
:

neously treated as an adverb (IXe'cos In this passage it instead of IXecos). may be due to the transcriber and
not to Clement himself. At all events our MS (A) in the three passages of 2 Maccabees has IXecos, where the

Test, xii Pair. Jos. 18.

The
in
15, 20,

allied
S.
iii.

words occur several times
I

Peter: dyadonoie7v
6,

Pet.

ii.

common text

has a proper grammati-

While

dyaBoTroios, I Pet. ii. 14. KaXoTToita regards the abstract

17

;

cal construction tXeco yevop.evov, tXeco

character of the action, dyadonoua looks to its results and more especially to its effect
6.

In yevecrBai, tXeco yevopevov. Vis. ii. 2, Sim. ix. 23, we have
text fails to

Herm.
the exis

pression tXecos yivecrOai, but the con-

on others.

show whether

IXecos

For the confusion of ocioc and eeioc comp. §§ 14, 21, and see above 1. pp. 138, 140. For 60-i.as
ocrias]
§

treated as an adverb or an adjective. E. A. Sophocles Lex. s. v. gives an instance of the adverb IXecos from

see § 45 ev oaia Kal dp.cop.co rrpodeaei, 56 Sia Trjs oaias TratSe/a? avTov ; for

6elas, §

4° ra

fidOr) Trjs

Oeias yvcocrecos.

Moschion, and the inscription above quoted proves it to be a possible word.
10. dycov r)v k.t.X.] Comp. Col. ii. I. Hilgenfeld rjpepas re <a\ vvktos] calls attention to the fact that the

There might possibly be a question which of the two words should be read here but (1) we have a combination
:

CLEM.

II.

i8
ttJs

THE EPISTLE OF
dheXcpoTrjTOs,
eis

S.

CLEMENT
fierd Seof?

[n
kcli

to

(ruo^ea-dai

cruveihrjo'ecos

tov

dpidfjiov

tlov

skXektcop

clvtou'

eiXi-

Kpivefe

kcli

aKepaioi rjre
kcli

kcll

d\xvr\LTiKaKOi

ek dXXrjXovs*
eirl

7rdo"a crao-is

irdv (r^itrjULa fifieXvKTOv vjuIv
tcl

toTs
5

eirevdeLTe' 7rapa7rTWfjLctcriv toIs 7rXr](riov
I

vcTeprj/uLara

fiera

oVous]

C;
3

per''

eXiovs (eXcuow
anepeoi

A) AS.
apvqalKaKoi]
editors gave

i elXiKpiveis] eiXeiKpi-

veia

A.
read the

ct/c^pcuoi]

A.

C

;

apapvrjaiKaKOi A.

So

I

MS with Teschendorf, but previous

it avafjLi>r}aiKaKoi.

4 ftdeXvKrbv]

A;

add.

rjv

C,

and so probably S.

5 rots 7r\7;crto^]

A;

twi>

writer elsewhere has the
'

same order

day and night
'

thence

§§ 20, 24, and argues scriptorem non e Judaeis, qui
'

the expression pera deovs Heb. xii. 28 Xarpevoopev tvapeartos r<5 0e<5 pcra evXafieias koi 8eovs (the correct reading),

noctem anteponunt, sed

e gentilibus,

Romanisquidem,ortumesse.' This argument is more specious than sound.

an epistle which has largely influenced Clement's language elsewhere. For the use of aweldrjo-ts here comp.
34 avvaxdevres rfj crvveiSijaei. It denotes inward concentration and as§

Thus

in the
'

always

Apocalypse the order is day and night,' iv. 8, vii. 15,

xii. 10, xiv. 11,

ways

xx. 10; in S. Paul alnight and day,' 1 Thess. ii. 9, iii. 10, 2 Thess. iii. 8, 1 Tim. v. 5, 2 Tim. i. 3 while by S. Luke either
' ;

sent.

Zahn
still

{Gott. Gel.

Anz. Nov.

8,

retains the reading per' eXeovs, explaining it of brotherly kindness

1876)

shown towards

offenders,

and pro-

order

is

used indifferently

Gospel
(ix.
1.

xviii. 7) (ii. 37, 24, xx. 31, xxvi. 7).

both the and the Acts
in

poses (rvvaBX^creoosfoY avveidrfcrecos. He might have quoted Aftost. Const, ii. 13
eiveira

p,era

eXeovs

kol olKTippov

kcli

dBeXcpoTijros]
17, v. 9.

A

word peculiar

to

7rpocrX-q^r((os oliceiov

Testament; 1 So Polyc. Phil. 10 fraternitas,' where the Greek is not extant Herm. Aland. 8. pera Beovs] I have ventured to
S.

Peter in the
ii.

New

VTVia\vovp€vos avt(3 o-GiTrjplav for this sense. Lipsius

Pet.

{Jenaer Litcraturz. Jan.
accepts
9,

13,

1877)

1

p-era deovs,

but holds by his

conjecture avvde^ aea>$ {Academy, July
1870),

;

adopt this reading, as other recent editors have done, on the inferior authority of

unnecessary.
eXevcrecos.
2.

though it is now rendered D onaldson ( Theol. Rev.

Jan. 1877) suggests p.era reXeias avvIf

C (mcta Aeoyc

for

m€T6-

Aeoyc), because it rescues the passage from a difficulty and so commends itself. By this combination piera deovs koi (Tvvet,8rj(rea)s the whole clause is transferred from God to the believer, and

(Tvvei8rjcr€(os]

the

reading

eXeovs be retained, awetSijo-eoas must mean with the consent of God,' but
'

awe tdrjae coy becomes intelligible. With
the whole expression comp. Liturg. D. Jacob, p. 55 (Neale) S6s ifrui>, Kvpte, pera ttcivtos (jiofiov mat avveiBijo-ecos For the Kadapas irpoo-Koplo-ai k.t.X. idea of fear as an agent in the work of salvation see Phil. ii. 12; and for

hardly possible. I had accordingly hazarded the conjecture ev8oici](re(0s (eyAoKHceooc for cyNeiAhcccoc), which is less violent than
this
is

avvciLvecrecos, crvvel^eoos, (rvvdeTjaecos, and.

other emendations. This conjecture struck me before I was aware that
of which

Davis had suggested avvevdoKijcreas, word I cannot find any in-

n]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
d/uerajueXrjTOL fjTe errl iracrr]

19

avTcov ihia eKpivere*

dya-

6o7roua,

etoimoi

eic

han

eproN

at^Qon'

Trj

iravapeTco

kcll (reflacriuia)

TroXiTeia
tcc

KeKOcr/uLtJiuevoi

iravTa ev

tw

(f)o($u>

TrpocTTayfjiaTa Kal tcl ^ucaiwfJLaTa 10 tov Kupiov eni ta ttAath thc KApAiAc ymwn ererp^nTO.
irX-qaiov
aiTOLfxoi
I.

avTOv 67reT€\elT€'

C; vicinoruni
A.

S.

6

idia]

C;

idia

A;

idia S.
;

7

eroipoi]

8 <re(3aapiu] A, and so apparently S

(re(3aapi04TaTr)

C

(see

p. 126).

9 e7rere\en-e] e7rere\etrai A.

stance.

The

'of His

clause would then mean mercy and good pleasure':

povs
8.

elvai
§

:

comp. 2 Cor.
'

ix. 8,

and see

below

§ 9 iKerai yevopevoi tov eXeovs The lexiKal rfjs xpr/o-TOTrjTos avrov.

comp.

34 with the note. the graces of your noXiTeia]
;

cons supply a few instances of the form evdoKtjo-is (e.g. Diod. xv. 6, Dion. Hal. iii. 13), which also occurs below In the N. T. the § 40 (see the note).
allied

heavenly citizenship' see Phil. i. 27, Ephes. ii. 12, 19. For noXiTeia, noXiTeveo-dai, see §§ 3, 6, 21, 44, 51, 54.
9.

avTov]
Trj

i.e.

from

iravapeTOd

tov Qeov, understood Kal cre^acrpico no-

of

word evboKia is generally God; Matt. xi. 26 (Luke x.
i.

said
21),

XiTeia;

COmp. § 54 T V V dp,eTapeXt]TOV ivoXiTeiav tov Qeov.
to.

Eph.

5, 9,

Phil.

ii.

13.

If

we accept

deovs (see the last note),
is

however no

npoa-TaypaTa']

The two words
:

emendation

needed. tov dpidpbv k.t.A.] See the note on § 59, where the same expression occurs. So too in our Burial Service,
shortly to accomplish the of Thine elect'
elXiKpivels Kal aKepaioi]
vels,
'

occur together frequently in the LXX see esp. Mai. iv. 4, and comp. 1 Sam. xxx. 25, Ezek. xi. 20, xviii. 9, xx. ri,
etc.
10.

enl

tci

wXaTr) k.t.X.]
vii. 3,

Taken from
iiriypa^ov be

number
elXiKpi-

the

LXX

of Prov.

enl to 7rXaTos Ttjs Kapbias crov,

where

For
;

see Philipftians i. 10
ii.

for aKepaioi,

Philippians
3.

1

5.

dp-vrjcriKaKoi]

So we have

dp,vq-

below, § 62. Comp. Test, xii Pat)'. Zab. 8 dpvqcriKaKoi yiveaOe, Clem.
o-ikcik<os

nXaTos corresponds to the Hebrew ID? a tablet.' The phrase is repeated in the LXX with slight modifications in Prov. xxii. 20, and in some copies but there is also in Prov. iii. 3 nothing corresponding in the Hebrew
' ;

vii. 14 (p. 883) dpvrjcriKaKov elvai dibdaKei, Hermas Maud. ix. avTos dpvrjaiKaKos eVrt, and so Strom.
ii.

Alex. Strom,

of Prov.

xxii.

20.

Wotton's

state-

ment

that nXaTos occurs in this sense 'passim' in the LXX is erroneous.
this LXX reading the expression to nXaTos Trjs Kapbias is not uncommon in the Christian fathers (e.g.

18 (p. 398) 81 dpLvqaiKaKias.
5.

From

toU
tcov

nXtjo-Lov]
ttXtjo-'lov.

rot?

brachylogy for Jacobson quotes
epa tu>v
7rXrjcriov.
'

A

Eur. Hec. 996
6.

prjb'

Iren.

i.

praef. 3,

and other passages
to.

dp,eTap,iXr]Toi k.t.X.] i.e.

When

quoted by Wotton), and

nXaTrj

you had done good, you did not wish when there was an opporit undone
;

was doubtless written by Clement But it seems not improbable here.
that the expression arose from a very early corruption of the LXX text (a confusion of nXdros and nXaKos), since

tunity of doing good, you seized it.' The latter clause eroipoc k.t.X. is from

Titus

iii.

I

npbs nav epyov dyaBbv

eToi-

20
III.

THE EPISTLE OF
flacra

S.

CLEMENT
v/uuv,

[in

So^a

kcli

TrXaTvafio^ eiodt]
"E(J)AreN
kai
d

Kai
kai

eireTeXeadr]

to
kai

yeypa/uL/uevov
kai
K<Xl

enieN

€ttAatyn9h
'G/C

enAXYN^H

AneAAKTiceN
[KCtl]

HrATTHMeNOC
KCLI

TOVTOV
kcli

(^fj\0S

(j)66vOS>

6piS

(TTCtO'lS,
5

oitoy/uios

ctKctTacrT acrid,
01

TroXejJLOS

Kai al^/uaXoxria.

ovtcvs €7rriy€pdricrav
eiri

atimoi eni Toyc eiMTiMoyc, ol aSo^oi

tous evho^ovs,
en)
1

Neoi

Toyc
dod-rj

aeppoves eirl tovs (ppovt/uiov^y 01 Sia tovto rrdppoo AnecTiN npecByTepoyc.
ol
3 direXdiCTiaei']
2pis]
kclI

ifiodr)]

A.
4

<rev

A.

A;

tyis
;

(om.

/cat)

CS, Deut. CS.

xxxii. 15;

aireyaXaKTi-

8 aVeoTtv]

(which probably represents direariv)

airtaTrj C,

which

is

nearer to the

A; lxx

est

S
Is.

of

7rAa£ is the natural equivalent of ni? and is frequently used elsewhere in

15? K«i aipa aTa(pv\rjs emeu (v. 1. eniov) oivov' Kai ecpayev 'laK<w/3 Kai evenXqcrBt]

the

LXX

to

translate

it.

S.
is

Paul's

Kai dneXaKTicrev 6 rjyaTrr)p,evoS) eXnravBrj,
e'TraxvvOr}, enXarvvBr).

metaphor in 2 Cor. iii. 3 from the original of Prov.

derived

It

diverges

Still

vii. 3.

more from the
Justin Dial. 20
(p.

original

Hebrew.

III. 'But, like Jeshurun of old, you waxed wanton with plenty. Hence strife and faction and open war.

237 b) quotes the

same passage, but his quotation has no special resemblances to that of
Clement.
4. £r\Xos k.t.A.] The words occur in an ascending scale Jirst the inward
:

foolish,

the ignoble, the young, the have risen against the highlyPeace esteemed, the old, the wise.

Hence

and righteousness are banished. The law of God, the life after Christ, are You have fostered jeadisregarded.
lousy, whereby death entered into the world.'
'

sentiment of division
;

(£r\\os developnext, the outward ing into cpBovos) demonstration of this (epis developing into ardcris) lastly, the direct
;

conflict

and

its

results (dLcoypos, aKa-

1.

nXarvapos]
in}
i.e.

eiilargemeiit,

room

TaaTacria, 7roXepos, alxpaXcoaia).
£i)Xos Kai cpBovos]

to

move
;

freedom and plenty,

These words oc-

opposed
kt)

to SXi^ns, orej/o^copia, dvdyxxii.

cur together also below,

§§4,

5

:

20 npoecpdacrdv pe tfpepai OXiyjfecos p.ov Kai eyevero Kvptos enMrTrjpiypd pov Kai e^-qyayev p.e
els

as 2 Sam.

comp. Gal.

v. 20,

21,

Test, xii Patr.

cxvii.

ttXcitvct p.ov Kai etjelXero p.e, Ps. 5 eK BXiyj/eas eTveKaXecrdprjV tov

Sym. 4 aTTo navTos £77X01; Kai cpBovov. For the distinction between them see Trench N. T. Syn. ser. 1 § xxvi, and Galatians 1. c. ZfjXos is rivalry, am*

Kvpiov Kai tTrrjKovcriv pov els irXaTvcrpov comp. Ps. xvii. 20, cxviii. 45,
:

bition,'

the

desire of

equalling or

Ecclus. xlvii. sition of ev
pelaBai,

12.

See also the oppo-

It does not neexcelling another. cessarily involve the wish to deprive

evpvx<*>p(0

and
v.
I

o-Tevox<*>-

him of

his advantages,
;

which
;

is

im-

Hermas Mand.

ev evpv-

plied in cpBovos

^copo) KaroiKovv ciyaKkid<jeTai.

Hence

the Latin use of dilatai'e, dilatatio.
2.

ecpayev k.t.X.]

A very free quotaxxxii. 14,

rished, it will £r}Xos Aaveld cpBovov ecrxev, Plat. Menex. p. 242 A TTpatTov p,ev £t}Xos dno
(rfkov

but, if unduly chelead to this § 4 81a.

tion

from the lxx of Deut.

be

cpBovos, y£sch.

Again. 939

Ill]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
kcli

21

h io

Aikaiocynh

eiptiwf,

ev

tw

diroXeiTreiv eKacrrov

tov

(pofiov
/mtlSe

tov Oeov Kal ev
vo/ulijulois

Ttj TTLG'Tei ctvTOu d/uift\vco7rijo-ai

ev Tois

twv irpoo-Tay (jlcltiov

clvtov wopev-

eo~6ai /urjSe 7ro\iTeve(r6ai kcltcc

dWa
avTOv

€Kcco~tov fiaSi^eiv kcitcc
Ttjs

to KadrJKOV tw XpicrTcp, Tas eTTidvpuas Ttjs KapSlas
do~ef3rj

Trovrjpas, (^ijAov

ahiKOv Kal

dveiXrjcpo-

15 TOtS, 01
lix.

OV Kal 0ANATOC eiCHA6eN 6IC

TON KOCMON.
I.

14

dcpi<XT7]K€v,

given in the lower note; see above,

p.

Xeiirecv]

aToXenrl

A;
ttjs

d7roXi7re/>

C, and so probably S.
prints dXX', as

124 sq. 10

9
Triaret]

airottksti

A.
of C.
6

13 dXXd]

AC, but Bryennios
Kapdias]

if this
/cat]

CS

;

om. A.

15

AC;

were the reading om. S.

dcpdovrjros

Arist.

Rhet.

ii.

y ovk 4 v(p
l

eni^rfXos neXei,
3

£rjXov dveiXrjCpoTGiV.
15.

wv

£rjXovo~6ai

Kal OdvaTos

k.t.X.']

From Wisd.
v. 12.

ii.

(3ovXovTai Kal
5.

prj (pOovelcrOai.

24
'

(pdovo) 8e BiafioXov Odi'aros elarjXOev

aKarao-Tavia]
xii.

tumuW

',

COmp.

els

tov Koo-p.ov

;

comp. Rom.

The

Luke
o~iai,

xxi. C)7roXep.ovs Kal a/caracrrao-iay,

2 Cor.

20
iii.

epis,

£rj\os...dKaTaaTci-

16 ottov yap (^Xoy Kal epcOeia, eKel aKaraaTacria k.t.X.

James

following passage of Theophilus connects the quotation from the Book of Wisdom with Clement's application

of
vas

it
.

:

ad Autol.
e<p'
(0

ii.

29

(p.

39) 6 2ara6avaTa>o-ai

6.

oi arifxoi k.t.X.]

Is.

iii.

5

7rpoo~-

.

.

ovk

ur'XVO'SV

Ko^rei to naidiov npos tov npecr^VTrjv, 6 aTip.os npos top evTip.ov.
8.

TToppa) aneo~Tiv k.t.X.]

Is. lix.

14

avTovs (pdoveo (pepopevos, r)viKa ecopa Toy "A/3eX evapeaTovvTa tqj 0e&>, evepkoXovyrjcras els tov dde\(pbv avTov tov
pevov

Ka\

rj

diKaioavvrj

paKpav

dcpeaTrjKev.

Kaiv

eTroLrjaev

dnoKTelvai

tov

'grown dimThe Atticists condemned sighted^. apfiXvuTveiv and preferred dp,(3XvcoTThorn. Mag. p. 39. The word Teiv and the form dp-fiXvoanelv are as old
10.
d/i/3XvQ)7TJ7o-at]
;

ddeXcpov avrov
dp)(r]

tov 'A/3eX, Kal ovtcos OavcLTOv eyeveTo els Tovde tov koo~'

p.ov K.T.X.

IV.

Said

I

not truly that death

came

into

the world

through jea-

as Hippocrates, Progn. 1. p. 38 (ed. Foes.). In the lxx it occurs 1 Kings
xiv. 4 (displaced
xii.

24 and

xii.

25 in B).

and found between But in most
is

lousy? It was jealousy which prompted the first murder and slew a brother by a brother's hand jealousy
;

places where
d/x/3Xva)TTeii>.

it

occurs there

a

v.

1.

Comp. a Gnostic

writer
fin.).

in Hippol. Re/, v. 16 (p. 133 12. to KadrJKov tw Xp«rrc5]

ad

The

ex-

pression has a close parallel in Phil. i. 27 anions tov evayyeXlov tov XptoroO
7r6XiTevecr0€,

from which perhaps

it is

taken.

The emendations suggested

which drove Jacob into exile, which sold Joseph as a bondslave, which compelled Moses to flee before his fellow-countryman and before Pharaoh, which excluded Aaron and Miriam from the camp, which swallowed up Dathan and Abiram alive, which exposed David to the malice not only of foreigners but even of the
Israelite king.'

{XpicrTiava or ev XpicrTco for XpiaTco)

are therefore unnecessary.
14.
£77X01/ k.t.X.]

The
§

Comp.

45 adiKov

into the world

idea of jealousy bringing death had a prominent place

22

THE EPISTLE OF
IV.

S.

CLEMENT
Kai

[IV

reypawTai yap

outcos*

ereNe•TO M60' HM6-

pAC,

HNGrKGN KaIN AHO TOON KApTTOON THC |~HC OyCIAN TO) 06O), kai "ABeA HNerKeN kai aytoc And toon npooTOTOKooN twn npokai ene?AeN d Oeoc Batoon kai And toon ctgatoon aytoon.
kai

eni "ABeA

eni

to?c

Aoopoic

aytoy, eni
kai
kai

Ae

KaVn kai eni
Aian

5

ta?c
kai

GyciAic aytoy of

npocecyeN.

€Aytth9h KaVn

CYNeneceN
i'na
ti

toj

npocobntp ay'toy.
kai

eineN d Oedc npdc
ti

KaVn,
i

nepiAYnoc e'reNOY;
2

i'na

cyNeneceN

to

ovtws]

3

Trpo(3dra)v~\

AS; om. C. AC; add. avrov
with the LXX; C.

ry 9e£] AS; tu

Kvpiu)

C, with the LXX.

7r/30(TW7r<jj]

A

9 cap]

A;

civ

n

7 ry 4 e7re?5ej/] e7rt5e A. to Trpbawirov CS, in accordance with what follows. S has the same tippets avrov] A; auroO dp£eis C.

S, with

LXX.

in the teaching of the Ophites as re' ported by Iren. i. 30. 9, Ita ut et dum

for the

form of the Hebrew
it

is

the

same here as
where
ivp6o~o>TTov,

fratrem

suum Abel
mortem

zelum

et

occideret, primus ostenderet': and Ire-

in the following verse, is translated o-weneo-ev to

nasus himself also speaks of the Cv^ os of Cain, iii. 23. 4, iv. 18. 3 (see the last passage especially). Mill supposes
that the idea

telligible is
9.

and the dative though inawkward. ovk lav 6p6a>s k.tX] The meanis

ing of the original

obscure, but the

was borrowed

from

Clement.

however

it

As regards the Ophites that is more probable
it

which Clement here The words follows must be wrong.
translation

LXX

they derived

from a current

inter-

pretation of the

name

Kaiv

:

comp.

42 tov /up npcorov nakeo-as Kaiv, b epp.rjveveTai ^Xoy, os Kai ^r]\a>aas dveTkev tov ddeXcpov avrov

Clem. Horn.

iii.

6p6vs daXys stand for nriD ? 3*B*n ('doest good, at the door'), which the translators appear to have underunless stood doest right to open indeed they read nn: for riDD, as
'
'

1

;

"Aj3e\.

In a previous passage

(iii.

25)
dp.-

seems more probable (for in the older characters the resemblance of J and
S is very close). At all events it would seem that they intended dUXys
to refer to apportioning the offerings
i. 12, where it represents and is used of dividing the victim) and they might have under-

this

(f)OTepL£ov ovop.a,
epp,Tjv€ias rfjv

pseudo-Clement calls Cain because dtx^l e'x €l

TV S

eKdoxv^, ipp-rjveveraL yap

Kai ktiJo-is (il3p) *ai

C^os (^p)

K.T.X.

(comp. Lev.

The

interpretation kttjo-is is adopted by Philo de Cherub. 15 (1. p. 148), de Sacr.Ab. et Ca. 1 (1. p. 163), quod Det.

nm

:

pot. ins.
I.

10

(1.

p.
i.

197), etc.,

and by
iv.

Josephus Ant.

2. I.

Kai eyevero k.t.A.]

Gen.

3

8,

stood the offence of Cain to consist in reserving to himself the best and see Philo giving God the worst Quaest. in Gen. i. § 62 64 (1. p. 43

:

the LXX.

quoted almost word for word from The divergences from the

sq,

Aucher), de Agric. 29
et Ca.
p. 171

(1.

p. 319),

and de Sacr. Ab.
(1.

13,

20

sq,

Hebrew
7.

text are very considerable.
irpoo-(67r<p]

cult to

case is diffiexcept as a very early transcriber's error in the LXX

tw

The

account

for,

176 sq), in illustration The Christian fathers of this sense. however frequently give it a directly
sq,

;

moral bearing, explaining

6p6a>s

w

IV]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
COY;
'
'

23

OyK €AN 6p0OOC TTpOC€NerKHC 6p0(JOC Ae MH n P 0C C6 H ATTOCTpOCJ)H AYTOY/ lOAieAHC, HMApTEC; HCYX AC0N kai cy Apseic aytoy. kai elneN KaVn npdc "ABeA ton AAeATTpdcGOTTON
CJ)ON

Ay'tOY'

AI6A0OOM6N

6IC

TO neAlON.

KAI
6TTI

eYeN6T0 €N

TO)

efNAI AYTOYC 6N T(L TTeAlOJ
<J)6n

AN6CTH KaIN

"ABeA TON a'AgA-

aytoy

kai

AneKTeiNCN ayton.

15 Kai

(pdovos

d$eA<pOKTOviav
IctKcofi

'OpctTE, doeA<poi 9 tri\os $ia (jjAos KaTeipyacraro.
diro
7rpocru)7rov 'Hcrav

6

Trarrip

tj/utcov

d7reSpa

order as A, but this would be most natural in the Syriac. 12 diekdco/j.ev] add. igitur {— 8rj) S. This addition is found in some mss of the LXX. ;

AC

xediov] iraidiov
ayaTrrjToL

A.
1.

13

Trediip]

7rcu5iw

A.

A;

jfiXov

S; see above, § C.

15 KareipydaaTo]

AS;

14 dde\(poi] AC; KaTeipydaavTO C. f^os]

SieXrjs to refer

either to the obliquity of Cain's moral sense or to his unther, e.g. Iren.

fairness in his relations with his broiii.

23.

recte divisisset earn
'

4 'Quod non quae erga fraiv.

words are plainly wanted for the sense, and can only have been omitThe Masoretes ted accidentally. reckon this one of the twenty-eight passages where there is a lacuna in
the text
V. T.
I.
:

trem erat communionem,'

18.

3

see

Fabric.

Cod.

Aftocr.

Ouoniam cum

zelo et malitia

quae

erat adversus fratrem divisionem habebat in corde, etc.', Origen Sel. in
Gejl. (II. p. 30) ov bieikev opdats' rijs Betas vopodeaias KaTecppovrjaev k.t.X.
10.
rj<Tvxa(Tov]

Philo enlarges on the allegorical meaning of to ne8lov. 81a. tfXos] On the two declen15. sions of £V)Xos see Winer § ix. p. j8,
p.

104 sq.

sponds to the 'lying,' which the lxx have treated as an
imperative
19.

The word Hebrew f*2")

corre-

A. Buttmann p. 20. Clement (or his transcriber) uses the masculine and the neuter forms indifferently.
16.

6 7ra.Tr)p

r}p,<ov\

So §310

7rar?)p

'lie still';

Much

stress is

comp. Job xi. laid on rjavxao-ov

rjpwv 'Aftpadp,, §

TraTpdaiv rjpwv,
ivaripes rjpcov

60 Kadcos e8axas toIs § 62 oi npodedrjXcopevoi

by Philo de Sobr. 10 (1. p. 400), and by early Christian expositors, e.g.
Clem. Ho7)i.
12.
iii.

(where see the note).

25, Iren.
els

11.

cc.

these passages it has been inferred that the writer was a Jewish
Christian.

From

8U\6(ofjLei>
is

to

7re 8 iov~]

This

The
7, 9,

inference however

is

clause

wanting

in the

Hebrew and
and
Peshito

not valid
(Gal.
ix.
iii.

;

since Clement, like S. Paul
29,

Targum
versions,

of Onkelos, but found in the

LXX, the

Samaritan

6

— 8) or Justin

Rom.

iv.

11,

18,

{Dial. 134),

might

and the

later

Targums.
c

Origen's comment is interesting ; Sel. in Genes. (II. p. 39) iv tg> E(3pa'iK<x>
to \e%6ev vnb tov Ka'iv 7Tpos Tov"A^e\ ov yeypanTai koi oi ivep\ 'AkvXciv e8ei£av
otl ev

refer to spiritual rather than actual parentage; comp. 1 Pet. iii. 6 2dppa...

So too Theophiqs iyevjjdrjTe Te<va. lus of Antioch (quoted by Jacobson),
though himself a Gentile, speaks of iii. 28, comp. iii. 24) and David (iii. 25) as our forefather.' To these references add ib.

rw

c

a.7roKpv(p(p (pao~\v oi
kclto.

E/3paioi
ttjv

Abraham {ad Autol.

tcelcrdai

tovto evravda

tcdv

'

eftbopLrfKovTa i<8ox/iv.

These or similar

24

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT
'

[IV

tov d$eX(pov auTOv.

(I7A0S €7roir]arev

loocrrjcp

^XP

L

@a~

vcltov ^Lco^dfjvaL Kcil /xe^jOt

hovXeias elaeXdeiv.

trjXos

diro 7rpoo~w7rov (papaco fiaaicpvyeiv rivdyKaaev Mcovo'rjv Xeios AlyvTTTOv ev tw aKOvcrai clvtov diro tov 6juo(buXov
Tic ce K&TecTHceN

Kpm-iN h Aikacthn ecb hmojn; mh angAe?N Me cy 0eAeic, on TpdnoN ANeiAec exOec ton Aitytttion;
'

5

5

Sid

(7/A.os

Aapcov Kal
(^rjXos

Mapia/ui

e^to

Trjs

Trapepi^oXr]^

t]vXiardria'av.

Aadav
to

Kal 'Afieipcov (^tovTas KaTt)-

yayev

eis

afiov,

Sia

CTTao~ido~ai

avTom npos tov

2 eloeX6e~iv~\ A; eXdetv C, and so probably S. 5 KpiTyv r) dLKaarrfv] A; 6 ^x^ J ] A; dpxovra Kal dcKaarrjp CS, with the LXX. See the lower note. om. A. 8 f]vXL<rdT)aav] %0es C. ^Aos] A; $rjXov C. 7 dia] CS
;

T)v\r)<jdr)<xaj>
5i<x

A.

f??Xos]

^\oj/ C.

Aaveid] dad

10 dia £17X09] A; S; diafyXocr A; dia £rjXov C. AC. I have followed the best MSS of the N.T. for

iii.

20

e

01
d<p*

~E(3pcuoi }
oSv

ot

/cat

TvponaTopes
(3i(3Xovs

times, e.g. Exod.
xii. 7, 8,

iv. 10, xiv.

31,

Num.

tJ/xgoi',

Kai

ras

Upas
the

Josh.

viii.

31, 33

:

comp. below

e^opev
5.

k.t.X.

§§ 43> 5i> 53, Barnab. § 14, Just. Mart.
x.t.X.]

tls
ii.

ae
14,

From

LXX

of

Dial. 56 (p. 274 d), Theoph.
iii.

ad Antol.
Qeov

which follows the Hebrew closely, inserting however x^s Clement has Kpirrjv for (or e^des). apXovTa Kai, perhaps from confusion with Luke xii. 14 KpiTrjv pepio-Trjv (the best reading, though A and some others have biKao~Tr}v pepio-Trjv). The
Exod.
rj

9,

18, etc.

'O 6epdna>v tov

was a recognised title of Moses, as o cpiXos tov Qeov was of Abraham.
10.

J7

There
thority

is,

Or perhaps AavetS] so far as I know,
for
Aa/31S,

AatuS.

no auexcept in com'

77

LXX
vii.

is

quoted more exactly

in

Acts

feld reads Aa/3i8.

27 and in Apost. Const, vi. 2. The life of Moses supplies Clement with a twofold illustration of his point for
;

Yet Hilgensays C Aa/3iS ubique,' and a similar statement is made by Gebhardt, being misled by
paratively recent MSS.

Funk

Bryennios.
in

The word

he incurred the envy not only of the king (dnb npoaunrov ^apaco), but also of his fellow-countrymen (ev rco dicovo-ai

C
11.

in all its three

is contracted occurrences in

Clement;
vno
1

§§ 18, 52, as well as here.
tcov dXXocpvXcov]

The

Phi-

avrbu

k.t.X.),

as

in the

parallel
re-

listines,

Sam.

xxi. 11, xxix.

case of David below.
7.

'Aapcjv k.t.X.]

The Mosaic

12. virb laovX] 1 Saul eyed (vnofiXen-opevos LXX, A)

4 sq. Sam. xviii. 9 'And

cord mentions only the exclusion of

David from

that day

and forward.'

Miriam from the camp, Num. xii. 14, In this instance and in the next 15. (Dathan and Abiram) the jealous persons are themselves the sufferers.
9.

V. 'Again, take examples from our own generation. Look at the
lives of the chief Apostles.

See how

Peter and Paul suffered from jeaex-

tov

pression

is

depdnovTa used of

k.t.X.]

The

lousy;
ings,

Moses

several

how through many wanderthrough diverse and incessant

v]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

25

10

QepaivovTa rov Qeov Mcovcrrjv. vov ecrxev ov jjlovov viro twu
V7ro

Sid ^V/Ao, Aauelh <p66-

d\\o(pv\wv,
ihiwydti.

dWa

kcci

CaouX
V.

[fiacriXecos

7o*j0a>)\]

'AW
eXdw^ev
Trjs

tva
iirl

twv dp^alwu
tjjucov

viroSeiyfJiaTcov iraucrw-

fixeda,

tovs eyyicrra yevo/uevovs ddXrjTas-

15 Xafitoixev

yeveds

rd yevvaia

v7ro$€iy/ui.aTa.

SiKaioraroi /ueyicrTOi kcci tyjXov (pdouou (TTvXol eSicoxOria-au kcci ews davdrov ijdXticrav. Ad0u)fxev

Aia

Kai

oi

Trpo

6(p6a\fj.u»v

rjfjicov

tovs dyadovs diroaToXovs*

A;

the orthography of the word. vwb]A; cbro C. airb rod 2aoi)\ C. fiaaiKews 'laparjX] AS ; om. C.

n

12 vwo 2aou\]

13 virodeiy/jid16 fieytarot]

twv] virodiyfiaruv A.
...<ttol

15 yevvaia] yevvea
/xeyiaroi

A.

CS

;

A.

The word

was

fill

(myself included) as insufficient for the lacuna of A, but the text of the other authorities removes

by Tischendorf and several editors the space, and some other word substituted to
rejected
all

doubt.

persecutions, they bore testimony to Christ; how at last they sealed their testimony with their blood, and de-

17.

o-tvXol]
ii.

tians

9,

See the note on Galawhere it is used of S. Peter

and other Apostles.
tion (ttvXoi
is

The accentuaand
it

parted to their rest and
glory.'
14.
1

to

their

there discussed, has the support of C here.
1.

eyyicrra] ''very near," as

com-

pared with
quoted.

examples already expression must be qualified and explained by the mention of 77 yevea. fjp.a>v just below. It has been shown that the close of Do-

the

The

18. So too Clem. Horn. dyadovs] 16 o o ayaOos Tlerpos rrpocnvrjbrjcras Editors ic.r.X., quoted by Harnack.

and

critics

have indulged
conjecture,

in

much

licence

mitian's reign is pointed out both by tradition and by internal evidence as the date of this epistle (1. p. 346 sq).

suggesting dyiovs, Trpcorovs, deiovs, etc., in place of dyadovs. This has led to the state-

of

ment made

in

Volkmar's edition of

The language
this result.

here coincides with could hardly be used to describe events which had happened within the last year or two, as
It

Credner's Gesch. des N. T. Kanon p. 51, that A reads d ovs (a supposed contraction for irpcorovs). Nothing

can be farther from the

truth.

The

must have been the case if the letter were written at the end of Nero's And on the other hand reign. yevea rjp.wv would be wholly out of place, if it dated from the time of
f\

word dyadovs is full in A, and it

distinctly legible in
is

other authorities.

may

confirmed by the Such an epithet be most naturally explained on

the supposition that Clement is speaking in affectionate remembrance of

Hadrian, some 50 years or more after the death of the two Apostles. See the note on Ign. ddXrjTas]
Polyc.
1.

those
ally.

whom

he had known personOtherwise the epithet seems
of place.

to be

somewhat out

26
rieTpov, 6s

THE EPISTLE OF
$lcc

S.

CLEMENT

[v

(^rj\ov

ahiicov

ov% eva ovSe Bvo

ctAAot

TrXeiovas v7rrjveyKev 7rovovs,
i

kcli

ovtco fULapTvprjcras eVo-

Herpou,
filled

os]
[6

C
2

;

...o<r

A

;

Petms

S.

was
seen.

up

flerpjos or [II^r/)]os.
vir-qveyKev] virrjveyKe

The

Before the discovery of C, the lacuna of A true reading could not have been foreS,

C; and so doubtless
read

which has 73D

tulit,

portavit (see §

14).

As

regards A,

Young

vrrt/jLeivev',

but Mill and others

1. Uirpov k.t.X.] passage in Peter of Alexandria (de Poenit. 9, see

A

are mentioned in

where the two Apostles conjunction, was probably founded on Clement's acI.

p.

164),

But not only was this juxtaposition of the two Apostles appropriate as coming from the Roman Church ;
it

would also appeal powerfully to the Corinthians. The latter community,
its

count here, for it closely resembles his language. The same is also the case with a passage of Macarius

no

less

than the former, traced

spiritual pedigree to the

combined
;

quoted in the note on vnedeigev below. This juxta-

Magnes Apocr.

iv.

14,

position of S. Peter and S. Paul, where the Roman Church is con-

teaching of both Apostles and accordingly Dionysius (1. c), writing from Corinth to the Romans, dwells with emphasis on this bond of union between the two churches comp.
:

cerned,

The

occurs not unfrequently. language of Ignatius, Pom. 4,
to

1

Cor.
2.

i.

12,

iii.

22.
'

imply that they had both preached in Rome; and half a century later Dionysius of Corinth (Euseb. H. E. ii. 25) states explicitly that they went to Italy and suffered martyrdom there Kara rov avrov Kaipdv. This is affirmed also a generation later by Tertullian, who mentions the different

seems

'having borne his testimony? The word p.dprvs was very early applied especially, though not solely, to one who sealed his testimony with his blood. It is so applied in the Acts (xxii. 20) to S. Steixaprvprjo-as]

manners of

their deaths (Scorp. 15, de Praescr. 36) and soon after Gaius, himself a Roman Christian, describes
;

phen, and in the Revelation (ii. 13) to Antipas. Our Lord Himself is styled the faithful and true pdprvs (Rev. i. 5, iii. 14), and His paprvpia before Pontius Pilate is especially
less

the sites of their graves in the immediate neighbourhood of Rome

emphasized (1 Tim. vi. 13). Doubtthe Neronian persecution had done much to promote this sense,

(Euseb. H. E. ii. 25) see also Lactant. de Afort. Pers. 2, Euseb. Dem.
;

Ev.

iii.

3, p.

116.

The

existing

Acta

Petri et Pauli (Act. Apost. Apocr. p. 1, ed. Tischendorf) are occupied with the preaching and death of the two
Apostles at

aided perhaps by its frequent occurrence in the Revelation. After the middle of the second century at all events paprvs, paprvpelv, were used
absolutely
to

signify

martyrdom;

appears to have been the subject also of a very early work bearing the same name, on which see Hilgenfeld Nov. This Test. extr. Can. Pec. iv. p. 68. subject is further discussed in the excursus S. Peter in Rome appended to the first volume.
;

Rome and

this

Martyr. Polyc. Euseb. H. E. iv.
ib.
ii.

19
26,

Melito in Dionys. Corinth.
sq,
ib. ii.

25,

Hegesippus
ib.

23, iv. 22,

Epist. Gall.

v.

1,

2,

Cataphr.
1, iii. 3.

ib.

v.
iii.

16, 12.

Iren.
10,

Anon. adv. Haer. i. 28.
18. 5, etc.

3, 4,

iii.

even at this late date they continued to be used simultaneously of other testimony borne to the Gospel,
Still

v]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
ek tov
ScbeiXo/uievov tottov Ttjs c)o£*/s.
Wotton accordingly

27
01a (^rjAov

pevdrj

professed to see the H, and
to

says 'proculdubio legendum est 'hodie nihil nisi yn restat'. On the other virT)veyKev\ According Jacobson 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
short of death: e.g.

h.

by Hegesippus, by Apollonius ib. v. 18 (several times), and in a document quoted by Serapion ib. v.
Euseb. H. E.
iii.

this

distinction
1 1

;

see Euseb. Mart.

20, 32,

Pal.

ivpo tov

pcov vTTopovfjs
Xijcras dycova.

papTvpiov did kovtt]tov Trjs opoXoyias diaOof papTvpeiv in

19.

A passage

Churches

in the Epistle of the of Gaul (a. D. 177) illustrates

Thus the mere use
this early

the usage, as yet not definitely fixed but tending to fixity, at this epoch ovx ana^ ovde d\s dXXd noXXaKis
:

age does not in itself necessarily imply the martyrdoms of the two Apostles but on the other hand we need not hesitate (with
;

fAapTvprfaavTes
.

Kai ck drjpicov avdis

Merivale, Hist, of the

Romans

vi. p.

dvaXrjepSevTes. .our' avTol

pdpTvpas eavrfp lv €7T€Tp€-

TOVS a.V€K7]pVTTOV OVT€ pr)V
7rov

282, note 2) to accept the passage of Clement as testimony to this fact.

ovopari npocrayopeveiv avTOVS' aXX' enroTe tis rjpcHv di eViOTOXrjs
T]

tovtco

tco

For (1) Clement evidently selects extreme cases of men who Zcos Qavdrov
rjdXijcrav;

did Xoyov

papTvpas avTovs
niKpcos'
tt)s

irpocr-

(2)

The emphatic

position
defi-

elnev,

e7re7rXrjacrov
ttjv

rfdecos

yap

of papTvprjcras points to the
nite

more

Trape^copovv

papTvpias npocrKal dXr]tg>v
'

rjyopiav tco XptoTO) tco ttio-tco

meaning; (3) The expression is the same as that in which Hegesippus describes the final testimony, the martyrdom, of James (Euseb. H. E. ii. 23 <ai ovtcos i papTvpr/aev) and of Symeon (Euseb. H. E. iii. 32 koX ovtco papTvpel); (4) Dionysius of Corinth couples the two Apostles together, as they are coupled here, saying ipapTvp-qcrav Kara tov ovtov naipov (Euseb. H. E. ii. 25), where martyr-

Bivco pdpTvpi...Ka\ iirepipvqcTKovTO

t^eXrjXvdoTcov

rjdij

inelvoi

r)dr)

papTvpcov Kal eXeyov pdpTvpes ovs ev Trj
rf^icocrev

opoXoyia XpicrTos
XrjCpdr/vaij tg>v did rfjs

dva-

emcrCppayicrdpevos avi£6dov ttjv papTvpiav' 77/xets de o poXoyoi peTpioi Kal Tan eiThe distincvo'i (Euseb. H. E. v. 2). tion between pdpTvs and 6poXoyr)Trjs (more rarely opoXoyos), which the
humility of these sufferers suggested, became afterwards the settled usage
of the Church
at
;

dom

is

plainly

meant and where

pro-

bably he was writing with Clement's language in his mind. The early
patristic allusions to the

but that

it

was not so

martyrdoms

the close of the second century appears from the Alexandrian Cle-

of the two Apostles have been already quoted in the last note. It should

ment's comments on Heracleon's account of opoXoyia in Strom, iv. 9, comp. also Tertull. Prax. 1 p. 596 'de jactatione martyrii inrlatus ob solum et simplex et breve carceris taedium.' Even half a century later the two titles are not kept apart in
;

be added that
is

S.

Peter's

martyrdom

clearly implied in John xxi. 18, and that S. Paul's is the almost in-

evitable consequence of his position as described by himself in 2 Tim. iv.

6 sq.
3.

tov ocpeiXopevov tottov]
is

The

ex-

Cyprian's

language.

The Decian

pression

persecution however would seem to have been instrumental in fixing

copied by Polycarp {Phil. 9), where speaking of S. Paul and the other Apostles he says, els tov

28
Kctl
i

THE EPISTLE OF
epiv IladXos
ical

S.

CLEMENT

[v

i>7ro/uLOvrjs

fipafielov uTredei^ev, ewTaKis

fallacious.

Zpw] CS; def. A. Here again the calculation of the space has proved with xal Editors, before the discovery of CS, filled in the lacuna of

A

6 or Kal simply.
tavit)

^pa^ehv]

(3pa(3i.ov

A.

vvedei^ev] 2d€i%ei>
is

C;

tulit {por-

"O^D
^

S.

As

regards the reading of A, there

some doubt.

Young
.

printed

dwiax ep but Mill formerly and Jacobson recently read the MS y . . . €N. Accordingly Wotton and most later editors have written vir£<rx ev With respect to the
-

y

my own
I

membrana
(if

observation entirely agrees with Tischendorf 's, who says post /3paj3<.ov abscissa est neque litterae quae sequebatur vestigium superest'. Indeed
'

am

right) there

can hardly have been any such trace since the MS was bound,
edition, and it was accepted by Gebhardt (ed. 1); though in his later edition Gebhardt has adopted the simple verb edei^ev from C. If Mill and Jacobson are right, this cannot have been the reading of A, as the initial Y was once visible. My reasons for doubting whether this was possible, at

dqbeikopevov avrols totxov ela\ Trapa rdo SO ActS i. 25 TOV TOTTOV TOV KvplCO.

my

Uiov (comp. Ign. Magn. 5), Barnab. 19 rov <opio-[xevov tottov, and. below

44 tov idpvpevov avTots tottov. An elder in Irenaeus (probably Papias) discourses at length on the different
§

abodes prepared
36.
1

for the faithful acv.

cording to their deserving, Haer.
sq.
fipafielov] S.
ix.
1.

least in the later condition of the MS, are given in the upper note. On the

Paul's
iii.

own word,
See also

other

hand

virebeigev is

supported by
iv.

1

Cor.

24, Phil.

14.

a passage in the recently discovered

Mart. Polyc. 17 /3pa/3eio*/ dvavTtpprjtov direvrjveyfievov, Tatian ad Graec.
33 aKpaaias /3pa/3eioi/ dnrjveyKaTO and comp. Orac. Sib. ii. 45, 149. The word is adopted in a Latin dress,
:

work

of Macarius

Magnes Apocr.

14 (p. 181, Blondel), where speaking of S. Peter and S. Paul he says, eyveoo~av vTrodel^ai tovtols [i.e. roty
TTiaT€vovo~i,v\ ttolois dywo-iv 6 ttjs
tt'lo--

brabium, and occurs in Tertullian, in the translation of Irenaeus, and in the Latin versions

bravium

or

T€(os o-vyKeicpoTrjTai, o~Te(pavos.

In the context, which describes the labours

and martyrdoms of these same two
Apostles, the language of Macarius appears to give many echoes of this

of the Scriptures.
xmebei^f v] 'pointed out the way to, taught by his example'; comp. § 6 vnodeiypo, KaXKiarov iyivovTo iv rjp.1v. The idea of vTredeitjev is carried out

passage in Clement

;

vnepeivav ei/Ve-

fiws diddo~KOVT€s, t<ov ddiKovpevoov vntppa^oi, 7roXXa...r<a Koo~p(p prjvvo-avTcs,

by viroypappos below; for the two words occur naturally together, as in Lucian Rhet. Praec. 9 vnodeiKvvs to
Arjpoadevovs (.^^...Trap a Sfiy para napaTidets Tu>v \6yoiv ov padia piptia^ai...
Kal tov xpovov

tov fiiov to
.

TeXos dTr^vTrjaev, pe^pi

Oavdrov. .TrpoKivdwevaatcri, Ttjs evuXeias tov enaivov, oi yevvddai, ava ttjv oIkovpevrjv,
/3pa/3etoi/...KTQ)pei/oi,
. .

tvttoi
tcov

dv-

dpeias

.

ytvopevoi,

noXXd

kciXojv

naprroXw vnoypa^ei
VTrobeiKvveiv

ttjs

dytoviapdrcov, ttjs diSaxTJs kcu tov Kijpvy-

odoinopias

:

SO

eXnibas

paros, papTvpiov do£av, 7TiKpais...j3aadvois,

and

vTToypdcpeiv ikiridas are converti-

vnopovfj ttoXXt}, yevvalws (pepeiv.

It

ble phrases, Polyb. ii. 70. 7, v. 36. 1. This conjecture vnedeigev, which I offered in place of the i/ire'tr^e? of

previous editors, occurred independently to Laurent, who had not seen

seems highly probable therefore that the use of vnobeiKvvvai in this somewhat strange connexion was derived by him from the same source. Comp. also Ep. Gall. % 23 in Euseb. H. E.

v]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
(j)0p6O"as 9

29
Ktjpv^
I

SeajULa

(pvyaSevdels,

Xidao'deis,

yevofar

so that Jacobson

was certainly mistaken and Mill perhaps so; but

have so

y. regarded other hand the 5 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 I
'

this statement, as to offer a conjecture

which respects the

On

the

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 viredei^ev to gSeitjev see the lower

quum

note.
V.
I

€LS

TTjV

TOtV \oiTT(OV

VTV0TVTZ(O(TLV

flight

vnodeiicviHov

on

prjdev

(poftepbv

otvov

narpos dyanrj, p.T)8e dXyeivov onov Xpiatov 86£-a. S. Paul himself says (Acts
xx. 35) V7redei£a vp.lv on k.t.X. C is found in other cases to substitute the

simple verb, where

A

has the com-

from Damascus (Acts ix. 25, xi. 33), from Jerusalem (Acts ix. 30), from Antioch of Pisidia (xiii. 50), from Iconium (xiv. 6), from Thessalonica (xvii. 10), from Bercea (xvii. 14), and perhaps from Corinth (xx. 3). Some of these incidents would be
2 Cor.

pound

and would where the meaning of the compound was not obvious. The rendering of S, which
(see
1.

p.

127),

naturally

do

so

here,

described by cpvyabevdeis, but it is perhaps too strong a word to apply On (pvyabevetu, which though to all. found even in Attic writers was re-

by certamen, corresponds fairly with v-nivytv suggested by some editors but this was certainly not the reading of A. eirraKis] In 2 Cor. xi. 23 S. Paul speaks of himself as iv (pvkwcais irebut the imprisonment at pio-o-orepcos Philippi is the only one recorded in the Acts before the date of the Se; ;

also translates fipafielov

garded by purists as questionable, see Lobeck Phryn. p. 385. The reading paftbevdeis (comp. 2 Cor. xi. 25) which was proposed to fill the lacuna in A is objectionable, because the form pafiSlfciv alone is used in the

cond Epistle to the Corinthians. Clement therefore must have derived his more precise information from some other source. Zeller {Theol,
Jahrb. 1848,
ties at
p.

lxx and O. T. (and perhaps elsewhere, in this sense). Xidaadels] At Lystra (Acts xiv. 19). An attempt was made also to stone him at Iconium, but he escaped in time (xiv. 5). Hence he says (2 Cor.
xi.

25) anal; eXiddaBrjv.
iv. § 9.

See Paley

530) suggests that the

Hor. Paul.
Krjpv£]

writer of this letter

added the captivi-

S.
11.

Paul so styles himself
Epictetus too calls his
22. 69.

Cassarea and at

Rome

to the

2

Tim.

i.

five punishments which S. Paul mentions in 2 Cor. xi. 24. But the ncvrdkis

ideal philosopher Kjjpvg tS>v Oecov, Diss.
iii.

21. 13,

iii.

The

Stoics, like
Ktjpv-

there has no reference to imprisonments, which are mentioned se-

the Christians, were essentially Kes in their mode of action.

The

parately in the words already quoted. I should not have thought it neces-

picture of Diogenes at Corinth, given in Dion Chrysost. Oral, viii, ix, might

sary to call attention to this very obvious inadvertence, if the statement had not been copied with approval
or without disapproval other writers.
2.

stand mutatis 7nutandis for S. Paul. The word is accentuated <r\pv% (not Krjpv£) in C in accordance with the
rule of the
ler's

by several

grammarians; see ChandGreek Accentuation p. 181, no.

cpvya8evBeis~\

We read of S. Paul's

669.

30
/uevos ev
tjJs

THE EPISTLE OF
re
Trj

S.

CLEMENT

[v

ctvctToArj
/c/\eos

kcli

ev Trj Svcrei,

to yevvaTov

7ri(TT€a)s

avTOv

e\a/3ev,

hiKaioavvriv $i$a£as

b\ov tov Koafiov
i

K.a.1

67rl

to

T€jO/xot

t^s Svo-ews eXdcov
diKaioaijvrjv]

re]

AC

;

om.

S.

2 Trio-Tews] TriaTanaa

A.

A

;

5i/ccuo-

CS, connected by punctuation in both these authorities with PXafie. Bryennios had overlooked the reading of C in his edition, but corrects the omission
a-tfv^s
1.

to yevvaiov k.t.X.]

'

the noble refaith
'

8e avTrjs (rrjs olicovpevrjs) Ti6rjai irpos
Svcrei
(p.

nown which he had won by his
i.e.

;

his faith in his divine mission to
:

pev tcis 'MpaicXeiovs 106) pexP 1 T ® v aicpodi/

o-TrjXas,

ii.

4

rrjs 'lfirjp'ias

preach to the Gentiles
Gesch. des
3.

see Credner's
p. 52.

N. T.Kanon (i860)
Koo-fxov k.t.X.]

oXov tov

In the spu-

airep bvo-piKcoTepd cctti, iii. I (p. 1 37) TOVTO (TO UpoV aKpCOTr/piOv) eOTTl TO dvTLKCOTdTOV OV TTjS ^VpC07Tr]S pOVOV ahCka KCU
Trjs

rious letter of
fixed to

Peter o

Clement to James prethe Homilies it is said of S. Trjs dvaecos to aKoreivoreCOS

olicovpevrjs

TovTai yap vivo

andarjs crr]pe7ov' irepatcov dvelv rJ7reipa>v 17

pOV TOV KOCTflOV flepoS
iKavcoTepos
(pooricrai

TTdVTCOV
...

oiKovpevT) Tvpos 8vo~iv, toIs re Trjs Eupa>Trrjs aicpois Kal toIs TrpcoTois Trjs Aiftvrjs,
ill.

KeXevcrdeis

tov

5 (p- !6cj) eneidr)

KaTa tov nopOpbv

eaopevov ayaObv bXoo too Kocrpco prjvvcras (SaaiXea, pi\pis ivravda rfjs 'Pcoprjs
yevopevos...avTos tov vvv /3iov (Sialics to £fjv peTijXXatjev (§ 1, p. 6 Lagarde).

eyevovTo tov Kara tt)v KaX7rrjv, vopiaavTas Teppovas eivai Trjs oiKovpevr)s...Ta
ci<pa, ib. (p.
1

70) £r)T€lv

iiri

tcov Kvpioos

Xeyopevaov

o-TrjXcov

tovs

Trjs olicovpevrjs

This passage is, I think, plainly founded on the true Clement's account of S. Paul here and thus it accords with the whole plan of this Judaic
;

opovs (these references are corrected

from Credner's Kanon p. 53), and see Strabo's whole account of the western boundaries of the world and
of this
Veil.

writer in trans/'erring the achieve-

coast
i.

of Spain.

Similarly

ments of S. Paul to S. Peter whom he makes the Apostle of the Gentiles
:

Paterc.

2 'In ultimo

Hispa-

see Galatians p. 315. to Teppa ttjs Bvcrecos]
west.'

t

the extreme

niae tractu, in extremo nostri orbis termino.' It is not improbable also that this western journey of S. Paul

In the Epistle to the Romans (xv. 24) S. Paul had stated his inFrom the tention of visiting Spain.

included a visit to Gaul (2 Tim. iv. 10; see Galatians p. 31). But for the
patriotic belief of some English writers (see Ussher Brit. Eccl. Ant. c.
1,

Clement here it appears that this intention was fulfilled. Two generations later (c. A.D. 180) an anonymous writer mentions his havSed et profecing gone thither; tionem Pauli ab urbe ad Spaniam proficiscentis/ Fragm. Murat. (pp. 19, 40, ed. Tregelles, Oxon. 1867; or Westcott Hist, of Canon p. 517, ed. For the expression to reppa ttjs 4).
language
of
'

have included Britain
stle's travels,

Stillingfleet Orig. Brit. in

c.

1),

who

there
;

is

the Aponeither evidence

nor probability comp. Haddan and Stubbs Cou?ic. and Eccles. Doc. I. This journey westward p. 22 sq. supposes that S. Paul was liberated
the Roman captivity related the Acts, as indeed (independently of the phenomena in the Pasafter

in

Svaecos pointing to the western extremity of Spain, the pillars of Hercules,

toral Epistles) his

own

expectations
ii.

comp. Strab.

ii.

1

(p.

67) nipaTa

expressed

elsewhere

(Phil.

24,

v]
kcli
5

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
fxapTV privets
67ri

3

1

twv

r\y ov juev cov ,

outcos d7rrf\Xayri
V7T0fJL0Vri<Z

TOV

KOCT/UOV KCtl €1$

TOV

CiyiOV T07TOV 67TOpev6ri 9

yevo/uevos juieyio'TOs vTroypafjLjjLos.
Didache
p.

py

.

3
viro (see

e7rt]
is

The word

is

distinctly legible in

AC, and

therefore
;

the conjecture

below) niundo S (see the note on ii. §

inadmissible.
ewopetidrj]

5 rod koct/xov]

AC

ab hoc

19).

AC;

susceptus est

(eirripdr)?) S.

Philem. 22) would suggest.

Those

the passage simply interpreted.
4. eVi T(ov rjyovpevoov]
'

who maintain

that this

first

Roman

before rulers'

;

captivity ended in his martyrdom are obliged to explain to Teppa rfjs
dvaecos of

comp.

§
1

2)7

/StKnAe'cos

Tols yyovpevois r)pQ)v...TOV 1 kol tcov qyovpevcov, § 5 1 °'

Rome

itself.

But

it is

in-

credible that a writer living in the metropolis and centre of power and
civilization could

rjyovpevoi AlyvTrrov, ^ 55 ttoXXoi (3ao~iXels' kcl\ rjyovpevoi, §61 tois re ap\ov(TLV
<a\ -qyovpevois r\pdv
eiri rfjs yfjs.

The

speak of

it

as 'the

extreme west,' and this at a time when many eminent Latin authors and statesmen were or had been
natives of Spain,

names of Nero and Helius (Dion Cass, lxiii. 12), of Tigellinus and Sabinus (the
67), etc.,

praetorian

prefects

a.d.

and when the com-

have been suggested. In the absence of information it is waste of
time to speculate. Clement's language does not imply that the Apostle S paprvpia eVi t&v r\yovpkvatv took place in the extreme west (as Hilgenfeld argues), for there is nothing to show that eVi to Teppa k.t.X. and papTvprjaas enl twv rjyovpevcov are in-

mercial and passenger traffic with Gades was intimate and constant. (For this last point see Friedlander Sittengesch. Roms II. p. 43, with his On the other hand Phireferences.) lostratus says that, when Nero banished philosophers from Rome, Apollonius of Tyana rpenerai eVi ra io-irepia
tt)s yfjs

tended to be synchronous.
the clause koi eVi to Teppa
e\6a>v
Trjs

Indeed
dvaecos

(iv.

47),
is

which he
diately
Ketrai

visited

and the region described imme(v.

afterwards
Kara
to
tt)s

4)

to.

TdSeipa
repp,a

'Evpa>7rr)s

be explanatory of the preceding SiKaiocrvvrjv didd£as o\ov top Koa-pov, and the passage should be

seems

to

(quoted

by Pearson Minor Theol.

Works 1. p. 362). This is the natural mode of speaking. It is instructive to note down various interpretations
rfjs 8vaea>s which have been proposed: (1) 'to his extreme limit towards the west (Baur, Schen-

punctuated accordingly. 6. vTroypappos] a copy, an example] as for instance a pencil drawing to be traced over in ink or an outline to be
'

of cVi to Teppa

filled in

and coloured. The word

oc-

'

curs again §§ 16, 33; comp. 2 Mace, ii. 28, 29, 1 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 between the east and west ' (Schrader, ' Hilgenfeld) ; (4) to the goal or centre
of the west' (Matthies) ; (5) 'before (yno for eVi) the supreme power of

word

is vnoypacprj.

For an explanaAristot. Gen.
01

tion of the

metaphor see
p.

An.

ii.

6

(I.

743) kol yap

ypacpels

v7roypd\j/avT€s rats ypappals ovtcds eva~ The \e[(povai to7s xP<x>H- ao L TO C"> ov
-

the west' (Wieseler, Schaff). Such attempts are a strong testimony to the plain inference which follows from

sister art of sculpture supplies a similar metaphor in vttotvttooo-is, the first

rough model,

1

Tim.

i.

16, 2

Tim.

i.

13.

32

THE EPISTLE OF
VI.

S.

CLEMENT

[VI

Toutois to?9 dv^pacriv oo-icos 7ro\iT€V(raii€voi$ &vvridpoi(r6ti 7roXv 7r\rj6o£ €kA6ktu)v 9 OLTives 7ro\\a?9
aiiaais
leal

(iacrdvoiSy
;

($ia

(^ij\os

7ra66vT6s,

vTroheiyfjia

3 £77X05]

A

£fj\ou

X^Laai A.
dircae S.
I

am

C, and so again in the next line. 4 8i(ax0et<rat] 8iu5 AavatSes teal Aip/ccu] A ; SavatSes Kal 8etp Kal C ; danaides et not prepared to say now that the word is written A&H&iAec as I
in-

VI.

'

But besides these signal

distinguished stances, many less saints have fallen victims to jea-

which our three extant authorities were derived. But such testimony,

though very strong,
since

is

lousy and set us a like example of Even feeble women forbearance. have borne extreme tortures without

we

find this

common

not decisive, ancestor

at fault in other places; see above, If correct, it must refer to I. p. 145.

Jealousy has separated husbands and wives it has overthrown cities, and uprooted nations.'
flinching.
:

2.

ttoXv

77X77 0o s]

The

reference

those refinements of cruelty, patronized by Nero and Domitian but not confined to them, which combined theatrical representations with judicial

chiefly, though not solely, to the sufferers in the Neronian per-

must be

suffered in the character of

punishments, so that the offender some hero

secution, since they are represented as contemporaries of the two Apostles.

Thus

iv

f\\xiv

will

mean among
'

us

Roman

Christians,'

and the

al<iai

Kal ftdaavoi are the tortures by Tacitus Ann. xv. 44.

described

The Ro'

of ancient legend or history. For the insane passion of Nero, more especially, for these and similar scenic exhibitions, see Sueton. Nero 11, 12; and for illustrations comp. Friedlander Sittengeschichte Roms II. p.

man
tude)

historian's
'

ingens to Clement's 7roXv

is

multiexpression the exact counterpart
TrkrjSos.
i

by or amid Previous editors have substituted the accusative, 7roX\as ahias but, as the dative is frequently used to denote the means, and even the accessories, the circum-

noWaU

aUiais K.r.X.]
7

?nany sufferings.
;

234 sq. Thus one offender would represent Hercules burnt in the flames on (Eta (Tertull. Apol. 15 'qui vivus ardebat Herculem induerat ') another, Ixion tortured on the wheel (de Pudic. 22 puta in axe jam incendio adstructo '). read also of crimi;

'

We

nals who, having been exhibited in the character of Orpheus (Martial.

stances (see Madvig Gr. Synt. § 39 sq), I have not felt justified in alterIn this case dia ing the reading.
Cfaos 7ra66vTes will be used absolutely, and TroXXms- aliciais k.t.X. will explain
5.

Sped. 21) or of Daedalus (id. 8) or of Atys (Tertull. 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

7j7ro6Viy/xtt

iyivovro.

ing
ties,

is

Aavatdes kol Atpjcai] This readsupported by all our authori-

with minor corruptions, and I have therefore replaced it in the text,

very appropriate for this treatment; but all attempts to make anything of the legend of the Danaids entirely fail. Arnold (Neronise/ie Christenverfolgung p. 38, 1888) cuts the knot by
suggesting that additions were

though not without misgiving. If it be not correct, the error must have existed in the archetypal MS from

made

to the original legend of the Danaids for the purposes of the amphitheatre;

VI]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
ev
tjjuTv.

33
SicoxdeTcrai

kclWkttov eyevovTO
5

Sid

(^rj\os

yuvalKes, "fAavai'Ses Kal AipKaif,
formerly read
it

aiKLorfJiaTa

Seivd

Kal

(h
I

and
first

blurred),
edition.

and

and n being frequently indistinguishable where the Ms is creased was certainly in error as regards the division of the lines in my

just as

in these scenic

exhibitions

1)

which

I

placed in the text in

my

Orpheus was torn to pieces by a bear But after all (Martial Sped. 21).
the difficulty still remains, that the mode of expression in Clement is
altogether

first

edition, yvvaLK.es, vedviftes, TraiBl'

on this however expresses himself doubtfully on the reading, quotes Heb. x. 32
ir6Kkr\v affkrjcnv v7rep.e1va.Te TradrjfiaToov,

awkward and unnatural hypothesis. Harnack, who

(tkcii, as highly probable and giving an excellent sense Women, tender maidens, even slave-girls comp. August. Serm. cxliii (v. p. 692 sq) Non solum viri sed etiam mulieres
;

'

:

'

et pueri et

puellae martyres vicerunt,'
'

Leo Serm. lxxiv (1. p. 294) Non solum viri sed etiam foeminae nee tan-

tovto pev 6veidi(T[xo7s re Kal BXl^ecriv

tum impubes

Bearpigopevoi,
fxevoi

is

but here 0earpi^6best explained by 1 Cor. iv.

9 Bearpov eyevrjQ-qpev tco Kocrpco k.t.A., where no literal scenic representation is intended. Laurent explains the

pueri sed etiam tencrae virgines usque ad effusionem sui sanguinis decertarunt quoted by Wordsworth (I.e.). To these illustra'

;

tions

add Minuc. Fel. 37 viros cum Mucio vel cum Aquilio aut Regulo
'

words by saying that the punishment of the Danaids and of Dirce in proverbium abiisse videtur.' But he can
'

comparo
trae

? pueri et mulierculae noscruces et tormenta, feras et

omnes suppliciorum

terriculas,

in-

only quote for the former

es

rbv ra>v

Aaval8a>v ttIOov vdpocpopelv Lucian Tim. 18, which is hardly to the point, as it

spirata patientia doloris inludunt.' For the meaning of naidLa-Kr] in Hellenistic
iv.

Greek see the notes Galatians
calls
it 'Uberrima conbut there is a free-

merely denotes labour spent in vain. Clement of Alexandria indeed [Strom. iv. 19, p. 618) mentions the daughters

22.

Tischendorf
jectural

Danaus with several other examwomanly 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;
of
ples of

So dom which
corruption
is

it is,

justifies

itself;

and the

just such as

might have

but this does not meet the difficulty. It has been suggested again, that
these
of

Christian
:

may have been actual names women martyred at

occurred at an early date, when the epistle was 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 Monthly Christian Spectator, He assured January, 1853, p. 16. me that it had occurred to him inde-

Rome

but the names are perhaps improbable in themselves, and the plurals cannot well be explained.

Having regard
of this

to

the

difficulties

expression I am disposed still to favour the acute emendation of Wordsworth (on Theocritus xxvi.

pendently; and that, till quite recently, he believed the credit which had been assigned to another to be due to himself, and wrote to this effect to the Western Times as lately as 1 87 1, not knowing that Wordsworth's emendation

was published
3

CLEM.

II.

34

THE EPISTLE OF
sttl

S.

CLEMENT

[VI

dvocia Tradovcraiy
K.aTy\vTY[<TaV) kcu
aco/mciTi.

tov

Trjs rcio-Tews (3e/3aiov Spo/uov

eXafiov yepas yevvaiov al dcrdevels

tw
kcli

ZrjXos

dir^XXoTpLcoaev

yafj.€Tas

dvDpwv

r\XXoicocr€v pr]6ev v7ro tov iraTpo\ rjfjLcov 'ASa/u, Toyto NYN OCTOYN 6K TOON OCT600N MOY KAI CApI 6K THC CApKOC MOY- 5

to

t^rjXos

teal

epis

7ro\et?

fieyaXas KaTEGTpe^sev

kcci

e6vr)

fieyaXa e^epifyocrev,
5 6(tt£wv] ocTaiwv

A
7

;

darQv C.
i^epi^ojaev]

6

fy>ts]

epeia

A.

KaT4cTpe\pev~\

AS

;

KareaKaxf/e C.

A

;

i^eppt^ooae C.

g virop.vr]<JKOvTes\

A

;

in

The fact of its having 1844. occurred independently to two minds is a strong testimony in its favour.
Bunsen (Hippolytus
I.

tovto vvv k.t.X.] From the LXX 4. of Gen. ii. 23, which corresponds with the Hebrew.
6.

p.

xviii,

ed.

(rfkos kcu epis]

The two words

2,

1854)

this
1

enthusiastically welcomes emendation as relieving him

occur together, Rom. xiii. 13, 2 Cor. xii. 20, Gal. v. 20 see above, § 3.
:

from two monsters which disfigured a beautiful passage in the epistle of

the

Roman

Clement.'

in a review of

my

Lipsius also edition (Academy,
it;

peydXas K.T.A.] See Ecclus. xxviii. 14 7roXft$- oxvpas KaBelXe kcu oiKias peyicTTcivcov «arecrrpf\^f. Jacobson refers to Jortin, who supposes
rroXeis

July 9, 1870) speaks favourably of
p.

that Clement

had

in his
'

mind Horace

and Donaldson {Apostolical Fathers
122,
ed.
2)

Carm.

i.

16.

17 sq,

Irae Thyesten

calls

it

admirable,

though elsewhere (Theol. Rev. January 1877, p. 45) he himself offers
another conjecture, yevvaiai re kol dovXai. Lagarde (Armen. Stud. p. 73)
conjectures
dvaXKidcs
ill.

exitio gravi stravere, et altis urbibus ultimae stetere causae cur perirent

funditus.'
7.

i^eplfacrev]

For the form see TisI.

chendorf Nov. Test.
A. Buttmann
editors

p. lvi (ed. 7),

kcu
p.

KopiKai

;

Gramm. p.

Haupt {Hermes

146,

1869)

needlessly
§ 15,

alter

28 sq. Most the readueyaXo23 and ii.

suggests duvihes 8Uaiai, comparing Clem. Alex. Protr. 12 (p. 92) at tov

ing to e^ppi^uycrev.
prjpova
§ 31.

Compare

(pvXXopoe'i §

Qeov dvyarepes,
2.

al

duvddes al KaXai.
k.t.A.]

KciTrjpTrjcrav

The verb

Koravrav signifies to arrive at a destination, and the corresponding substantive KaTavrrjua is a destination, a goal,' Ps. xix. 6 comp. Schol.onArist.
:

'

For C see above, I. p. 127. ' While instructing you, we would remind ourselves also. We are all entered in the same lists we must all run on the straight path obeying the will of God and respectVII.
;

;

Ran. 1026 (993)
rca,

ekaiai a-TCxqdov lo~Tav'

Karavrr] ua tov Spouov. Thus 6 /3e'/3atoy dpouos the sure course,' i.e. the point in the stadium where
ovcrat

the victory is secured, is almost equivalent to ' the goal.' For KaTavrdv em

ing the blood of Christ. Examples of penitence in all ages are before our eyes. Noah preached repentance to his generation Jonah to the men of Nineveh. All whosoever listened
:

to

them were
9.

saved.'

comp.

2

Sam.

iii.

29, Polyb. x. yj. 3,

xiv. I. 9.

Hymn,

vTropvrjcrKOVT€s\ Comp. Orph. lxxvii. 6 (p. 345, Herm.) cptXd-

vn]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
V
IT.

35

TavTa, dyawriToiy ov

jjlovov u/uias

vovdeTovv-

T€s e7TL(TTeWop.ev,
10 ev

dWa
ecrfdev

Kal eavTOvs ^virofJivriG'KOVTe^'
(TKajmiuaTL,

yap rw avTw
€7riK€iTai.

Kal

6

avTos

r\\xiv

dyoov

Aio

diro\eL7rwjJL6v tcc? Kevas Kal

\xa-

Taias (ppovTidas, Kal
Ttjs irapahocreoos tj/mtov
virofxifivri<TKoi>Tes
r)fx?v

eAdco/uiev

ewl tov evKXerj Kal
Kal
'IScoiuev
C.
C.

arejjivov

Kavova.

tl
Tjp.iv

KaXov Kal
dyuv]

C.

10 ev yap]
11 airo\eiwup.ev]

C

;

dub. S.

AS; Kal yap ev A; airoX'nrwpLev
notes.

A; dywv
A.

12 evKKerf] evK\airj

ypvivvos vTvopLvqa-Kovaa re iravra (a refer-

In the phrase v-nep

to.

eV/ca/x-

ence given by Hefele). So also fivtj0-Kop.m in Anacr. ap. Athen. xi. p.
463 (which editors perhaps unnecessarily alter
jxvqaKeTai

p.eva irr)bav;

p.

A

evfypoavvqs

413 Strom,

a\\eo~6ai (e.g. Plat. Crat. A, Lucian Gall. 6, Clem. Alex.
v.
e

13,

p.

696; see below on
is

Kavcov),

to

do more than
to.

into

pLTjo-erai

or

pLvijcrerai).

But as the

scribe of A blunders elsewhere in adding and omitting letters under similar

or expected,'

eo~Kap,p.eva is

required the trench

circumstances (see above, I. p. 120), we cannot feel sure about the readThe word occurs again § 62, ing. where C reads vTrop,ip.vijo-KovTes, as it does here (see I. p. 126 sq). There is
the

cut at the end of the leap beyond the point which it is supposed the greatest athlete will reach (Pind. Nem. v.

36 p,aKpa
toc tis'

drj

avTodev dXp.a8'
1.

V7roarKa7r-

e'^o)

yovdrcov eXacppov

oppidv).
p.

Krause indeed (Hellen.
interprets
to.

eaKap.p.eva

393) of the line

same divergence of form
'

MSS
is

in the of the spurious Ignatius, Tars. 9.
aicapipLaTi]

IO.

lists'

The

o-<dp:p.a

the ground marked out by digging a trench or (as Krause supposes) by
contest
:

marking the leap of the preceding combatant, but this explanation does not account for the metaphorical use. 6 avTos rjpuv dya>v] See Phil. i. 30
tov avTov dycova e^ovTes olov
epiOL.

el'Sere

iv

lowering the level for the arena of a
see

Boeckh Corp.

Inscr.

2758, with the references in Hellen. 1. p. 105 sq, and for its meta-

no Krause

II.

Rom.
Heb.
ycova,
aycov.

aits'* j as enLKeiTai] Ign. 6 6 TOKeTOS piOl €7TLK€lTaL COmp.
'.

'

aw

xii.

I

tov rrpoKelpLevov
ii.

r/puv

phorical use Polyb. xl. 5. 5 ovBe eVt rov o-Kap-pLaros (ov to 8r] Xeyop,evov, Epict. Diss. iv. 8. 26 eh too-ovto
o~Kap.p.a

Clem. Rom.

§ 7 *"
l

x e P°~*lJ/

7rpoeKaXelTO

irdvTa

ovtivclovv.

number of examples of this metaphor in Christian writers is given by Suicer s.v. This word and many others referring to the games, as
agonotheta, epistates, brabium, etc., are adopted by the Latins (see esp. the long metaphor in Tertull. ad

A large

empty and futhe former epithet pointing to the quality, the latter to the aim or efKevds Kal p-aTaias]
tile]

a

fect of the action.

not

uncommon
xii.
1,

;

e.g.

The combination is LXX Is. xxx. 7,
18;

Hos.
oph.
15,

Job
iii. 1 1

xx.

ad Aut.
p.

3, Plut.

comp. TheVit. Artax.

Mor.

17 A.

13. ttjs napadoo-ecos]

The lacuna was

Mart. § 3), just as conversely military terms are naturalised from Latin into Greek see Ign. Polyc. 6 with the
;

was our variously filled so long as only authority, the best suggestions
being TeXeuoaevs and
ddXrjcrecos.

A

The

3—2

36

THE EPISTLE OF
eU to

S.

CLEMENT

[vn

TL Tep7rVOV KOL TL TTpOOrZeKTOV €VW7TlOV TOV 1TOlt](raVTOS
rifjias.
ft)5

drevia-iafjiev
TLfJLLOV

al/ua

tov XpLCTOv
$1<X

kcll

yvtofixev

eCTTW

TW

OTL TTCLTpl CtVTOV,
iravTi

TY]V rj^6T€paV

o-coTtiplav
3

EKXvdev
avrov]

tw

/coV/xw

^erai/oias

X a 9 lv

tQ

iraTpl

presumably.
if 6 tl

An

(which might be

p)

tw irarpl avrov r£ Gey C ; TU)6ew[Kanra.Tp\iavTov A, stroke (probably l) and a portion of a preceding letter upright See the lower note. on] S translates as are visible.
S
;

id quod. the omission in S

\ peravoias x<fy>«0

AC

5

peravotav S.

Bensly points out that

may be

easily explained
5 virrjveyKev}

Kni3*m, ^nii^D.

A

;

by the homceoteleuton in the Syriac, sustulit ITD S ; ewrjveyKe C. dtikI.

true reading could hardly have been anticipated ; but it adds to the close-

npoabeKTOV iv<onLOv\
I

So

diroheK-

tov evcomov,

Tim.

ii.

ness of the parallel in Polycarp Phil.
7 Bl6 aTToklTTOVTeS TT)V fxaTaiOTTJTCt TLOV ttoWcov km ras v^etiSoStSacrKaXias' eVi

tov ££ apxV s
€7no-Tpey}sa>fX€v,

*?/*«'

a

napadoSevra \6yov passage already

anobfKTov evcoiriov Qeov, of which Clement's language here seems to be a reminiscence comp. 1 Tim. v. 4, where naXbv nai is
:

3 tovto koKov KOL tov acoTrjpos r)ptov

quoted by the editors.
7rapab6crecos r)p<ov kcivovci

By

tov

rfjs

Clement ap-

interpolated in the common texts from the earlier passage. The simple Prov. 7rp6o~BeKTos appears in the LXX,
xi.

parently means 'the rule (i.e. measure of the leap or race) which we have received by tradition', referring to the examples of former athletes quoted in the context; comp. § 19 eVi tov

dpj(jfjs

20, xvi.

15,

Wisd.

ix.

12 (comp.

Mart. Polyc.
evTTpoo-beKTos

14),
is

compound commoner in the
in Cle-

but the

N.

T.,

and occurs three times
40 twice).

ment
3.
i.

(§§ 35,

ivapahebopevov
(to
is

rjp.lv

ttjs elprj-

Tipiov to) 7rarpl]
Tipico aip,aTi cos

Compare

i

Pet.

vr)s o-kotvov

which passage again
5
1

19

dpvov apcop.ov kol
after

Polycarp

indebted), §

tyjs

napa-

do~7Tl\oV XpiO~TOV.
Trarpt]

Kakws kcu 8iko.l<os op.oClement's phrase is borrow(pcovLas. ed by his younger namesake, Strom.
debopevr/s r)piv
i. I

The lacuna
I

ra

Qeto

in

A

must,

think, be supplied

by

(p.

324)
ical

ivpo{5r)o-eTaL

r)plv

Kara tov
kcl-

evKketj

crepvov ttjs napaboaecos

vova.

alone for two reasons; (1) If Tvarpl were contracted TTpi, as is most usual in the MS, the letters would not be sufficient
kol ivarpX rather
7rarpi

than

This is probably a conKavova] tinuation of the metaphor in o-Kap,pa comp. Pollux iii. 151 t6 de p,eTpov
:

tov 7rr]8^paTos kclvcov, 6 de opos to ecrKappiva' 60ev eVi tcov tov opov vrrep7TT]8(ovtcov 01 7rapoipia£6p.€voi

find 6 Qeos the Apostolic writings followed by tov Kvplov, etc. (e.g. Rom. xv. 6, 2 Cor. i. 3, etc., to
fill

the space

;

(2)

We

kol naTrjp frequently in

1

Pet.

i.

Xeyovai nr)dav xrnep to. ecrKapp,iva. See § 4 1 (with Thus kclvwv will be the the note). measure of the leap or the race as-

naTrjp is

3, Rev. i. 6), whereas 6 Qeos never so found. In fact with

any genitive following, the alternative seems to be 6 Qebs kol naTr/p or Qeos
TraTrjp.

signed to the athlete. tL koKov k.t.A.] From Ps. cxxxii. tl repnvuv K.T.\, Iftov drj tl koXov
rj

7rarj)p
1

On the other hand 6 Qeos occurs once only in the N. T. (Col. iii. 17, with a v.l.), and there it On the whole is used absolutely.

vn]
5

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
hieXdcofJLev

>

virriveyKev.
/uddco/uLep

eU
kcci

tc!§

yeveas

7racra<s

kcci

kcltcl-

otl ev yevea

6 hecriroTris

yevea /ueTavoias tottov eScoKev toTs /3ov\ojuevoi<> e7rio'Tpa(prjvai eV avTov,
/uLerdvoiav,
kcci

Ncoe eicripv^ev
du/jLev els]
10/j.eveia

ol

v7raKOvcravTes eawdr]-

A

;

bUXdufxev (om.

els)

C
els

;

transeamus super S (which probably
tt&vtols

represents dieXdw/uLev

els).

In

Rom.

v.

12

dvdpuirovs 6 ddvaros dtrjXdeu

both Pesh. and Hard, have "2 12V not hv "QJJ as S has here.
els is

In

§

4 8ie\6eiv
/cat]

rendered by "7 *QJJ.

The verb

8ie\8eu>
;

is

frequent in the

LXX.

AC

;

om.

S.

76

decnrbT-qs]

AC

om. S.

however the correct reading is probably preserved in the Syriac, the different positions of ra 6ec3 in the two Greek MSS showing that it was a
later addition.
i

(Luke ii. 29, Acts iv. 24, Rev. vi. 10, and one or two doubtful passages), but occurring in this one epistle some
twenty times or more.
subjection to

The

idea of

rally taken, ported ; for

geneunsupXen. Hell. iv. 7. 2, Soph. El. 834, are not parallels. Perhaps 'won {rescued) for the whole world? This passage is dUXdoofxev k.t.X.]
5.

\mr)veyKev\

offered?

So

it is

but this sense

is

thus very prominent in Clement, while the idea of sonship, on which the Apostolic writers dwell so emphatically, is kept see Lipsius p. in the background
is
;

God

This fact is perhaps due in part 69. to the subject of the epistle, which
required Clement to emphasize the duty of submission; but it must be ascribed in some degree to the spirit of the writer himself.
8.

copied in Apost. Const, ii. 5 5 6 yap Qebs, Qebs u>v eXeovs, air apx*l s zKaar-qv
yeveav eVi fieravoiav KaXel did tu>v 81Kai(ov...Tovs 8e ev

rw

KaTaK.Xvo~p.(p

81a

tov

Ncoe,

tovs

ev

~2obopois
'

Sta

tov

Ncoe cicfjpvgev k.t.X.]

The Mo-

(piXotjevov AcoY (see below § Ii) K.T.X. 6. yevea Kai yevea] each successive

saic

narrative

generation? in the LXX, Esth.
lxxxix.
1,

A

Hebraism preserved
ix.

Noah The nearest approach

says nothing about as a preacher of repentance.
to this

concep-

27, Ps. xlviii. 11,
:

xc.

1,

etc.

comp. Luke

i.

tion in the Canonical Scriptures is 2 Pet. ii. 5, where he is called diicaioavvrjs Krjpvg.

50 yeveas KM yeveds (vv. 11.). tottov] The same expression 8i86vai tottov ixeravoias occurs also in Wisd.
xii.

however

is

The preaching of Noah one of the more promi;

nent ideas in the Sibylline Oracles

10;

comp. Heb.

xii.

17 ixeravoias

tottov

ovx evpev, Tatian.
fxeravoias tottov,

ad

Graec.

1

5

see especially i. 128 sq. Ncoe Sepa? 8dpcrvvov ebv Xaolai re ttclo-i Kijpv^ov

ovk
ii.

e')(€i

Apost. Const.

38 tottov fxeravolas (opiaev, V. 1 9 The Xafielv avTov tottov p.eTavoias. corresponding Latin poenitentiae
'

fierdvotav k.t.X. This passage, though forming part of a comparatively late poem, was doubtless founded on the
earliest (pre-Christian) Sibylline
(iii.

occurs in the celebrated letter of Pliny to Trajan Plin. et Traj.
locus'*

97—828

of the

existing collection)

Epist. 96.
is
7.

The emendation
Very

tvttov

which is mutilated at the beginning and takes up the narrative of the
world's history at a later point than the deluge. Indeed this earliest Sibyl the book (if the closing passage of

not needed.
deo-TTOTTjs]

rarely applied

to the Father in the

New

Testament

38
(Tctv.

THE EPISTLE OF
'Icovas

S.

CLEMENT

[vn

Nivev'iTais
ettl

/meTavorjo'avTes

KaTa<TTpo<pr]v eicrjpv^ev, ol toIs djjiapTr]fj.aaiv avToov epiXacravTO

Se

tov Qeov iKSTevcravTes

Kal eXafiov ccoTripiav,

Kalirep

dWoTpiOL tov Qeov
VIII.
TrvevjJiaTOS
i

ovres.
rrjs

Ol XeiTOvpyoi
dyiov
;

%dptTOS tov

Qeov

Sia

5

7repi
S.

/ueTavolas i\a\r]crav,
3 iKereva-avres]

Kal ai/ros

ol be]

C

oide

A;

o'ide

A;

t/cereuoj/res

S.
still

5 Xeirovpyoi] Xirovpyoi

A.

8 p.era opKOv]

AC

;

C, and so apparently Bryennios reads p.ed' opuov

belongs to the same poem) conwith the deluge by claiming to be a daughter-in-law of Noah (iii. 826). From these Oracles it seems not improbable that
nects herself

~ TAeTavoeiTe, Ibov yap KaTaKXvcrp.os epx € rat (p. 68, ed. Tisch.). passage

A

Clement, perhaps unconsciously, derived this conception of Noah. To this same source may probably be
traced the curious identification in Theophilus ad Autol. iii. 19 Nc5e KaTayyeXXcov toIs Tore dv6pa>noLS p,eXXeiv avKaTaK.Xvo~pi.6v eo~ea6ai -Tpoecp^Tevaev
toIs Xeycov'

by Georg. Syncell. (Chron. p. 47 ed. Dind.) from Enoch, but not found in the extant book, seems to have formed part of Noah's preaching of repentance
;

cited

see

Dillmann's

Henoch
§ 9,
I.

pp. xxxviii, lxi. See also

below
'

with the note on

iraXiyyeveo-'ia.

comp. Jonah
o-Tpa<prjcreTai.
4.

Karaarpo(f}T]v] ''overthrow, ruin ; iii. 4 koX Nivevr/ /cara'

AevTe KaXel

vp:as 6

Qeos
e-

els \xeTavoiav' hio olKeitos
kXtjOt]
;

AevKaXicov

for Theophilus has elsewhere preserved a long fragment from the
lost

aliens frotn dXXoTpiot k.t.X.] God,' i.e. 'Gentiles': comp. Ephes. il. 12 ajrrjXXoT pica p,evoi Trjs 7roXirei,

as

Toil Io~parjX...Kal

dBeoi

ev tg> Koo-p.cp.

opening of the

(ad Autol, ii. passage incorporates ments of hexameters,
...Qeos els p.eTavoiav.

earliest Sibylline 36), and this very

Both dXXoTptoi and dXXocpvXoi are thus used, as opposed to the covenant-people.

several
e.g.

frag-

Aevre KaXel
also

VIII.

'God's ministers through

As Josephus

the Spirit preached repentance.

The

quotes the Sibyllines, he too in his account of Noah (Ant. 1. 3. 1 eueiBev
eTTi to KpelTTOv avTovs Trjv hicivoiav Kal Tas irpd^eis p:eTa(pepeiv, quoted by Hil-

genfeld here) may have been influenced by them. See on this subject For the MohammeI. p. 178 sq.

Almighty Himself invites all men to Again and again in the repent. Scriptures He bids us wash away our sins and be clean He proclaims repentance and promises forgiveness.'
;

5.

Ol XeiTovpyoi]

i.e.

dan legends of Noah, as a preacher of repentance, see Fabricius Cod. Pseud. To the passages Vet. Test. 1. p. 262.
there collected from apocryphal and other sources respecting Noah's preaching add this from the Apocalypse of Paul § 50 (quoted also by Hilgenfeld) eyoo elpu No>e...Kai ovk
enavaapajv
toIs

though they are not so called LXX or New Testament.
8.

the prophets ; in the

Zco

yap

eya> k.t.X.]

Loosely quoted

£00 eyw, rd8e Xeyei Kiipios, ov ftovXopai tov Qdvarov

from Ezek.

xxxiii.

11

tov dcrefiovs
diro
rrjs

(os d-roarpeyj/'ai

tov dae^rj
£rjv

68oi>

avTov

Kal

avTov.

dnoo-Tpocpf) dnoaTpi-^raTe diro ttjs 68ov vp.u>v' Kal Iva ri d-rodv^aKere, oUos 'icr-

dvOpanroLs

Krjpvcrcreiv'

paijX

;

k.t.X.

VIIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

39

oe 6 §€(T7roTr]s tlov airavToav irepl fxeTavoias eXd\rj(rei/
fJL6Ta

bpKOV
<

Zoo

r^p eroo.

Aerei

Kypioc, oy

BoyAomai ton

10

0ANATON TOY AMApTCOAOY, OOC THN M6TANOIAN* TTpOCTTldeiS kcli <yvu)fJLr]v d ya6t]V MeTANOh'cATe, oTkoc 'I c pAhi A, atto thc
anomi'ac

ymoon"

elnoN to?c y'chc toy Aaoy moy' 'Ean cocin
7<zp]

which has no manuscript authority.
Trpo<JT7)de<.cr

AS
C.

;

om. C.
elirov]
;

9 irpoandds]

A.

11

vp<2v]

AS

;

rod \aov

/jlov

AC dum

diets tu

(uttuv) S.
IO.

"Edv]

AC

;

nav

[?]

or Kal idv S.
(2) The expression 717300-TiOels Kal yvaiprjv dyaOf^v seems to im-

to treat these

Meravo-qaare k.t.X.] It is usual words as a loose quoxviii,

afterwards.

tation

from Ezek.

30 sq ohos

'io-pa^X, Xeyci Kvptos, €7n.aTpd(pr]Te Kal dnoarpeyp'aTe etc naacov tcov ao~e(3eicov

ply that, even if not a continuation of the same passage, they were at all

vpcov...Kal

Iva

ri

airoOvrjaKere,

olkos

events taken from the same prophet as the words quoted just before. (3)

^Iapar]X

;

diori ov oVXco rov ddvarov tov

from the canonical Book of Ezekiel, the words
dnoOvijaKovros.
If

taken

are probably a confusion of this passage with the context of the other
(Ezek. xxxiii.
follows.
11),

This inference is borne out by the language used just below in introducing the passage from Isaiah, Kal iv hipep rona, implying that the previous words might be regarded as a single
quotation. (4) great portion of the quotation is found in two different passages of Clement of Alexandria,

preceding note.
y

as given in the See however what

A

n. Eav eoaiv k.t.X.] This passage is generally considered to be made up
of Ps.
ciii.

and

in

one of these the words
:

IO, II ov
rjp.1v

tfp&v enoirjarev

Kara ras dpaprias ovde Kara ras avo-

Quz's div. salv. 39 (p. 957) ov fiovXopai tov 6dvaTov tov apaprcoXov aXXci ttjv peTavoiav'
kciv
cocriv

are attributed to Ezekiel

plas rjpcov avTairebozKev fip.1v' ore Kara to \jy\ros tov ovpavov divo rrjs yijs i<paTaia>o~e Kvpios to eXeos civtov eVi rovs
(poftovpevovs avTov, and Jer. iii. 19, 22 Kal tlna, Ilarepa KaXecrere pe kcli cm

ai dpaprlai

vpcov

<os

(poiviKovv epiov,

as x L ° va XevKavco,
cos

kclv

peXavrepov tov o~kotovs,
eKVL\jsas (p.
7toitJo-(0,

epiov XevKov
i.

and Paedag.
did
'le^eKiijX'
ttjs

10
'Eav
Kal

151)

(p-qal

yap

ipov

ovk

aTToaTpaCp^aecrde

..

.

eVtorpatcl
i.

eTTio-TpaCpfJTe

c£ oXrjs

KapBias

(prjTe viol

itncrTpecpovTes Kal lao-opai
Is.

€Lnr)T€, Ilarcp,

avvr plppaTa vpcov, together with 18 Kal cai' eocriv at dpapTiai

dyiov.
(1)

Thus

aKovaopai vpwv cos Xaov it seems to follow either

k.t.X.

Such fusions are not uncommon in early Christian writers and occur many times in Clement himself. But
several
solution

onical

in the recension of the canEzekiel used by the two Clements the passage xxxiii. 1 1 was

That

objections
;

lie

against

this

account

is

here (1) No satisfactory thus rendered of the words

T€pai aaKKov k.t.X.

idv wenv nvppoTepai kokkov Kal peXavcofor the passage of
:

followed by a long interpolation containing substantially the words here or quoted by Clement of Rome (2) That he is here citing some apocryphal writing ascribed to Ezekiel, which was a patchwork of passages
;

Isaiah, from which they are supposed to be loosely quoted, is given as an

borrowed from the canonical prophets.

The

latter supposition is fa-

independent quotation

immediately

voured by the language of Josephus

4Q
Al

THE EPISTLE OF
AMApTIAI YMOON
ATTO

S.

CLEMENT
TOY OypANOY,

[vm

THC THC

600C

KM

6AN
eni-

nyppoTepAi kokkoy kai MeAANcoTepAi cTpA(f)HTe npdc Me el 6'Ahc thc KApAiAC kai
o>cin

cakkoy, kai

eirrHTe, TTatgp,

enAKOYCOMAi ymoon
Xeyei
o'vtcos'

ooc

Aaoy ahoy.

Kai

eV 6T€pcp

T07TO)
5

AoYCAcee kai kaGapoi reNecGe* AQ>eAec0e tac And toon yyX^n Y M(*> n att6nanti toon 6c|)6aAmoon noNHpi'AC moy' nAYCAcGe And toon noNHpiooN ymoon, maGgte kaAon
nOieiN,
dpcf)AN(|)

6KZHTHCAT6
KAI

KpiCIN,

pYCAC06
/

AAIKOYM6NON,
KAI
;
I

KpiNATG
N,

AlKAIOOCATG
;

X^P A
4 AaoO

KAI
1x7101;]

^ e YT€

A 6 AG f X © ^>M6

3 /capStas]
ov'tcjs]

A

ipvxv*

CS.

A;

ovt(x)s

\eyei

CS.

Acwcracrfle]

C Clem 152 Xovaaadcu A.

\awa71w A.
/cat]

5 \4yec

A; om. CS.
7
7ratfo'a<r0e]
;

yeveade] yeveaQai A.
iravvacrdai

a<peAe<70e] a<f>e\eadcu

A
9

;

dcpeXere C.
/cat

A.

8

pucrao-fle]
;

pvaacrdai A.

Si/ccuwcrare]

AC

St/catwo-are
/cat
.
.

(om.

/cat)

S.

xW A

X^"

C

;

dub. S.

/cat

dieXeyxO^ev]

eAex-

{Ant.
Kai
7Tfpt

x. 5. i),

ov fiovov ovtos ('lepefxias)

for Tertullian {de

Cam.

Ch?ist. 23

;

7rpoe#eo-7rto"e

ravra rols bxXois
'le£eKir]\os
/3t/3A ta

aXka
kcitc-

6

7rpo(j)i]Tr}s

Trp&ros

rovrcov 8vo

ypatyas

comp. Clem. Alex. Strom, vii. 16, p. 890) and others quote as from Ezekiel words not found in the Canonical

\i7rev.

This statement however

may

book

:

see the passages collected in

be explained by a bipartite division of the canonical Ezekiel, such as some modern critics have made and as Josephus in his account of the
;

Fabric. Cod. Pseud. Vet. Test. p. 1 1 17. Hilgenfeld points out that one of
'

these,
rit

In quacunque hora ingemue-

Canon (c. Apion. i. 8) and elsewhere appears not to recognise this second Ezekiel, this solution is perhaps more Or again his text may be probable. corrupt, /3' (=bvo) having been merely
a repetition of the first letter of (3iSee also the remarks of Ewald /3Ata.
Gesch. des V. Isr. IV. p.
19.

peccator salvus erit', is closely allied to Clement's quotation here. This apocryphal or interpolated Ezekiel
tin

must have been known
also,
ois

to Jus-

Martyr
Kai

for

he

quotes

a

sentence, iv
Tovrois

av vp.as /caraAa/3o), iv

Kpivm {Dial. 47, p. 267),

Apocry-

which we know from other sources to have belonged to this false Ezekiel (see Fabric.
I.e. p.
1 1

phal writings of Ezekiel are mentioned in the Stichometry of Nice-

18)

;

though

phorus (see Westcott Canon p. 504), and from the connexion (Bapou'x,
'A/3/3a/coi;'p,,

Justin himself from lapse of memory ascribes it to our Lord, perhaps confusing it in his mind with Joh. v.
30.

'E£eKirj\, Kai Acm^'A, yjsevS-

eniypacpa)

it

may be

conjectured that

cott Introd. to Gosp. p. 426.)

(On the other hand see WestSo too

they were interpolations of or additions to the genuine Ezekiel, like the Greek portions of Daniel. This hypothesis will explain the form of the
quotations here.

At all events it appears that some apocryphal writings attributed to

Ezekiel

existed,

apocryphal passages of other prophets, as Jeremiah (Justin. Dial. 72, p. 298) and Zephaniah (Clem. Alex. Strom, v. 11, p. 692), are quoted by the early fathers. The passage of Jeremiah quoted by Justin must have been an interpolation, such as I sup-

IX]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
kai

41
(boiNiKoyN,
ooc

10 Aerer

ean

cocin

ai

amapti'ai

ymwn

obc

vjona AeyKANoV eAN Ae (Lcin obc kokkinon, o>c epiON AeyKAI CAN OeAHTG KAI CICAKOyCHTe MOy, TA ArAeA THC KANG3.
rfic

c})Arec0€-

can

Ae

mh

MAyAipA Ymac
15 tayta.

KATeAeTAi*

OeAHTe mhAg eicAKoycHTe Moy, to r^p ctoma Kypi'oy eAAAHC€N

TrdvTCLS

ovv roik dycnrriTOvs avTOv fiovAo/mevos
ecTripi^ev

/uLeravoias

/uLeTaa^eTu,

tw

TravTOKpctTOpiKw

(iovXrj/uaTL avTOv. IX. Aid v7raKOV(T(jdfJL6v
dojfxev

ty\

fxeyaKoTTpeirei kcu ivdo^o)
alterutro (om. koX with Pesh)
utipios

A

;

/cat
I.

5iaAex0c3 uej>
/

C

;

loquamur cum

see above,

10 Xeyei] p. 143. LXX. 13 (pay cade] <pay eadai A. om. S with the Pesh.

A

;

add.

deXrjre] deXrjrcu

S CS, with Hebrew and A. 14 yap] AC
:

;

pose was the case with Clement's for he writes citation from Ezekiel
;

word from the LXX.
Essays in Biblical Greek

See Hatch
p.

177, for

avTTj

77

7repiK07rr)

rj

£k toov

Xoycov tov
ev

'lepepiov
tlctiv

en

icrrXv

eyyeypappevrj
iv

the various readings in the MSS of It is the LXX and in the quotation.

dvTiypd(pois

tcdv

avvaycoyais

'lovdaioov, Tvpb

yap

oX'iyov

xpovov ravra

egenoyp-av

k.t.X.

On

the apocryphal

quotations in Clement see below §§
13, 17, 23, 29,
2.

twice quoted by Justin Martyr, Apol. 44 (p. 81), i. 61 (p. 94), and the first verse again in a third passage, Dial. 18 (p. 235); but his quotations do
i.

46 (notes).

peXavcoTepai]

The comparative

not agree verbatim one with another. Almost all the various readings of our
authorities here, <aBapo\ {kcu Kadapol),

peXavcoTepos occurs Strabo xvi.
(p. 772),

4 § 12 cannot verify Jacobson's further statement 'hanc formam habes saepius in LXX.' It is derived from the late form peXavos — piXas, on which see Lobeck Paral. p. 139.
but
I

dcpiXeade

(arpe'Xere),

kcu

dcKcuooo-ciTe

(dLKaioSo~aT6),

X^P9-

(x*)P av)i

$*vTe

KCU

(devre),
etc.)

dieXey^dcopev

(StaXe^&opei/,

are found in the MSS of the
diKaioocraTe X7P*?]

LXX

or in Justin or in both.
9.

Another
is

late

form of the superlative
to

peXaivoraros.
ctcikkov]

the

widow] preserving

'give redress the same
opcpavop.

rjXios

eyevero

Comp. Rev. vi. 12 kcu 6 peXas cos o~d<Kos rpi-

construction as in

Kpivare

X lv °s, Is. 1. 3 ivbvaoo tov ovpavbv a kotos kol as o-a.KK.ov drjaoa to 7T€pij36Xaiov avTov. It was a black haircloth.

The lxx however has the accusative Xnpw in tne second clause though
with a various reading xVP a
10. Xeyei] SC. 6 Kvptos,
-

which words

Thus
Xclkkov
is

Hilgenfeld's

emenda-

tion

superfluous, besides being out of place, for the comparison
is

occur in the LXX of Isaiah in accordance with the Hebrew.
16.
7raj/ro/cparopii<a)]

between garment and garment.

earliest instance of this

Apparently the word comp.
;

The
4.

o-kotovs of the existing text of Clem. Alex, may at once be rejected.
iv
erepco
tottco\
is

Is.

i.

1

6

§60. IX.

20.

The

quotation

almost word for

Let us therefore obey His gracious summons. Let us contemplate the bright examples of obedi-

'

42

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT
tov eAeovs
kcli

[IX

fiovXriaei civtov, kcu LKeTai <yev6fj.evoi

t^s
eirl

XprjcrTOTrjTOs clvtov Trpocnrea'cofj.ev

kcli

67ricrTp6ylsto/uLev

TOlk

o'lKTipfJLOVS

CLVTOV,

CL7roAl7TOVT€S Tt]V fJlCtTCtlOTTOvicLV

Tt\v re epiv kcli to eis Oclvcltov ayov (^ijAos. ctTei/iaM/uev tovs TeAelcos AeiTOupyrjo'avTas tt\ fjLeyaAo7rpe7rei So^rj eis

5

clvtov.
1

Aafiwjjiev 'Gvto%, bs ev v7raK0rj S'lKaios

evpedek

yevop-evoi]

AC

;

3 olKTipixovs] oiKTeip/jLovcr A. reXelovs S. ; 5 reXei'ws]

but S seems to read yivop.evoi. iXiovs] eXaiova- A. awoknrbvTes] AC ; but S apparently atr oXelirovTes.
XetTovpyrjaavTas] XtTOvpyrjaavTaa

AC

A.

7 ddva-

ence in past ages Enoch who was translated and saw not death Noah
:

and

just

;

§ 60).

It is

above (comp. /xeyaXoTTpeVeta only found this once in

through
3.

whom

a remnant was saved

the N. T.
6. 'Evoox] Clement is here copying Heb. xi. 5 'Ei/co^ p-^reredr} tov p,r] Idclv Bavarov K.a\ ov\ rjvplo-K€TO (comp. Gen. v. 24); though the words are

in the ark.'
ixaraioivovLav]

The word

occurs

in Classical writers, e.g. Plut. 119E, Lucian Dial. Mori. x. 8

Mor.
(1.
ii.

p.
7,

369)
12,

;

comp. Theoph. ad Autol.
1.

apparently remembering this passage has
iii.

Polycarp, Phil.

2,

displaced, as often happens when the memory is trusted. In the sequence of his first three instances also,

d.TTo\nr6vT€s ttjv nevrjv

paraioXoyiav

Enoch, Noah, Abraham

—he

follows

TWV TToWwV TrXcLVrjV. But thlS does not justify a change of reading here for p.a.Taio7roviav, which is the
KCU TT)V
;

the writer of that epistle. See also the language in Ecclus. xliv. 16, 17,
to

which Clement's expressions bear
of

reading of

all

the authorities here,

is

more appropriate, and a transcriber's error is more likely in the MSS of
Polycarp
late source)
:

some resemblance. dUaios] The book
quoted as
9.

Enoch

is

'Eva>x ° Si'kcuo? in Test, xii
18,

derived from one very than in all our copies of Clement nor is it impossible that Polycarp's memory deceived him. Maraiokoyla occurs I Tim. i. 6.
(all
4.

Pair. Levi 10, Juda

Thus

it

seems

to

Dan. 5, Benj. have been a re-

drevio-copev k.t.X.]

Clement of

Alexandria Strom, iv. 16 (p. 610), after giving an earlier passage from this epistle (see §1), adds eiV ipcpavearepov 'Areiwto/xei/
?)

cognised epithet of this patriarch, and perhaps formed part of the title of the apocryphal book bearing his name. It was probably the epithet applied to him also in the opening of the extant book, i. 2, in the original
;

see also

xii. 4,

xiv.

1,

xv.

1,

and

else-

k.t.X.

down

to 'Paa/3

where.
7.

but contents himself with a brief abridgement, and does not quote in full, so that he gives but
7r6pvr]

12),

avTov\

reflexive use of ovtov see A.
p.

98 sq.

Enoch himself. Forthis Buttmann Comp. also §§ 12, 14, 30.
i.e.
'

little
5.

aid in determining the text.
tt)

lAcyaXoTTpeTrel ^6^77]

The same
Pet.
i.

a second birth, a roiewal] of the world after the
8. 7raXiyy€V€criav] i.e.

expression

occurs in

2

17.

flood;
vii.

as

Orac. Sib.

i.

195 (comp.
alcov,

The word
in

p.€ya\o7rp€7rrjs
I,

is

frequent

Clement, §§

19, 45, 58, 61, 64,

devTepos eVcrerat words put into the mouth of
Il)

Kal

Noah

x]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
ov^
evpedrj

43
Ncoe ttlctto^

jueTeTedrj, Kcti

avTOv OavctTOS.

evpedeh Zia
EKrjpv^ev,

7-^75

XeiTOvpyias avTOv TraKiyyevecriav koct/uw
$1

Kcti

Siecrcocrev

avTOv 6 SecnroTtis

tcc eicreX-

10 Oovtcl ev dfJLOVoia

^wa

els rrjv KiftcoTOV. ttlctto's

X.
ros]

'Afipadfji, 6 <pi\os TTpoca'yopevdeU,
;

euiv

A

6

ddvaros C.

8 dta
deo-n-orrjs]

rrjs

Xeirovpyias]

AS

(but XiTovpyiaa

A)

;

rp

Xeirovpytg. C.

go

S translates the word here and

in other passages

dominus universi
himself.
(ii.

(/D"l N"lD).

n
ii.

tthttos] ttlgtio'

A.

See Philo

Vit.

Moys.

12

p. 144) TTakiyyeveaias iyivovro r)yt-

poves <a\ Bevripas ap^r/yirai 7re/Ko§ou, where also it is used of the world

pronounced upon him for his faith. He was promised a race countless as the stars or the sand in multitude, and in his old age a son was granted
to him.'
11. o <plXos]

renovated after the flood. Somewhat similar is the use in Matt. xix. 28,

From

Is. xli.

8 'Abra:

where

it

describes the
earth.'

'new heaven
Stoics
also

ham my
comp.
2

friend'

(LXX
7,

ov r}ycmr)cra)

and new

The

Chron. xx.
of
the

and see the
Wiss.
Theol.

employed this term to designate the renewed universe after their great
periodic conflagrations Mund. incorr. 14 (11.
rjyovpevoi tov
xi.
I
;

passages

LXX quoted by

Roensch
ii.

Zeitschr. f.

see Philo de 501)
ol

XVI. p. 583 (1873).

p.

ras

23 Kai (piXos
17
(piXos

See also James Qeov ii<Xrj8r), and below
tov
Qeov.

cKTrvpaxreis Kai ras naXiyyevecrias elo~-

§

TrpocrrjyopevBr)

Kocrpov,

Afare. Anton.
For
Anyiii.

tt)v 7repiodiK.r]V

naXiyyevecrlav ra>v

In the short paraphrase of the Alexandrian Clement this chapter relating

oXcov

(with Gataker's note). Christian uses see Suicer s. v.

direct

reference

to

the

baptismal

Abraham is abridged thus, 'A/3paa/x os $ia Tvio~Tiv Kai (piXotjevlav (piXos Qeov 8e tov 'icracuc Trpoar/yopevdr) ; 7rarr)p
to

water (Xovrpov
5),
1

7raXiyy€V€0~ias, Tit.

and

as typified
iii.

Pet.

21),

by the flood (comp. seems out of place here

;

it has therefore been suggested to read 0y cbiAoc for o cbiAoc. But no alteration is needed. Abra-

but Trakiyyeveo-ia appears to allude indirectly to the renewal of the Corinthian Church by repentance. See
the next note.
10. iv opovoia] An indirect reference to the feuds at Corinth. Even the

ham

is

lutely, as

here called 'the friend' absoamong the Arabs at the
often styled Elsimply: see d'Herbelot s.v.
is
'

present day he

KhahT
Chicrch
xviii.

Abraham,
1.

and
p. 13.

Stanley's Jewish So too Clem. Horn.
'Ez/co^

dumb
Tutv

animals set an example of concord see below § 20 ra iXa^iara
;

13 ovrcos 8vvaTat...ovde
inLo~Tao~6ai

6

evapeo~Trjo~as prj eldivai ovre Nc5e 6 81-

£a>a>v

ras

crwfXevcrets
noiovvrai.

avra>v

iv

Kaios
cptXos

prj
prj

ovre

Aftpaap

6

opovoia Kai

elprjvr/

The word

avvtivai,

which has other

opovoia is of frequent occurrence in

Clement. X. 'Abraham by obedience left his home and kindred, that he might
inherit the promises of

resemblances with this passage of the Cletn. Recogn. i. genuine Clement 32 'Abraham pro amicitiis quibus
;

erat ei familiaritas

cum

Deo.'

It is

God.

Not

once or twice only was a blessing

an indication how familiar this title of Abraham had become in the Apo-

44
peurj

THE EPISTLE OF
ev

S.

CLEMENT
prj/uLaciv

[x

tw avTov
ovtos cV

vttvikoov

yeveadai toTs

tov

Qeov.
e/c

i^rjAdev e'/c tt/s yrjs avTov Kal Ttjs crvyyeveias avTov Kal e'/c tov o'lkov tov iraTpos
vTrctKorjs

avrov,
fUKpov Qeov.

ottcos yfjv oXiyrjv

Kal orvyyeveiav do-devrj Kal olkov

KaTaXnrcov
Aeyei

KXripovofjLYiaryi

ra?

67rayyeAias

tov

5

yap

avTto*

"AneAee ck thc thc coy kai ck

thc cyrreNeiAC coy kai Ik toy oi'koy toy nATpdc coy eic thn |"HN HN AN COI ACl'lOO, KAI TTOIHCOO C€ 6IC 60NOC M6TA KAI €Y"

AOTHCCO C€ KAI Mer^AYNOO TO ONOMA COY, KAI 6CH efA0rHM6NOC"
KAI

eYAOTHCOO TOYC 6YA0T0YNTAC C6 KAI KATApACOMAI IO
N

TOYC KATApOOMCNOYC C 6, KAI 6 f A TH H C Kai TraXiv ev tw ^yAai thc thc.
airo Acot eiirev
i

TA

I

6N

COI

TTACAI Al

Sia^copicrdfjvaL toic

avTov
o^GaA-

avTw

6

Qeov
OTI
5

VWBAeyAc
e?,

moic coy, Ae atto toy Tonoy, of n?n cy
KAI

ANATOAAC

KAI

GaAaCCAN*
A.

npdc BoppAN kai AiBa TTACAN THN THN, HN CY OpAC,
A.
10
kclto.-

15

3 avyyeveias] avyyeviaa
pdaofiai]

e7ra77eXt'as] eirayyeXeiaorju]

A;

Karapdcraojuai. C.

15

AS
;

;

aiuvos C.

19 'E&yayev] A; i^yaye de add. rod ovpavov S. 24 yripa] yrjpet C see the note on § 65. For a similar omission see Ign. Rom. 4. 6eu>] AS; om. C. -rrpos]
xxii. 2,

om. C. CS.

16 al<2vos\ A; tov 21 rods darepas] ;

AC

25

A;

els

C

;

super S (with the Hebr. and Pesh. of Gen.
stolic age, that Philo once inadver* tently quotes Gen. xviii. 17 Afipaap. tov (ptXov fxov for tov 7raid6s pov and

where the lxx has

k<\>

or

iirl).

of the Lord.'

Later Rabbinical

illus-

trations of this title will be
cially in

found in

argues from the expression, de Sobr. 11 (i. p. 401), though elsewhere he gives the same text correctly de Leg. All. iii. 8 (1. p. 93), Quaest. i?i Gen. iv. 21 (p. 261 Aucher). At a much earlier date one Molon (Joseph, c. Aft.ii. 14, 33) who wrote against the Jews and
is

Wetstein on James ii. 23, and espeBeer Leben Abraham's, notes

427, 431, 950.

Comp.

Tertull. adv.

Jud. 2 'unde Abraham amicus Dei deputatus ?' 6. "AneXde k.t.X.] From LXX Gen.
xii.
1 3 with slight but unimportant In omitting Kai devpo variations.


A

quoted by Alexander Polyhistor
19, p.

(Euseb. Praep. Ev. ix
(piXov,
if it

terpreted the name Abraham

420) inas narpos

with

Clement agrees and the Hebrew against the common text which inserts the words.
after tov naTpos aov

apparently reading Dn"Qtf as were Dm2N. And in the Book of

Jubilees c. 19 (Dillmann in Ewald's Jahrb. in. p. 15) it is said of this

patriarch that he was written down on the heavenly tablets as a friend
'

He also reads cvXoyrjdijo-ovTac with against the common text evevXoyrjdrjaovTai, but evXoyijptvos where A has See Hatch Biblical Greek evXoy7)Tos. p. 154 for the various readings in this
passage in the MSS of the lxx, in Acts

A

xi]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
AoaCOO

45
^COC

CCH

AYTHN

KAI

TO)

CTTCpMATI

COY

AlOoNOC

KAI

TTOIHC00 TO
TIC

CnepMA COY <i>C THN AMMON THC THC 61 AyNATAI elApiGMHCAl THN AMMON THC THC, KAI TO CTTCpMA COY
KCLl

6iApi9MH0HC€TAI.

7TCC\lU

XeySf 'ElHTArCN
€IC

6

06OC TON
KAI
'

20'ABpAAM

KAI

€?TT€N

AYTCO*

ANABAcyON
CI

TON OYP^NON

ApiGMHCON
oy'tcoc

TOYC
to

ACTCpAC,

AYNHCH ClApiOMHCAl
eniCTCYCCN
Aikaiocynhn.
ev

AYTOyX

Ictai

cnepMA

coy'

Ae 'ABpAAM

tco

Oeoo, kai eAoricGH aytoj eic

Alcx tticttiv kcu
01

(pi\oj~eviav e&66t]

avTco vios

ywpa, Kai

u7raKorjs

25 7rpo<rriveyK€v clvtov
tbv

Qvlticlv tco

Qeto irpos ev tcov opecov

eSei^ev avTco,

XI.

Aid (piXopeviav Kai

evcrefieiav

Acer

ecrcoQr\

£k

Coc^ofJLcov, Trjs Trepi-^cipov 7rdtrr]s

Kpideicrr]?

Sia irvpos Kai

deiov 7rpohr]\op 7roiricra<; 6 ^ecTTTOTt]^, on tovs eXiri^pv30 ras eir avTov ovk eyKaTaXei7rei, toi)s Se erepoKXiveTs
Spew] opcuwv A.
28 Kpideio-qs] A, as I read it. Tischendorf, with whom Wright agrees, reads it Kpidrjo-qa and appeals to the photograph. The photograph seems to me more like KpideLcrrja, and another inspection of the MS itself
I

confirms me.
6lov

can see no traces of the left-hand stroke of an h.
iroL-qaas]

29 deiov]

A.

AC
;

;

S

translates as

if eiroiTjaep.

30

eir

avrbv] A,

and so too apparently S
vii. 3,

els

avrbv C.
ev k.t.X.]

p. 436).

and in Philo Migr. Abrah. 1 Clement agrees with Philo
a-rreXde for e^e\6e.

(i.

25.

npos
'

Gen.
ei7ra).

xxii. 2 e$'

in

ev tcov opecov cov av croi

quoting
12.

iv

Ta
is

Sia^coptcr^^at]

The
xiii.

ex-

pression
fiera

taken from Gen.
rbv

14

to

Biaxcopiadrjvat

Acor

ok

XI. Lot's faith and good deeds saved him from the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah; while his own wife perished and remains a monu-

avrov.
13.

ment
'Ava^Xe-^as
xiii.

to all ages of the

punishment

Gen. word.
19.
5, 6,

14

k.t.X.]

From LXX

with which
28.

God visits

the disobedient

16,

almost word for
xv.

and wavering.'
Kpideio-qs 81a nvpbs]
1

Comp.

Is.

'E^yayei/]

From LXX Gen.
i.e.

lxvi.

6 ev
yrj.

tco

nvpl Kvpiov KpiBrjaerai

with unimportant variations.
his entertaining
;

nacra

77

The emendation KavOeLo-rjs
is

24. <j)i\o£eviav]

for KpiOeiar)?

unnecessary as well

the angels comp. Heb. xiii. 2. Similarly of Lot just below, §11, and of

as weak.
29. lute ;
7rot?7o-as]

A

nominative absop.

Rahab, § 12. The stress laid on this virtue seems to point to a failing in the Corinthian Church. See also the note on acpi\o£eviav below, § 35.

Winer § xxviii. A. Buttmann p. 251 sq.
see
'

194,

erepoKkivels] swerving aside] especially in a bad sense ; Epictet.
30.

46

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT

[XI

VTrapxovTas eh KoXaariv Kal
dovarjs
(rrjs

cuKKTfJiov TiQr\<riv*

crvve^eX-

yap

avTto

T775

yvvaiKOS, eTepoyvco/uovos virapyovarrj/uelov

Kal ovk ev o/uovoia, eU tovto
crTr\\r]v

eTedrj

tocTTe

yeveadai avTr\v

ahos ew?

ty\<z rffj.epas

TavTrjs,

ek
5

to yvcocTTOv
i

elvai iraaiv otl ol
;

dl\jyv^0L Kal ol ^lctcl^ovi

nSXaaiv]

AC

but S translates as

if Kpiaiv.

erepoypw/xovo^]

C

;

A

is

read eTepoyvoo/mocr by Teschendorf and Jacobson, erepoyvwfxov by Vansittart. The last letter appears to me like c with possibly y superposed. Wright is probably correct in his explanation that the y is seen through from eyp60H on the opposite side

om. C.
Diss.
iii.

of the page. The reading therefore is erepoyvio/uLoo-. 6 Kplfxa] Kpip.a C. arj/xelwaiu'] arjfxicjaiv A.
12.

3 tovto]

AS

;

8

(f)CKo^eviav\

7 eTepoickiv&s e^co rrpbs
eTepoicki-

rjhovrjv.

See below, §47 tovs
rjpeHv.

too Irenasus {Haer. iv. 31. 3) speaks of it as 'statua salis se?nper manens]

vels

VTrnp^ovras a(p

So

erepo-

which he makes a type of the Church.
Cyril of Jerusalem also, Catech. xix. 8 (p. 309), describes Lot's wife as eo-Trj\iTevp.evt)

Clem. Horn. Ep. ad Jac. 15, said of the ship of the Church heeling over, when not properly trimmed.
kXlvlo.
2.

6Y

alutvos.

The

€T€poyvcop.ovos]

The word has
(1)

bounds
II.

in

such

pillars

region aof salt (see

two senses, either

'dissentient,

otherwise-minded,' Cyril. Alex. inEs.
xlviii (II. p. 642), Hi (II. p.

Robinson's Biblical Researches, etc. Mediaeval and even p. 108 sq).
travellers

na>s irepoyvap-ovas Trap* eKeivovs

736) 6Xorp6or (2)
',

modern

have delighted to

'wavering, double-minded', Cyril. Alex. Cord. Cat.inPs. 1. p. 225 8i\j/vxov
re Kal eTepoyvapovos.

identify one or other of these with Lot's wife.
5.

ol 8l\J/vxol]

The word occurs
8,
iv.

only

As

it

seems

to

twice,

James

i.

8,

in the

New

be defined here by ovk iv 6p,ovoLq, the first meaning must be adopted
;

Testament.

Both the word and the

though Lot's wife was also eTepoyvap.a>v

in the other sense,

and as such

is

classed

among ol

£ovtcs below. again an allusion to the feuds at Corinth see above § 9.
;

dfyvxoi xal Sio-raIn ev 6p.ovoia there is

3.

els

tovto

k.t.A.]

Here

coore is

warning are very frequent in Clement's younger contemporary Hermas, Vis. ii. 2, iii. 2, 3, 4, 7, 10, 11, iv. 1, 2, Sim. viii. 7, etc., but especially Maud, ix, x. Comp. also Didache 4 ov 8l^vxV €LS noTcpov eaTai ov, with the corresponding passage in Barnab. 19. See below § 23 with
'
Tj

dependent not on
0-rjp.elov

els
els

tovto, but

on

iriB-q

',

and

tovto 'to this

end' stands independently, being afterwards explained by els to yvoi{ttov elvai k.t.X.
4. e(os rfjs
rjp..

the note (comp. Clejn. Rom. ii. § 11). XII. 'Rahab also was saved by her faith and her hospitality. She

ravTrjs]

A pillar of salt

believed in the might of the Lord God, and she rescued the spies ; therefore she and her family were

is mentioned as standing in Wisdom x. 7, dmO-Tovcrrjs ^vxqs p,vr)p.elnv ecrTrjKvla o-Trfkrj

identified with Lot's wife

She was gifted too with a spared. prophetic spirit, for the scarlet thread typified the saving power of Christ's
blood.'
f

(iXdy,

and in Joseph. A?it. i. 1 1. 4 says that he himself had seen it.

who
So

8.

Paci£]

This account

is

taken

XIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
-rrepi

47

T65

Trjs

tov Oeov

(Hvva/uLecos

eh

Kpijaa kcli

eh

crrj-

jjl6L(jO(tlv

Tracrais rals yeveais yivovTai.

XII.
TTOpVY]' 10

Aid

ttlctlv

l

kcli

(piAo^eviav
'

eo~codti

Pad/3

r\

€K7T€fJL(f)d€VT(t)V

ydp

V7T0

IfJCOV

TOV TOV NaVVj

KaTacTKOirtov eh ty]v 'lepL^co, eyvto 6 (3ao~i\evs Ttjs yfjs otl r)Kaariv KCLTacrKOireva'ai tt\v ^copav clvtcov, kcli epeA, but
p. py'.

CS

repeat the preposition, see dia (pcXo^euiav.
i]

For

C

see Bryennios Didache

iropvrj]

A

;

77

i-mXeyo/xevr] iropvr)

CS

;

irefKpdeurwv] eKirecpdevruv

A.

tov tov]

A

;

9 €Ktov (omitting the second tov) C.
?Trep,\pev

see the lower note.

10

tt]v]

A; om.

C.
p. py'
.

n
;

i%eirep.\J/ev]

A;

C; dub.

S.

For C see

Bryennios Didache

T,

from the book of Joshua but Clement gives it in his own words, even when recording the conversational The instance of Rahab was parts. doubtless suggested by Heb. xi. 31, James ii. 25 for both these epistles were known to S. Clement and are
;

dopted by several Jewish and some Christian interpreters see Gesenius Thes. s. v. H31T, P- 422. Others again have interpreted the word as meaning
;

'Gentile'.

The

earliest

Christian

fathers took a truer view, when they regarded this incident as an antici-

J^

w

quoted elsewhere.

His expression

(,-;8ta ttLcttiv teal

(piXo^eviav connects the two aspects, to which the two Apostolic writers severally direct atten-

pation of the announcement in Matt, xxi. 31; e.g. Justin Dial, in, Iren.
iv. 20. 12.

tion, the tt'kttis of the one, the epya

nopvrj is

In Heb. xi. 31 also 77 inikeyopivr) read for 77 iropvr) by N (first

of the other; comp. §§31, 33, 34, 49 (notes). See also the note on the <fii\o£ev'ia
77

hand) and likewise by the Harclean Syriac, this part being preserved
only in the Cambridge MS (see above, I. p. 130 sq). Bensly also calls my attention to a passage in Ephraem

of

Abraham

§ 10.
r)

izopvq]

For the insertion

eVi-

Xeyopevrj

The

see above, 1. pp. 125, 139. object of this interpolation is to suggest a figurative sense of the
;

Syrus Op. Graec.
Kai

1. p.

310

op,oL<os 8e

Paa/3

77

word
Horn.

comp.
iii.

Orig.
(11.

in Ies.

Nave

(piXo^evias
drjo-acn,
dprjvr].

eViAeyo/xei^ ivopvrj diet rrjs ov crvvcmcoXeTo to7s a7ret-

§ 3

p.

403) 'Raab in-

8e^ap.evrj

tovs KaTaaicoirovs iv

terpretatur latitude Quae est ergo latitudo nisi ecclesia haec Christi,

quae ex peccatoribus velut ex meretricatione collecta est?... talis ergo et haec meretrix esse dicitur, quae exVl

Immediately before, this father has mentioned Abraham and Lot as examples of persons rewarded for their cpiXo^evia, so that he seems to have had the passage of S. Clement
9.

ploratores suscepit Iesu'; comp. ib. From a like motive § 3 (P- 4 11 )'

in view.

tov tov Naur)] In the

LXX Num.

the

Targum

interprets the
,

word

in

xxxii. 12,
etc.,

Josh.
V.
I.

ii. I by Xn' pn3ia = 73-avSoKevTpta 'an innkeeper,' and so Joseph. Ant.

he

xxxii. 44, Josh. vi. 6, is called 'lrjo-ovs 6 tov Navrj,

Deut.

owes
etc.

2 v7rox&povaiv e'ls tl Karaywyiov... iv too rfjs Pa^a/3j/s Karaycoyioo,
c

This explanation has been a-

and the same expression is adopted here, though in the genitive it sounds somewhat awkwardly. it. civtcov] Not avToHv, as most edi-

48
7T€iu\j^€V

THE EPISTLE OF
avhpas

S.

CLEMENT
avTOus,
'

[xn

tovs

crvX\r]fj.-^sOiJL€vov<z
y\

o7rws

(TvWtifJLCpdevTes QavaTwQoocriv.
eicr^e^afjievf]

oxjv

(piKopevos

PaafS

avTOvs 6Kpv\js€P ek to vireptoov vtto ty\v eTnaradevTiav Se twv irapa tov (Sa(ri\ivoKa\a\ir\v\
Aeo)5 Kal
rftc
rj

AeyovTwv

TTpdc ce eicAAeoN
6

oi

katackottoi thc

5

hmoon"

eiATAre Ay~royc,

r^p BACiAeyc oy'tgoc KeAeyer

Se

<x7r€Kpi6r]'

EichAOon

men

oi

ANApec,

oyc

ZHTeiTe,

npdc

Me,

aAAa eyOeooc atthAGon
avTols

kai

nopeyoNTAi

th

dAor

VTro^eiKvvovcra

ivaWa^.

Kal enrev

irpos

tovs

i <rvX\r]tA\J/otJL{vovs] (rv\\r)\}/o[ievov<j A, though just below it has <jvXXr)/j.(p9evT€<T. For the omission of /x compare etcrrecpdevTuv above. C has <rv\\i]\f/p[ifrovs, avXFor the orthography see § i aTrpo<TwiroXi)nirTws. Xr](pdeuT€s. 5 Xeyovrcov] AC
;

add.

Mi

S.

6 ovtojs]

.

.

raxr

A;

ovtcj C.

8 airTJXdov~\

A;

e^rjXOov

C.

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

the upright stroke of

N as of
§

K.

10 eyti]
is its

AS;

ora.

C.

11

vfxQv]
l

A;

tors print
I.

it

;

comp.

9 and see the
21.
i.e.

more frequent sense
l

;

(2)

cross-

note on Philippians
\rniy\rovTCLi.

iii.

tovs avXXr]p^opevovs"\

ol crvX-

wise] or inversely' \ e.g. Aristot. Aiiim. Hist. iii. 4 (p. 515, Bekker)
eTepai ((pXelSes)...(pepovo-LV
els tci

For
i.

this construction see

evaXXd£,
-q

-q

Winer
4.

§ xviii. p. 121,
7.
'

and the notes
on
see
1.

p,ev €K tQ>v apio~Tepa>v els to. 8e£ta,

§e

Galatians
the
flat
ii.

dpio-repa €K tQ>v be^iav.

So too

\tvoKaka\L7}v~\ flax-stalks'' laid

Josh.
Teyovs

roof of the house to dry So Joseph. {Ant. v. 6.
it,

;

the attitude of Jacob crossing his hands, when he blesses the sons of

2)

Joseph,

is

described in Barnab.
to
eVoi'770-ev 'laK<»/3

13

explains

Xivov yap dynaXidas

iiri

tov

(professing

quote the words of
evaXXa.%

eyjsvxe-

The word inrepwov does

Genesis) koX
tcis

not occur in the original narrative, which describes the men's lurking place as on the house-top (eVi rot; But Clement would not bcoiiciTos).

xelpas'

k.t.X.

Again

in

mathe-

w ith Eastern customs and might easily substitute
necessarily be familiar
r

matical language speaking of proportion, evaXXd£ is permutando, i.e. the inversion of the antecedents and consequents, as defined by Euclid v.
def. 13 evaXXdtj Xoyos earl Xfj^ns tov qyovp,evov npos to rjyovfievov kol tov inocomp. Aristot. p,evov TTpos to inopevov
:

a wrong expression.

r

vnobdKvvovaa avTols] Clement 9. must have made a slip of memory, as he has done already in vnep&ov
;

Anal. Post.

i.

5

(1.

p. 74),

ii.

17 (p. 99),

for in the original narrative

Rahab

shows the opposite route not to the king's messengers but to the spies.
i

evaXXdg]

in the reverse' or 'oppo-

Eth. Nic. v. 6 (p. 1 131), who is rather The attempts to fond of the word. supply the lacuna in A were signal failures before the discovery of the second MS.
11.

site direction.'

The word
;

ivaXXai;

has

two meanings

(\Y alternately] which

does not occur

6 (p6j3os k.t.X.] The expression in the LXX here, but

:

kxxju

XIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
Kypioc
O 6

49
Oedc
6an

10

avSpas' I~incockoyca pncockgo if(x> oti YM03N TTApAAlAOOCIN yMIN THN r*HN TAYTHN,
d

TAp Q>dBOC KAI
cbc

TpoMOc ymcon eneneceN to?c katoikoycin ayth'n. OYN reNHTAI AaB€?N AYTHN f M AC, AIACOjCATG M6
oTKON
15

KAI

TON

TOY TTATPOC MOY1

KCtl

eiTTCtV aVTri'
I

"EcTAI OyTOOC COC

CAaAhCAC HMIN.
contat
kcli

(X>C

6AN

OYN

TNtpC

nAp ATI N OMEN YC HMAC,
thc
oiki'ac, a'ttoAoyntai.

CYNAieiC TTANTAC TOYC COYC YTTO TO TeTOC COY, KAI AIACOO0Hd'coi

r^p eAN efpeGoociN

e'loo

irpCHTedevTO avTrj Sovvai crrj/ueToj/, 07ro)9 Kpefjiao'tj e'/c tov olkou avTrjs kokkivov, irpohriXov 7rOLOVVT£S oti Sta
om. CS.
posed in S.
Xrjaas]
0o/3os, Tpofxos]

C;

$o/3o<r, .../xocr

A.

The two words
eav]

are trans15 eAda? C.
crou]

12 avTTjv]

A;

\e\d\7]Kas C.

eav] A; ai»C. AC; r^ 7171/ S. ws] AC; not translated in S.

A;

7rapa7ti'o^.ej'oi's]

AS

Toroeyoaaov A; to areyos (om. 0-01;) C; reads gov, not ou as sometimes stated.
(koX 6Vot) S.

(by the pointing); irapayevo/xevovs C. tecticm domtis tuae S.

16 to re7os See below.
et

A
qui

17

ocroi 7<xp]

AC;

omnes

illi

ea^]

A;

av C.

18
ix. 2,

/cpe//.aa"j7]

A;

eKKpe/xdarj

CS.

is

common
ii.

elsewhere;

e.g.

Gen.

word
the
18.

is

perhaps not intended to bear
here.
'

Deut.

25, xi. 25.

These passages

meaning

not only the combination of (pofios and rpojios, but the repetition of the article before the latter. Cotelier observes that Clement seems to have had in his copy of the lxx
illustrate

irpoo-i6evTo

k.t.A.]
'.

they

went

The word is on to give her a sign used in imitation of the LXX diction, where it very frequently renders ?pi
and thus reproduces the Hebraism 'to add to do,' as e.g. Luke xix. 11
Tvpoo-Qela-a etireu,

(Josh.

ii.

9) the

words

kcu KaTenTrjo--

aov navres
vfxcov,

ol ko.toikovvt€s ttjv yrjv d(p

Acts

xii.

3 npoaidero

which are wanting in all the best MSS, though supplied in the Complutensian edition and represented in the original Hebrew. The
existing text of the
TTeTTTOiKev

o-vWafielv KcuIleTpov, and so commonly In this sense both the in the lxx.

LXX has

only

eVi-

yap

6 (po(3os vficov icp

rjp,as.

Haractive and middle are used. nack strongly objects to the translation 'praeterea ei signum dederunt' and renders 'praeterea mandaverunt
ei ut signum daret,' appa rently taking npocTTLOeo-Oai 'to enjoin' or 'impose.'

The text of our aumakes it difficult to decide whether we should read o-reyos or
16.
reyos-]

thorities

This seems an impossible rendering,
ii.

reyos.

occurs in the lxx only once, Epist. Jer. 8; the latter not at all in the lxx, but in Aquila Num. xxv. 8. In these passages they are used for 'lupanar'; and

The former

in the narrative (Josh, the spies are represented as giving the sign of the scarlet thread to Rahab in the first instance. Dial. 19. 7rp6$r)\ov K.r.A.] So Justin
19)

and moreover

reyoy especially has

bad

sense
iii.

elsewhere
186,
II. v.

frequently this Orac. (e.g.
387).

Ill

(p.

Sibyll.

But the

cmapT[ov...To crvp.[3oXov tov Xpiarov edrjXov, 8l

338) TO 0-vp,(3o\oV TOV KOKKIVOV tov aip,aTOS
ov
ol

naXai

CLEM.

5o

THE EPISTLE OF
cli/ulcitos

S.

CLEMENT

[xn

tov Kvplov Xvrpcoo'is earTai iracriv toIs TTMTTeVOVCTlV KCLl e\7ri^OV(TLV 6777 TOV QeOV 'OpaT6,
.

tov

dya7rt]TOL,

ov

fiovov

7TLcrTis

dWd

7rpo(j)rjTeia

iv

Trj

yvvaiKi yeyovev.

XIII.
vol

TaweivocppovricrcoiULev ovv, dde\<poi, dirodefjie-

5

irdcav dXa^pveiav Kai
i

TV(pos

k<xi

d<ppoo~vvr]V

Kai

tov Kvplov]

2 Kai eXTrifrvcnv]

AC; rod x/h<7to0 AC; om. S.
twv

S

(see the

3 ov]

A; on
3.

passage of Justin in the lower note). ov CS. d\Xa] A; add. Kai

TropvoL Kai adiKoi ck rravrcov
o-(o£ovTcu k.t.X.,

eBvtov

perhaps

idea from this passage.

getting the Irenaeus (iv.

20. 12) copies Justin, 'Raab fornicaria conservata est cum universa

So Origen in 4 (11. p. 403) Sed et ista meretrix quae eos suscepit ex meretrice efficitur jam propheta etc'
dXXa
7rpo<pr)Teia]

Jes. Horn.

'

iii.

§

4.
'

yeyovev]
isfound]

The

perfect tense yeyo-

domo
See
iii.

sua, also
(II.

fide

signi

coccini
Jes.
(II.

etc'

vev,

Origen

In

Horn.
p.

§5

p. 405),

vi§4

411),
p.

the right ii. 14 r) 8e
ftacrei

must unquestionably be reading here comp. 1 Tim.
;

yvvr) e^aTraTrjOelaa ev Trapa-

In Matth. Comm. Ser. 125
919).

(ill.

From this time forward it becomes a common type with the
Barnabas (§ 7) similarly explains the scarlet wool of the scapefathers.

yeyovev, where, as here, the tense denotes the permanence of the

record and the example.
Gal.
iii.

See also
enayye23 6 eK ttjs

18

r<5 de 'A/3paa/z di
iv.

Xlas Ke\dpicrTaL o Qeos,
TraidlcrKrjs

goat (see the note there).
also

Compare

Heb.

ix.

19,

which may have

suggested this application to Clement. The word 7rp6dr)Xos occurs twice besides in

KaTa crapKa yeyevvrjTai, where the explanation of the perfect is the same. So too frequently in the

Epistle to the Hebrews, e.g.
8edeKaT(OKev, xi. 28 7re7roiTjKev.

vii.

6

Clement §11

7rp68r)Xov noirjcras

XIII.
ble,

'Let us therefore be

hum-

6 deo-noTrjs

which we
Xov
ovv

(the same construction have in Heb. xii. 14 irpob-q-

on

on

i£ 'lovSa k.t.X.), §

40
It

npodrjXcov

fjpAv ovTcav tovtcov.

may be

a

question in many passages whether the preposition denotes priority in time or distinctness. In Demosth. de Cor, 293 el p.ev yap r)v aoi 7rp68r)Xa
ra.
fxr)

and lay aside anger and pride. The Holy Spirit condemns all selfexaltation. Let us call to mind the words in which the Lord Jesus commends a gentle and forgiving spirit.

The promise
5.

of grace

is

held out to

patient forbearance.'
a.7To6ep,evoL

k.t.X.]

So
ttjs

^

57
tt)v

p,eWovra...TOT edei npoXeyeiv,
irporjSeis k.t.X.,
lb.
1

el

de
r)v

p,d6eTe

v7TOTaao-ecr9aL

anoOepLevoi

99

el

yap
Kai

dXd(ova Kai vneprjcpavov
vp.a>v

yXcocro-rjs
1

anacri
trdai

TrpodrjXa to. p.eXXovTa Ka\ Tvporjbeaav anavTes

yevrjcreo~v

avOdbeiav.

oyKOV cmo6ep.evoi
Pet.
6.
CijXos,
ii.

Comp. Heb. xii. irdvTa, James 1. 21,

I

npovXeyes. On the other hand irpob-qXos frequently signifies 'plain/ 'manifest,'

1.

Tvcpos]

A

'famous,' 'illustrious,' and it is explained by npocpavrjs in the Greek

nXovTos,
§
ix.

neuter form like eXeos, etc, for which see
78 and Jacobson's
§ 4.

Winer
note on

p.

lexicographers.

£r)Xos

above

For an

ex-

XIIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
kclI
TroiricrboiJLev

51

opycts,
TTvevfJia

to
c xY

yeypa/uLjULevov'

Xeyet yap to
eN tco

to ayiov Mh
icxYpdc eN th

kayxacGoo
I
'

o co(J>oc en th cochiA aytoy, 6 ttAoycioc

mhAg

d

aytoy MHAe

10 ttAoytgj aytoy,

&AA

h 6

kayx^mcnoc eN
KpiMA

Kypi'to k&yx&cQcx), t °Y

6KZHTeiN AYTON KAI
fjLeixvf]fJievoL

TTOI€?N

KAI AlKAIOCYNHN* JULCtAlG'Ta

tiov Xoycov

tov Kvpiov
C; dub.
S.

'Irjaov, ovs e\a\r]crev
See the lower note and comp.
Tijcpos]
1.

CS.
p. 126.

4 yeyovev] A; iyev/jdr] 6 aXafrovelav] C;
6]

aXa^oviav A.

A;

Tvcpov C.

10 <xXV ^

A

;

dAA' 6 C, and so perhaps S.

Tvcpos Jacobson here quotes Cone. Ephes. Can. 8 (Routh Script. Eccl. Opicsc. p. 395). As the v is long

ample of

recension of original text; or (2) the text of Jeremiah (or Samuel) was in circulation in the first century

A

in the older writers but short in the

which contained the exact words
Kavx<£p-evos iv Kvpico Kavxacrdco.

6

more recent

(e.g.

Greg. Naz.

11.

pp.

The

490 v. 44, 880 v. 45, ed. Caillau), I have accentuated it according to this later usage; see L. Dindorf in Steph. Thes.
s.v.

former
thesis.

is

the

more probable hypo-

24 as

Iren. iv. 17. 3 quotes Jer. ix. it stands in our texts. In

and compare the analogy of
Galatians
1
ii.

crrv-

Xos, (ttvXos,
8.

9.

Mr) Kcivxao-dai K.r.A.]
is

sage

taken from
23, 24, or

This pasSam.ii. 10, or from

neither passage does the Hebrew aid in solving the difficulty. In 1 Sam. ii. 10 it is much shorter than and quite
different from the LXX. Lucifer pro Athan. ii. 2 (Hartel, p. 148) quotes it 'non glorietur sapiens in sua sapientia nee glorietur dives in divitiis suis, sed in hoc glorietur qui gloriatur,

from both combined. Jer. The editors have overlooked the first
ix.

of these passages, quoting only the second, though in several points Cle-

ment's language more closely resembles the
I

inquirere
gloriari,

me

et

scire in

Dominum

first.
ii.

The

latter
rj

part

in

Sam.

10 runs dAA'
6
/cai^co/xei'os

iv tovtco

Kavxao'Oco
yiV(D(TK€lV

avvieiv

kcu

qui facio misericordiam et judicium et justitiam super terram.' As Cotelier

quia ego

sum Dominus

TOV KvplOV KCU TVOieiv Kplfxa
yr)s',

Kai hiKaioo-vvqv iv piaco Tr)s

while

the corresponding passage in Jeremiah diverges still more from Clement's quotation. On the other hand S. Paul quotes twice (1 Cor. i. 31
KaBcos yey pairrciL, 2 Cor. x. pevos iv Kvpico Kavx^o-dco.
1

remarks, he seems to have read e*^with Clement, for he has 'inquirere' three times in this context, but the coincidence may be acciOn the other hand Antioch. dental. Palaest. Horn, xliii (Bibl. Vet. Patr.
relv
p.

7) o Kai>xa>-

1097, Paris 1624) quotes directly

The resem;

blance of Clement's language to S. Paul may be explained in two ways either (1) S. Paul does not quote literally but gives the sense of one or other passage (1 Sam. ii. 10 or Jer.
ix.

from 1 Sam. ii. 10, and betrays no connexion with Clement's language. 12. pepvrjpivoi k.t.X.] Comp. Acts
XX. 35 p-vrjpioveveiv tcov Xoycov tov Kvpiov See above § 2 'irjcrov, otl elrrev k.t.X.
rjbiov

XapfidvovTes k.t.X. (with the note),
reflects

23 sq) and Clement, writing afterwards, unconsciously combines and confuses S. Paul's quotation with the
;

where Clement's language
the context of this quotation.

4—2

52

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT

[xiii

$iSd<TKcov eTTieiiceiav kcci /uaKpodv/uLiav

outws yap einev
od c

'EAgatg
OYT00
00C

Tna eA6H0HT6 AcbieTe ina a(J)€0h ymin*
;

noie?Te,
*
'

TTOIH6HCeT<M YMIN'

00C

AlAOT€, OYT00C AO0HC6TAI Y M N
GOC

KpiNGTe, ofTOOC KpiGHCecOe"
Op

XpHCT6Y€C6e

;

oy'tooc

XP h

"

CT6Y0HC6TAI YMIN'
tai

ymin.

Tavrrj

M6Tp(0 M6TpG?T€ €N d^TO) M€TpH0HC€Trj ivToXrj koll toTs 7rapayye\fJ.acrLV

5

tovtois

<TTy]pi^(i)fjiev

eavrovs

eis

to

7ropevecrdai v7rriKOOvs

ovTas
i

Tofc
eirieiiceiap']

dyi07rpe7Te(TL
eirieiKiav

XoyoLs
C
; .
.

aurou, Ta7reivo(pporwa A.
3 oura>s] C,
2 'EXeare]

A.

iXeeXre

C.

depiere]

A

;

oKpere

ovtus] C.
;

A

;

and

in all the other

places in this sentence where it occurs ovtw. 4 KplveTs] KpiveraL A.
fx^Tp^...fxeTpr]dr](r6TaL vpuv] here,

so too A, except in the

first,

where
C.

it

has
5

xp^crretfecrfle] xp^crrei/ea'tfcu
Cos

A.

$
ev

avrC}]

S;

evavTr)

A;

ovrus

C

;

Clem; before om. Clem.
10 7rpau>]

AS

Kplvere k.t.\.,

7 (rTyjpi^ojfiev]

A

;

crTrjpifafiev

C.

7ropeye<x#cu] iropeieuQe
2.

C.

A;

irpaov C.

r& Xoym]

A

'EXeare
is

k.t.X.]

The same saying
vii.
I,

where

it is

quoted almost exactly as

which

recorded in Matt.

Luke vi. 36 38, to which should be added Matt. V. 7 pampioi ol iXerjpoves on avTol iXerjdrjcrovTai, vi. 1 4 iav yap vi. dcpfjre toIs dv6pco7rois k.t.X., Luke
31
Ka6a>s

2,

here, except that iv avrat

is omitted. betrays no misgiving that he is not quoting directly from the Gospel, when evidently he has taken the

He

words from his namesake the
Clement.

Roman
ii.

deXere

'iva

tvoluhtiv

k.t.X.

Comp.

Aftost. Const,

21,

(comp.

Mark

xi. 25).

quotations are often need not go beyond the Canonical Gospels for the source of this pas-

As Clement's very loose, we

Ps-Ign. Trail. 8. On the form cXedv (for iXeelv) see Winer § xv p. 97 sq, A. Buttmann
p.

The resemblance to the original is much closer here, than it is for instance in his account of Rahab above, § 12. The hypothesis theresage.
fore, that

50; comp. Clem. Horn, xviii. 6. Previous editors needlessly read e'Xe4.
cos

eire here.

xp^crretW^e]
S.

The
Luke

corre(vi.

sponding words in

36)

Clement derived the saying from oral tradition or from some
not needed. Polycarp indeed {Phil. 2) in much the same words quotes our Lord as saying
acptere

are yiveade olKTippoves. In Justin Dial. 96 and Aftol. i. 15 they are quoted
yivecrde 8e

lost Gospel, is

KM

deped^aerat vpuv, iXeelre Iva
it

xP r (TT01 Kai oiKTippoves, and Horn. iii. 57 yiveo~6e dyadol Kai olicrtppoves. The verb xP^o-reveo-Oai occurs 1 Cor. xiii. 4.
)

in Clem.

iXeqQrjTe,

but

can hardly be doubted
of introducing the

5.

op

perpa

k.t.X.]

Quoted

also in-

from

his

manner

quotation (pvrjpovevovTes cov eirrev 6 Kvpios diddo-Kwv), that he had this

directly Clem. Ho7n. xviii. 16 <S p-erpco See €p€TpT)<XaV, pL€Tprj6fj aVTols TOO t(JCO.

passage of Clement in his mind and does not quote independently. See also Clem. Alex. Strom, ii. 18
(p.

Mark iv. 24, besides the passages already quoted from the other Evangelists.
8.

dyionpe7reori]
1.

Compare

Polyc.
earli-

476) eXedre,

(pr](r\i>

6 Kvpios k.t.X.,

Phil.

This

is

apparently the

XI v]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
(prjcrlv

53
tin a

vovvres.
J

yap

6 ayios Aoyos*
ka)

'Etti

eniBAeyoo,

10 <\AA h en) ton

XIV.
koovs
kcli
tjjuias

np^yN hcyxion AiKaiov ovv Kctl bcriov, dvSpes d$e\<pol,
Oeco
r\

ka'i

TpeMONTA moy ta Aotia;
virr\-

fidWov yeveaOai tw
yap ov
ty\v

tois ev dXa^oveia

ctKa.TacTTao'La /uvcrepov
($Aaf3rjv
v7roi(roiJL6v

tyXovs dp^tjyoh e^ctKoAovTv^ovcrav, /udAAov $e
eTri&oojjLev
k'iv-

deiv.
15

Zvvov

imeyau, eav pi^OKivfivvcos
toov
dv6pu)7r(jov y

eav-

tovs toTs

de\r]fj.a(Tiv
iced

o\tlv€s e^aKOVTLtjuxas
§§ 2,

(^ov&lv eis epiv
rovs \6yovs
21.

aTacreis eU
;

to d7raAAoTpiwcrai

C

(with lxx) dub. S. 12 rjfxas] AS; vp.ds C.

n

oaiov]

AC;

deiov S.

See also
#ec5

yevtcdai ry 6ey]
13 ^rjXovs]

A; t£

yeveadcu

CS.

aXa^oveia] aXafrvia A.
epeis

A;

ftjXov

C.

17 %pw~\

S (where the plural depends merely on ribui, and would be suggested by ardthe plural of the following word); ctipe'crets C Nicon. See above, I. p. 125.

A;

ceis]

araaKT A.

els

to]

AC

;

rod Nicon.

passage in which the word occurs. Suicer gives it a place 'quia a lexicographis omissa,' but does not quote either of these passages in the Apoest
stolic fathers.
9. 'E7J-1 riva k.t.X.]

Second.

See the several references.

For the stress laid by Clement on the duty of vna<o-q,
vttijkoovs k.t.X.]

see §§ 7,
13.

9, 10, 13, 14, 19, 58, 60, 63.

fAvaepov]

The form
;

p.vcrep6s

A quotation from

the

LXX of Is. lxvi. 2 with slight and unimportant variations. For a distinction between irpavs and rjo-vxios see Bengel on 1 Pet. iii. 4 (where both words occur). Comp. also Hatch Biblical Greek p. 73 sq.
XIV.

occurs again below § 30 and in both places the editors have altered it to pvaapos. This is not necessary see Lobeck Pathol, p. 276. In Lev. xviii.
:

23

it

is

so written in

A

;

and simiis

larly in

Mark

i.

42 eKadeplaOr]
:

read

'We

ought to
If

rather than

man.

we

follow

obey God men,

we

shall

and
shall

peril;

plunge ourselves into strife if we follow God, we

MSS see Tischendorf on Acts x. 15 and proleg. p. 1 (ed. 7), Winer § v. p. 56. See also the form pupav (for pnapav) in Boeckh C. I. G. no. 3588. So likewise the play on
in the best
lepevs, piepevs, in Apost. Coiist. ii. 28. (C writes pvaapav for pvaepav in § 30, but not so here).

The be gentle and loving. Scriptures teach us, that the guileless and meek shall inherit the earth; but that the proud and insolent shall
be blotted
11.

apx^yois\
(TTacreois.

Comp.

§
'

5 1

^PXU 01

T ^l s

out.'

Ainaiov k.t.X.] This passage as

15.

pi.^roK.Lvbvvoii\
;

in a foolhardy
i.

far

as

koXws

'e'xovros

is

quoted

in

spirW

Appian

Civ.

103,

It

does

Nicon the Monk, in an extract given by Cotelier from the Paris MSS Reg.
2418, 2423, 2424. He strings together with this passage quotations from §§ 15, 46, of this epistle, and § 3 of the

not occur in the ment.

LXX

or

New

Testa-

16. it-a.K.ovTi£ov(TLv\ The word here appears to mean, launch out.' Generally, when it occurs metaphorically,
'

54

THE EPISTLE OF
kccXcos 6)£Ovtos.

S.

CLEMENT
avTois
kclto,

[xiv

tov

-^priarTeva'ijofJLeQa

ty\v

evo"7r\ayxviav

Kal

y\vKVTr\Ta

tov Troir\GavTOs

r\\xa^,

yeypairTai yap" XpHCTOi ecoisiTAi oiKHTopec thc, akakoi Ae ynoAeic})9H'coNTAi en aythc* oi Ae ttapanomoynt€C eloAeGpeyOHCONTAi att aythc kcci 7raA.fi/ Xeyei' E?Aon AceBfi

5

ynepYYOYM^NON
V

KA<|

enAipdiweNON wc tac KeApoyc toy
KA'l

AiBa-

NOY, KA
1

|

TTApfiAOON
A;
eavrote

lAOY OyK HN, KAI eleZHTHCA TON TdlTON

1 y\vK6T7]Ta] yXvKrjrrjTa C. CS. 4 oi de... om. S (by homoeoteleuton). ii^oXedpevdrjcrovTcu.] A; e^oXoSee the lower note. 5 Ei5(w] lSov A. dpevdrjaovTai. C. acrefirf\ there is the same v. 1. in the LXX. 6 eircupbfxevov'] a<re(3r)v A; tov dae^rj C

avroLs]

ci7r'

avrrjs]

AC;

;

atirepopevov

A.

7 tov tottov

. .

.evpov]

AC;

avTbv Kal

oi>x evpe&rj 6 t6ttos

avTod (with the LXX) S. C. 10 KoW-rjdQ/JLev]
Aoyouff or ykoio-cras

AC;

9 evKaTaketppa] evKaTaXL/ufxa dKoXovdtjacopev Nicon.

A; ey/caTaXXei^a
12 Ouros 6 Xaos]

would be under-

stood,
1.

if

not expressed.
'

to avTo, which occurs in the context of his next quotation.
4. ifjoXeOpevdrjcrovTai] On the varying forms oXeBpeveiv and SXoOpeveiv see Tischendorf Nov. Test. p. xlix. Our chief MS for the most part writes

them] the comp. 2 Thess. This iii. 1$ pr] °>s e)^6pbv -qyeicrOe k.t.X. must be done 'in imitation of the comavTols]

towards
;

leaders of the schism

passion of the Creator Himself
ttjv

(kcito.

the
5.

ev(T7r\ayxvtav k.t.X.);

comp. Matt.

word with an e. EicW daeftfj k.t.X.]

v. 44.

Others substitute ai>To7s = dXXijbut this is not so good. MoreXois, over, as the contracted form avTov etc., for iavTov etc., seems never to occur in the New Testament, it is a question whether Clement would have used it see the note on avT&v § 12.
:

of Ps. xxxvii. 36 38 with unimportant variations. The LXX has ko.1
i£rjTT]cra

LXX

From

the

avTov.

avTov Kal ov% evpeOrj 6 tottos In the Hebrew there is
to
6

nothing corresponding
avTov.

tottos

Without hinting that he is quoting from a previous writer, Cleof Alexandria, Strom,
iv.

tvanXayxyiav k.t.X.] The same combination occurs in Theoph. ad Autol. ii. 14 T*jv yXvKVTrjTa kcu ev2.

ment

6

(p.

577), strings together these same six quotations, beginning with Ps. xxxvii.

cnrXayxyiav Kal biKaiocrvvqv

k.t.X.

quoted
ii.

by Harnack.
3.

xPV°"r0L

k-t-A..]

From

Prov.

21, 22.

The

first

part of the quota-

tion xp77o-Toi...eV avTrjs is found in with a very slight variation (and partially in

A

36 sq and ending with Ps. xii. 4 sq In comparing the two, we observe of the Alexandrian Clement, that (1) In his first passage he restores the text of the
(TTapprjo-iacropai iv avTai).
k.t.X.

S),but

B omits

the words ; the

second runs

in all the best

MSS of the
avTrjs-

LXX,

0SV1 [Se] ao-e(3a>v ck yfjs oXovvtcu, oi

LXX, and quotes Kal i^T-qa-a avTov (2) For the most part he follows Clement of Rome, e.g. in the remarkable omission noted below (on dXaXa
;

de Trapa.vop.oL i£oiO~6r)crovTai

an

In

yetnj9ijTco

k.t.X.); (3)

He

inserts be-

quoting the latter part Clement seems to be confusing it with Ps. xxxvii. 39
oi Se 7rapa.vop.01 et-oXoOpevOrjo-ovTat, eVt

tween the quotations an explanatory

word or sentence
ends

of his

own

;

(4)

He

this string of quotations with the

xv]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
kai

55

aytoy
10

oyx eypoN.

^yAaccg

<>kakian kai Tag cyOythta, oti

6CTIN GNKATAAeiMMA ANGptOTTCp eipHNIKtp.

XV.
vy\v.

Toivvv KoWr\6oojjLev
/urj

Toh

/ulet

eixrefieias eipr]eipri-

vevovcriv, kcli

toIs

/xe0' v7roKpicrecos fiovXojjievois

Aeyei yap ttov Oytoc

6

Aaoc to?c xeiAeci'N Me tima,

KApAlA AYT03N TTOppGO ATT6CTIN An' 6M0Y- KCtl TTCtXlV CTOMATI AYTOON €YAorOYCAN TH Ae KApAlA AYTOON KATHTcp KCLI TToKlV \ey€l' 'HrATTHCAN AYTON TO) CTOMATI 15 pOQNTO.
H

Ae

;

A

and apparently S;

6

\abs odros C.

rots x«Aeo-«>]
;

AS;
Clem;

rtp arofiarL

C.

13 diretXTLv]

A
'

Clem;

a7re'xet

C Nicon
I.

dub. S.
ttj

14 euXoyovaav]
§e]

A;

ev\6-

Teschendorf says of the reading of A Kar-qpovvro certum est,' but Wright reads it KaTrjpwvTo. I looked On such forms as kclttjpovvto see several times and could not feel certain.
(with lxx)
;

yovv C; ev\oyov(XL Clem. the LXX. KaTripQvTo]

See

p. 127.

AC
;

/cat rrj

S, with

C

KarapQivrai

Clem

Tischendorf Nov. Test. prol. p.

lvii (ed. 7).

very words of the
ra7T€ivo(j)povovuT0Jv

Roman

Clement,

avrov, without
is

any from another. a remnant] i. e. 9. evKaTaktifxpLa] a family or a memorial of some
citing
l

yap... to noipviov indication that he

Both Evangelists Tip.a as here. have a7re^ei with the lxx, where Clement has aneo-Tiv. Clem. Alex,
p.e

form however to

follows our Clement, modifying the suit his context. In

iyKaTaXeippiaTa tcov daeficov e^oXodpevcrerat comp. Ps. xxxiv. 16 totj e^oXodpevaai €K yrjs to
:

kind, as in ver. 39

to.

Clem. Bom. ii. § 3 it is quoted exactly as here, except that 6 Xabs ovtos stands for ovtos 6 Xaos. Justin quotes the

[Mvrjfxoo-wov avTcov,

quoted by Clement

below, § 22.

Let us then attach ourselves the guileless and peaceful; but avoid hypocrites who make a show
to

XV.

'

LXX, Dial. 78 (p. 305). For various readings in the MSS of the lxx and quotations from it see Hatch Biblical Greek p. 177 sq.
14.

Tea 0-Top.aTi k.t.X.]
4,

From lxx

Ps.

lxii.

with unimportant variafor

of peace.

Against such the denun-

tions.

ciations of Scripture are frequent

and

€vXoyovo~av~\

evXoyovv.

See
refer-

severe; against the idle profession of God's service against the deceitful

Sturz Dial.

Mac.

p. 58,

and the

and proud
12.

lips.'

ences in Winer § xiii. p. 89. In the lxx here SB have evXoyovo-av. Clem.
Alex, (edd.) quotes evXoyovo-i.
15.

Ovtos
is

6 Xabs]

From

Is. xxix. 13,
8,

which

quoted also Matt. xv.
6.

'Hyanrjo-av

k.t.X.]

From

Ps.

Mark
text.

vii.

Clement follows the

lxxviii. 36,
'

y]

Evangelists rather than the original For the opening words of the

'E7ria-Tco6r]o-av

almost word for word. is here a translation of
stedfast.'

IJDfcO,

were

Though

r\ya-

original, eyyi£ei p.01 6 Xabs ovtos iv r<a o~Top.a.TL avTov kol iv toIs \eiXeiTiv

7TT]o-av is

avTcop Tt/xwo-iV p.e, they give the sentence in a compressed form ovtos 6

Xabs

(0

Xabs ovtos Matt.)

rots' ^et'AecrtV

read by the principal MSS (SB) of the LXX, the original reading was probably 7771-0x770-01/, as this corresponds with the Hebrew. See also Hatch Biblical Greek p. 204 sq.

56

THE EPISTLE OF
oyK
ey0e?A
Ota
iugt'

S.

CLEMENT
erncTooGHCAN
x
6|

[xv

aytoon kai th rAooccH aytoon eyeycANTO ayton, H Ae KApAlA

aytoon
AiaGh'kh

aytoy,

oyAe

eN

th

aytoy.

tovto "AAaAa reNHGHToo ta
AlKAlOY

Ah ta
TTaKlV
5

AoAlA TA AAAOYNTA KATA TOY

ANOMIAN*
ta

KOLl

'EloAeGpeycAi

Kypioc

ttanta

ta

)(6iAh

AoAia,

rAooccAN

MeTAAopHATlONA, TOyC eiHONTAC, thn rAooccAN hmoon mgtaAyNO0M6N, TA )(6l'AH HMOON TTAp' HM?N 6CTIN* TIC HMOQN KypiOC
ecTiN
1
;

And thc TAAAincopi'AC
expeiaavTo]

toon

tttoo)(oon
3 5ia tovto]

ka'i

And
;

toy
om. A.

AS Clem

;

exj/e^au

C.
4
r<x

CS Clem

yevrjdrjTCo]

A

Clem;

yevrjdeiT)

C.

\a\ovvTa...Ta 56\ia] S;

om.

AC
ical

Clem by homoeoteleuton.
elirdvTas C.

5 yXwo-cav fxeyaXoprj/mova tovs elirbvTas]

AS;

y\&o~o~av /xeyaKoprj/uiova tovs elirovTas

Clem

;

yKGiaaa fxeyakop-qiiwv koA ttoKlv Tous
insertion

The

scribe thus patches

up by

and

alteration the text

which

the previous omission had dislocated, so that it may run grammatically and make 6 ixeyaXuvufiev] A; fieyaXvvov/xev C Clem; dub. S. sense; see 1. p. 143.
dia tovto]

3.

This should not be

XeiA?7

treated as part of the quotation, since it is not found in any of the passages
together.

Psalms which are here strung The Alexandrian Clement however (p. 578), quoting from his Roman namesake, may perhaps have
of the

ra 86\ia. Wotton and others detected the omission but made the insertion in the form ko\ 'e£. K. it. r. x- r « 86Xia ko.\. This does not explain the scribe's error. The <a\ before yXcocrcrav peyaXoprjpova, though

regarded it as such. "A\a\a K.r.A.] I venture to transcribe (within brackets) the note in my first edition; from which it will be seen

found in AB, is marked as to be erased in S and is omitted in many MSS in Holmes and Parsons and in
;

our Clement's text of the

LXX it must

have been wanting. The H ebre w omits
the conjunction in the corresponding The existing omission in the place.
text of the

how

far

I

the text,

had divined the reading of as since confirmed by the

Syriac version.

[The words SkdXa yevrjOrJTco Ta x e ^V Ta 86Xia are taken from the LXX, Ps. xxxi. 19. Those which follow are from
the

LXX

Ps.

xii.
to,

3—6

i^oXoBpevaai
[naY]

Roman Clement seems to be as old as the end of the second century, for his Alexandrian namesake (see the note on eldov dcrefirj k.t.A. above) gives the passage, dXaXa
yevqQrfTU) TvdvTa
to.

Kvpios navTa

x ei'A*7 ra boXia

X € ^ r Ta ^°Ata
l

Kal

yXcoaaav p.eyaXopr)pova tovs slnovTas k.t.X. Since in the quotation of Clement, as it stands in the MS, yXSo-aav
peyaXoprjixova

yXcoacrav peyaXoprjpova k.t.X., inserting
Ka\ before
it

yAaWai/, though quoting
as
it

in the

main

is

quoted here.

has no government, it seems clear that the transcriber's eye has passed from one to. x € &V to. 86Xia to the other and omitted the introductory words of the second quotation.
I

Or we have the alternative of supposing
that a transcriber of the Alexandrian

Clement has independently made a
similar

omission to the transcriber
peyaXoprj6.]

of the

Roman. For the form
'

have therefore inserted the

p,ova see the
7.

note on e^epifaaev §

words i^oXeBpevaai Kvpios navra ra

irap' ijfilv]

in our power, our

xvi]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
TTeNHTOON
H<\

57
Kef€\

CTeNATMOY TWN
10

NYN
I

ANACTHCOMAI,

KypiOC"

9HC0MAI 6N COOTHpIO),

ppH C ACOMAI 6N AyTCp.

XVI.
OVK

Ta7reivo<ppovovvT(t)v
67TI

yap icTiv

6

XpiCTO^^
O"KrJ7TTp0V

€7TaipOll6V(jOV

TO

TTOlfJLVLOV CtVTOV.

TO

[rrjs fieya\(x)crvvr\<f\
'Iricrovs,

tov Qeov, 6 Kvpios

\jj/uLtov~\

Xpio~Tos

ovk fj\6ev ev

KOfJLirw dXafyveias ov$e

V7reprj(f)a-

15 vias, KctiTrep
7 irap' t)/juv]

Svvct/uLevos,

dWa
CS.

A

Clem;

Trap' t)h&v

Taireivocppovwv , Kadcos to 8 dirb] A; om. CS Clem. 9 dva-

<TT7)(70[xaL\ ava<jTrj<jop,ev

A.

cioTTjpia or ev <TUT7)picp)

\wavvrjs]

AC;

S; om. om. S Hieron.

C

10 ev awTrjpiip] Clem; evvwT-qpia The MSS of the LXX vary.
i)[i(av]

A

;

fcOp"l122 (ev
13
rrjs jxeya-

A; om. C Hieron;

dub. S, for
'Irjaous]

pD is
Irjcrovs

used equally for 6 /ci/pios and 6 utipios i)/xwv. Xptcrros 14 dXa^oveias] a\a£oviaa A. Xpicrros CS Hieron. AC [Hieron]; add. r)\dev S.

A;

15 Ta7reivo<ppovuv]

own.' It represents the Hebrew 13DX. The dative is correctly read also by Clem. Alex, and some MSS of the

our Lord. Fell refers to the application of the same text made by Justin Dial. 63 (pp. 286 sq) to show on kol
7Tpoo-Kvvr)Tos eari kcu Qebs kcu Xpiaros. Jerome in Isai, Hi. 13 (iv. p. 612)

LXX
9.

;

but

SAB

have nap'

rjpatv.

avao~Tr}o-opai\

The reading
:

of

A

avacrr-qaopev

has arisen from avaavacrrrja-ope

quotes this passage of Clement, 'Scep-

a-Trjaope,

whence

comp.

aix/JLahocHTia (alxpa\a)o~Lav) for atyjuaXcocria

trum Dei, Dominus Jesus Christus, non venit in jactantia superbiae, quum
possit omnia, sed in humilitate.' This application of our Lord's example

(al)(pa\(D0~iq) in

ii.

^ 6.

So too
for erwei-

§

41
10.

crvveidrja-LU (crvveidrjo-l)

8r](ri= avveiftijo-ei.
dr/cropac
k.t.X.]

'/ WzY/

^ /#<:<?

bears a resemblance to Phil. and may be an echo of it.
13.

ii.

5

sq
is

ibffi zVz safety,

I will deal

boldly by

peyaX(oavvrjs]

The word

him? The Hebrew of the
is

last clause

wholly different from the LXX.

doubtful here, but occurs several times in Clement elsewhere, §§ 20,
2 7> 36, 58, 61, 64, 65 in its favour.
14.
;

XVI.

'

Christ

is

the friend of the

and

this fact is

lowly; He Himself is our great pattern of humility. This is the leading feature in the portrait which the evangelic prophet has drawn of the lamb This too is led to the slaughter.

iv Kopnco k.t.X.]
iv.

Macar. Magn.

Apocr.
rrjs

2 (p. 159) ttoXvs yap ovtos aXa^oveias 6 Kopnos.
k.t.X.]

dka£oveias
£a>v

The adjectives dXaiii.

declared by the lips of the Psalmist. If then He our Lord was so lowly, what ought we His servants to be ?'
12.
1

occur together, 2. The one refers to the expression, the other to

and
i.

Rom.

vneptjcpavos 30, 2 Tim.

ovk enaipopevcov

K.r.X.]

Comp.

the thought; see the distinction in

Pet. v. 3,

Acts xx.

29.

The word
expression
8,
77

Trench N. T.Syti.
15.

§ xxix. 1st ser.

TToipviov

occurs again §§ 44, 54, 57.

Ka'iivep h)vvapevos\

This passage

to o-KTJnTpov k.t.X.]
is

The

where

apparently suggested by Heb. i. Ps. xlv. 6 pafidos €v6vtt)tos

implies the pre-existence of Christ ; comp. Phil. ii. 6 sq os iv p-opcpr} Qeov
vnapxcov
I.

k.t.X.

;

see the introduction

pafidos rrjs (3acn\eias crov is applied to

p.

398

sq.

58
irvevfjia

THE EPISTLE OF
to
ayiov
irepi

S.

CLEMENT
(prjaiu

[xvi

avTOv

e\a\y](rev'
;

yap'
Kypioy

Kypie, tic eni'cTeyceN th akoh hmoon

kai

d BpAXi'^N

tin
o)C

i

AneKAAfcbGH
pi'zA

;

ANHrreiA^MeN Inanti'on aytoy,
kai

ooc ttaiAi'on,
hold,'

en

fH

AiyoacH*

oyk ecTiN efAoc aytco, oyAe
oyK
ei)(eN

kai

eJAoMGN ayton,

eiAoc

oyAe kaAAoc, aAAa

5

to e?Aoc aytoy atimon, eKAeTrroN nApA to eiAoc toon ANGpoonCON*

ANOpOOTTOC 6N TTAH|~H
oti

CON

maAaki'an,
KAI

AnecTpAnTAi

to

nONCO KAI €lAobc CbepeiN npdcoonoN aytoy, htimacGh
Ka'|
4> e

OyK eAOTICGH.

OyTOC TAC AMApTIAC HMOON

p6

1

KAI TT6pl

HMOON OAyNATAI, KAI HM6?C eAopCAMGGA AYTON 6?NAI 6N TTONCp IO
3 dv7]yyei\a/xev] avrjyyikafxev A.
avrtp]
iraidiov]

AS

;

irediov

C.

4 eldos

A

(with Lxx); avrtp eldos

C; and

so S, but the order cannot

be pressed in

this case.

error

for

K'lBIt^,

6

e/cAet7roj']

5 /cdAXos] AC; db^av S, but Xn^lK' is probably a copyist's the former word having occurred in the previous sentence. skXlttov A. to eldos tiov avOpunruv] AC; iravTas avdp&irovs S.

Messianic appli2. Kvpie K.r.A.] cation is made of this 53rd chapter of Isaiah by S. Matthew viii. 17 (ver.
4),

A

The lxx

itself differs

considerably

by
S.

S.

Mark
xxii.

xv.

28

(ver.
12),

12),

by
S.

Luke
i.

37 (ver.

by

29 (ver. 4, 7), xii. 38 (ver. 1), by Philip Acts viii. 32 sq (ver. 7, 8), by S. Paul Rom. x. 16 (ver. 1), and by S. Peter 1 Pet. ii. 23 sq (ver. 5,

John

from the Hebrew in many points. See also Hatch Biblical Greek p. 178 sq, p. 201 sq, on the form of the early quotations from this passage of the lxx.
3.

dvr]yyeika\iev k.t.A.]

The LXX

reading here is devoid of sense and must be corrupt, though the MSS and
fxev.

9).

Barnabas also (§ 5) applies ver. Lord; and Justin both in the Apology and in the Dialogue
5, 7,

to our

early quotations all present dvrjyyelXaAs this word corresponds to the

interprets this chapter so frequently

:

Hebrew ?V^ (Aq. Theod. dva^T/o-erai, Symm. dvej3r)), Is. Voss proposed
dvereiXdfiev (see Grabe Diss, de Variis Vitiis p. 38) ; but even this

see esp. Apol.

1.

50,

51 (p. 85 sq),

230 sq), in both which passages it is quoted in full. For Jewish Messianic interpretations of this chapter see Hengstenberg Chris tol.
Dial. 13
(p.
11.

LXX

p. 310 sq (Eng. trans.), Schottgen Hor. Hebr. II. p. 138 sq, and espe-

is not enough, and we should require dvereikev. The following meaning however seems generally to have been attached to the the preachers anwords; 'We

alteration

cially Driver and Neubauer The fifty third Chapter of Isaiah according to

the

Jewish

Interpreters,

Oxf.

and

before the Lord ; as a child is He, as a root etc' (see Eusebius and Jerome on the pas-

nounced

Him

Lond. 1877, with Pusey's preface. Clement's quotation for the most
part follows the

LXX tolerably closely.

but Justin Dial. 42 (p. 261) sage) strangely explains ws ivaibiov of the child-like submission of the Church
;

The more
from

important divergences the lxx are noticed below.

to Christ.

The

interpretation of Oriviii.

gen ad Rom.

§

6

(iv.

p.

627)

xvi]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
nAH|"H
KAI

59

KAI €N

£N

KAKOOCei.

TAC AMApTIAC HMOON KA*I nAiAeiA eipHNHC hmoon en' ayton* too mooAootti aytoy hmgic
ia9hm€n.
ttant€c
ooc
;

AYTOC Ae eTpAYMATl'cOH AlA MGMAAAKICTAI AlA TAC ANOMIAC HMOON.

15

npdBATA enAANH9HM€N ANOpoanoc th OACO AYTOY 6TTAANh'6H* KAI KVpiOC HApeAOOKGN ayton Y^ep
KAI AYTOC AlA TO K6KAKOOC0AI OyK AMApTIOON HMOON. TO CTOMA* OOC TTpdBATON eni CCfJATHN h'xQH, KAI OOC ANOlVei

TOON

AMNOC eNANTl'oN TOY KGl'pANTOC AChOONOC, OjTOOC OYK ANOlVei €N TH TATTeiNOOCei H KpiCIC AYTOY Hp0H' TO CTOMA AYTOYSee the lower note for the lxx reading. CS. See the lower note. 13
12 apLaprias, dvo/xlas]
iroudeid] 7rcu5ia

A;

transposed
15 virep rQiv

in

A.
it

a/napTLcov]

AC;

reus afxapriacs

S with the LXX.
A.

See the lower note.

19 ev

rrj rcnreipwcrei]

AC;

add. ejus S, where the punctuation attaches

to the previous

sentence.

Kplais] KpL<xeiG

is not quite clear. The fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries gene-

U»» 'D WiriDB3, 'as hiding the face from him* or 'fromus? The lxx seem
have adopted the latter sense, though they have omitted 130D 'His face is turned away] i. e. as one ashamed or loathed comp. Lev. xiii.
to
;

rally interpret cos pLfa ev yfj bi^rcocrr] as referring to the miraculous con-

ception.
naid.
p.

In

the

order

ev.

avr.

cos

Clement agrees with
(p. 85,

SA

Justin

;

230

260

sq, evcoiviov avrov);

45

*

and so the old Latin, e.g. Tertull. adv. Marc. iii. 17 (and elsewhere) 'annuntiavimus coram ipso velut puerulus
etc.':

12. dpapTias, dvofilas]

So B, Justin p.

but B has cos 7rai8. order of the Hebrew.
6.

ev.

avr.,

the

230; but SA, Barnab. § 5, Justin p. 85, transpose the words, reading dvofiias in the first clause and dp.aprias in the second.
14.

irapa to eid.

r.

dv6p.]

The LXX

av0pco7ros] 'each

man]

distribu-

S, Clem. Alex. p. 440, napa ndvras (S corr. from rrav) tovs vlovs rcov avOpooncov
;

Hebraism not uncommon in the LXX; and the use is somewhat
tive; a

Marc.
Marc.

B, Justin p. 230, Tertull. adv. iii. 7, adv. Jud. 14, napd tovs
;

similar in

John

ii.

25,

1

Cor.

xi. 28.

vlovs rcov av6poo7ra>v
iii.

A, Tertull. adv.

17, Trapa izdvras avdpooirovs',

dpapncov] The LXX has rals dp,apTiais, and so Justin pp. 86, 230, Clem. Alex. p. 138; but Tertull. adv.
15. VTvepToov

Justin p. 85, Clem. Alex. p. 252, napa tovs dvOpconovS'

Prax. 30 pro
19. zv
rfj

'

delictis nostris.'

TcnreivcSaei. k.t.A.]

LXX. The words must have crept in from below, ev tvovoo teal ev nXrjyfj, either by a lapse of memory on Clement's part or by an error in his copy of the LXX
7.

Kai tvovgo]

Wanting

in the

sage Acts
77

is

also quoted

This pasfrom the LXX in

viii.

33

ev

rfj

TaireLvcoaei [avrov]

where the first avrov should be omitted with the best
Kpiais avrov
rfpOrj,

or in the transcription of Clement's

MSS, so that S. Luke's quotation accords exactly with the LXX. For the

own
8.

text.
direo-TpaTVTaC\

probable meaning of the

lxx

here
I.e.
;

The

original

is

see the commentators on Acts

6o

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT
OTI Al'pCTAI

[xvi

THN r6N€AN AYTOY
H ZCOH

TIC AlHTHCeTAl;

ATTO

THC THC

AYTOY" And TOON ANOMIOON TOY AAOY MOY HK€I 6IC 9ANAKAI

TTONHpOYC ANTI THC TA(})HC AYTOY KAI Tofc ttAoyci'oyc anti toy Oanatoy aytoy' oti anomi'an oyk kai enoiHceN, oyAc GYpeGh AoAoc cn tco ctomati aytoy.
TON.
AGOCGO TOYC

5

KypiOC BofACTAI KABApiCAl AYTON THC
AMApTIAC, H

nAHTHC

CAN

A(2>T6 TT€pi

yYX

H<

YM^N

BofAeTAi AcbeAeiN

OyCTAI CTTCpMA MAKpdBlON. KAI K^piOC And toy ttonoy thc YYX fl c a ttoy, AciIai
CYN6C6I, AlKAIWCAl AlKAION
GY AOY"

AYTO) 0O3C KAI TTAACAI TH

A6YONTA TTOAAO?C* KAI TAC AMApTIAC AYTCON AYTOC ANOICCI.
i

AlA 10

tt]v

yepeav]

AC;

/cat

ttjv

yeve&u S.

2

rjKei]

AC;

-rjx^V
;

S.

See the

lower note.

7 oxperai] e^erat

A.

8

rrjs

tpvxv*]

AC

airb rrjs \pvxvs S.

The

]1D

which represents
patristic
I.

airb before rod irbvov is

pointed as

if =[i£y,

12 reus]

and

for

interpretations
p.

of

yevea,

Suicer

744

s.

v.

The

in Tertullian or Origen. ovde evpedr) dbXos] 5.

Hebrew

is different.

2. ^f/cei] rjxOr] lxx and Tertull. adv. Jud. 10; but r]K€L is read by Justin pp. 86, 230, though elsewhere he has VXfy P- 2 ^ 1 ( MSS VX^V v )t comp. p.

So A in the LXX, but SB (corrected however in S by later hands) have simply ovde
boXov,
closely.

following the In 1 Pet.
os

Hebrew more
ii.

22

are the
ovde

words

afxapTtav ovk enotrjaev

317 on

curb

r<ov

avopiwv tov

Xaov

dx@weraL els Oavarov. As ff)^6r\ may easily have been introduced from ver. 7, rjKei was perhaps the orig-

evpedrjdoXos evTcoaTopaTL avTov, though this is not given as a direct quotation

and may have been intended merely
as

a paraphrase, like

much

of the

and so it inal reading of the LXX stands in some MSS in Holmes and
;

context.

But

it

is

quoted by Justin

Parsons.
3.

also ko\ ovx evpedr/ doXos p. 230, and ovde evpedr) dbXos p. 86, though in a

kcu deco-co K.r.A.]

The LXX clearly
the

means

that

the

wicked and

third passage he has ovde doXovp. 330. And so likewise Tertull. adv. Jud.

wealthy should die in requital for as Justin Dial. 32 (p. His death
;

10 'nee dolus in ore ejus inventus
est,'

Origen
C,

I.

p. 91 c,

avTov tovs 7tXovaiovs BavaTco6rjaeo-6aL. Thus the reference to the crucifixion of the thieves and the entombment in Joseph's
249) avri tov
6a.va.T0v

287
191

and Hippol.

II. pp. 250 D, in Psalm. 7 (p.

grave, which the original has suggested to later Christian writers, is

The passage of S. Lagarde). Peter might have influenced the form of quotation and even the reading of the MSS in some cases but the pas:

rendered impossible in the LXX. This
application however is not made in the Gospels, where only ver. 12 ev
Toly dvopois eXoyiaOr) is

doXos appears are so numerous, that we must suppose it to have been so read in some
evpedr]

sages where ovde

quoted

in this

connexion, nor (I believe) in any father of the second century nor even

copies of the LXX at least as early as the first century. This reading is found in several MSS in Holmes and

Parsons.

xvi]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

6l

TOYTO AYTOC KAHpONOMHCGI TTOAAOYC KAI TOON ICXYP^N M6pi6l ckyAa* anG' 03N TTApeAoGH eic Ganaton h YYX^ ^ytoy kai toTc ANOMOIC eAop'cBH' KAI AYTOC AMApTl'AC TTOAAOON ANHNerKGN KAI
AlA TAC
J

5 'Eroc>

AMApTIAC AYT03N TTApeAoGH. Kctl TTClKlV GCI/T09 <pr\(TlV Ae eiMi ckooAh! kai oyk ANGpoonoc, ongiAoc ANGpoonooN

%

g5oyG6Nhma Aaoy- nANTec 01 GeoopoYNTec Me eleMYKTi-ipican Me, cAaAhcan £n xeiAeciN, cki'nhcan K€(J)aAhn "HAniceN
kai
;

ern
e

Kypion, pycacGoo ayton, ccocatoo ayton, oti GeAei ayton.

OpctT€, avSpes dya7rr]TOL, tU 6 VTroypa/ujULO^ 6 SeSo/ue20 vos rifjiiv el yap 6 Kvptos ovtcos era7reivo(ppovr](rev , tl
A;
17
ev rots C,
kKivr\Gav~\

eKeivqoav

and so probably A.

S,

which has 2 not
18
6'rt]

7.
ei

15 5e]
S.

AS; om.

C.

AC;

6.

t9}s ir\r)yrjs\
;

So SB
has

Justin pp. 86,

230

but

A (LXX)

quently.
Trjv

Tertullian
'

however reads

a7r6 rrjs 7rXr]yfjs.

y^vxv v

eximere a morte

animam

For K.a.Ba.pi&iv or KaBalpeiit twos comp. Herod, i. 44. So the intransitive
verb KaBapeveiv (Plato Epist. viii. p. 356 e) and the adjective KaBapos (Herod, ii. 38) may take a genitive.
Score]

So

tin pp. 86,
Scotch).

LXX (SAB) and 230 (MSS, but many
also

Jusedd.
this
dis-

adv. Jtid. 10. likdcrai (sc. avTov) stands in the present text of the LXX (SAB), and in Justin pp. 86, 230, nor is there any indication of a different reading but, as JDE?' stands in the corresponding place in the Hebrew, the original reading of the LXX was
ejus,'
:
1

Eusebius comments on

probably

TrXrjcrai,

as

Grabe suggested
39).

as the

LXX

reading,
it

and Jerome
so.
'

tinctly states
it

to

be

interpreted, offering' (or, translated into
'

was

Accordingly If ye make an
its

(Diss.de Vit. pare the vv.

Var.LXX,p.
11.

Comin

pdcraei

and

prjcrcrei

Mark

ix. 18.

Chris-

12. toIs avofiois] iv rots dvofxois

LXX

tian equivalent,
trite

If

ye be truly conpardon').
V.

and pray

for

With

dovvai nepl

com p. Heb.

3 Trepi eav-

(SAB). Justin pp. 86, 231, (though in the immediate neighbourhood of the first passage he has fiera tcov dv6p.cov,
p.

The tov 7rpoo~(pepeiv 7rep\ du-apTicov. meaning of the original is doubtful, but Score seems to be a rendering of
D vJ*f) taken as a second person, thou shalt give? The reading Scotch, ''give himself] which some editors here would adopt, is quite late and can
'

85);

perd.

dv6p,cov,

Luke

xxii.

37,

(fMark
14.

xv. 28 f).

avTos] Christ Himself, in

whose

person

the

Psalmist

is

speaking.

tcu

§ 22, where avTos 7rpocrKaXelhas a similar reference. The words are an exact quotation from

Comp.

hardly stand.
7.

the
K.r.A.]

LXX
to

Ps. xxii. 6

8.

The

applica-

Kvpios /3ovXerat

The LXX

tion

our
6

Lord

is

favoured by

departs very widely from the Hebrew, but its meaning is fairly clear. For afaXelv cliro, '/<? diminish from] comp.

Matt, xxvii. 43.
19.

vnoypaiipos]
§
5.

See the note

above on

Rev.

xxii. 19,

Exod.

v. 11,

and so

fre-

62
7roif](T03fjiev

THE EPISTLE OF
rifxel^

S.

CLEMENT
Trjs

[xvi

ol
;

vtto

tov Qj<yov

^dpiTO^ ccvtov

Si

avrov eAdovTes

XVII.

Mi/uiriTai yevodfjieda KaKeivcov, o\tlv69 ev Sepkcci

ixaciv aiyelois

/uLrjAwTcus

7repLe7rdrr](Tav

Krjpvcrorov-

Tes Tt]V eXevcnv tov
'GAicraie 6tl $e Kai
'

XpicrTov*

Aeyojjiev Se

'HAiav

kcci 5

le^EKirjA,

tovs 7rpo<priTas' 7rpo\ tovifxapTvpridrj
2 ekdovres]

tois
1

kcli

tovs
A;

}X€fJLapTVpr]fJi€vovs.
iroi-qao^ev

imeydAcos

7roiriawfjt,ej>]

C; dub. S.

direXdovTes C.
/cat]

6 'EXwreu*]
S.
irpos toOtols]

A;

'EXt<r(rcu£

C.

fri 5e]

S; eXdovroa A; AS; om. C.

AC; om.

AC;

add. 5e S.

7 ep.apTvprjdri\

AS;
it

add. 5£ C.
renders

9 drevifav] A; dreviaas C; dreviaco S, apparently, for
videbo gloi'iam Dei.

et dicit cogita,7is humiliter,

raTeivocppovuv] C;

rov £vyhv ttjs x^P lT0S l A verbal 1. paradox, explained by the 'easy yoke' of Matt. xi. 29, 30. The following 81 avrov is 'through His humiliation and condescension.' XVII. 'We should also copy the humility of the prophets who went about in sheepskins and goatskins ; of Abraham the friend of God, who

garment of

hair' (where the lxx omits the negative and destroys the
;

sense, Kai evdvaovrai btppiv rpiyivr]v) see also Bleek Hebr. I.e., Stanley's

word

Sinai and Palestine p. 305. The pr\koiTr) is used in the LXX to
nviX, pahidamentnni^
e.g.

translate

'a

mantle'
1

;

of Elijah and Elisha,

Kings

confessed that he was mere dust and of Job the blameless, who ashes condemned himself and all men as impure in the sight of God ; of Moses the trusty servant, who declared his nothingness before the Lord.'
;

14.
it

Though not a

xix. 13, 19, 2 Kings ii. 8, 13, strict equivalent,

was doubtless adopted as describing the recognised dress of the prophet. Ezekiel is fitly classed with the older prophets, as representing a stern and
His dress is nowhere ascetic type. mentioned in the O. T., but might be taken for granted as the ordinary
garb of his office. Clem. Alex, after fXT]\corais adds Kai rpi^av Kaprfkeicov he adds 7r\iyp.a<Tiv, as after 'ie^eKt^X Kai "liodwqv, the former interpolation
preparing the way for the
'EXio-me] best MSS of the
6.

of this chapter and part of the next are quoted by Clem. Alex.
Stro?n. iv. 16 (p. 610) in continuation of § 9 sq (see the note there) but he cites so freely, abridging and enlarging
:

The whole

at pleasure,

and interspersing his own commentary (e.g. rrjv ov^ vttotvlttperpionaOcov), that

latter.

rovcrav vopxo alvtrropcvos dfxapTiav yvcocrriKoJs

A

he cannot

frequent form in the lxx (with a single or

generally be taken as an authority on the text, and (except in special cases) I have not thought it worth

a double

o-),

e.g. 2

Kings

ii.

1

sq.

The

editors have quite needlessly changed it into 'EXiaaalov, which is the form
in

while to record his variations.
3.

Clem. Alex.
rovs

iv bepixaaiv k.t.X.]
'

From Heb. xi.

For the prophets' dress comp. Zech. xiii. 4 The prophets shall be ashamed... neither shall they wear a
y].

Epiphanius has 7rpo<prjTas] been thought to refer to this passage in Haer. XXX. 15, avros (K\rjp:r]s) iyKcaKai Aa/3id Kai 2a/i^coi/ Kai fxta^ei. 'HXiW

XVIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
tov Qeov,
K<xi

63
Xeyei
'Erca

'Aflpaa/ui kclI (f>i\os 7rpocrf]yop€v6r]
ctTei/L^cou

ek
kai

Tt]v

So^av tov Qeov,
6tl $e kcu

Ta7ret,vo(ppov(jov
Trepl '/a5/3

10 Ae eiMi rn

cttoAoc.

outws yeeavTOV
oya'

ypctTTTar
ceBhic,

'I00B

Ae hn Ai'kaioc kai AMeMTTToc, aAhGinoc, eeo-

dnexoMeNoc And ttantoc kakoy*
OyAeic
11
de]

d\K

ccvtos
pyttoy,
Kai]

KarriyopeT \eycov y
raireivocppcovuv

KA0Apdc And

an

A.

S with LXX.

aX-qdivbs] aX-qdeivoa

CS Clem; om, A. A; clXtjOlvos /cat Clem
LXX)
S.

AC

[Clem]; om.
12
/ca/coO]

611.

AC
av]

Clem;
C;

irovqpov irpayparos (with

KaTrjy

A;
oi)5' el

Clem;

contra seipsum dicens loquitur (as if def. A. See the lower note.
;

13 Karrjyopei \tywv] C; ovS' Kar'qyopQv Xeyei) S.

rravras tovs 7rpo(prjTas k.t.X.

but the
spurious

the

lxx Gen.
i.

xviii. 27.

reference

must be

to

the

1 1.

'lco/3 r)v k.t.X.]

A loose quotation
SB have
dXrjOi-

Epistles on Virginity, where Samson, as well as the others, is mentioned by-

from Job

1,

where

name
7.

(see above, I. p. 409). tovs pepaprvprjpevovs]
to,

vbs apepnros dUaios Beoaefirjs, and apepnros dtKaios aXijOeivos deoaefirjs.

A

'

witness
or

approved] whether by
;

bome God

by men

see below, §§ 17, 18, 19,
vi. 3,

13. Karrjyopei Xeycov] I prefer this to KarrjyopSv Aeyet or Karrjyopcov elnev. Wotton is certainly wrong in saying

38, 44, 47,

Acts

Heb.

xi. 2, 4, 5,

39, 3 Joh. 12, etc. Here the testimony of God's voice in Scripture seems to

There no trace of the word and cannot have been any. He must have made
is

that he could read elnev in A.

be intended, as appears from examples following.
8.

the

some confusion with the
which
is

elnev below,

blurred.
k.t.X.]

(ptXos
ii.

7rpoo~r)yopev6r)\

Comp.

Ovdels
ovff av\

A

loose
5.

quotation

James
9.

23,

and

see above, § 10 with

from the LXX Job

xiv. 4,

the note.
ttjv

All the best

MSS of the

dogav]

i.e.

the outward

ma;

nifestation, the visible light and glory which betokened His presence as e.g. Exod. xvi. 7, 10, xxiv. 16, 17,
xxxiii.
1

LXX agree in reading iav kcu, which many editors have preferred here.

On the other hand Clem. Alex. Stro?n.
iv.

19, 22, xl. 28, 29,

Luke

ii.

9,

611) has ovd el, and as in the rest of this quotation he follows
16
(p.

y

Cor. xv. 40 sq, 2 Cor. iii. 7 sq, etc. favourite word rcnreivocppoveov]

his

namesake pretty

closely,

where he

A

with Clement
like

see § 2, 13 (twice), 16 (three times), 19, 30, 38, 48. In
;

manner

Tajreivocppocrvvq

and

ra-

Origen, frequently quotes the text, generally has ovd' av (e.g. 11. p. 829) or

departs from the LXX, he done so in this instance.

may have

who
ov&

7reivcoo-is

occur several times. The scribe of A reads Taneivocppcov a>v here, as he reads Taneivocppov ov § 19. In both cases his reading must be corThis verb occurs only once rected. in the LXX (Ps. cxxxi. 2), and not once in the New Testament. 'Eyw be k.t.X.] Quoted exactly from

but someIn Apost. Const, ii. 18 it is quoted as here. The passage is one of very few outside of the pentateuch quoted by Philo, de Mut. Norn. 6 (1. p. 585),
el

(in. pp. 160, 685),

times omits the negative.

who reads

tls yap...Ka\ av...

64
miac
oi'kco

THE EPISTLE OF
HMepAC
aytoy
h
h

S.

CLEMENT
ttictoc 4n

[xvn
oAcp to>

zo)h aytoy.

Mcovcrrjs

6K.\r}6r} y kcli

$ia Ttjs VTrrjpecrias clvtov eicpivev
KC(l

6 Geos AiyviTTOv Sta toov \xa(TTiyudv
tcov
clutwv.

TCOU aiKKT[xa/uLeyctAtos

dXKa

KctKeivos

So^acrdeis
e7rl

ovk
~

ejueya\opt]jUiovr]0'€i/ 9

ct\X

el7reu 9

Trjs

(Scltov

xp flluia

5

TKTfJLOV

avTco

SiSo/ulsvov,
(with

Tic 6iMi
2);

erob,

on Me neMneic;
AC;
Kpivei (appa-

i avTov pri]
rently) S.
(or tov) plctTov

AS
;

Heb.
{S&tov

iii.

om. C.
(3o.tov

gicpivev]

5 eirl ttjs (3d.Tov] e

A;

eirl

tov

rrjs

j3&Tov

C
9

;

enl

rrjs

S

e/e

ttjs

Clem.

See the lower note.

€iinop.ei>]

i.

tthttos k.t.A.]
xii.

He

is

so called
2.

Horn. xvi.

14,
iirl

Apost. Const,
tov fiaTov

v.

20).
xii.

Num.
avrov
fXOV. 2.

7;

comp. Heb.

iii.

The

So we have

Mark

is

tov Oeov, for the

LXX has
xiii.

vnrjpecrias]

Comp. Wisd.

11, xv. 7.

26 (though with an ill-supported v.l.), but in\ ttjs ficiTov Luke xx. yj. In Justin Dial. 60 (p. 283) we meet with ano ttjs /3arof 6 /3aYos, 6 jSaros, o /Saroy,
,

eKpivev k.t.A.]
6eio~r)s

Compare § 11 npibia nvpos. Moses was the
fulfilling

£k ttjs (Bcltov, in the same chapter. See on this double gender of the word

instrument in

the prophecy

Fritzsche on
6.

Mark

1.

c.
iii.

uttered before, Gen. xv. 14 (comp. Acts vii. 7) to be eOvos co eav bovXevo~coo~i

Tls elpu eyco]
be k.t.X.]
teal

From Exod.

11

ns

elpu eyco, otl nopevaopiai k.t.X.
eyco

Kpivco eyco.
cp.€yakopr]p.6vT]o-€v]

7.

From Exod.

iv.

5-

See the note

IO lo~xv6(pcovos
elpu.
8.

(3pabvy\cocro-os eyco

on

etjepl^cocrev, § 6.

eVl ttjs ftaTov]

A

cannot have so

'Eyco be
is

elpu aTpus k.t.A.]

This

read the words as they stand in C, unless this line was very much longer than the preceding or following one.

quotation

not found in the Old

Testament or in any apocryphal book extant whole or in part. The nearest
parallel
£corj vp.cov

Moreover

ctti

tov

ttjs (3o.tov

xPVfJiclTi0

~~

is
;

James

iv.

14,

no la yap
77

17

p,ov avTcp bibop,evov is in itself

a very

aTpus [yap] ecrre
k.t.X.

nphs oXlalso

unlikely expression. read en\ ttjs j3citov or en\ tov fiaTov, this being a common mode of referring to the incident Luke xx.

awkward and
Probably

yov

(paivopLevrj
xiii.

Compare

A

;

37 (comp. Mark xii. 26), Justin Dial. 128 (p. 357), Cle?n. Horn. xvi. 14,

'As smoke from the chimney' (or 'the window'), where the LXX seems to have translated originally aTpus ano atcplbcov (see Sim3

Hosea

Apost.

Co?ist. v. 20.

The reading
to

of
in-

C must be

attributed

the

son's Hosea p. 44), corrupted into ano baKpvcov in B and corrected into i< Kanvoboxrjs from Theodotion in A
;

decision of a scribe hesitating between the masculine and feminine

and
a
the

I Ps. cxix. 8^ bottle in the smoke/

'

am become

like

where again

the word being sometimes masculine, 6 (Bcitos (e.g. Exod. iii.

genders
2, 3, 4,

;

LXX

ndxvrj.

mistranslates coael do-Kos ev In none of these passages

Apost. Const, vii. 33), sometimes feminine (Dcut. xxxiii. 16, Acts vii. 35, Justin Dial. 127, 128, Clem.

however are the words very close, nor are they spoken by Moses. Perhaps therefore this should be reckon-

XVIIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
Ae
eiMi

65
Kat
ttoKlv

erob

icxNo'cfrooNoc

kai

BpAAyrAcoccoc.
KyOp^c.
eirl

\eyei, 'Er<o Ae eiMi atmic atto

XVIIL
10

77

Se

eiTrwfjLev

tw

/uLe/uaprvpr] /mevco

AavelS
ay'ton.

; 7rpo£ 6v enrev 6 ©eos, EypoN anApa kata thn kapAi'an Moy, AaygiA ton Toy leccAi, eN eAeei aiooni'co e^picA

dWa

koll

avTOs \eyei 7rpos tov Qeov
C;
eXcuei

'

Eaghcon
10 6 0e6s]

A; eiTTOLixev C. AS; om. C.

10, 11 Aaveid] dad

11 eXeei]

AC. A;

iXaiq>

See above, § 4. S Clem (edd.).

See below.

ed among S. Clement's quotations from apocryphal books, on which
Photius (Bibl. 126
rrjs

to be the

prjrd

riva

<os

dnb

Betas ypoxprjs ^evl^ovra Trapeurdyei)
:

remarks
(notes).

see also §§

8, 13,

23, 30,

46

Hilgenfeld supposes that the words were taken from the Assumption of Moses. This is not impossible but the independent reason which he
;

He is declared God's own heart. Yet he speaks of himself as overwhelmed with sin, as steeped in impurity, and prays that he may be cleansed by God's Spirit'.
example of humility.

man

after

10.
i.

7rp6sbi>]

7,

and

see
21

Comp. Rom. x. 21, Heb. Winer § xlix. p. 424.

Evpov
lxxxix.
p.ov,

k.t.X.]

A combination
dyico p.ov
xiii.

of Ps.

gives for the belief

that

Clement

zvpov

AauetS tov dovXov

was acquainted with that apocryphal work is unsatisfactory see the note on the phoenix below, § 25. I have
;

pointed out elsewhere (§ 23) another apocryphal work, from which they

e^piaa avTov, 14 avdpomov Kara with Acts rrjv Kapbiav avrov, or rather xiii. 22 evpov Aavelft tov tov 'leaaai,
e'Aat'a)

iv
I

with

Sam.

iivbpa Kara ttjv Kapb'iav

p.ov

(itself

a

might well have been taken. The metaphor is common with the Stoics see Seneca Troad. 392 sq Ut calidis fumus ab ignibus Vanescit...Sic
:

'

loose quotation from 1 Sam. xiii. 14). In the first passage eXaia> the reading of SA is doubtless correct, the cor-

spiritus effluit', M. Anton, x. 31 Kanvbv Kai to p.t]dev, xii. 33 veKpa. kcu kcmvos; so also Empedo-

hie

quo regimur

responding H ebrew being \GW; though read by B. But Clement appears to have read ikeei as our Greek
eXeei is

MSS

testify.

cles (in Plut. Op.

Mor.
31)

p.

360

c,

quoted

quoting Ps.

cxli.

Similarly in § 56, when 5, he reads eXaioo-

by Gataker on

x.

had

said, <okv-

p.opoi Kcunvoio biK-qv dpOevres dtri-KTav.

(i.e. eXeos) dp,apT(dXcov for eXaiov dp,aptcdXwv. the interchange of ai

On

Kvdpas] Another form of ^rpas-, just as kl0o>v and x LT ^ v are inter-

and

e in this

On

the

other

word see above, 1. p. 121. hand Clem. Alex.

changed.

The proper

Ionic genitive

would be KvBprjs, which is used by Herodes in Stob. Floril. lxxviii. 6 (quoted in Hase and Dindorfs Steph.
Thes.). Clem. Alex. Paed. ii. 1 (p. 165) has KvdptdioLs and for instances of
;

Strom, iv. 17 (p. 611), quoting this passage of his namesake, restores
the correct

word eXala
as

(if

his editors

can be trusted),

naturally, if ing in the Psalms.
12.

he would do accustomed to this read-

Kvdplvos (for xvTplvos) see Lobeck Pathol, p. 209. In the text of Clem. Alex, here \vTpas is read. XVI 1 1. 'Again take David as an

'EXirjo-ov k.t.X.]

The

51st

Psalm

quoted from the LXX almost word for word. The variations are very slight

and unimportant.
5

CLEM.

II.

66
Me, 6

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT
eni

[xvm

Oedc, kata to mcta eAedc coy, kai

kata to ttAhGoc

toon oiKTipMOON coy elAAeiyoN to ano'mhma Moy.

nAeiON

nAyNON Me ATTO THC ANOMIAC MOY, KA*I ATTO THC AMApTIAC Moy KA0ApiCON M€' OTI THN ANOMIAN MOY kr<X> pNOOCKOO, KAI H coi monco HMApamapti'a Moy eNoaniON Moy £ctin Aia ttantoc.
ton, kai to

5

noNHpoN eNoaniON coy enoiHCA* onooc an Aikaio>COy,
KAI

0HC €N TOIC AOTOIC

NIKHCHC €N

TO)

KpiNeC0AI

CC.

lAoy r^p eN anomi'aic cyn€Ah'mc{)9hn, kai cn amapti'aic €KicCHCCN M€ H MHTHp MOy. lAOY T^p AAhi0eiAN HTAnHCAC TA

AAHAA
I

KAI

TA KpfcblA THC
A.

COC^IAC

COy eAHACOCAC MOI.
A.
e7ri

f>AN- IO

£\eos] eXcuocr

i oiKTip/xwu] oiKTetp/xup

ir\elov k.t.K.]

C

omits the rest of the quotation from this point to
2.

itjovdevwaei. (inclusive) at

the end

eVt 7r\eIoi/ k.t.A.]

i.e.

'wash

me
is

again and again'.
'multiply (and)
6.

The Hebrew
me'.

wash

onus

k.t.X.]
iii.

also
6ai,

Rom.
is

4.

This verse is quoted The middle KpLvto-to

prosy or some other taint was purged according to the law see Lev. xiv. 4 sq, Num. xix. 6, 18, and Perowne On the Psalms, ad loc.
;

12.
£eiv

ciKovTieis]

Ho have a cause adjudged,

see Sturz de Dial.

For the word aKourtMac. p. 144.
to translate

plead] a suit.
e.g.
Is.

The
i.

said of one of the parties to 'pleading' of God is a
18, v. 3.

It

was perhaps invented
16.

theHiphilofJW.
evdes]

common image in the Old Testament;
In this passage however the natural rendering of the Hebrew would be Kpiveiv, not Kpivea6ai.

A common
e.g.

form of the
xvii. 6,

neuter in the lxx,
xxi. 25, 2

Judges

Sam.

xix. 6, 18,

etc.

The

masculine
xcii. 14. 19.

evdrjs also

occurs, e.g. Ps.

The future vacrjo-eis is improbable (see Winer § xli. p. 304),
7.

viKrjo-ys]

ryefxoviKO)]

The word occurs

especially with a preceding diKaia>6fjs ; and the MS is of no authority where

A

frequently in the Greek philosophers. The Stoics more especially affected the term, to ijyepiovLKov, or ijyepoviKov

it

a question between h and ei. The lxx text (SB) has vixrio-ys. 8. eKLcro-rjaev] conceived\ not found elsewhere in the LXX. The sense and construction which the word has here seem to be unique. Elsewhere it denotes the fastidious appetite of women at such a time and takes a genitive of the object desired comp.
is
''

without the article, using it to signify the principle of life, the centre of being, the seat of the personality, the element which determines the
character, etc. (see Menage on Diog. Laert. vii. 86 § 159; Schweighauser on Epictet. Diss. i. 20. 11 with the
Cic. de Nat. Deor. Considering the world to be an animated being, they discussed what and where was its The Stoic definition of rjj€ (jLoviicov.

index;
ii.

Mayor on

;

11

§ 29).

Arist.
9.

Pax 497.
to.

adrjXa k.t.A.]

The LXX

trans-

lators

have missed the sense of the
wo-co'7r&)]

original here.
11.

qyeixovLKov

in

the

human

being,

as
in

As one

defiled

by

le-

given

by

Chrysippus,

appears

xvin]
TieTc

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
Me yccobnco,
kai

67
Me, kai

KA8Apic6HCOMAr nAyNeic

ynep

XIOna AeyKAN6hC0MAr AKoyTielc Me ataAAiacin kai eychpocyNHN" ATAAAlACONTAI OCTA T6TAn€IN0C)MeNA. AHOCTpevpON TO

15

npdcconoN coy And toon amaptioon moy, MIAC MOY e2AA€iyON. KApAlAN KA0ApAN
Oedc,
kai

kai

ttacac tac ano-

KTICON

6N

6M0I,

nNeyMA eyOec erKAiNicoN eN to?c erKAToic Moy. mh Anopi'vpHc Me And Toy npocdcuroy coy, kai to ttn€yma to
ATION
AlACIN

COY MH ANTANieAHC

a'tt'

€MOy.

ATTOAOC MOI

THN

A|-<*A-

TOY

COJTHpiOy
I.

COY,

KAI

TTN6YMATI
A.

HfeMONIKO)
7
vucrjcrrjs]

CTHviKT)crei<T

of the chapter; see

p. 128.

irXeTov] irXiov

A.
irXvvteicr

10 aov]

A

A.
I.e.

(with lxx); om. S (with Hebr.), 16 iy/carois] evKarota A.
ttjs

11 TrXvvels]

Diog.

Laert.
to

to

KvpiaTaTov

'spontaneous',
giving'.

and
it

so

'liberal

in

"^vxfjs iv

al cpavTaataL ku\ al oppal yivovrat Kai o6ev 6 Xoyos d^a7re/x7rerat.

M. Antoninus
being
(ii.

divides

the

human
o-aptcia,

gets a secondary meaning 'a prince' or 'a noble', 'generosity' or 'liberality' being con-

Hence

2) into

three parts,

TrvevpaTiov,

sponds to where (iii. 16) aapa,
id. v.
1 1.

qyepoviKov, which correhis triple division elsetyvxq, v °vs
',

nected with persons of this high rank. In this meaning, which is extremely

common,
to

the

lxx

translators

seem

comp.

In Epictetus the use of the very frequent. A full definition of it is given in Sext. Empir. ix. § 102 (p. 414 Bekker) naaai al eVi to.

word

is

peprj rov oXov e^anoaTeXXopevaL dvvdp,€ts cos ano rivos rnjyrjs tov yyepovtkov e^anoaTeXXovTai, with the context.
It
is

have taken it here; and the ideas which heathen philosophy associated with the word rjyepoviKos suggested it as an equivalent. Thus nvevpa rjyca spirit which Plovikov would mean is a principle or source of life.' The
'

Hebrew phrase
to

itself

however seems
'an

signify

nothing more than

identified

by various writers

with the Xoyos or with the vovs or with the irvevpa or with the ^rvxf],

according to their various philosophical systems. In Latin it becomes principatus in Cicero {de Nat. Deor.
'principatum id dico quod Graeci vocant') and principale in Seneca {Ep. 92 § 1, 113 § 23, and elsewhere). So Tertullian de Resurr.
I.e.

open, hearty, free spirit.' But, inasmuch as the Holy Spirit is the fountain-head of all spiritual life, the expressions nvevpa
fjyepoviKov,

'spiritus

principalis',

came soon

to

fjyep.oviK.6v

be used by Christian writers of the Holy Spirit and the passage in the Psalms was so explained, as e.g. by
;

Cam.

15

'principalitassensuumquod
appellatur,' de Anim. 15 in anima gradus vitalis

r\ytp.oviKov

'summus
quod
principale.'

1. vii. § 1 {Op. 593 De la Rue) 'principalem spiritum propterea arbitror nominatum, ut ostenderetur esse quidem

Origen Comm. ad Rom.
-

IV

P-

multos
et

spiritus,

sedinhis principatum
appellatur,

fjytpoviKov

appellant,

id

est

dominationem hunc Spiritum sancet

tum, qui
I'HJ, here transtenere'.
signifies

principalis

The Hebrew word
lated
rjyepoviKov,

'prompt',

connexion indeed might appear to them to be suggested

This

5—2

68
picoN
Me.

THE EPISTLE OF
AiAaIoo
ce.

S.

CLEMENT
oAoyc
coy,
kai

[xviii

anomoyc tac

AceBe?c

enicTpevpoYciN eni

THC COOTHplAC MOY-

6 Oedc pycAi Me el aimatoon, 6 Oedc, ArAAAlACeTAI H rAOOCCA MOY THN AlKAIO-

CYNHN

Kyp 16, moy ANArreAei thn

COY-

TO

CTOMA MOY
coy'

ANOl'leiC,

KAI

TA

)(eiAH
5

aTngcin

oti

ei

hGcAhcac Oycian,
6YCIA
TO)

eAOOKA AN' OAOKAYTOOMATA

of»<

CYAOKHCeiC.
CYN

06O)
T€-

HNEYMA CYNT6TpiMM6NON' KApAlAN TAneiNCOMeNHN d Oedc oyk elOYGeNcocei.

TCTp IMM6 N H N

KAI

XIX.

ToOV TOffOVTCOV OVV KCU TOLOVTCOV

OVTWS

fX€-

jULctpTvprmievcov
Ttjs

to Tct7reivo(ppovovv
ov
jjlovov
r\jJLas

kcci
kcci

to

i)7roSees

cia 10

viraKoris
4 sq to

dWa

tccs

irpo

r)}xwv

<TT6/j.a...Ta

x e ^vl A; the words

are transposed in S with the

LXX and

Hebrew. om. C; kcu

ovtus] A; 9 Toaovrup, toiovtwv] A; transposed in CS. 10 Taireivo(ppovovv~\ Tairetvocppovov A; Taireivbcppov C. oiirws S.
rds irpo
tj/jluv

n

Yei>eds)

d\\d] CS; aAXa<r A. 12 re] C.

7eyeds]

AS;

AC; om.
itself,

S.

13 clvtov]

tovs vpb ijfiuv (omitting AC; rod 6eou S.

by the words of the Psalm
since to nvevpia to ayiov in the preceding verse.
crov

and
2.

o~TY)picrov
alp,a.Ta)v]

here.

occurs So in the

The plural denotes especially 'bloodshed', as in Plat. Legg.
ix. p.

Fragm. Murato?'.

p.

18 (Tregelles),

872

E,

and the instances

col-

where speaking of the four Gospels
this very early writer says that they are in perfect accord with one another

lected in Blomfield's Gloss, to ^Esch. Choeph. 60 see also Test, xii Pair.
:

Sym. 4

els

atfiara
v.

napo^i/vei,

Anon,
^a/pet o

'cum uno ac
clarata sint in
torische
TTvevfxa

principali

Spiritu de-

in Hippol.

Haer.

16

aip.ao~i

omnibus omnia'; on which passage see Hesse Das Mura-

roOSe tov Kocrp-ov Seo-TroTrjs, Tatian. ad Graec. 8. The same is the force also

Fragment
riyepLoviKov

Thus p. 109 sq. furnishes an ad-

of the
alp-ara

Hebrew

plural DVD1, of which here and elsewhere is a ren-

ditional instance of the alliance of the phraseology of Greek philosophy with scriptural ideas, which is a common phenomenon in early Chris-

dering: comp. Exod.- xxii. 1, where, as here, 'bloodshed' is equivalent to
'blood-guiltiness'.

tian literature.
oTT?pio-oi/]

So SB read
others
see

in the

LXX,

but

A and

o-Ttjpitjov.

On
;

these double forms

Ansf. Gr. Spr. § 92 (1. p. on the use of ar^pio-ov, etc., in the

Buttmann and 372)

XIX. 'These bright examples of humility we have before our eyes. But let us look to the fountain-head of all truth let us contemplate the mind of the universal Father and
;

Creator, as manifested in His works,

and see how patience and order and
beneficence prevail throughout creation'.
9.

The

Testament, Winer § xv. p. 101. A in Clement is inconsistent for he has iar-qpi^v § 8, but io-Trjpio-ev § 33, o-Tr)pig<opL€V § 13,
scribe of
;

New

Ta>v ToaovTcov k.t.X.]

An

imita-

tion of

Heb.

xii. 1.

xix]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
eiroirio'ev,

69
tcl

yeveas fieXrlovs

tovs re KaTaSe^a/uLevous

\oyia avTOV
(jL6<yd\(jov

ev (pofia) Kal dXrjdeia.

lloWcov ovv Kal

15

fi.oofj.ev

Kal ev^o^oov /uereiXticpoTe^ 7rpd£ecov, eiravahpdeV* tov e£ dp%i}s 7rapa^eSo/uevov rifjuv Trjs eip/ivrjs

(TK07rov y Kal aTevicrcojuev
crv(j.7ravTOs koo~/uiov, kcu

eh tov iraTepa
tclTs
7779

kclI ktlctty\v

tov

fjLeya\o7rpe7reo-i Kal virepeip/jvris

(iaWovo-ais avTov Scopeals
KoWridco/ULev'
20 juev toTs
fiovAti/ua'
l^cojuev

evepyeorlats

Te

bfJLfJLao-iv

avTov KctTa Sidvoiav Kal e/x/3Ae\/^Trjs yfrv^fjs eh to \xaKp6Qv\jLOv avTov
dopytjTOs virdpyei irpos 7rdo~av

vorjo-to/uev 7T<jos

Tt]V KTICTIV
14 wpa^euv]

avTov.
;

C

TTpa^aiav

A; add.

toijtuv, ddeXcpoi ayair-qrol S.
5,
et

17 Koa/ixov]

AC;

hujus mundi S; see above, § dcofiev] AC; consideremus (vorjaw/iev)

and below, adhaereamus
1.

ii.

§

19.
is

19 koXXtj-

S, but this

probably one

of the periphrases which abound in S (see
10.

p. 136).

rcnreivocfrpovovv]

See the note on

connexion with deopai indigeo,
dnoSeTJs, evderjs, KaraSer/y, rather

like

raneivocjypovcov

above, §17; and comp.
i

than

§ 38 below.

with deos timor, like
12. KaTa^e^a/jLevovs]

dderjs, irepLder^s.

to vnodees] submissiveness\ i subordinatio?i\ This seems to be the

Davies proposes

meaning of the word, which

is

very

rare in the positive, though common in the comparative vnobteo-Tepos see
;

The emendation would have been more probable if the preposition had been different, diadegoKaTcidegopevovs.
fjievovs

and not

KaTadc^ofxivovs.

Epiphan. Haer.
Kal
JXaTTco/jLevov,

lxxvii. 14 to i>7ro8ees

14.
i.e.

fxeTeiXrjCpoTes] ''participated

in\

a passage pointed out to me by Bensly. Accordingly in the Syriac it is rendered diminutio
et

profited

by as examples.

The

demissio.

Laurent

mesius
vertit
;

male

says 'Colosubstantivo siibjectio
h.
1.

achievements of the saints of old are the heritage of the later Church. 15. tlprjvrjs o-kottov] ''the mark) the

goa^ ofpeace\

collaudatur enim

volun-

sanctorum hominum egestas', comparing Luke x. 4, and Harnack But accepts this rendering egestas
taria
'
'.

God Himself is the great exemplar of peaceful working, and so the final goal of all imitation. 21. dopyrjTos] cahn \ Ign. Philad. 1, Polyc. Phil. 12 (note). Aristotle
i

this sense is not well suited to the

context, besides being unsupported ; nor indeed is it easy to see how

could have this meaning, which belongs rather to evderjs. It might possibly mean 'fearfulness', a sense assigned to it by Photius, Suidas, and Hesychius, who explain it v7r6(poS3os. But usage suggests its
inroberis

attaches a bad sense to the word, as implying a want of sensibility, Eth. Nic. ii. 7. Others however distinguished dopyrjaia from dvatadrjo-ia (see Aul. Gell. i. 27) and with the Stoics
;

it

was naturally a favourite word,

e.g.

Epict. Diss. iii. 20. 9 to dveicTiKov, to dopyrjTov, to npqov, iii. 18. 6 evcrTadcos,
aldrjuovos, dopyrJToos,

M. Anton.

1.

1

7o

THE EPISTLE OF
XX.
01
ovpavol
ty\

S.

CLEMENT

[xx

StOLKrja'eL

ev

elprjvri

viroTacrcrovTai avTw'

avTOv aaXevofdevoi re Kai vv^ tov tijuiepa
dXXr)Xois

TeTay/ueuov

V7T ccutov Spo/uov Ziavvovaiv, fJL^ev
riXios

efJLTro^i^ovra.

re Kai

Kara

Ty\v

(HiaTayrjv
m

a"eXf]vr] dorTepcov re X°P 0L avTOv ev ojjlovolcl $ix a Traarris

5

avrots 7rapeK/3d(recos e^eXlo crovo~iv tous e7riTeTay/uLevovs
opiarfJiovs.
i

yfj

toTs Kvocpopovcra kcltcc to OeX^/ua avTOv
diKcuwaei
;

cHoi/oycrei]

AC;

darepiav re X°P° L ]
/3dcrea;s]
.

AC

S apparently. but S translates as if
irapafiaaews C.

4 re

/ecu]

AS;

Kai (om. re)

C

ape/c/Sacrewcr

A;

6 irapeKcttrrepe's In S it is rendered in omni egressu cursus
re Kai xopoi.

to KaXorjdes Kai aopyrjrov.

does not occur Testament.

in the

The word LXX or New

of avTov.

New

But such passages in the Testament as Matt. xxiv. 29,

XX.

'All

creation

peace and harmony. succeed each other. The heavenly bodies roll in their proper orbits. The earth brings forth in due season. The ocean keeps within its appointed bounds. The seasons, the
winds, the fountains, accomplish their work peacefully and minister to our wants. Even the dumb animals observe the same law. Thus God has by this universal reign of order manifested

moves on in Night and day

Heb. xii. 26, 27, are not sufficient to justify the alteration ; for some ex-

Not pression of motion is wanted. 1 regulated change fixity, rest,' but is the idea of this and the following
'
'

sentences.

For

this

reason

I

have

retained aaXevopevoi. In the passage of Chrysostom quoted by Young in

defence

of his
(V. p.

Cxlviii. § 2

reading, in Psalm. 491) ovhev (rvvexvOr)
eW/cAv-

tcov ovtcov' ov dokaTTCL tt)v yfjv
crev,

ovx tfXios rode to opcopevov KareKavaev, ovk ovpavbs 7rapeaaXev0r) k.t.X.,
this father

His beneficence
to

to

all,

but

especially
1.

us

who have sought
If the

would seem purposely to have chosen the compound napaaa-

His mercy through Christ Jesus'.
reading be correct, this word must refer to the
o-aXcvofxevoi]

Xeveadai to denote disorderly motion. The same idea as here is expressed in
i. 6 ao-Tpcov %opeiav ev rco kvkXco tov ovpavov ois r) ytvopevr/v

Theoph. ad Autol.

motion of the heavenly bodies, apparently uneven but yet recurrent and orderly; and this reference seems to be justified by egeXiao-ovaLv below. SaAeiW&u is indeed frequently used in the Old Testament to express terror and confusion, in speaking of
the earth, the hills, etc. but never of the heavens. So too in the Sibylline On the Oracles, iii. 675, 714, 751.
;

7roXv7roLK.iXos o~o(pia tov

Qeov naaiv

181a

OVOpLClTa K€KXrjK€V, COITip. lb. U. \^.

iv opovola] Naturally a frequent 5. phrase in Clement; §§ 9, 11, 34, 49, 50, comp. §§21, 30, 60, 61, 63, where

likewise the
6.

word

opovoia occurs.

napeKfido-eas]

The

other reading

napajSao-ecos destroys the sense.

For

the

whole
vii.

other hand
o-a.Xev6p.evoL
;

Young would read
correction,

p,r)

Const,

passage comp. Apost. 34 (pcoaTr]pes...a.7rapdj3aTOV
doXixbv Kai

and Davies, improving

aco^ovTes

tov

kot

ovdev

upon

suggests ov craXevopevoi, repeating the last letters

this

TrapdXXdaaovTes tt}s afjs 7rpocrTayr)s. In the immediate neighbourhood is the

xx]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
re
kcci

71
drjpcriv

idiots KaipoTs Tt\v 7rav7r\r]6ri dvdpu)7rois

kcu
fJLt]

iracriv toTs ovctlv err

a\)TY\v (^toois

dvctTeWei
tl

Tpo(pr]v,

10

Si^ocrTaTOVG'a vcov vtt avrov.

juri^e

dWotovcd

tvov

SeSoyiuaTLG'iuekcli

d/3v(T(r(vv

re dve^L^vLaaTa

vepri-

pu>v dv€K$itjyr]Ta Kpi/uara toIs ccvtoTs crvveyeTai TrpocrTay/uLacrLV.

to kvtos

Trjs direipov
TrapeKfidcreios,

daXa&O'ris kcltcc ty\v
and where probably the reading

ipsorum, which probably represents

was

3lcl

for Si'xaavrrjs

8 iravTr\7)drf\
ilia S.

A;

irafXTrXrid-q

C

9

ctt''

avrrju]

A;

e7r'

C; in

same quotation from Job xxxviii.
here in Clement.
if-ikio-aovo-iv]

1 1

as

We may
out the case we

would suggest

either adopt this, or (as I in preference) strike

Comp.

Plut.

Mor.

word

altogether.
fall

In either

p.

368

A

rocravrais fjpepcus top avrrjs

may

back upon the con-

kvkKov igeXlacrei (of the moon), Heliod. ySth. V. I4ot Se Trepl tov vop,ia kvkXovs
dyepcoxovs e^eXlrTovres (both passages given in Hase and Dindorf's Steph.
Thes.).

jecture of Lipsius (p. 155, note) that KpifxaTa was written down by some

thoughtless scribe from
dve^epevurjTa
" €^ix VLao TOL aL
to,

Thus the word continues the
of

Rom. xi. 33 KplpaTa avrov kcu av°^ ot avTov (he gives the

metaphor x°P°h tangled mazes of the dance, as
Eur. Troad.
3.

describing the
e.g.

The

6pio~uo\ therefore

are their defined orbits.
9.

eV

avrrjv]

For the accusative
e.g.

so used see

Winer § xlix. p. 426. dvareWei] Here transitive, as
iii.

ix. 33, which is repeated by Jacobson, and still further corrupted ix. 23 by Hilgenfeld). Indeed the same word seems still to be running in the head of the scribe of A when below he writes Kpvp,ara for Kvp.aTa. The

reference

veprepa are the 'subterranean regions

'

Gen.

18,

Is.

xlv. 8,

Matt.

v.

45

;

comp.
Strom,
rpo(pas

Epiphanes
iii.

in

Clem.
77X10?

Alex.
<oivas

2,

p.

512,

regarded physically. KpLfiaTa is the reading of all our authorities. It must have been read moreover by
the writer of the later books of the
vii. 35 dvegattention has been called also to the connexion of

Yet

dvareWei (MSS dvareXkeiv), which closely resembles our Clement's language here.
£a>oi$
airao-Lv

Apostolic Constitutions,
iXviao-Tos Kpifxao-iu.

My

10.

rcov

dedoyparicrpevcov
p,rj

Comp.
12.
i.e.

§

27 ovdev

k.t. X.] trapeKOrj rcov de-

words
13.

in Ps. xxxvi (xxxv).

5 to. KpipLard

8oyp,a.Tio-p,eva>v vii

avrov.

crov [a$<xei] a(3vo~oros

Kpi/xara] 'statutes,

ordinances]
are
16

noWr/. to Kvro^y the hollow, the basin]
lxiv.

the

laws
eVt

by which they
e.g.

as Ps.
is

governed, as
earrjarau

2 Chron. xxx.
crrdo-LV

Tfjs daXdo-crrjs.

7 6 avvTapdo-crcov to kvtos In Dan. iv. 8 to kvtos

rrjv
('

avroiv

Kara

to Kptfia

avTcov

pointed

'),

as they were ap2 Chron. iv. 7 ras Xvx^ias

opposed to to v\f^os. Comp. also Theoph. ad Autol. i. 7 6 avvrapdaacov to kvtos ttjs daXdaarjs, and Apost.
Const,
viii.

Kara to Kpip.a avrav (comp. ver. 20).

12 6 o~vo~Trjo-dfievos a-

very awkward, and several emendations have been suggested, of which Kklp.aTa is the best.

But

KpLpaTo. is

(3vo~crov

kcu

ueya kvtos

avTrj

7re-

pi6eis...irr)ya'LS devdoLS uedvo~as... €ViaVT(OV KVk\01S... V€(f)a>V OfJL^pOTOKCOV

72

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT

[xx

eic tac cyNAroorAc ov irapSrjjuuovpyiav clutov cvcrTadeu

eK/3alvei

tcl

TrepiTedeifjieva

avTrj

icXeldpa,
eiirev

dWa

Kctdcos

^leTapev
i

auTtj,

ovtcos
A.

7roiei.

yap'
oirrw

"Eooc

obAe

dijfiiovpytav] b-qpiovpyeiav
avi>TpiPrj<reT(u]

3 oi/rws]
crvvTpifiriaovTai

A;

C

4 /ctfwara]

Kpvpara A.
diadpopals
£<aa>v
els

A;

C.

5 d*^/). a7rfy.]

A;

direp.

Kapncov

yovas <a\

(jra.6p.ov dicmveovroov k.t.X., in which
crvaraa-iv,

the resemblances
dental.
I.

dvepcov passage cannot be acci-

in our MSS, but

though cmkpavTos is read here not only by Clem. Alex. p. 693 and Dionys. Alex, in Euseb. H. E. vii. 21, or their transcribers, and may possibly be correct. Yet as I could
not find any better instances of this use than Eur. Med. 212, /Esch. Prom. 159 (where Blomf. suggests dnipaTos), and in both passages the meaning

els
i.

Gen.
kixtu)

9 KCU

ras (rvvaycoyas] From LXX crvvq-^drj to vdcop to V7TO-

tov

ovpavov

els

tcis

avvaycoyas
It

avTcov,

wanting in the Hebrew.

refers to the great bodies of water,

the Mediterranean, the Caspian, the

Red

Sea,

etc.
k. t. X.]

may be questioned, I have preferred reading direparos as quoted by Origen Select, in Ezech. viii. 3.
The proper meaning
'

TrapeK$aivei xxxviii. IO, II

From
de
avrf]

Job
opia

of aTtepavros,
it is

edeprjv

boundless,' appears from Clem. Horn.

TrepiOels KkelOpa kcu

nvXa?,

elrra 8e civtt}

xvi. 17, xvii. 9, 10,

where

found in

Me'xpt tovtov eXevcrrj kcu 01;^ vne p(3r)0~r], aXX' ev aeavrrj avvTpifirjo-eTai crov to.

close alliance with direipos. See also Clem. Alex. Fragm. p. 1020. On the

KvpaTa comp. also Ps.
:

civ. 9, Jer. v. 22.

other

hand

for dneparos
iv.

comp.

e.g.

This passage is directly quoted by Clem. Alex. Strom. v. 12 (p. 693), by Origen de Prific. ii. 6 (1. p. 82, 83), Select. i?i Ezech.
4.

wKeavos

k.t.X.]

13 (p. iyg)pel T<ii Oepei kcu Tea fteipcovi ttoXvs kol cmepahere are divided The lines in tos.

Macar. Mzgn.Apocr.

A

<\nepAN|T0C
assist

;

and

this division

would

(in. p. 422), Efihes. ii. 2 (vn. p.

viii.

by Jerome ad It must 571). also have suggested the words of Irenaeus Haer. ii. 28. 2 'Quid autem
3
et recessu,

the

insertion

of the n.

An

earlier scribe

would write Anep^Toc
1596 ed. Migne)

for Anep&iTOC.

Psal. 138

(p.

possumus exponere de oceani accessu

Kal coKeavbs

See Didymus Expos. el yap airepavros, aXX ovv Kai ol
deanorov
rrpos

quum

constet esse certain

peT

avTov Koapoi toxs tov

causam

?

quidve de his quae ultra

diaTayais buBvvovrai

navTayap Ta

sunt enuntiare, qualia sint?' On the other hand the expression 6 noXvs

eum

avTovyeyevrjpeva OTVoi\oTroia?\ ttot eo~TLV Tayals ttjs eavrov irpovoias dioiKovpeva
lOvverai.

kcu cnrepavTos dvOpcoirots coKeavbs

by Dionys. Alex,
vii.

21 may be through Clement or Photius see below, p.
'

used Euseb. H. E. derived indirectly
in

Origen.
86.

On

This language may possibly have been derived from Origen, and not directly from Clement. Anyhow the recognition of both the various
readings, Tayals, diaTayais, of notice.
ol is

worthy

impassable] as the context shows, and as it is rendered in the translation of Origen de Princ. ii. 3 (' intransmeabilis The com'). mon form in this sense is direparos
5.

c\neparos\

per ovtov Koapoi

k.t.X.]

Clement

may possibly be referring to some known but hardly accessible land,
lying without the pillars of Hercules

;

xx]
HfeiC,
5

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
KAI

73
(£k€CIVOS

TA KYMATA COY 6N

COI

C

YN Tp BhCGTAI.
I

dvdptoTTOis direpaTOS Kal ol /uet ccvtov koct/uol t«?5 aurals

Tayciis tou ie&TTOTOV hievdvvovrai.
avdp. C.
aireparos] Orig See the lower note.
;

Kaipoi eaptvol Kal
;

intransmeabilis S

diripavros

AC

Didym.

6 raycus]

AC;

Staraycus Origen.

Clem, Dionys, See below.

and
IV.

in foreign seas
'

:

as Ceylon (Plin.

H. vi. 22 Taprobanen alteram orbem terrarum esse diu existimatum est,Antichthonumappellatione'),
or Britain (Joseph. B. J. ii. 16. 4 vnep axeavov erepav e^rjrrjcrav oiKovpivrjv kcli

amined in the 1st volume of A. von Humboldt's Exam. Crit.de la Geogr. du Nouveau Continent see also other works mentioned in Prescott's Ferdi:

nand and

Isabella
is

II.

p.

102.

This

p^XP L r ^ v avMTToprjTcov irporcpov Bperravwv birjveyKav to. o-rrXa). But more

interpretation the fact that

quite consistent with
33)

Clement below

speaks of the ocean as to nepiexov
Tr)v yr)v vdcop.

known land

probably he contemplated some unin the far west beyond

the ocean, like the fabled Atlantis of Plato or the real America of modern

At all events this passage was seemingly so taken by Irenasus and
tinctly explained thus

From Aristotle onwards discovery. {de Caelo ii. 14, p. 298, Meteor, ii. 5, p. 362), and even earlier, theories had
from time to time been broached, which contemplated the possibility
of reaching the Indies by crossing the western ocean, or maintained the existence of islands or continents towards the setting sun. The Cartha-

Clement of Alexandria, and it is disby Origen (Sel.
viii.

in Ezech.

3 sq, de Pri?tc. ii. 6) at great length. All these fathers acquiesce in the exist-

who

discusses

it

ence of these
later date

'

other worlds.'
this opinion

At a

however

came

ginians had even brought back a report of such a desert island in the
Atlantic,
[Aristot.]
§

be regarded with suspicion by Christian theologians. Tertullian, de Pall. 2, Hermog. 25, was the first to condemn it. The idea of the
to

which they had Mirab. Ausc. § 84
844,

visited,
p. 836,

Antipodes Div. Inst.

is
iii.

scouted by Lactantius 24, with other fathers

136

p.

Diod.

v.

19,
I.

20; see
p.

of the fourth century and later (comp. August, de Civ. Ueixvi. 9) and in the
;

Humboldt Exam.

Crit.

In the generations before and the time of Clement such speculations

130. after

reign of Justinian (V.a.d. 535) the speculations of Cosmas Indicopleustes
Coll. Nov. Pair. II. p. 113 sq), who describes the earth as a plain surface and a parallelogram

(Montfaucon

were not uncommon.
'

the
ii.

prophecy in Venient annis saecula seris Quibus oceanus vincula rerum Laxet
375

Of these Seneca's Medea

in

form (see Humboldt

I.e.

I.

p. 41

et

ingens pateat tellus

etc.,'

is

the

stereotyped for many centuries the belief of Christian writers on this
sq),

most famous, because so much stress was laid on it by Columbus and his
fellow discoverers
:

subject.

It

was made a special charge

but

the

state-

ments in Strabo i. 4 (p. 65), Plut. Mor. p. 941, are much more remarkable.

against Virgilius, the Irish geometrician, bishop of Salzburg (f a.d. see Stokes Ireland and the 784)
;

Celtic Chtirch p.
'

224
52
-

sq.

opinions of ancient writers on this subject are collected and ex-

The

6.

Tayais]

directions] as
i.

Hermes

in Stob. Eel.

iTronrr^p to'lvvv

74
Bepivoi
Kctl

THE EPISTLE OF
jUL6T07ra)pivoi
kclI

S.

CLEMENT

[xx

^ei/uepLVOi ev elptjvri /uera-

7rapaStS6a(TLj/

dWqXois.

dve/ucov

CTadjULOi

kcltcc

tov

XeiTOvpyiav ccvtcov dirpocrKOTroos eirireXovariv devaoi re 7rr)yal Trpos diroXavcriv icai vyeiav tovs Trpos §r}/uuovp<yr}6e'i(rca Si^a eAAei^ews irapeyovTai
lSlov Kaipov ty\v
failS dv6p(J07TOLS /ULCt^OVS.
TCL

5

T6 iXa^LCTTa TWV
Kai
eipr\vr\

^OOCOV

ras

crvveXevcreis
Tclvtcc

clvtwv

ev

ojuovolol

ttoiovvtcli,

TrdvTa 6 fxeyas hriiuiovpyos Kai SecnroTris toov dirdvTcov ev elpr]vrj Kai o/uovoia 7rpo(reTa^ev eivai, evepye1

/jLeTOTTupiPoi] ixedoirwpivoi

A.

/xerairapadidoaaiv] A,

and so app. S

;

fieraif

didoaatv C.
it

i

dvefxwv]

A;

add. re CS.
3 ttjv]

S translates ventique locorum as

had read

dvefxoi re arad/Awv.

AS

;

Kai ttjv

C

\eiTovpylav~\

Xeirovpyeiav A.
S.

4 divaot]

A;

devvaoi C.
5 7rpos

dirokavcriv]
7rpos fatjv

AC;

add. re

vyeiav]
ecrrai

A;

vyieiav C.

f0777s] A;

C.

S translates

Tciyfjs

rwv o\cov o^vbepKrjs Bebs

illustration of Clement's

meaning

is v.

'ASpao-reta,

with other passages quoted

the noble passage in

Lucretius

by Hase
Set.

in Steph. Thes. s. v. Origen in Ezech. 1. c, and apparently alsodePrinc. I.e. (for the Latin is dis-

737
3.

sq.

dTTpoaKonois]
rrjv

So

8ie7reiv

vno

crov

again § 61 dedopevrjv avTols

positionibns\

has

diaTayals,
;

which

rjyepoviav aTvpoaKoTrais.

For the

cor-

but he would editors adopt naturally substitute a common for

some

an unusual word, and his quotation throughout is somewhat loose.
'

dirpoo-KOTTos, responding adjective which seems to have been a specially Pauline word (Acts xxiv. 16,

as well as

1

Cor.
I.e.

x.

32, Phil.

i.

10)

1.

neTcnrapabLdoacriv]
7 ;

give

way

i?i

see Philippians
4.

succession

again a rare word, of

vyeiav]
:

A common

which a few instances are collected in Hase and Dindorf's Steph. Thes. From Job 2. dvepcov crraOpioX]
xxviii.

writers

see

form Lobeck Paral.

in late
p.

28

(with the references), Phryn. p. 493, It is so written in Pathol, p. 234.

25 enoirjaev Se
fxirpa,

dvijx<x>v
it

tjTaOpbv

Kai
'

vftaTCDv

where

means

several inscriptions, and so in Orph. Hymn, lxxxiv. 8

scanned
(p.

350,
7777-10-

weight/

as

the

original

Clement

however

may

shows. have mis;

Herm.)
Xeipov

c\(3ov

eTTnrveiov<ra

Kai

vyeiav

(unnecessarily altered

for he understood the meaning seems to use the word in a different
' sense, the fixed order'' or as the context stations
7

'

the fixed
requires.

by Porson, Eur. Orest. 229, into 7771-10X^tp' vyieiav), and elsewhere. Editors therefore should not have substituted
vyieiav.
5.

Compare
£0)779

rapela § 50.
fxa£ovs]

The common Greek

this sense is o-Taaeis, 75. 8 Kara rivas dvepiov araaeis, ix. 5. eVix^ptoi tcis roiv dvepcov (Trace is

expression in e.g. Polyb. i.

23

KaXXto-ra yivwaKovcri

:

see
48. 2.

Schweig-

hauser on Polyb.

i.

A

good

The metaphor was perhaps suggested by Jer. xviii. 14 (LXX) pr) eKkei\j/ovaiv otto nerpas paaroi, which however departs from the existing reading of the Heon tnc s e °f brew. For ?rpos C°»V S
rovs npbs
'
)

^

xxi]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
tjjUlds

75

IO TCOV TCt 7TCtVTa y V7r6peK7r€pKT(TC0S $€

TOfS

7T|0OO"7re-

OLKTip/uoh avTOv hia tov Kvpiov y\\au>v (peuyoTas '\y\(TOV XpKTTOv, to r\ So^a kcli r\ juieyaAcoaruvri ek tovs
toTs
alcovas tcov aicovcov.
d/uLrjv.

iS

ctl

'Opare, dycurriToi, /urj al evepyecrica avrov 7ro\\ai yevcovTcu ek Kpl/ua iraariv ij/uuv, edv iutj d^icos
KCtl

XXL

CLVTOV 7TO\lT€v6fJL€VOl TCt KCtXtZ

€Vap6CTTa eVCOTTLOV

CtV-

tov

7roLcd/ui6u

fjied'

dfJLOvoias.
[xa^ovs altogether.
tt

Aeyei yap

ttov
AC;

IT n

gym a

ea quae

ad vitam, omitting
S.

if <rv\\7]\J/eLs)

10

fiots] OLKTeip/AOLcr

A.
eis

7 aweXevaeis] poa it e <p evy or as] AS ; irpocrcpevyovTas C. 12 teal i] p.ey a\o)cr vvrf] AC; om. S.

auxilia (as

n
15

olnrip-

els Kpi/na
;

ird<TLU 7]puv]

A;

Kpl/xara avv nqplv
I.

C (eiCKpiM&T&CyN
16 avrov
pri.]

for

GICKpiM&TT&CIN)
S.

in judicium nobis S; see
c

p.

143.

AC; om.

life] xxvii.

conducive

to life]

comp. Acts

our curse unless
strive to please our most secret

we seek peace and
Him.

34 Trpbs rijs vperepas crcoTTjplas, Cle?n. Horn. viii. 14 irphs Koapov kcu

He

sees

all

thoughts.

Let us

Tepyjfecds,

and see Winer
is

§ xlvii. p. 391.

This sense of npos in classical Greek.
7.
'

more common
Jer. viii. 7

men

therefore offend foolish and arrogant rather than God. Let us honour
;

heaven knoweth his appointed times and the turtle and the crane and the swallow ob;

The

avveXtvo-eis] stork in the

Comp.

Christ let us respect our rulers, and revere old age let us instruct our
;

serve the time of their

coming

',

etc.

wives in purity and gentleness, and our children in humility and the fear of God. His breath is in us, and His pleasure can withdraw it in a mo-

Or

it

may

refer to their pairing at

ment
15.

5
.

the proper season of the year.

Comp.

dittos

TvokiTev6pevoi\

The

ex-

Ptolem. Geogr.
Thes.).
8.

i.

9 (quoted in Steph.

pression occurs in Phil. i. 27. Clement's language here is echoed by

drjpiovpyos]

Only once

in the

Polycarp Phil.
16.

5.

New
lxx

Testament, Heb. xi. 10: again only in 2 Mace. iv.

in the
1

evapeara evecmov] Heb.
Ps. cxiv. 9.

xiii.

21

;

(and

comp.
17.

there not of the Creator). On the Christian use of this Platonic phrase
see Jahn's Methodius
10.
7rpocr4>€vyeii>]
II.

Xeyei yap K.r.A.]
iv.

Clem. Alex.

Strom,

pp.

1

1,

39, 91.

mainder

17 (p. 611 sq) cites the reof this section and the whole

Altogether a late
:

and somewhat rare word see
xxix. 3 (Sym.).
It

1

Sam.

of the next, continuously after §§ 17, 18 (see the note §17). For the most part he

the

lxx
77

or

New

does not occur in Testament.
rj

12.

dotja kcu

/xey.]

So again

§ 64.

quotes in the same loose way, abridging and interpolating as before but here and there, as in the long passage
;

In the doxology Jude 25 also the two words occur together; comp. Ecclus.
xliv. 2.

rcis

yvvalKas

ijpu>v ...dveXel

keeps

fairly close to the

XXI.

1

His blessings

will turn to

original and may thority for the readings.

avrrjv, he words of his be used as an au-

76
Kypi'oy
7T(jos

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT
'

[xxi

Iccofxev Ayxnoc epeyiMooN ta tami€?a thc r^cTpoc. iyyvs icrTiv, Kal otl ovSev XeKrjdeu avrov toov

evvoioov r\[xwv ovSe tcov SiaXoyLcr/uicou
kcliov
fJLctTOs

wv

iroiov\xe.Qa,

01-

ovv ecriv

]iy\

\nroTaKT6iv

v\

[xas

diro

tov

6e\t]5

avrov'

juaWov

dv6pu)7roi$ a<ppO(ri Kal dvorirois

teal

67raipofJL€vois

Kal eyKav^cofdevoL^ ev
rj

\6yov avTudv

irpocrKO^fitiixev

tcg

dXa^oveia tov tov Kvpiov Qew.
iSodr],
Clem.

'Irjaovv [XpurTOp], ov
i
~\

to

al/ua

vwep

rifjujov

ivTpa2
i<rTiv~\

AC;
fxevoi.

X6x vos C Clem 6n; Xvxvov A. add. nobis S. otl] AC; om.
A.

rafxiela]
(?)

AC;

Ta.fj.ela

retv C.

4 XnroTtiKTeiv] A ; XenroTaK8e S. 6 iyKavxvu&ois] ejKavxu5 p.aXXov] AC; add. 10 ijfMuv] 8 XpHTTov] A; om. CS. dXa^oveia] aXa^ovca A.
S.
veovs] vcuova

A; om. CS.

A.

11 iraideiav] iraidiav

A.

tov

(po(Bov]

xx. 27,

Uvevpa Kvpiov k.t.X.] From Prov. which runs in the LXX <pa>s
nvor) av6 peon gov os epevva iipavva)

2.

eyyvs

eo-Tiv]

As below
18, cxix.

§

27

;

comp. Ps. xxxiv.
18, Ign.

151, cxlv.

Kvpiov
Tupelo,

Ephes. 15 ra
io~Tiv
3.

KpvTTTa. r)p.oov ey-

adds rj (japieia) Koikias. Xi>x vos after avOpwirav, but this must
originally have been a gloss suggesting an alternative reading for (poos, as

A

yvs avTw
Vis.
ii.

(with the note), Herm. There is no allusion here

to the nearness of the advent, as in Phil. iv. 5 (see the note there).

Xvxvos

is
;

Theod.

actually read by Aq. Sym. see a similar instance of cor-

ovhev XeXrjdev k.t.X.]
is

This passage copied by Polycarp Phil. 4 <a\
avTov
ovbev
ovTe
Xoyio~poov

rection in this

MS noted above on
vi.

§ 17.

XeXrjdev

Comp.

also Prov.

23 Xvxvos evToXr)

vopov kol (pas. from which passage

''inward questionings] see the note on Phil,
ovTe evvomv.
$iaXoyio~p,oi,
ii.

On

perhaps Xvxvos came to be interpolated here. Hilgenfeld prints Xeyei yap
ttov TTvevpa

14.
4.

XiTTOTaKTelv]

So

avTOfjioXelv

be-

Kvpiov Avxvos epevvcov k.t.X. and finds fault with Clem. Alex, for making the words nvevpa Kvpiov part
of the quotation (Xeyei yap nov
r)

Ignatius has the same metaphor but uses the Latin word, Polyc. 6 pijTis vpoov 8eaepTcop evpeOfj
low, § 28.
:

ypa<firj

see the note there.

ILvevpa Kvpiov k.t.X.)

but they seem to be wanted to complete the sentence. Our Clement in fact quotes loosely, transposing words so as to give a somewhat different sense. See below, Is. lx. 17 quoted in § 42. For the exact words Xe'yet yap nov see §§ 1 5, 26, and
;

On

the authority of our older

MS

I

for other instances of Xe'yet (or $770-1)

have preferred the form XnroTaKrelv. There is poetical authority for the see simple vowel in Xltvoto^lov Meineke Fragm. Com. II. p. 12 14, in. p. 71, with the notes. So too in analogous words, wherever they occur in verse, the form in 1 is found e.g.
;
:

with no nominative expressed, §§ 8, 10, 16, 29, 30, 46. On the spelling of
Tapiela (ra/^eta)
scriber)
is

Xnravyrjs,

Xnrovavs,
differed

XnrovavTrjs,

Xi-

ttottvoos, Xnroo-apKrjs, XtTTo^i^eljA

The
;

Clement
:

(or his tran-

grammarians

on

this point

capricious

see § 50 (note).

see Chceroboscus in Cramer's

A need.

xxi]
Trcofjiev

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
tovs
Trporjyov/uLevovs
tJ/ulcov
rifJLtov

77
tovs

ai&€<jdu)fJL6V)

10

rrpecfivTepovs
ty\v irai^eiav

Tijuricrcojuei',

tovs veovs

TraL^evcriajjiev

iwi

to

tov <po/3ov tov Qeov, ras yvvcuKas y\\x(jov dyadov ^LOpdcocrcojULeda' to dpia<yd7rr]TOv Trjs
ev^ei^da-diocau , to aKepaiov Ttjs irpavTr\TOs

dyvetas

rjdos

avTcov /3ov\t]iua dTro^ei^aTwcav , to eirieiKes Trjs y\co&15 o"f]s avTiov §ia Trjs criyrjs (pavepov 7roir]G'aTcocrav' ty\v
dyaTrr\v clutgov,
AC; om.
ayvelas.
S.
/ur)

Kara
AC

Trpoa-KXicets,

dWa
14

Trdaiv toIs
rjdos ttjs

13 ayvelas] ayviaa A.
evdei^dadojcrav]

Clem 612 has

the order

Clem.

Bryennios wrongly gives the reading of
p.
p/c5').

A

Clem

as ivdei^drwaav {adloc.

and comp.

fiov\y}iia~\

AC; &WQV1

(nal fiovkriixa) S.

15 criyrjs]

CS Clem;

(pwvrjcr

A.

16 irpoaKKicreis]

AS

;

TrpoaKkrjaeis C.

This same itacism occurs several times in C, §§ 47, 50.
11.

Graec. Bibl.
6
ttjs ei

Oxon.

p.

239 \eyei
81a.

cers of the
toIs

Church
§
I.

;

see the note on

'Qpos or 1 Txavra Tvapa to Xeinco

riyovpivoLs

The

following

vea>s,

Bicpdoyyov ypcKperai, olov XenroAei7rora£ia, XenroTci^iov, XenroQ,piyevrjs 81a

tovs 7rpecr(3vT6povs must therefore refer to age, not to office.
10.

aTpcvreiov' o 8e
ypdcpecrdai.

tov
to

1

Xeyei

There seems
ei.

be no

lycarp Phil. 4
Prov. xvi.

tovs veovs k.t.A.] Copied by Poto. TeKva naideveiv ttjv

poetical

and therefore indisputable

naibelav tov (poftov tov Qeov.

Comp.
Kvpiov

authority for the
5-

4

(xv.

33)

<p6(Sos

apa

Ka\ dvorjT.] acppoves kcu dvorjToi
a(pp.

LXX
elcri,

Jer. x. 8

7rait)eia,

found, in

some
MSS.

copies, but not in the principal The former word points to

and Ecclus. i. 27 where the same words are repeated. 15. o-iyrjs] They must be eloquent
their silence, for ywaigi Koapov
r]

by

defective reason, the latter to defective perception.
6.
iv.

criyr) cpepei.

This meaning

is

so obvi-

Comp.
iv

§ 39.

iyKavxcopivoLs k.t.A.] See

James

16

Kavxaade

Tais

aXa^oveiais

ously required, that I had restored 0-4777? in my first edition on the authority of the Alexandrian Clement

vpcov.

alone in place of the senseless
of A.
fers to
TY]V

cpcovfjs

tov Kvpiov k.t.A.] Clem. Alex, (p. 611 sq), as commonly punctuated, quotes the passage tov Kvpiov 'Irjcrovv
7.

It is

now confirmed by

our

two new
1

authorities.

Hilgenfeld re1 Tim. ii. 11. So tOO PolyC.

Cor. xiv. 34 sq,
K.T.A.]

Xeyco...ov to aipa virep i)pa>v rjyiacrOr]'

dyClTTTJU

p,a>v,

evTpancopev ovv tovs nporjyovp-evovs 17kcu aldecrdcopev tovs 7rpecr[3vTepovs '
Tiprjcreopev

irdcrrj

Phil. 4 ay air (ocr as TvdvTas e£ tcrov iv The numerous close iyKpareia.

naideiav tov Qeov.

tovs veovs, 7raidevcrcop.ev tt)v different punctua-

A

tion, kcu al8ecr0a>pev' tovs 7rpeo~(3vTepovs TiprjcrcopeV tovs veovs 7raidevo-a>pev k.t.A.,

this chapter in Polycarp show plainly that he had our epistle before him.
16.
V.

coincidences with

Kara. npocrKkicreis]
p-rjbev

From

1

Tim.

would bring the quotation somewhat
nearer to the original.
9-

21

7roicov

KaTa

TrpocrKkicriv.

The word
i.e.

7rp6aKkia-is

occurs again

tovs 7Tpo-qyovpivovs\

the

offi-

§§ 47, 5o-

7&
(pofiov/uievois

THE EPISTLE OF
tov Qeov d<no>?

S.

CLEMENT
TrapeyeTwvav

[xxi

icrrjv

tcl

tekvcl

^/ulcov ty]S

juadeToocrav,

tl

ev Xpio-Tvo Traiheias fjieraXafjifiaveTCoa'av' irapa Qew \o~yyei) tl
Ta7reivo<ppocrvvri

dydirr] dyvt]

wapa tw
ev

Qeco SvvaTai,

7T(x)<;

6 <po/3os avTOv

KaXos

k<xi

jueyas Kai ciaftov TravTas tous ev

avTw
yap

6ctlws
ecrTLV
eo~Tiv,

5

d.vao~Tp6<pofjLevov<;

Kadapa
ov

hiavola' epevvrjTt]^
y\

evvoLcov Kal evdv/mricrecov'

ttvoy\

avTOv

ev

r\fjuv

Kal otclv de\f] dveXel avTrjv.

XXII.
tls"

TavTa

Se ttclvtcl /3e/3a*Oi

y\

ev

XpLCTw

ttigt-

Kal

yap avTOS

$ia

tov

TrvevfJLaTOS

tov dyiov ovtu)s
c|)6Bon

io

irpocTKaXeTTaL
AiAaIoo

tjjuias*

AeyTe tekna, AKoycATe moy,
tic

zooh'n, ymac. ANepoonoc Kypioy ArAnooN HMepAC iAgin aYaOac; ttaycon thn rAcoccAN coy And kakoy, kai x e| A H T °T m h AaAhcai AoAont gkkAinon And
2
tj/jlwv']

gctin

d

OeAooN

S Clem

;

v/xQv

AC.
A.

p.eTa\ap.j3av^T(i}aav]

AC

;

ixeraKa^iTwaav
avrov]

Clem.

3 laxvec] ta-^ut

4 tu]

tov Kvpiov Clem.

5 nal adofav]

AC

;

et

om. liber ans
;

A

C
et

Clem.
salvans S
;

ACS

;

crdb^uv

(om.

/cat)

Clem.

ociojs]

AC;

deius S.

KapUq Clem.

i<TTiv~]

AC

;

See above, om. Clem.

§§ 2, 14.
7

6

diavoia']
;

AC;

iudv/mrjaeuv]

C

evdv/xrjaaicov

8 dVeXet] A; dvcupei CS. evOvfjLruuL&TOJv Clem. 9 8e] AC; om. S. 10 ourws] AC; but Bryennios reads otfraj without indicating that he is departing 12 rts eariv avdpuiros] C omits from here to pvcrerai. aiiTov 6 from his MS.

A;

Kvpios,

and begins again

eira 7roXXat at p-daTiyes tov d/xapTcoXov k.t.X.

(1.

21).

i.

60-tcos]

This word
for
it

is

best taken

ful

with

7rape^6ro)crai/,

would be an

utter

and God-loving, but threatening destruction to the sinful and
TaOra Se navra
for
it is

unmeaning addition
vols tov Qeov.
6.

to rols <pofiovp.4-

disobedient'.
9.

k.t.X.] i.e.

Faith
re-

epewrjTrjs k.t.X.] As Heb. iv. 12 Kal ivvoiwv napKpiriKos €vdvp.rjoreu>v
8ias.
7.

in Christ secures all these
suits
;

good

He Himself who

thus

ov...avTov]

A

Hebraism,

for

which see Winer
8.

§ xxii. p. 161.

the rare future eX<5 of atpeco see Winer § xv. p. 94 with his references: comp. Exod. xv. 9,
dveXel]

On

appeals to us, not indeed in the flesh, but through the Spirit, where David says 'Come etc' For avTos irpoo-KaXetTat see above, § 16 avTos cprjo-iv, with the note.
Aeire k.t.X.] From LXxPs.xxxiv. The sq almost word for word. differences are unimportant, 18. to p,vr)p.oo~vvov\ See the note on
11.
1 1

2 Thess.

ii.

6.

XXII. 'All these things are assured by faith in Christ. He himself speaks to us by the lips of David, promising all blessings to the peace-

cvicaTakeipLp,a.

above
In

§ 14.

eKeKpa^v]

the existing text of

XXIIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
KAI
TTOIHCOIM

79
KAI

15

KAKOY
ayth'n.

A^GOIST

ZHTHCON

GipHNHN
eni

AlOOiON

o^GaAmoi Kypi'oY en)
AYT03N-

AiKAi'oyc, kai

oota aytoy

Aehcin

npdcoonoN

Ae

Kypi'oy

ttoioyntac

npdc kaka

Toy eloAeepeycAi ek thc to mnhmocynon aytoon.
6

eKeKpAleN
6K
ttacoc>n

AlKAIOC

KAI

KypiOC
6K
TTACOJN

eiCHKOyceN

AYTOy
ttoAAai

KAI
ai

20 toon eAiyecoN

aytoy epycATO ayton.
pyC€TAI

GAi'yeic

Toy

AlKAlOY
TToAAai
eni

KAI
ai

AyTON

MACTirec

Toy

AMApTooAoy, Toyc

Ae

KypiOC* eAni'zoNTAC

€LTa'

KypioN

eAeoc KyKAoocei.

XXIII.
25 7rarr]p
t]7TLio£

'O

oiKTipiuLcov

Kara iravTa Kal euepyeTLKOS
tovs
(pofiov/uievovs

e^a cnrXayyya
t€
kcci

6tti

aurov,

Trpocrrivws rots

%apiTas avTOv
Siavoia.
rjfjicov

(xttoSlSoT toTs
/urj

7rpo(repxo[iei'Ois
fxevy fjLf]he
14

avTto a7r\rj
r\

$10
eirl

S^tn^wvirepfiaX-

Iv^aWeadoo

^p-v^r)

rah

/cat]

A

Clem

LXX

(v. 1.).

X € &v] (with lxx); om. S. 16 6<pda\/j.ol] of Clem (with

A

A

A; add. aov S Clem with the lxx and Hebr) on ocpdaX/xol
;

S (with BS of LXX).
See below.
6\l\peLs...b Kvpt.os]

irpos]

A;

els

Clem with
A.

the lxx.

18 eKenpa^ev k.t.X.]
iroXXal al

20

dXixpecou] dXixpaiuv

avrov] om. Clem.
21 elra]

iterum S, frequently a translation of /cat irdXcv, which possibly we should read here; but see below, § 23, 22 at] ACS; fiev yap Clem. rod a/xapraAoO] AC ; tuiv fiera ravra. Clem ; rbv oe iXiriiovTa CS with the LXX afxapTwXwv Clem LXX. tovs 5e eXTrifovras]

S; om.

A;

def. C.

C

;

et

A

and Hebr.

23 £\eos]
is

C Clem;

e\aioa

A.

24

olKripfjuav] oiKTeip/iwp

A.

Clem. Alex, this
Kvpios
ruption.

read

etceKpatjev de 6

stituted for top i\ni£ovTa.

teal elo-r]itovo~e,

obviously a cor-

XXIIL
that
fear

'God
Him.

is

merciful to

all

20. 7roXXat at dXiyj/eis K.r.X.] This is from Ps. xxxiv (xxxiii). 20, the verse but one following the preceding quotation. The LXX however has the plural roav BiKaicov, avrovs, and SO it is The quoted in 4 Mace, xviii. 15. Hebrew has the singular, and so the Peshito. The words have obviously been omitted in A owing to the recurrence of LToXXat al, and should be

Let us not spurn His gracious gifts. Far be from us

the threats which the Scriptures hurl against the double-minded, the impatient, the sceptical. The Lord will
certainly come,
28.

and come

quickly'.

'indulge in caprices and humours'. The word is generally passive, to be formed as an image', 'to appear', and with a
iVSaXXeV^o)]
'

dative 'to resemble';

see

Ruhnken
it

restored accordingly.
LToXXat al [xdo-riyes k.t.X.] An exact quotation from Ps. xxxii. 10 (lxx), except that tovs iXni^ovras is sub-

Timaeus

s.v.

Here however

is

a

middle signifying 'to form images, to conjure up spectres', and so 'to indulge in idle fancies', like the later

8o
\ovo-ais
rifjiuiv
t]

THE EPISTLE OF
kcli

S.

CLEMENT

[xxiii

ivSo^ois Scopeals ccvtov.

iroppco yevecrdco dd)

Al'vpYXOI,

TaAai'ttoopoi' gicin oi ypacbrj avTrj, 07rov Aeyei' 01 AlCTAZONTGC THN YYX HN 01 A6T0NT6C, TaYTA HKOY"
'

CAM6N
I

KAI

em

TOON

TTATepOON

HMOON, KAI

lAOY

TeTHpAKAMeN
2 avrtj] 5 crvv^e^rjKev]

iroppoj yeveadoo]

AS

;

woppu ye yevecrdw C.

AS

;

ai/TOv C.

3 ttjv ^/vxnv'\

A;

rrj \}/vxy

C

See below, § 33. dub. S.
;

use of cpavTa^eadai. The lexicons do not recognize this use, but see Dion Chrys. Orat. xii. 53 (p. 209 m) irpoTepov pev yap are ovdev
aXXrjv

rived directly or solely from the First Moreover it is there conEpistle.
tinued, ovtcos Ka\ 6 Xaos pov aKaTao~Tao~ias Ka\ 6Xi\fseis eo~x €V eneiTa anoXr]?

aacpes

etSores

aXXos av€7rXaTTopev Idiav, nav to OvrjTov Kara ttjv eavTOv bvvap.iv Kai
(pvcriv

yjreTai to.

dyadd. As this passage does not occur in the Old Testament, it
lost

IvdaXXopevoi

ko\

oveipcoTTOVTes,
vii.

must have been taken from some

Sext.

Emp.
ovk.

adv. Math.

((pavTacriat) ttoKlv
elcriv,

avro 8e
xi.

249 eWi ano vndpxovTOS pev to vndpxov IvddX122
o

apocryphal writing. Some writers indeed have supposed that Clement here, as he certainly does elsewhere
(e.g. §§ 18, 26, 29,

XovTai

k.t.X.,

tov ttXovtov

32, 35, 39, 46,

50,

peytaTov dyaObv IvdaXXopevos, Clem. Alex. Protr. 10 (p. 81) xP V(T0V V
\160v
rj rj

52,

53,
is

and

k.t.X.),

just below toxv rjijei fusing several passages of

devdpov
rj

rj

irpaf-iv

rj

irdOos

the

Canonical Scriptures, such
i.

as
26,

voaov

cpofiov lv$dXXeo~6ai cos 6eov,
viii.

James

8,

2 Pet.

iii.

4,

Mark

iv.

Method. Symp.

2 ert ivdijpovo-ai

toIs aoopaaiv IvBaXXovrai Ta Qela. (The last two passages I owe to Jahn's

Matt. xxiv. 32 sq (Mark xiii. 28 sq, Luke xxi. 29 sq); but the resemblances though striking are not sufficient, and this explanation does not account for the facts already men-

Method.
'ivbdkpa

11. p. 51 collected before I

;

the others

I

saw

his note.)

had So

most frequently suggests the idea of an unreal, spectral, appearance, as Wisd. xvii. 3 IvbdXpaaiv i<~

Tapacro-opevoi, Clem. Horn. iv. 4 <i> ai/ TacrpaTa re yap Kai IvdaXpara iv pecry SV rj pipas Tin dyopa (paivecrdai noicov

tioned. The description 6 irpoqirjTiKos Xoyos and the form of the quotation 6 Xaos p.ov k.t.X., as given in the 2nd Epistle, show that it must have been

Tvdaav iKTrkrjTTei

Tr)v

ttoXlv,

Athenag.
Iv-

Sllppl. 27 al ovv akoyot avrai Ka\

8aXpaTco8eis ttjs ^vxfjs Kivrjaeis elbcoXopavels diroTiKTOvcn cpavTaaias, where

taken from some spurious prophetic book formed on the model of the Canonical prophecies. I would conjecture that it was Eldad and Modad, which was certainly known in the early Roman Church; see Herm. Vis.
ii.

he

is

speaking of false objects of worTaXaiTToopoi k.t.X.] The same pasis quoted also in the 2nd Epistle

3 iyyvs Kvpios roi? emo-Tpecpopevois, yiypaTVTai iv rco 'EASaS
TrpocprjTevcracrLv
/cat

ship.
2.

cos

McoSaS
too

to"ls

iv

rfj

iprjpco

sage ascribed to Clement (§11), being there introduced by the words Xiyei yap ko.1
the quotation there is essentially the same, yet the variations which it presents
6 7rpo<pr)Tiic6s Xoyos.

a passage alleged by Hermas for the same purpose as our quotaXaa>,

Though

show

that

it

cannot have been de-

one who is sceptical about the approaching afflictions of On this apocryphal the last times. book see Fabricius Cod. Pseud. V.T. It may have been forged by 1. p. 801.
tion, to refute

XXIIl]
5 kai

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

8l

oyAeN hmIn toytoon cynB€Bhk€n. CO ANIOHTOI, cymBaA€T€ 6AYTOYC 2yAco- AaB€T€ AMneAoN' npcoTON M6N c^YAAopoeT, £?TA BAACTOC riN€TAI, €?TA cJWAAON, € TA AN0OC, KAI M6TA
I

t

ayta omcJ)a2, e'ta ctac{)yah nApecTHKYT^.
A;
<rvn(3{(3T]Kei>

'OjOaTe, otl ev
C.
7 /cat

C.
if

6

irpCorov pev <pv\\opoeT\
/cat

AS; om.

pera

ravra] translated in S as

eZra, the

being omitted.
will

some Christian to sustain the courage of the brethren under persecution by the promise of the Lord's advent and, if so, the resemblances to the
;

be remembered that

this apo-

New Testament writings in this quotation are explained. Hilgenfeld suggests the Assumption of Moses (see the notes § 17, 25) as the source of
this

cryphal prophecy is supposed to be delivered to the Israelites in the At all events we cannot wilderness. arbitrarily change eVi into ano with

Young and most subsequent

editors

quotation, but does not assign
for this

(Jacobson and Hilgenfeld are exceptions), for hit is read in both our MSS, both here and in ii. § 11.
6.

any reason

view except his
ac-

Xdj3ere

apneXov

k.t.X. ^

1

The
iv.

own theory

that

Clement was

words strongly resemble Mark

26

quainted with that work.
ol 8iyj/vxoi k.t.X.]

Comp. James
ev

i.

8

dvr)p

dlyj/vxos

aKardcTTaTos

ndaais

sq (comp. Matt. xxiv. 32 sq, Mark xiii. See also 28 sq, Luke xxi. 29 sq). Epict. Diss. iii. 24. 86 cos o-vkov, <os
ara<fivXr], rrj
iii.

rats odols avrov.

Hermas

see the note

For the on

parallels in
§ 11.

The

24. 91 to (pvXXoppoelv

conjecture in the last note is confirmed by the fact that Hermas gives

yiveo~6ai
rfjs

reraypivy a>pa rov erovs, /cat to laxdba dvrl avKov /cat da-Ta(pl8as e<

o-TacpvXrjs k.t.X. ,

M. Anton,

xi.

35

repeated warnings against Sn^u^ta and even speaks thereupon in the context of the passage referring to

op(pa£, o-TacpvXij, crracpis, ndvra pera/3oXat ovk els to prj bv dXX' els to vvv
prj ov.

'Eldad and Modad.' For close semblances to this quotation see
Hi.

reVis.

(pvXXopoel]
8.

For the

orthography
6.

see the note on i^eplfacrev §
TTapea-TrjKvIa]
'rifie';

bid tovs di^/vxovs tovs diaXoyi{opevovs ev toLs Kapblais avTcZv el apa

4

41

ovk earat, Mand. ix. 01 yap dtard^ovres els rbv Qebv ovroi elo-iv
ecrrai

ravra

r)

rj yap <pi6r) napeo-TrjKvla. phrastus Caus. Plant, vi. 7.

Exod. ix. So Theo5 7rapiora-

pevos

ol dlyj/vxoi k.t.X.
3.

and
2 Pet.
iii.

e£io-Tapevos, of wine ripening going off (see Schneider's note).
/cat

ol

Xeyovres k.t.X.]
r)

4

Ka\ Xeyovres ILov eariv
irapova-ias avrov;
eKOiprjdrjo-av,
d(f)

f]s

enayyeXia rijs yap ol narepes

Similarly napaylveaBai is used, e.g. Herod, i. 193 wapayiverai 6 o~Itos.

The words
(da-TacpLs),

op(pa£, ara(pvXr],

crTaCpls

ndvra ovtcos 8iapevei an
in
the time of. use the first

dpx^js KTLo~e<os. Ka\ eVi] 'also 4.

denote the sour, ripe, and see the dried grape respectively passages in the previous note, and add
;

Either

the

speakers

AnthoL
'Opart

in. p.

3, iv. p.

131 (ed. Jacobs).

person

r]Kovcrapev as identifying

them-

k.t.X.]

This

sentence

is

the Israelite people of past generations, or (as seems more
selves with

probable) eVt rcoi/ narepav must mean 'when our fathers were still alive', It i.e. 'in our childhood and youth.'

generally treated by the editors as part of the quotation, but I think this wrong for two reasons; (1) In the

2nd

is cited,

Epistle, where also the passage after aTaqpvXr) n-ape 0-7-/7 /cuta fol-

CLEM.

II.

6

82
KctiptZ
oltt

THE EPISTLE OF
oXiyco eU Treireipov
kcli

S.

CLEMENT
to

[xxiii

KaTavra

6 KctpTros tov £v\ov.
/3of-

dXrjdeias tcl%v

e^aicpvrjs TeXeiiodricreTai
kcii

Xrj/uia

avTOv,

crvveinfJiapTVpovG'^

Ttjs

ypaiprjs

otl
eic
5

taxy "lei kai oy xpoNiei, kai |2ai'(J)nhc Hlei 6 Kfpioc TON NAON AYTOY, KAI 6 ApOC ON fweiC TTpOCAOKAT€.

XXIV.
67riSeiKVVTai
ea'ea'daL,
rj$

KaTavor'}<ra)/uiev, dya7rr]Toi, 7ro)s 6 Sea"7roTrj^

Si^yeKws
ty\v

tjjuFi/

7771/

fxeXXovorav

dvaaTaciv

dirap-^v €7roir]craTO tov Kvpiov 'Irjcovv
iScojULev,

XpLCTTOV €K veKpcov dvacTTrjcras.

dyct7rr}TOi, ty\v
kcli

Kara
i
'

Kaipov

yivo\xevr\v
A.
7

dvacrTao~iv,
1 i^aLcpvrjs] e^e^vrja

tjjuLepa

vv£
i$-ai<pi>r)s]

io

iriTreipov] ireiripov
'

A.

4

e£cu% 1

7

?

A.

eTTL^elKwrai 5it)V€ku)s
nobis perpetuo S.

rjfjuv]

A
10

(but eTndLKWTcu); 8it)V€k£)S

i]fuv eirideiKwai
jjdr)

C; monstrat
9 Xptcrr^f]
S.

8 tt)v dirapxw]
/caret

AC

;

add.

S.

AS; om.
yLvofxevTjv]

C.

Kaipov]

C

;

Kara/ecu...

A;

in

omni tempore

AC;

add.

ijfjuv

S.
vvktSs,

11 Koifiarai...

i)/j.£pa]

AC

;

S renders as

if it

had read
o^Vo)?

KOLixarai

[rts]

aviararaL

rj/xipas.

lows immediately the sentence
feat

the words opart k.t.X. not only not being quoted but being hardly compatible with the form
o Xaos ^iou k.t.X.
;

42 KaTaaTtjaco tovs enio-Konovs cites Is. lx. 17). This portion of Malachi's prophecy is
(e.g.

§

k.t.X.,

where he

quoted

of the context as there given
is

;

(2) opart

much less frequently in early Christian writers than we should have

an expression by which Clement himself elsewhere, after adducing a quotation or an example, enforces its
lesson; as §
1.

expected.
first

On

the other

hand the

part of the same verse l8ov dnoOTeXXoo tov dyyeXov p,ov is quoted
i.

4, 12, 16, 41, 50.

els Treneipov] 'to

maturity'.
els is

The

construction KaravTav
in the

common

LXX and
raxv

N.T.; see also above
k.t.X.]

§5.
4.

Matth. xi. 10, Mark 2, Luke vii. 27, and not seldom by the early fathers, by whom, following the evangelists, it is explained of John the Baptist. XXIV. 'All the works of the
Creator bear witness to the resurThe day arises from the grave of the night. The young and fruitful plant springs up from the
rection.

fj£ei

A

combinax. 37),

tion of

Is. xiii.

32 raxv epx^rai Kai ov
ii.

xpoviel (comp.

Hab.
1

3,

Heb.

and Mai.

iii.

kcu

ei-ai<pvr)s tj£ei

els

tov vaov avTov KvpLOs ov vpels ^relre koX 6 ayyeXos Trjs biaBrjKrjs ov vp.els
BekeTe.

decayed

seed'.

The

substitution of 6 dyios
is

for 6 ayyeXos k.t.X.

intentional, but

may have been much more pro-

The eloquent passage in Tertullian de Resicrr. Cam. 12, 13, where the same analogies are adduced, is probably founded on this passage of Clement (see above, I. p. 160). Compare also Theoph. ad Aut. i. 13, Tertull. Afiol. 34, Minuc. Fel. 48,
especially the passage of Theophilus,

bably an inadvertence of Clement, who quotes from memory largely but
loosely

and

is

terpretation

influenced by the inwhich he has in view

xxv]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
y\\mv

83
w/£, dvivTaTai

dvdcTTaa-LV
n^xepa'
Y)

ZnAovviv*
aTreicriv,

KOL/udrai

r\

vv% eirepx^Tai, Ad(3to/uL€v 6 (T7rOpOS 7T(jO£ KCLl TIVCL TpOTTOV yivETCtl ; KCtpTTOUS* elfiAGeN 6 crm'pooN Kal efiaAev ek Trju yfjv eKacrov tcou
rifiepa

TOVS

15 (TTrepiAaTwv,

driva Trecrovra
eiT
e'/c

eis ty\v yijv
r\

^rjpd Kal yvjuud
tt/s

OLaAverai.
irpovoias

tyjs

SiaXucretos
dvl(TTr}(Tiv

jueyaAeioTris
e'/c

tov $€(T7roTOv
'

avrd, Kal

rod eVos

irAeiova

av^ei Kal eKCpepei Kapirov.
Ictofjieu

XXV.
20

to

irapd^o^ov

pevov ev

Toh dvaToAiKoh

yivotokois, tovt€cttiu to?9 wepl

arj/ueTop,

to

avhraraL iifUpa] avlaraTcn i] rjfitpa C; avKXTarair]... A. After the H Tisch. thinks he sees part of a second h and would therefore read 77 rjfj.e'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 frpa

/cat

yvixva]

AC

;

frpto S.

which has many points
with Clement.
8.
ttjv

in

common
xv.

quoted by Wetstein on 1 Cor. 1. c, and Methodius in Epiphan. Haer.
lxiv.

dnapxrjv]
eytfyepTcu
;

I

Cor.

20

44

(p.

570) Ka.Tdp.a9e yap

to.

o-nep-

Xpicrros
is

tQ>v K(Koipvqp.€V(i>v

ve<pa>v anap^r) comp. ver. 23. It

ex

p,ara

ncos

yvp.vd Kal aaapKa /3dXXerat
i

els ttjv yfjv k.t.X.

evident from what follows that
this 15th
(

16. bia\veTaL\

rot\

Comp. Theoph.
dnodvrjaKei

Clement has mind.
IO.

chapter in his
at
its
I

ad Aut.
Kal \i>€Tai.

i.

13

npatTov

Kara

<aipov]

season '.

In

my first edition
'

proper adopted

from
24.

1

This analogy is derived Cor. xv. 36; comp. John xii.
as in Ephes.

the reading Kara Kaipovs, 'at each recurring season ; as in the parallel

18. avgei] Intransitive,
ii.

21, Col.

ii.

19.

It is

treated how-

passage Theoph. ad Aut. i. 13 koto. Kaipovs 7rpo(pepovo~iv tovs Kapnovs, but in deference to the recently discovered
Kara
12.
^(OpL€V
14.
is

ever as a transitive in the Syriac, avgei and eKqbepei have the same subject as dvLo-Trjcriv.

where

authorities,

I

now adopt
§ yj

ttaipov.

XXV. 'The phcenix is a still more marvellous symbol of the resurrection.

Aa£o>/ze*/]

So again

^a-

TO

(TCO/ia f}p.toV.

he

dies.

i^rfKBev k.t.X.]

The

After living five hundred years From his corpse the young

expression
iv. 3,

bird arises.

When
This

he

is

fledged and

borrowed from the Gospel narra;

tive

Matt.

xiii. 3,

Mark

Luke

strong, he carries his father's bones and lays them on the altar of the sun
at Heliopolis.
is

xiii. 5.

done

in

broad
:

15.

from
It

yvpiva\ See 1 Cor. xv. 36 sq, which this epithet is derived.

tion

denotes the absence of germinasee the rabbinical passages
:

and daylight before the eyes of all the priests, keeping count of the time, find that just five hundred
years have gone by'.

6—2

84
Tf]V

THE EPISTLE OF
lav. 'Apa/31

S.

CLEMENT
l

[xxv
'V

opveov
I

yap

ecrTiv
A.

o

Trpocrovo/ULa^eTai

6pveov] opvaiov

I.

tion

opveov K.r.X.] The earliest menof the phoenix is in Hesiod

not unfrequent.

Claudian devotes a
it.

whole poem

to

Another ascribed

(Fragm. 50 ed. Gaisf), who however speaks merely of its longevity. It is from Herodotus (ii. 73) that we first
hear the marvellous story of the burial of the parent bird by the offspring, as it was told him by the Egyptian priests, but he adds cautiously e/xol
jxev

to Lactantius {Corp. Poet. Lat. p. 1416 ed. Weber) also takes this same subject.

The

in

classical

references to the phoenix and other writers are

ov

mora

Xeyovres.

It

is

men-

collected by Henri chsen de Phoenicis fabula Havn. 1825. The main features of the account seem to have been very generally

tioned again by Antiphanes (Athen. xiv. p. 655 B) *v 'HXlov fiev (pacri yiyFrom the veadau noXei (poiviKas.

believed by the Romans.
(iii.

Thus Mela

8),

who seems

to

have flourished

in the reign of Claudius, repeats the

Greeks the story passed to the Romans. In B.C. 97 a learned senator Manilius (Plin. N. H. x. 2) discoursed at length on the phoenix, stating that the year in which he wrote was the
215th since
its last

marvellous story without any expression of misgiving. Pliny indeed declines to

pronounce whether

it
5

is

true or not ('haud scio an fabulose ); but Tacitus says no doubt is enter-

was the
subject.

first

Roman who

appearance. He took up the

close of the reign of 36 according to Pliny (following Cornelius Valerianus) and Dion Cassius (lviii. 27), but A.D. 34 as Tacitus reports the date the marvellous bird was said to have

Tiberius

— A.D.

At the

tained of the existence of such a bird, though the account is in some points uncertain or exaggerated. Again
./Elian (Hist. An. vi. 58), who lived in Hadrian's reign, alleges the phoenix

as an instance of the superiority of brute instinct over human reason, when a bird can thus reckon the time

reappeared in Egypt. The truth of the statement however was questioned by some, as less than 250
years had elapsed since the reign of the third Ptolemy when it was seen

and discover the place without any guidance and somewhere about the same time or later Celsus (Origen c.
;

But the (Tac. Ann. vi. 28). report called forth many learned disquisitions from savants in Egypt both native and Greek. few years
last

Cels. iv. 98, I. p. 576), arguing against the Christians, brings it forward to show the greater piety of the lower

animals
Still

as

compared

with

man.

A

later (a.d. 47) the bird was actually exhibited in Rome ('in comitio propositus, quod actis testatum est,' are

Philostratus (Vit. ApolL iii. 49) mentions the account without recording any protest. I do not lay
later

any

stress

on such passing allusions

as Seneca's (Ep. Mor. 42 'Ille alter

Pliny's words) and may have been seen by Clement, but no one doubted that this was an imposture. The story of the phoenix of course has a place in Ovid's Metamorphoses (xv.

fortassetamquam phoenix semel anno quingentesimo nascitur'), or on descriptions in romance writers like Achilles Tatius (iii. 25), because no

392 Una est quae reparet seque ipsa reseminet ales' etc.), and allusions to it in Latin poets are naturally

argument can be founded on them. It thus appears that Clement is not more credulous than the most learned and intelligent heathen wri-

xxv]
ters of the

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
preceding and following
Rec.
is
I.

8*

p. 99),

the 'profectio phoenicis'

Indeed he may have generations. thought that he had higher sanction
than the testimony of profane authors. Tertullian (de Resurr. Cam. 10) took Ps. xcii. 12 diKdLos as (poivi^ dvOijcrei
to refer to this prodigy of nature,

mentioned in connexion with the exodus, and it seems probable that the writer borrowed the incident from Ezekiel's poem and used it in a simi-

and

Clement may possibly have done the Even Job xxix. 18 is translated by several recent critics, 'With my nest shall I die and like the
same.
phcenix lengthen

The appearance of the way. phcenix would serve a double purpose; (1) It would mark the epoch; (2) It would betoken the homage paid
lar

by heathen religion to the true God and to the chosen people for Alex:

my
§ 53

days' (comp.
rjv
/xt)

Lucian Hermot.
err]

(poivacos

following some rabbinical authorities but even if
fiiaxTj]),

therein

andrian Jews sought to give expression to this last idea in diverse ways, through Sibylline oracles, Orphic

:

be the correct rendering, the LXX version, through which alone it would be known to Clement, gives a different
this

sense to the words,
(xei

77

rJAtKi'a

pov

yrjpd-

(ocnrep

crreXe^o?

(polvi<os,

irokvv

poems, and the like and the attendance of the sacred phcenix on the departing host would not be the least eloquent form of symbolizing this homage in the case of Egypt. But this Ezekiel, though he coloured the
;

Xpdvov

fiia>cra>.

The passage

of Job

xxix. 18, in relation to the phcenix, is the subject of a paper by Merx in
his Archiv. f. Wiss. Forsch. d. Alt. Test. II. p. 104 sq (1871).

At all events, even before the Christian era the story had been adopted by Jewish writers. In a poem on the

incident and applied it to his own purpose, appears not to have invented it. According to Egyptian chronology the departure of the Israelites was coincident or nearly coincident with an appearance of a phcenix (i. e. with the beginning of a phcenix-

Exodus written by one Ezekiel, probably an Alexandrian Jew in the 2nd or 3rd century B.C. (see Ewald Gesch.
IV. p. 297), the phcenix, the sacred bird of Egypt, is represented as appearing to the Israelite host (see the

Tacitus {Ann. vi. 28) says period). that a phcenix had appeared in the
If this were the reign of Amasis. earlier Amosis of the 17th or 18th dynasty and not the later Amosis of

the

26th dynasty
ii.

Herod,

passage quoted by Alexander Polyhistor in Euseb. Praep. Evang. ix.
29, p. 446).

Though

the

name
;

is

not

mentioned, there can be no doubt that the phcenix is intended for the description accords with those of Herodotus, Manilius (in Pliny), and Mela, and was doubtless taken from some Egyptian painting such as Herodotus saw and such as may be seen on the monuments to the present day (see Wilkinson's Anc. Egypt. 2nd ser. I. p. 304, Rawlinson's Herod. II. In the Assumption of Moses p. 122). too, if the reading be correct (see Hilgenfeld Nov. Test, extra Can.

were consicide; dered by some authorities (whether rightly or wrongly, it is unnecessary here to enquire) to have left Egypt
in the reign of this sovereign;
e.g.

(the 172), the time for the Israelites

Amasis of
would coin-

by Ptolemy the

priest

of

Mendes

(Apion in Tatian ad Graec. 38 and Clem. Alex. Strom, i. 21, p. ^y8) and by Julius Africanus (Routh's Ret. Sacr.

For rabbinical references the phcenix, which seem to be numerous, see Buxtorf Lex. Rab. s. v. ?in, Lewysohn Zoologie des Talmuds
II.

p. 256).

to

p.
II.

352 sq
p.

;

comp. Henrichsen

1.

c.

19.

The
too

reference in a later
Sid.
viii.

Sibylline

(Orac.

139

86

THE EPISTLE OF
was
from

S.

CLEMENT
noWcov marcou
it
(

[xxv
re nai cnvLcmcv.
Vit.

otclv (polviKos itrekdtj Trevraxpovoio)

atyiKTai

probably derived Jewish poem.

an

earlier

On the other hand Euseb.
iv.

Const.

72) gives

merely as a report,

is

the mere fact that the phoenix mentioned in the Assnmptio7i of Moses affords no presumption (as Hilgenfeld supposes) that Clement was acquainted with that work; for the story was well known to Jewish In the manner and purpose writers. of its mention (as I interpret it) the Assumption presents no coincidence

Thus

Greg. Naz. {Orat. xxxi. § 10, 1. p. 562 d) says cautiously el ra> mo-ros 6 \6yos, and Augustine de Anim. iv.

33 (20) (x. p. 404.) uses similar language, '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

with

Clement's

Epistle.

The

pas-

Clement
taken.
tic

sage in the Assumption of Moses is discussed by Ronsch in HilgenWissensch. Theol. feld's Zeitschr. Ronsch takes xvil. p. 553 sq, 1874.

to which exception may be Other less important patrisreferences will be found in Suicer's
s.v. (f>olvi£.

f

Thes.
It

is
its

now known

that the story

the reading profectio Phoenices, and explains it of the 'migration from
Phoenicia',
i.e.

owes
my.
is

origin to the symbolic

and

pictorial representations of astrono-

Canaan, into Egypt

under Jacob.
fynicis to
it

And

others also take

mean

Phoenicia, explaining

The appearance of the phoenix the recurrence of some prominent astronomical phenomenon which
marked the
close of a period. Even Manilius (Plin. N. H. x. 2) had half seen the truth; for he stated 'cum

however

in different

ways.

See

Hilgenfeld's note to Mos. Assumpt. In this way the phoenix enp. 130.
tirely

Of subsequent Tertullian, as we

disappears from the passage. Christian fathers,
saw, accepted the

hujus anni

alitis
fieri

vita

magni conversionem

iterumque significationes tempestatum et siderum easdem reverti'.

story without misgiving. As Theophilus of Antioch {ad Aut. i. 13) fol-

For

the

speculations

of

lows Clement's analogies for the

re-

Egyptologers and others phoenix period see Larcher

on

the

Mem.
1.

de

surrection up to a certain point, but omits all mention of the phoenix,
I

VAcad. des Inscriptions
sq
p.
(

etc.

p.

166

1

81

5

),

Lepsius Chronol.

d.

infer that his

knowledge of Egypii.

180 sq,
iv.
p.

Uhlemann Handb.

Aegypt. d. Ae-

tian antiquities (see

6,

iii.

20 sq)

gypt. Alterthumsk.
sq,

saved him from the

error.

For the
fact to

same

reason, as

we may
{c.

conjecture,

Origen also considers the
very questionable
p.

be
I.

III. p. 39 sq, 79 226 sq, Poole Horae Aegyptiacae p. 39 sq, Ideler Handb. der Chron. I. p. 183 sq, Creuzer Symb. u.

Cels. iv. 98,

576).

But

for the

most part
xviii. 8),
I.

it

Mythol. II. p. 163 sq, Brugsch Aegyptische Studien in Zeitschr. d. Deutsch.

was believed by Christian
S. Cyril of

writers.

Morgenl. Gesellsch. x.

p.

250 sq (1856),

Jerusalem {Cat.

S

.

Geogt'aph. Inschrift. der Altaegypt.

Ambrose
172),

(see the quotations,

167,

Denkmaler
f.

I.

p.

258 (1857), Wiedein Zeitschr.

Rufinus {Symb. Apost. 1 1, p. j^), and others, argue from the story of the phoenix without a shadow of misIn Apost. Const, v. 7 it is giving. urged against the heathen, as a fact which they themselves attest and
;

mann Die Phoenix- Sage

Aegyptische Sp7'ache etc. XVI. p. 89 sq (1878), Lauth Die Phoefiix-Periode 1880 (a separate issue of a paper in Abhandl. d. Bayer. Akad. der Wiss.).

The
mass

Epiphanius {Ancor. 84) says ds

aKorjv

actual bird, around which this of symbolism and of fiction has

xxv]
(boTvi^'

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
tovto
fJLOvoyeves virap-^ov
I

87
TrevTciKocria*

^fj

btt]

/xovoyeves] fiovoyevr/a

A.

gathered, bears the name be?mu in the Egyptian language and appears to be the ardea cinerea (or purpurea),

found on coins and medals of the

Roman
Piper
p.

emperors (for instances see 449) to denote immortality

a bird of passage
I.e. p.

;

see

Wiedemann

104.

Thus the phoenix was a symbol from the very beginning. Horapollo
says that in the hieroglyphics this bird represented a soul, or an inundation, or a stranger paying a visit after long absence, or a restoration
after

or renovation, with the legend Saec. AVR., or AETERNITAS, or &I60N. It is significant that this use begins in the

time of Hadrian, the great patron

and imitator of Egyptian
I.

art.

of its kind, u?iique\ This epithet is applied to the phcenix also in Origen, Cyril, and
fiovoyeves]

'alone

a long period

{aizoKarao-rao-iv
i.

TTokvxpoviov), Hierogl.

The way was

34, 35, ii. 57. thus prepared for the

Apost. Const, v. 7, and doubtless assisted the symbolism mentioned in
the last note.

The statement about
(petal

This Apoapplication of Clement. stolic father however confines the

the phcenix in Apost. Const.

yap

symbolism man. But
versified

to

the

resurrection

of

opveov tl novoyeves vtrap)(eiv k.t.A. is evidently founded on this passage of

later patristic writers di-

Clement;

comp.

e.g.

el

tolwv...8l

the application and took the phcenix also as a type of the Person of our Lord. The marvellous
birth

aXoyov opveov deiKwrai 77 dvacrraens Clement's language in k.t.X. with So also in Latin it is 'unica', § 26.

and the unique existence of

this bird, as represented in the myth, were admirably adapted to such a

symbolism and accordingly it is so taken in Epiphan. (I.e.), Rufinus (I.e.), and others; see especially an un:

'semper unica', Mela iii. 9, Ovid Am. 6. 54, Lactant. Phoen. 31, Claudian Thus Milton Laud. Siil. ii. 417. Sa?nson Agonistes 1699 speaks of
ii.

'that

self-begotten

bird... That

no

known but apparently very
author in Spicil. Solesm.
III.

ancient
p. 345.

second knows nor third,' and again Paradise Lostv. 272 'A phcenix gaz'd

by

all,

as that sole bird,

When

to

of these writers press the parallel so far as to state that the phcenix The fact arises after three days. that a reputed appearance of the

Some

enshrine his reliques in the Sun's Bright temple to ^Egyptian Thebes he flies'. Why does Milton despatch his bird to Thebes rather than Heliopolis
err}
?

phcenix was nearly coincident with the year of the Passion and Resurrection (see above, p. 84) may have At a later assisted this application. date the Monophysites alleged the phcenix as an argument in favour of
their

TrevraKocria]

The

longevity of
stated.

the

phcenix

is
it

Hesiod gives
generations of

(9x4x3x9 =
;

differently

men

N. H.

x. 2)

509 years

;

) 972 Manilius (Plin. Solinus {Polyh.

peculiar doctrines (see Piper Mythol. u. Symbol, der ChristL Kunst.
I.

36) 540 years ; authorities mentioned in Tacitus 146 1 years, which is the

1, p.

454).

For the representations

of

the

phcenix in early Christian art see Piper I.e. p. 456 sq. Before it appears as a Christian symbol, it is

length of the Sothic period Martial 7), Claudian, Lactantius, and (v. others, 1000 years; Chaeremon (in
;

Tzetzes

C/iil.

v.

6.

395) 7006 years.

But, says Tacitus,

'maxime vulgatum

88

THE EPISTLE OF
ij$r)

S.

CLEMENT
tov dirodavelv
Kai
(TfjLvpvris

[xxv
clvto,

yevo/uevov re
cty]kov

7rpos
e/c

diroXvcriv

eavTto

iroiei

Xifidvov

Kai

tcov

Xolttlcv

dpcofULctTcov,
kcli

eU

ov

7rXr]poo6evTOs
o-rjTro/uievris
e/c

tov
ty\<z

-^povov

eicrepxerai
arKLoXriP

reXevra.
o?

Se

crapKos
5

tls

yevvctTcti,

rf/s

iKfidhos tov T6T6-

XevTri kotos tyoov dvaTpecpo/mevos 7TT6po(pveT' eKeivov G"r}KOU vaios yevojuevos alpei tov

eiTa yevbirov
to,

6o~Ta tov
Siavvei

TrpoyeyovoTOs
Ttjs
'

eo~Tiv,

ano

'ApafiiKrjs

Kai tclvtcx (iacTTai^tov X^9 a ^ £W9 T^ 9 AlyvwTOV
*

eU

ty]v

Xeyo/uL€vr]v

HXiov7roXiv

kcli

ij/uiepas,

(SXeirov- 10

tiov wdvTcov, €7ri7rra? eirl
1

tov tov
AC
;

yiXlov fito/uiov TiQr\ariv
sitae S.

re]

A

;

5e

CS.
S.

3 tov xpovov]
5e]

add. vitae

4 reXevra]

AC

;

add. in

Mo

AS

;

re C.
illic.

5 yevvarai]
5s]

A

;

eyyevdrai CS,
rere7 o-r]Kbv

the latter translating nascitur in ea
\evTr)KOTOS~\ reXevTrjKOTOo-

AC
see

;

otrrts
I.

(apparently) S.
126.

A;

TeXevTrjaavTos

C;

p.

eKeivov]

AC;

S adds

nmn

]D

(

= KVK\6dev

avrov).

8 petard fav] ^acTa^ov

quingentorum spatium'; and this is adopted by almost all the Christian fathers together with most heathen
writers;
I.

found in the smouldering ashes e.g. Artemid. Oneirocr. iv. 47 avrbs eavra
;

of the latter see a
p. 180.
'

list

in

Lepsius Chron.
7

ck Kao~ias re Kai apvpvrjs Trvpav aivoOvrjCTKeL' Kavdeicrrjs 8e rfjs 7rvpas pera. xpovov e\ rfjs o~7ro8ov crKwXrjKa
Troirjo-afievos

tov aTvoBavelv avro] SO that it should die, explaining the preceding
yevofxevov npbs dnoXvo-cv 'at the eve of
y

yevvao-Qai Xeyovaiv k.t.X.
tial v. 7).

(comp. Marobserve the different stages in the growth of
It is interesting to

its

dissolution';

comp.
to

§

eocrre

itrCkaOicrOaL

rjp.as.

46 e px6[xeSa This con-

struction

seems

me

preferable to

the story, as follows; (1) The lon(2) The engevity alone (Hesiod) tombment and burial of the parent
;

connecting avro with what follows,
as in the Syriac version for in this case I should expect that avro eavra
;

by the offspring (Herodotus)

;

(3)

The

miraculous birth of the offspring from the remains of the parent (Manilius)
;

would stand

in juxtaposition, as e.g.
i.

(4)

The

three days' interval

Rom.
5.

viii.

23, 2 Cor.
is

9.

between the death of the parent and

o-kc6\t]£ tis

yevvarai] This

mode

resuscitation of the offspring (Epi-

not mentioned by Herodotus (ii. 73) but it formed part of the story as related by Manilius to the Romans and is frequently mentioned by subsequent writers. To this account is sometimes added the incident that the parent bird lights its own pyre and that the worm is
of reproduction
;

phanius).
6.

yewaios] ''strong, lusty J as e.g.
vii.

p. 228 R laxvpol en It correra acopara. sponds to Ovid's 'Quum dedit huic aetas vires'.

Dion Chrys.

vioi Kai yevvaloi

9.

dtavvei]

''makes its

way\
e.g.

fre-

quently used absolutely,

Polyb.

xxvi]
clvtcl,
kcli

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
ovtws eU tovttlo'w dcpop/ua.
tcls
01

89
ovv lepeis
kcll

67ri(rK€7rTOVTai

dvaypacpas twv y^povwv

evpicr-

KOVG"lV CLVTOV 7T6UTaKO(TLO(TTOV 6TOVS TreTrXtipwfjLevov e\t]15

\v6evai.

XXVI.
el

Meya

kcli

dav/uao'TOV ovv

vo/ULL^o/uev

elvai,

6

Sri/uiovpyds

twv dwavTwv dvaGTaviv
$1

iroLr\creTai

twv
20 Xelov

6criws

avTw SovXevaravTwv
kcli

ev 7T€7roi6ri(r€i 7ri<TTews
r\\xiv

dyadrjs,

ottov

opveov

he'iKvvcriv

to /ueya-

Ttjs

ewayyeXias
M€
KAI

elANACTHCeiC
KAI
A.
12

avTOv ; XeyeL yap irov Kai elOMO AO TH C OM Al COT KAI 6KOIMH0HN
6M0Y
S.
G?.

YHNOOCA,
9

6lHrep0HN, OTI CY M6T
C;
diavevet.

KCLL

WCXXlV
A;

duxvijet,]

A; migrat volans

n
;

tt&vtojv]

awavrwv C.
tepets]

e7rt7rras]

AS; om.

C, doubtless owing to the following hrl.

C.

add. ol tt)s MytiirTov S. 14 ireirXrjpoju^vov] AS irXrjpovufrov ueyaXelov] ueyaXiov A. 19 opviov 5eiKVvaii>] opvcuov 8lkvv<tlv A. 22 i^rjy^pdrjv] A; /cat e^-qyipd^v CS. 20 e7ra77e\ias] eirayyeXeLaa A.

AC;

iii.

56.

I

(cwrd),

iv.

70. 5 («),

ii.

54.

6

same combination
17-

of

epithets

see

occurs above, § 20. The reading of A, diavevei, is out of place, for it could only mean 'turns aside', i.e. for the purpose of avoiding. Several instances of the confusion of hiavvuv and biavevetv by transcribers
(7rpoy).

The word

536 dr]p.iovpybs /c.r.X.]

§ 20.

On

this Platonic
II.

See above phrase compp. 39, 91. in the coni
:

pare Jahn Methodius
18.

iv TV€not.6rj(T€i k.t.X.]

are given

by Jahn Methodius
'

11.

p.

fidence which comp. Ephes.
ttjs

co?nes of honest faith' iii. 12 iv 7T€7roi6i]o-€i did

no.
13.

nicrreas

avTov,

and below
10,

§

35

ras dvay pachas] 'the public re;

cords''

AlyvffTiwv di
ixui/

comp. Tatian ad Graec. 38 elcriv at eV dicpiftes XP°~ For the Egyptian dvaypacpai.
i.

iv 7T€7roidr](Tei. The ris dyaOr) occurs Tit. ii.
TricrTis

phrase nla-

where
'fi-

however
delity.'
19.

tt'lcttls

seems

to

mean

dvaypacpal see also Diod. Sic.
xvi.

44, 69,

to ueyaXelov] 'the greatness*
§§ 32, 49.
i.

;

Joseph, c. Ap. i. 6 sq. The recently discovered register of the epiphanies of the bulls Apis is a par51,
allel instance of such chronological records; see Bunsen's Egypt I. p. 62

comp.

Luke

49

(v.l.),

occurs Acts ii. 11, and several times in
It

the lxx.

from Ps.
p,cu

20. Xiyei yap nov] Taken apparently xxviii. 7 kcu dveOciXev rj crdp£

(2nd

ed.).

p.ov kcu £K deXrjuaros

XXVI. 'Is it then strange that God should raise the faithful, when He has given this marvellous sign? To such a resurrection we have the
testimony of the Scriptures'.
16.

avTco

(comp. Ps.
5
C

uov i^opoXoyrjcrolxxxvii. 11).

21.

iKoi.urj9r)v k.t.X.]

A confusion of
kcu virvcacra,

Ps.

iii.

iKOLurjOrjv

i%T)yip6r\v otl

Meya

kcu

davp-avrbv]

For the

Kvpios dvTiXrj^/crai uov, and Ps. xxiii. 4 ov (poj3rjdi]o-ouai kcikci otl crv utT iuov et.

90
»

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT

fxxvi

Xeyer Kai anacthcgic thn capka moy taythn thn ANANTAHCACAN TAYTA TTANTA.
/co/3

I

>

XXVII.
at yjyv^ai
StKatct)

TavTt]

ovv

Trj

iXiridi

irpoo'heZeo'dcoo'av

r\fj.tov

tw

7tl(Ttw ev Tafc eirayyeXiais Kai Tip

ev to?s KpifJiaaiv.

6

napayyetXas
\lsevcrao~6at,
i\\xiv>

/urj

yjsevfiecrdai 5

7roXXco nxaXXov avTOS ov yj^evo'eTat*

ovhev

yap dhvvadva^coirvpr}-

tov irapd
craTto

tco

Qeio,
it'ictis

el

/urj

to

ovv n

avTOv ev

Kai

voY]trco\iev

oti

iravTa iyyus oijtw ecTTiv,

ev Xoycp Trjs /ueyaXcocrvvrj^
10

avTOv crvvea'TrjcaTO Ta iravTa, Kai ev Xoycp CvvaTat

avTa KaTacTTpeyjsat.
ANTICTHC6TAI
i

Tic epei

ay'tot

ti

enoiHCAc; h tic

TO)

KpATCI

THC ICXYOC AYTOY;
i

OTe BeXet Kai
C
;

adpKa] aapnav A.

avavTX-^vaaav]

A

;

avrkfjcracrav

toleravit

(avcLTXrjcraaav}) S.

3 irpo<xbeM<idw<xav]
t<£

A; om. C; dub. S. 7 t£] A; om. C;
10
to.

dimly]

A;

see above, § 21.
;

4 ev] Trpoadex&duaav C. oiKa'up (om. ry) C, and so apparently S. to] A, and so apparently S; om. C.
;

AS

iravra]

A, and so probably S
C. 16

iravra C.
wotrjaetv A.

13

Troirjaei]

AS

;

Troirjacu

C.

15 01] accidentally omits
peojfAa k.t.X.]

A; om.

iroirjffiv]

x €L P& v ] ACS; Bryennios

x eL P^v recording the reading of C (p. 51). 17 rb areruns to GTepkwp.a' Kai aKovovrai al <f>uval iravTwv (IXeTrofie'vwv Kai The omissions here are not aKovo/xe'vuv' (po^TjOQ/xev k.t.X., omitting many words.

m

C

I.

'Iw/3 Aeyet]

From LXX Job

xix.

XXVII.
fast to

'Let us therefore cling

26 dvacrTTJaei 8e pov to acopa to avavtXovv TavTa as read in A, but KB have dpao-rrjaai to Sippa piov to dvavrXovv (or
avrXovv) ravra. The Hebrew original For the conis different from either.

is able to perform. To His power no bounds are set. To His eye and His mind all things are open. The

He He

God. cannot lie.

He

has promised, and Whatsoever He wills,

fusion of dvaTXr)o~ai and dvavrXijo-ai in this passage of Job and in Prov.
ix.

heavens declare His glorious works'. t(» 7rioTa) k.t.X.] Comp. Heb. x. 4.
23 niCTTos yap
xi.

12 see Schleusner Lex. Vet. Test.

6

eirayyeCkapevos,

and

s.v. dvavTXeco,

Field Orig. Hexapl.

II.

II.

p.

It may be a question what 36. reading the Syriac translator had here, but the same word ?2D is used elsewhere (e.g. Eus. H. E. viii. 14) to render dvarXavTes; see Payne Smith

6. ovbev yap dbvvaTOv k.t.X.] Compare Heb. vi. 18 iv oh ddvvaTov yj/evaaaOai [tov] Qeov, with Matt. xix. 26

(Mark
7.

x.

27)

;

see also Tit.

i.

2.

dvafaTrvprjo-ciTco] Intransitive;
1.

Thes. Syr.

s.

v.

the note on Ign. Efthes.
text

The

see con-

Harnack

refers to the discussion

of this passage of Quellen z. Gesch.
p. 158.

Clement
d.

in Caspari
III.

seems to suggest that 77 ttio-tls avTov should be rendered 'His faithfulness', as in

Tan/symbols

Rom.

iii.

3; see Gala-

tians

p. 155.

xxvm]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
7roirj(r€i

91
7rap6\6rj
evtoTriov
el

ok

OeAei

Trdvra,
vtt

kcli

ovhev

fit]

twv

Sedoy/uaTicr/ueucoi/
15 eicriv,
kclI

avTOv.

iravTa

avTOv
Oi oy-

ovSev

\e\rjdev ty\v (SovXriv clvtov,

pANOi

AmroyNTAi

AoIan

OeoY,

ttoihcin

Ae

x €l

P^

N

aytoy

ANArr^AAei to CTepeoaMA" h HMepA th HMepA epeyreTAi pHMA,
kai

uyl nykti ANArreAAei tn^cin* kai oyk eiciN Aoroi oyAe
oyX
1

AaAiai', (Ln

akoyontai
fldurcou

ai

(Jxjona'i

aytgon.
kcli

20

XXVIII.

ovv
kccl

(SXeirofJievcov

dKOVOfie-

vtov, (po^t]6cofjiev

avTOv
iva

aTToXeLTrcofJiev <pav\u)v

epycov

fjiiapds

67ri6uiuiias,

tco

i\eei

avrov
7rou

CKeiracrditifJLev

a7r6

tcov

fieXKovrcdv

KpLfJidrcov.

yap

tis
I.

r\\x(av

p. 128). altogether explained by the practice of abridging quotations (see In the previous 18 dvayyAXet] A; avayyeXe? S (with Hebr. and LXX A); def. C. line S has the present (dyayyeXXet). 18, 19 \6yoi, XaXiai] S transposes these

words, as in the LXX.

19 ai cpuval]

The

text of

S

is

perhaps corrupt here.

As

it

stands, the translator
it is

would appear

to

have had tcus

(puvcus &s?p2, instead of

N?p, unless
12 (tuapas]

a very loose paraphrase.
a-repiio/xa k.t.X.).

20 odv]

A

;

re (JVD)

S

;

om.

C

(see the note

on rb
;

21 airoXelirwfxev]

A;

aTroXlirwp.ev C.

Td)i>

C (see Bryennios Did. p. py'). 23 tQv /xeXXdvrod p.4XXovros Kpl/xaros (Tfljn &0"H) S. The variation cannot be explained by ribui here, and must have been deliberate see also §21.
/3Xa/3epas
;

AS

Kpi/A&Tuv]

AC

;

9. eyyus avrco] So Ign. Efthes. 15 ovdev \av6av€i tov Kvpiov, dXXd kq.1 to.

that The heavens etc?

The

el is

no

KpvrrTa

rjtioiv

iyyvs avrco eariv, which

is

perhaps a reminiscence of this passage: compare § 21 above.
iv
(ov

So treated part of the quotation. the passage presents no difficulty; and the corrections proposed (e.g.
the omission of
ft,

or the reading kcu

Xoyw

k.t.X.]
r<5

See Heb.
prjpaTi
ix.

i.

3 (pip-

ra navTa

rfjs
1.

8vvdp,€<os

avrov: comp. Wisd.

See the

Perhaps ovpavoi) are unnecessary. also the koI before ovk elo~\v should be excluded from the quotation in the
oi

introduction, I. p. 398, on the relation of Clement to the Logos doctrine.
11. Tts epe I
xii.

at™
t<3

k.t.X.]

From Wisd.
rj

same way. The quotation is then word for word (except the interchange of Xoyot and XaXiai) from the LXX
Ps. xix.
19.
I

12 tls yap epel Tt tnoirjcras
Kpiparl
o~ov;

tis

3.

dvTKTTrjo-eTai

comp.
on

av...avTwv\ See above the note

Wisd. xi. 22 KpdreL (Spaxiovos o~ov ris avTia-T^aerai ; The expression to Kpdtos ttjs Icrxvos avrov occurs in Ephes.
i.

§ 20.

XXVIII.
sees

'Therefore,
all

since

He

19, vi.

10.

The

icpaTos is

the iVyvs

things, let us forsake our vile deeds and take refuge in

and hears

exerted on
13.

some

object.

ovdev
v. 18.
rt

prj TrapiXOrj k.t.X.]

Comp.
'seeing

Matt.
15.

Of

ovpavoi

k.t.X.]

His mercy. We cannot escape His powerful arm; neither in the height of heaven nor in the abyss of ocean nor in the farthest parts of the earth'.

92

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT

[xxvin

hvvaTai (pvyeiv cltto rfjs KpaTaias %eLpos avrov ; 7ro?os Se koct/ulos SePeTai Tiva tcov avTO/uoXovvrcop air avTOv ;
\ey€L yap irov to ypacpelov fToy Achhiloo kai noy Kpygan anaBw eic ton oypABh'comai And toy npocconoy coy non, cy e? eKer ean AneASoo eic ta ccxata thc thc, eKei h
AellA

5

COy CAN KATACTpCOCOO

GIC

TAC AByCCOyC, 6K€? TO nNeyMA
CS.
e/<et
rj

5 el e/ce?]
7 odv]

A

(with

LXX ABS);

eKei el

5e£i<x crou]

AS

;

<ri>

e/cet el

C.

AC;

om. S.

aTroopdfffl]

A;

dirobpaaiQ (or a7ro5pa,cret)

S;

tls diroSpd-

2.

auro/ioXoi;vrG)i/]

See above,

Xi-

with the Prophets

;

see

Fiirst

Der

noraKTelv § 21,

and the note on
6.
'

fiecre'p-

Kanon

rwp Ign. Polyc.
3.

to ypa<peioi/]

///£

writing.''

S.

Clement here seems

to

adopt the

threefold division of the

Old Testa-

Testaments p. 10 scb P« 55 sc Elsewhere he uses ypacpela more widely, Haer. xxvi. 12 (p. 94) aXXa p.vpla nap* avrols neTrkacrp.eva ypacpela comp. Deut. x. 4 (Aq.).
l;

des Allen

ment books which appears in Ecclus. in Philo (prol.), in S. Luke (xxiv. 44),
(de Vit. cont. 3,
II.

John Damascene likewise
Orthod.
iv.

(de Fid.

17,

1.

p.

284), following

p.

475), in Jose-

Epiphanius, describes the historical
to 2 Chronicles, as ra Ka\ovp.eva ypacpela napd ricri fie dyioypacpa. In the Classical language
(as also
'

phus

(c.

Aft.

i.

8),
is

and generally.

The
fiifiXia

books from Joshua

third division

called ra aXXa

and ra Xowra rav /3i/3XiW in Ecclus., x/mXpol in S. Luke, vfivoi in Philo and
Josephus.
translated
Its

LXX Job

xix.

24,

Hex.

Jer.

more general name

in

xvii. 1) ypacpelov is

not 'a writing' but

Hebrew was

D'QinD, 'the writings',
:

a pen.'

by ypacpela, sometimes by dyioypacpa comp. Epi(i.

sometimes

Uov acp^o)]
tion

A

very loose quota7

from Ps. cxxxix.

10,

where

phan. Haer. xxix. 7

p. 122)

ov yap

aTrrjyopevTai nap' avrols vop.o6ecria nal ra napa 'lovdaiois 7rpo(firJTai <a\ ypadpela

the slight variations of the principal MSS of the LXX do not affect the wide

Ka\ovp,eva, and again nap' avrois yap nas 6 vop.os ical oi 7rpo(p7jrai, Kal ra

ypacpela

Xeyopem
162)

k.t.X.,

Mens,

et

Pond.

4

(II.

p.
Ticri

ra K.a\ovp.eva ypacpela

divergences in Clement's quotation. Compare also the parallel passage in Amos ix. 2, 3, to which Clement's quotation presents some faint resemIt is important to observe blances.
that in using KaracrTpcocra),
'

Tvapd

the

In fie ayioypa(pa Xeyop.eua. of these passages however Epiphanius includes the historical
first

make my

couch,' Clement conforms to the original niT^X, where the LXX has xaTaficZ.

books among the ypacpela, and in the second he confines the term to them, placing the Psalms, Job, Proverbs, etc., in a separate section which he This does not calls ol o-tixip^s.
truly represent the Jewish tradition, in which 1, 2 Chronicles alone be-

This

is

the

more remarkable,

shows no knowledge of the Hebrew, and in the Psalms
as he elsewhere

generally quotes pretty accurately from the lxx. Whence then did he
get this that he

longed to the D'Oinn, while the historical books generally were ranged

word? We may conjecture was acquainted with one of the versions afterwards included by
Origen in his Hexapla.

The

5th

xxix]
coy.

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
ttoI

93

ovv Tt5 dire\Qr]
;

rj

irov diroopacr] diro

tov

tcl

TravTct efJLTrepie-fcovTOs

XXIX.
io xijs,

npoo-eAdcojuiev
kcli

ovv clvtco

ev

octlot^tl

\]sv-

dyvds

d/midvTOVs xelpas aipovTes irpos
eTrieiKrj
kcci

clvtov-,

dyonrwvTes tov
09

€K\oyrjs

/uepos

evcnrXay^vov Trarepa ^/ucov Ovtco yap yeeiro'increv eavTw.
6

ypCLTTTai* "Otg AieMepizeN
crei

y^ictoc gOnh,
S.
r/yuas

cbc

AiecneipeN

C.

ret]

A
A.

;

om. C, and so probably
12 /m^pos]

g o$v]

AC

;

om.

S.

11

iTrteucT)~\ eirieixriv

A;

add.

CS.

01/Vw] ovtws C.

version

(e

in Origen) has crrpaija) or

len,

ad loc), and as this seems to have been the one found in an old cask either
Karaorpcoo-co (see Field's Hexaftl.

de Antid. ii. 7 (xiv. p. 145, ed. Kiihn) dAA' ocrias p.€v x&pas is rjipa
1

Xafxirpbv delpas

on

at Jericho or Nicopolis (Euseb. 16, Epiphan. Mens, et Pond. 18, p. 174 ; see Hody de Bibl. Text. Orig.
vi.

HE.

(quoted by Wetstein The expression describes the attitude of the ancients (as of Orientals at the present day) when engaged in prayer, with ex-

Tim.

ii.

8).

etc. p. 587 sq), it may very well have been an ancient Jewish tradition prior Clem. Alex. to the age of Clement. Strom, iv. 22 (p. 625) quotes the passage nearly in the form which it has here (though substituting the lxx
Karafioi)

tended arms and uplifted palms. ( 12. eKkoyfjs p,epos k.t.A.] has made us His special portion] or rather ''has set aftart for Himself a special ftortion\
is

for KciTaorpcoo-a)),
it

and doubt-

In either case the eKkoyfjs p.epos the Christian people, the spiritual Israel, who under the new covenant

less derived

through the medium of the Roman Clement, so that he is not an independent authority. The verb d<pi]Keiv is not dcprj^a)] found in the LXX or N.T., and is

have taken the place of the chosen people under the old as 1 Pet. ii. 9
;

voxels be yevos ckXcktop, ftacriXeiov lepd-

revp-a, edvos dyiov,
k.t.A.

Xaos

els 7r€pi7rolr)criv

See the notes on uapoiKovaa
riy uio-fxivois (§ i).

word comp. Plato Resft. vii. p. 530 E, Antiphon in Bekker Anecd. p. 470 s.v. dcprjKovros. XXIX. Therefore let us approach Him in prayer with pure hearts and
altogether a rare
;
'

and

Thus

p,epos i<-

Xoyfjs here is

Xeypivoi vivo tov § 50 (comp. § 64).
fiipos iiikoyrjs
'

coextensive with ol inXetov Qeov did 'ir/crod Xpicr-

The words

are not to be translated

undefiled hands.
cial portion

We

are God's spe'.

and inheritance, of which the Scriptures speak once and again See on the liturgical character of
this

a portion of his elect' but 'a portion by election,' eKXoyfjs being a genitive of the same kind as in Acts
set apart
ix.

15 crKfvos inXoyrjs, Iren.

i.

6.

4 cmep-

portion
sq.

of

Clement's
the

Epistle
1.

p,ara eKXnyrjs.

The expression therefore

which
p.

follows,

introduction,

386

IO. dyvds k.t.A.] I Tim. ii. 8 eiraipovras oaiovs x e ^P as Athenag. Supftl. see 1 3 eiraipcofxep ocriovs xelpas avrco
i
;

also Heliodorus the tragedian in

Ga-

has no bearing on the question whether Clement was a Jewish or Gentile Christian. See the note on Xaos below. 13. "Ore dienepi&v k.t.A.] From the LXX Deut. xxxii. 8, 9, almost word for word.

94
YIOYC 'AAAM,
0eoy.

THE EPISTLE OF
IcTHCGN
OpiA

S.

CLEMENT
KATA Api0MON

[xxix

60NOON

ArreAooN

ereNHOH Mepic Kypi'oy Aaoc AyToy 'IakooB, cxoi'nicma Kcti ev KAHpoNOMiAc AyToy 'IcpAi-iA. eTepco T07T(o Xeyei' 'lAoy Kypioc AamBangi eAyTO) I0noc gk Mecoy e0NooN, cocnep
I

apidfibv] apidov

A.

i

iyevqdri]

AC

;

Kal

iyevTfjdr]

S with LXX.

I. Kara dpiBfibv k.tX] The idea conveyed by the LXX which Clement

and the
gear

The ends
;

error can be easily explained. of the lines have got out of

quotes

is that,

while the Gentile nato

7K"I^, which in the present text

tions were

committed

His

inferior

ministers, of Israel

God
:

retained the people

under His

own

special

guardianship comp. Dan. x. 13 sq, xii. I, but esp. Ecclus. xvii. 17 emoro)
edvet

occupies the end of ver. 8, has been displaced from its proper position at the end of ver. 9, and thrust out the original word DTDNn, which has thus

Karearrjaev

rjyovp.evou
'

Kal

pepls

Kvpiov 'io-parJX eariv, and Jubilees §15 (Ewald Jahrb. III. p. 10) Many are the nations and numerous the people, and all are His, and over all hath

The 'sons of God' are mentioned Job i. 6, ii. 1, xxxviii. 7, and in all places are translated (as it
disappeared.
appears,
p. 215.

correctly)

Qeov] in the

lxx

;

by ayyeXoi [rov see Gesen. Thes.

He

spirits as lords... but Israel did set no one to be

set

over
Lord,

He

neither angel nor
is

spirit,

but

He alone

their ruler

etc.',

See also Clem. Horn,

with the context. xviii. 4, Clem.

This conjecture is confirmed Samar. Pent, reads 'Israel' at the end of both verses, thus presenting an intermediate reading between the lxx and the present

by the

fact that the

Hebrew
§ 131 (p.

text.

Justin Martyr Dial.

Recogn. ii. 42 (references which I should have overlooked but for HilClem. genfeld Apost. Vat. p. 65). Alex. Strom, vii. 2 (p. 832) uses the text to support his favourite idea that heathen philosophy is the handmaid
of revelation
Tois
;

360 b) refers to the difference

between the Hebrew and lxx texts; see also Origen hi Num. Horn, xxviii. § 4 (11. p. 385), In Ezech. Horn, xiii
(in. p. 401). The reading of the Hebrew text is naturally adopted in

ovtos eariv 6 8i8oi>s
(ptkoaocpiav dia

ical

Clem.

Horn,

xviii.

4,

as

it

is

by

"E A X^ cri

Trjv

rac

v-

7ro8€eaT6pa>v dyye\(ov' elal yap crvvdiavevep.r]fievoi npoara^ei Bela re kcll ap^aLa

Justin's Jewish opponents. The writer lived late enough to have got it from On one of the Judaizing versions.

ayyeXoi Kara eBvrj, aAX' 77 p.ep\s Kvpiov rj On the other bo^a Tav 7rio~T€v6vTQ)v. hand the present text of the Hebrew runs He set the boundaries of the na'

the other hand the lxx is quoted by Philo de Post. Ca. 25 (i. p. 241), de Plant. 14 (1. p. 338). have here the com2. Aaor]

We

tions according to the number of the sons of Israel (bttW "02 nSDD ?) ; for
1

mon

antithesis of Aaos- 'the chosen

Jehovah is His people, Jacob is the rod of His So too the Peshito and inheritance'. Targum of Onkelos. But it is difficult to get

(or 'while', "O) the portion of

and eOvrj 'the Gentiles'; as Luke ii. 32, Acts iv. 27, xxvi. e.g. By 17, 23, Rom. xv. 10, 11, etc. becoming the Xabs however the Ispeople',
raelites

do not cease

to
xi.

be called an
50),

any good sense out of this reading, and the parallelism of the verses is thus shattered. I can hardly doubt therefore that the LXX is right,

Wvos

(see esp. Joh.

but are

rather Wvos dyiov (as Exod. xix. 6, I Pet. ii. 9) or edvos £k fieaov edvwv
(as below)
:

so Justin Dial. 24

(p.

242)

xxx]
5

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

95
aACO, KAI £le-

AAMBANei ANGpCOTTOC THN ATTApXHN AYTOY THC AeyceTAi €K toy IOnoyc eKeiNoy a|~ia ahoon.

XXX.
0,71a ovv fieph

'Ayiov ovv
oy AfiOYN
dyia ovv
(the
fxiprj

fji€pU virap-fcovres

7roiri(ra)/ui€v tcl

7 'Ayiov ovv]

OY above
C.

the line being written
p.

prima tnanu) A;

S

;

See

I.

143.

Iva yevrjrai edvos diKaiov,
(ra>v tvia-Tiv

\abs (pvXao--

xxvi. 2). All such titles, referring primarily to the Israel after the flesh, are transferred by-

(from

Is.

14 ftovvai ras dirap^as Kvpiov Kai ra dyia tcov ay lav, Ezek. xlviii. 12 earai avrols rj airapxf) debopivrj eK tcov airap"X&V rfjs yrjs, ayiov dyioiv anb rcov opicov k.tX. with the context ; but in all these

Clement, following the Apostolic writers, to

the Israel after the spirit; see

above the notes on
§

64

els

and comp. below Xabv nepiovaiov, and especially
§
1
,

fruits' is different.

I call atJustin Dial. 119 (p. 347). tention to this, because Hilgenfeld (Zeitschr. f. Wissensch. Theol. 1858,

passages the reference of the 'firstAs Clement's quotations elsewhere are so free (e.g. §§ 18, 26, 32, 35, 39, etc.), he may only

and here) distinguishes the \a6s of the first passage and the i'dvos
p.

585,

to the Jewish
respectively.

of the second, as though they referred and Gentile Christians

have combined these passages and but applied them from memory the alternative remains that he is quoting from some apocryphal writing, such as the spurious or interpolated Ezekiel quoted above (see the
;

Of such a

distinction
;

the context gives no indication and the interpretation moreover supposes
that Clement departs from the obvious meaning of the passages incorporated in the second quotation,

notes §§ 8, 13, 17, 23, 46). The dyia dyieov are the specially consecrated things, the offerings or first-fruits, as
in the passages just

quoted
xlii.

;

see also

Lev.

xxi. 22,
is

Ezek.

13.

The

ex-

pression

where the original reference of e'Ovos is plainly to the Israelites. See the note on iKkoyrjs p,ipos above. a-xoivia-fia] 'a portion measured out by a line' (see the note on Kavcov, § 7), a common word in the lxx
exactly representing the Hebrew b^n. 'idov Kvpios k.t.A.] combina4. tion of several passages Deut. iv. 34

applied here either to the people of God themselves, or to their spiritual oblations (see below, §§ 40,
44)-

XXX.
the
selves
defile
;

Holy One,
;

Therefore, as the portion of let us be holy ourlet us lay aside all sins which let us shun pride and ensue

'

A

;

el

irreipaa-ev

6

eavrco edvos e<
/x<u k.t.X.,

Qebs elaeXOcov Xaftelv peaov edvovs iv 7reipacrxiv. 2 Kai
o~ov
o~e

let us be on our guard against ; slander and backbiting ; let us seek not our own praise, but the praise of

peace

Deut.

i^eXi^aro

Kvpios 6 Geo?
k.t.X.

yevicrBai

ae \abv

avrco 7repiovo~iov cnrb ndvTcov rcov idvatv

(comp.

vii. 6).

Self-will is accursed in His but His blessing rests on the gentle and lowly-minded'. 7. 'Ayi'ou ovv pepls] i.e. 'As the special portion of a Holy God'

God.

sight

;

:

coairep

Xapftdvei

k.t.X.]

The

pas-

comp.
aavra
ndarj

I

Pet.

sages most nearly resembling this are, Num. xviii. 27 Xoyio-Qrjo-eTai vp.lv ra cKpaipepara vp.cov cos eriroe cnro aXco Kai dcpaipepa dnb Xrjvov, 2 Chron. xxxi.

vpcis

15 sq Kara top KaXeayiov ko\ avrol ayioi iv
i.

dvao~rpo(pfi
xi.

yevf]6r\re,
"

diori

ye-

ypanrai (Lev.
iya> ayios-

On

44) Ay 101 eaeaOe on the liturgical charac-

96

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT

[xxx
/uiapds re

tov dyiaa/uov wavTa, (pevyovres KaraAaAids,
Kai

dvayvovs cru/unrAoKas, fiedas
Oedc

re

Kai

vecoTepicr/Liovs

Kai fiSeAvKTas imBu/uias, fjivo'epdv fjioi^eiavy /3SeAvKTriv
V7reprj(paviav.
tai, vols
r^p,
(prjo-iv,

fnepHcpANOic ANTiTACceKoAArjdco/ULev

TAneiNoic Ae

Ai'acocin

x^P ,n

*

ovv

e/cet- 5

oh

r\

x a P Lg

a7ro

T °v Qtov
Kai

SeSoTcu.

ev^vawfjieda
cltto

Tt]v

dfiovoiaV) Tct7reivo<ppovovpTes, eyKparevofJLevoi,
yjsidvpicriuLOv

iravTOS

KctTaAaAias
Kai
/urj

iroppw
Aoyois.
'

eavTOVS
Aeyei eyAAAoc io
oAi-

7roiovvTes,

epyois SiKaiov/uevoi
ttoAAa AerouN
kai

yap*
roBioc*
2

'0

ta

ANTAKofceTAi

h

6

oTeTAi eiNAi Ai'kaioc;

eyAorHMeNOC T€nnhtoc tyn<mk6c
riNoy.

mh noAyc cn phmacin
C
;

€7raivos
;

tJ/ulwv

dvdyvovs]

ayvova A.

avfiirXoKas]

AC

the

word however by

contentiones {jurgia),
re]

and connecting
^SeXvKrrjv]

Kal <rvp.TrXoKas S, rendering fiiapds re Kal dvdyvovs

with KaraXaXias.

AS; om.
6

C.

3 p-vcrepdv]

C) re CS.

iioixdav] fxoix^tv A.

A; fxvaepdv (fivaapdv A; Kal fideXvKTTjv CS.

4 Qebs] 6 dirb]

AC. Bryennios AS; om. C.
10

reads

Qebs,

as

if

it

8 KaTaXaXids...eavTovs]

had some manuscript authority. AC; S translates as if KaraXa9 Kal]
it

Xias...eavTQv, connecting dirb iravrbs \j/idvpia/xov with eyKparevofxevoi.

AS

;

om. C.

rj]

77

A

;

el

C

;

77

(apparently) S, for

translates

Me

qui

ter of the

language here used, see
ii. I

curs in the
3.

lxx

or

New
this

above,

1.

p. 387.

fxvo-tpav]

For

Testament. form see the
Prov.
iii.

1. (pevy. KaraX.] I Pet. voi...ndcras /caraXaXtay.

cmo6£\is-

note on § 14. Qebs yap 4.
v. 5,

k.t.X.]

From
k.t.X.

dvdyvovs] Something be said for Xdyvovs which

2.

may
I
;

still

34 Kvpios vneprjcpdvois

In

I

Pet.

read in

James

iv. 6, it is

quoted

6

Qebs

my first edition after Colomies
Athenag. Suppl.
veglas,

comp.

Kal Xdyvois, 21 Xayveias

19 rot? aKoXdo-Tois nXeorj (iias rj

vneprjcpdvois k.t.X. simply K1H 'he'.
8.
yj/i6.

The Hebrew has
See below,
i.

Kal KaTaX.]

§ 35.

C/em. Recogn. ix. 17 (the Greek is preserved in Caesarius) pedvaovs, Xdyvovs, 8aip,ova>vTas, Acta Petri in
Isid. Pelus.

The words occur together also 2 Cor. xii. 20 30 yjnOvpio-Tds, comp. Rom.
;

KaTaXdXovs.
9.

Ep.

ii.

Nov.
6

Test. extr.

99 (see Hilgenfeld's Can. Rec. IV. p. 70)
e\(opr]ae tov ov8e 6 Xdyvos

epyois diKaiovptvoi]

See the note

at the

beginning of

§ 33,

and the

in-

yap

(piXoxpijfiaros ovk

rfjs

dKTrjpLoavvrjs

\6yov

troduction, 1. pp. 96, 397. 10. 'OTcnroXXd k.t.X.] From the LXX
of
It

tov

irep\ o-oi(ppo(TvvT]s k.t.X.,
ii.

Paed.

10
see

(p.

222

— 225).
Xdyvos,

Clem. Alex.

Job

xi. 2, 3,

almost word for word.

The comthe
Attic

mon form was
Xdyvrjs;

diverges widely from the Hebrew, and the sentiment evXoy-qpevos k.t.X.

Lobeck Phryn. p. 184. Neither word (avayvos or Xdyvos) oc-

has no connexion with the context. It may be conjectured that the words

xxxi]
eoTTta
fJLKrei

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
ev

97

Qeco

kcli

fir)

ep avTtov, avTeiraiveTOvs

yap
rifjaov
rj/uuov

6

Qeos.

15 StSocrdco

r] /uapTVpia Trjs dyadrjs 7rpa£etos i/V aWcov, Kadtos iSodrj tois iraTpdcriv

toTs

diKaiois.

dpdcros

Keel

avdddeia

kcli

ToAfJLa
kcli

toTs

KaTripafjievois
<ppoa"vvr]
Kctl

vwo tov

Oeov'

eTrieuceia

Taireivo-

7rpauTrjs irapa to?? Y)vAoyY\\ievoi<z

vwo tov

Oeov.
20

XXXI.
iStojuev

KoXKYidctifJiev

ovv

ty]

evAoyia

clvtov,

Kctl

Tives al

6S01

Trjs

aw' dpxijs yevo\ieva.
r)fjLtov

evAoyias. dvaTvAi^to/uLev Ta tivos X a P lv ^^oyrjdrj 6 waTrjp

'Aflpaajui
;

;

ov-^l $LKaioo~vvt]v teal dXrjdetav $ia wl(r-

Tetvs wouicras
multum
t>os]

7o"«a/c /ueTa wewoidtjo'ecos
etc.

yivccaKtov
1 1

to

dicit et

audit in hac (hoc) quod qui bene loquitur,

evXoyrj/ne-

12

14
17 18
for

A; om. C; S substitutes yevv-qros, thus repeating the same word, *lv* &Ov\ 7]fiu>v] AS; v/j-Qv C. 13 Oew] A; ry dea? C. 7<VJ AC; om. S. ayadrjs] AS; om. C. ijfxQv] A; vp.oov CS. 15 edodrj'] ederfdrj A. virb tov GeoO] AS; om. C. See I. p. 125. i-mei/ceia] eirieaaa A. S transposes raireLvocppoo-ivrj and irpav'TTjs, probably TrpavTTjs] A; wpaorrjs C. convenience of translation; see I. p. 137. 23 81a 7rto-rews] AS; om. C.
18.

yevvrjTos yvvaiKos 6\iyo(3ios crept in from xiv. I ftpoTos yap yevvrjTos yvvai-

irpavrqs]

This word

is

distin-

k6s 6\iy6(3ws, which may have stood next to this passage in a parallel column, and the ev\oyr)p.evos will have

guished from Taneivocppoavvrj, Trench N. T. Syn. 1st ser. § xliv, and from
€7ri€LKeia ib. § xliii.

XXXI.

'

come from
11.

the

first

word of the next

His blessing

Let us therefore cling to let us study the re:

verse, *]H2 misread "]ro.
yevvrjrbs]
7.
c

See the note on Ign.

Ephes.
12.

cords of the past, and see how it was won by our fathers, by Abraham and Isaac and Jacob'.
21.
'

O

eTraivos k.t.A.]

See Rom.

ii.

dvaTvki^aip.€v\

7tnroll\

and so

29 ov 6 eivaivos ovk e£ avOpconcov aXX €K tov Qeov, 2 Cor. x. 18 ov yap 6 iavTov arvviCTTawv K.r.A. ; comp. I Cor.
iv. 5.

'pore over'';

comp. Lucian Nigr. 7

tovs Xoyovs ovs totc r)Kovo~a avpayelpcov KOI avaTv\LTT(ov. 22. 6 iraTrjp -qp-av]

See the note on
k.t.X.]

avTwv] So read for avT&v. On the forms avTov, avrw, etc., as inadmissible here, see §§ 9, 12, 14, 32
13.

§4.
23.

ovxi

§iKaioo~vvqv

Com-

(notes).

avT€7raiveT0vs]

No other instance

of
2.

the word
15.

given in the lexicons. vn aXkcov] See Prov. xxvii.
is

bining the statement of S. Paul (Rom. iv. 1 sq, Gal. iii. 6 sq) with that of S. James (ii. 21 sq). See the note at the beginning of § 33, and the introduction,
1.

p. 96.

CLEM.

II.

98
/uleWov

THE EPISTLE OF
fjSeft)?

S.

CLEMENT
'laKtofi
di

[xxxi

TrpoariyeTO dvcria.

/ueTa Tairei-

d$eX<pov Kai Kai edovXevcrev, kcli eSodrj clvtw €7ropev6r] 7rpos Aa/3dv
vo<ppoo"vvr)s k^eyuspncrev Ttjs
yfjs clvtov

to

$to$6Kd(TKri7rTpov

tov

'

IcrparjX.
5

XXXII.
vorjcrri,

'Edv tis kol& eV eKa&rov eiXiKpivws KaraeTriyvuxreTai /ueyaXeTa twv vtt avrov SeSo/mevcov

Scopecov.

ep avrov yap
AC;
is

iepeTs

Kai

Xevlrai

iravres

ol

Xeirovpyovvres rco
i
3,

dvo'iao'rrjpicp
5

rod Qeov*
A;
6 av

i£ avrov
C
;

rjdiios]

Kal TjSews S.

'Ew]

conj.; def.

quae

si (as if

eav) S,

which
7

A.
lepeis
1.

perhaps correct. See the lower note. avrov] S; avrwu bwpeiZv] dtopaiwv A.
ol]

eiXiKpivus] iXiKpiv...

AC.

lepeis]

A;

ol

C.

AC; om.
is

(apparently) S.

8 XeiTovpyovvres] Xirovpy...
5 tci

rjdews k.t.X.]

There

nothing in

Patr. Nepht.
'icrpa^A.
'

8co8eKa o~Krj7TTpa tov

the original narrative which suggests that Isaac was a willing sacrifice ;

Gen. xxii. 7, 8. According phus however, Ant. i. 14. 4, on hearing his father's purpose he heyeTai 7rpbs rjbovrjv rovs Xoyovs and copfxrjcrev ore tov (Beopiov kcli ttjv crcpayrjv. See also
to Jose-

Beer's

Lebe?i

Abraham^
p.

p.

65

sq

with the notes
rabbinical

709

sq,

where ample
are
collected

XXXII. If any one will consider, he may see what blessings God showWhat great hoers on the faithful. nours did He confer on this patriarch From him was derived the Jacob priestly tribe of Levi from him came the great High-priest, the Lord Jesus from him are descended kings and
!

:

;

authorities

for this addition to the narrative.

The

And by the rulers through Judah. other tribes also he was the father of
countless multitudes.
will,
It

idea

is brought out strongly by Melito (Routh's Pel. Sacr. 1. p. 123) 6 Se

was God's

not their

own

righteous doing,

'icraafc

<jiya ne7rebr]p,evos <os

Kpios, ovk

dvoiycov
'

(pavfj

aropa ovde (pOeyyopevos to yap tjlcpos ov cpoj3r]6e\s ovde
to

to rrvp 7TTor]6e\s ovde to nadelv Xv7rr]0e\s e(3ao~Tacrev tov tvttov tov Kvplov
k.t.X.,

whereby they were glorified. And by His will also, not by our own piety or wisdom, are we and all men justified through faith by His

Almighty
ever'.
5.

will to

whom

be glory for

where

there
Is.
liii.

is

an obvious

reference to
yoiievos (pavij.

7 in ovde <p6ey-

'EaVJ Previous editors read el;

Philo de Abr. 32 (II. p. 26) is seemingly ignorant of this turn given to the incident.
4.

but,

though

el

with

the

conjunciii.

tive is possible (see Philiftpians 11), it is rare and ought not to

be

Equivalent to to 8a>8eKa(pvXov, which occurs below for o-KfjnTpov § 55 and Acts xxvi. 7 (D2^), 'a branch or rod', is a synonym for 'a tribe'; e.g. 1 Kings xi.
;

to 8a>8eKdo-Kr)nTpov]

introduced unnecessarily.
'

elXiKpivas] It seems to

distinctly

',

severally*.

be a military metaphor

from
6.

c

e'lXr)

turma
i.

'

;

see

the

note,

Philiftftians
vtt
is

10.

31, 32 Kai

Soocro)

aoi 8eKa aKrJTTTpa Kal
avrco,
;

8vo
-

aKtJ7TTpa

eo~Tai

and again
Test, xii

ver 35) 36 (see § 32)

comp.

avrov] i.e. tov Qeov. There awkwardness in the sudden transition to e| avrov, which must re-

a

little

XXXIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
'Iticrovs
KCtl

99

6

Kvpios

to

kcltcx

(rdpKcc
KCITCC

IO KCtl

Ctp^OVTeS

^yOV/UL6J/OL 9

i£ clvtov fiacriXefc TOV 'lovSdV TCI $6

\0l7TCt
cJs

CtUTOV OVK €V JULKpCt $6^tJ VTrctpyOVCTlV , "Ectai to cnepMA coy €7rayyei\ajJL€vov tov Qeov otl
(TKY\TTTpa
oi

ooc
Kcti

ACTepec toy oypanoy.
Si

riavTes
t]

ovv eDopdcrdriarav
rj

6fJL6ya\vvdri(rav ov

clvtwv

tlov epytov avToov

15 Trjs

$LKai07rpayias
10 /card]
5e]

fjs

KciTeipydaavTO ,
/card S, this

ccWct

Sid

tov
AS

rea A.
iryov/xevoi.

AC

;

oi

A;

re CS.

11 avrou]

being a repetition of the AS om. C.
;

last syllable of

56^]

;

ra£ei C.

12 tov Qeov]

A;

deov C.

14 clvtwv] avT<2v C.

fer to

dcopecov

in §§

Jacob ; but twv vn avrov ded. can only be said of God (as 19, 23, 35), nor can tV avrov
l

which Clement quotes so repeatedly, and from which his ideas of Christ's high-priesthood are taken, would dis-

per eum', as in the Latin version of Young. Lipsius {de Cle?n. Rom. Ep. p. 55) explains 'De beneficiis a Jacobo in nobis collocatis' and Harnack adds 'haec dona sunt sacerdotes, ipse Dominus se-

be translated

him otherwise (vii. 14). double descent (from both Judah and Levi) is maintained in the Test. xii Pair, (see Galatiajis p. 308), but
tinctly teach

A

this

cycle

writing travels in a different of ideas. And even in this

cundum carnem,
7.

reges.'

e£ avTov]

i.e.

from Jacob.
it

The

Judaic work the Virgin herself is represented as belonging to Judah.
In Iren. Fragm. 17 (p. 856, Stieren) likewise a double descent is ascribed
to our

following clauses render

necessary

to read avTov for avrSv, which might otherwise stand. For the whole pas-

Lord
KaTa

ex be

tov Aev\ Kai tov
kol

sage comp. Rom.
rpeia
kol
if-

ix.

4,

5

wv...-q

Xa-

'lovda to

aapica. cos (3ao~Lkevs

teal

ai eVayyeAiat, cov oi iraTepes
kclto.

lepevs eyevurjdrj.

On

the descent from

wv XpiaTos to
6

aapKa.

Levi see Sinker Test, of Twelve Pair.

9.

Kvpios 'irjaovs]

He

is

men-

p.

105 sq.
10.
kcito.

tioned in connexion with the Levitical tribe, as being the great Highpriest, a favourite title in Clement
:

tov 'lovdav] ''after

Judah]
and

i.e.

as

descended

from him

see the note § 36. Comp. Ign.Pkilad. 9 KaXol kcu oi iepels, Kpelaaov 8e 6 apXtepevs.

thereby inheriting the attribute of This idea of royalty, Gen. xlix. 10.
the royalty of the patriarch Judah

With Levi He
;

is

connected

runs through the Test, xii Patr.,
Jud.
iracri.
I

e.g.
p.01

as a priest from scended as a king.
is

Judah

He

is

de-

6 TvaTTqp p,ov
'earj

'laKtt>/3

rjv^aro

Hence His name

Xeycov, BacriXevs

Ka.Tevodovp.evos ev

placed between the two, as the

link of transition
other.

from the one to the But there is no ground for

12. "Eo-tcu k.t.X.] xxii. 17, xxvi. 4.

Comp. Gen.

xv. 5,

assuming that by this collocation Clement implies our Lord to have descended from Levi, as Hilgenfeld (Apost. Vat. p. 103, and here p. 98, ed. 2) thinks. The Epistle to the Hebrews,

not an exact quotation from any of these passages, but most closely resembles the first.
It is 14.
81

avTcov]

Not

clvtcov.

See

above the notes on
15.

§§ 9, 12, 14, 30.

rfjs diKaioirpayias k.t.X.]

Comp.

7—2

IOO

THE EPISTLE OF
kcli
r\fJL6is

S.

CLEMENT

[xxxn

deAtj/maTOS avrov.

ovv, did deXripaTOS

avrov

ev Xpicrrcp Irjcrov KArjdevres, ov Si

iavrccv liKaiovfxeda
fj

ovde hid rrjs rj/uerepas orocplas epycov
cov

rj

trvvecretos

evtrefieias

i)

KareipyacrdfULeda
r]S

ev 6<ti6t\)ti

Kaphas,

dWa
7TCLV- 5

Sid Tt}s 7Tl(TT6C0S 9 $1

TfdvraS TOl)s dlT altOVOS 6
to

TOKpdrcop Qeos

idiKctlcoG-ev
d\ir\v.

ecrrco

r]

So^a eU rovs

aitovas rcov aitovtov.

XXXIII.
a7ro
i

Ti ovv

7roiri<ra)iULev,

d$e\<poi; dpynaco^ev

rijs
avrov]

dyado7rouas
AC;
tov deov S.

kcli
ical

eyKara\eL7rco^.ev rt]v
Tenets...

dya-

homoeoteleuton.
tovs]

3 iifieripas] rjfxepaa

tov A.

AS; om. C, by diravras C. ; v&vras] See also 6 rovs alwvas t&v a'ubvwv] AS ; al&vas C.
tfeXi^aros avrov]
5

A.

A

below, § 45. This variation

8 T£ odv
is

ironfia-wfiev,

ddeXcpoi]

AS
1,

;

rl odv ipov/xev, dyairrjToi

C
4.

obviously suggested

by Rom.
9
/cat]

vi.
if

where the argument
C.

is
1,

the

same;

see

I.

p. 125.

For
S.

d8eX(f>oL

translated as

dyain)ToL see above, §§

apyna^fxev]

A;

dpyqaofxep C.

AS; om.

A;
Tit.

KaToXiirofxev

C; dub.

10 edcrai 6 de<nr6rr}s]

A;

iyKaraXelTUfiev] 6 8€<tt6tt)s edaai C.

iii.

5

oavvrj

a

ovk e£ epycov tcov ev SucaiKara enonjcrafxev 77/xeis aXXa
i.e.

to avrov eXeos k.t.X.
2.

6Y eavrcov]

r]p,d>v
i.

avTcov,
9,
iii.

as

e.g.

Rom.

viii.

23, 2 Cor.

1, 5,

seen before that the righteous have ever been adorned with good works, so now we see that even the Creator thus arrayed Himself. Having such an example, let us do good with all

and commonly.
3.

aocpias

rj

crvveo-ecos]
1

The words

occur together
xxix. 14), Col.
<tvv€toI,
i.

Cor. 9
;

Is. i. 19 (from so too aocpol kcu

our might'. In § 31 we have seen Clement combining the teaching of S. Paul and
S.

James

25 (Luke x. 21). They are explained in Arist. Eth. Nic. vi. 7, 10. The first is a creative,
xi.

Matt.

avvrjv kcu aXr/deiav

in the expression ovxl Siicaio8t,a niareoos iroirjo-as;

the second a discerning faculty. 6. r] 86£a] See the notes on Galatians
i.

So here, after declaring emphatically that men are not justified by their own works but by faith (§ 32 ov oV
avTcov
T)

tcov

epycov avTcov k.t.X.,

and

5.

again ov

bia... epycov cov KaTeipyao-d/ieda

XXXIII.

'What then?

If

we

are

ev 6o~iott]ti Kapdias
k.t.X.),

we leave off justified by faith, shall doing good ? God forbid. We must needs work. The Almighty Himself works. rejoices in His own beneficent
the earth, the ocean, the land living things that move on the and in the sea, are His creation.

aXXa 81a rfjs mo-Teas he hastens to balance this statement by urging the importance
of good works.

The same anxiety

reveals itself elsewhere.

The heaven,

Thus, where he deals with the examples adduced in the Apostolic writings, he is careful to

show

Lastly and
after

His created and blessed.

He made man own image. All these He
chiefly

nor works alone were present
of

that neither faith alone § 10
:

Abraham

dia

tt'lo-tlv

kol (piXo^eviav

As we have

12 e86dr) avTco vlbs k.t.X., §

of

Rahab

XXXIIl]
\otty\v',

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
fjLf]dafjLO}^

IOI
y

tovto

eaarai

6

Seo"7roT^s

£<p

y\]jZv

ye

yevrjdrjvai,
dvfj.ias
ttclv

dWa

cnrevcrco/uiev

jul6t<x

eKTeveias

kcii

7rpo-

epyov

dyadov
too

eTTLreXeTv.

clvtos
67rl

yap 6
avTOv

hrifjiiovpyos

Kal Se&TTOTrjs tcov diravTiav

rofc epyois

avTOv dyaWiaTcu.
15

yap
Kai

Tra/ujueyedecrTaTcp
ty\

KpaTEL ovpavous
(rvvearei

icrTrjpicrev,

aKara\ri7rTa) avrou

^teKoo'fJi^a'ev

aurovs'

yr\v

re

Sie^copLcrev
rjhpaa'ev
iirl

aVo
top

tov
ye

Trepie^ovTOS

avrr\v

vharos Kal

Above, § 23, we have the same phenoyev-qdrivat] A; yeprjOijvai (om. ye) CS. menon, though there the relations of A and C are reversed, A omitting and C reIt is wanted here for the sense. n eKreveias] e/crevta... A. taining 76.
14 dyaWLcirai] A; dydWerai ixeyeardr^ Leont Damasc.
rrj]

C C
;

Leont Damasc.
15 iarripicrev]

irafxp.eyedeaTdTui\

AC

;

irafx,-

AC;
16

earrjpt^ey

Leont Damasc.

A

Leont Damasc;
piuev

ei>

rrj

dub. S.

yi)j>

re &ext6pi(rej>]

C;

yr\v
17-

re

dpaaev]

AC

A; yrju Damasc

de 5iext6/H<rei>
;

Leont

;

yrjv de exupt-aev

Damasc.

17

edpacrev Leont.

8lo. tt'lcttlv kcli

See (pi\o£eviav i(Tw6rj. Westcott Canon p. 23. Nor is it only where doctrine is directly concerned that Clement places the teaching of the Apostles of the Circumcision and the Uncircumcision in
kcl-

eauca 6 SeaTTOTrjs k.t.A.] True dictum that everything is did 6e\rjfiaTos avrov and nothing 81 eavtwv, he ascribes the prevention of this consequence solely to God's pro10.

to his

hibition.

On
7.
'

6 deo-noTtis see

the note

juxtaposition, as e.g. § 49 aydnrj
\v7TT€i 7rXfj6os

above, §
ecp' rjp.lv,

dfxapricov, ayarrrj rravra

i7i

For the preposition in our case] comp. John xii.
Cor.
ix.

avextrai

This

(see the note there). studied effort to keep the balance
k.t.X.

16,

Acts

v. 35, xxi. 24, 2

14.

produces a certain incongruous effect in the rapid transition from the one
aspect of the antithesis to the other; but it is important when viewed in connexion with Clement's position as
ruler of a

avros yap k.t.X.] This passage as far as av^dvecrOe kcu TrXrjBvveade is
12.

quoted (with some omissions and variations)

by John of Damascus Sacr.
310).

Parall.

(11. p.

13. drjpiovpybs k.t.X.]

So Clem.Hom.

community

in

which the

xvii. 8 iravToiv Srjpiovpybv Kal decmoTrjv.

two sections of the Church, Jewish and Gentile, had been in direct anstill regarded each other with suspicion. On this position of Clement, as a reconciler, see Galatians p. 323, and the introduction here, I. p. 96. A part of this chapter is quoted by Leontius and

15.

io-rrjp tcrev]

See the note on

(TTTjpKTOV § l8.

tagonism and probably

John Res Sacr.
8.

(see above, I. p. 188) with considerable variations.

ii

This has been 17. Trepiexovros] thought to imply an acceptance of the theory of the coKeavos norapbs supposed to encircle the earth comp. e.g. Herod, ii. 21 to §' wKeavbv yfjv nepl Tvaaav peeiv, M. Ann. Seneca Suas. i. 1 de Oceano dubitant utrumne
;
'

Ti

ovv

7roiri<T<ofjL6v]

Evidently

modelled on Rom.

vi.

1

sq.

vinculum circumfluat.' Clement does not use the word (Dneavos, and as it is not unterras

velut

But, as

102
do~(paXfi

THE EPISTLE OF
tov
iSiov

S.

CLEMENT
dejueXiov
(HictTa^ei
tcl

[xxxiii

fiovXtijULctTOs

te

ev

auTrj

<£<joa

(poiTtovTct

Trj

iavTOv
ev

eKeXevcev

eivac

daXacrcrav Kal tcl
Trj

avTrj
9

^wa
etti

Trpo^rifjuovpyr]-

(ras eveitXeio-ev

iavTOv Swa/mei

iraci

to i^o5

ywTctTOV Koi
iepals Kal

TrafjLfjLe<y€des kcltcc

SiavoLav, avftpioirov rats

dfjoofjiois

-^epalv eirXacrev Trjs iavTOv eIkovos

yapa.KTr\pa.

o'vtlos

yap

<pr]criv

6 0eos*

TToihccom6n

an-

QpoanoN kat' eiKONA kai ka6' omoi'gocin HMeTepAN. kai enoiHC6N 6 06OC TON ANOpCOTTON, ApC€N KAI GAAy InOIHCGN Ayi

fiovk-qiAaTos]

AC;
;

6e\r}[iaros

Leont Damasc.

ra re ev

ai>Tr]...dvi>dpei]

om. Leont Damasc. aaa A irpodrj/XL
ira<n...(Lvdp(jnrov]

i iavrov]

AS

;

eavruv C.

Trpoeroipdaas
iirl

CS.

3 Trpodrjpiovpyrjcras] ewl 4 ev^KXeiaev] evtickiGev A.

AC;

tqxjtols

avdpwirov Leont Damasc S. the other authorities see the last note.

rbv e^oxwraro?' (i^oTarou Leont) Kal irappeyedrj For 5 irappeyedes] A; irappeyede'GTaTov C.

6

lepcus]

AC

;

icn'cus

avrov Leont

natural to speak of the water
ling' the

'

gird-

land independently of this
is

theory, the inference See the note on § 20.
3.

questionable.

the lips of Clement, and such a strong expression as irappeyeOes kcltcl didvoiav jars with his language elsewhere

about
before
tcl

Tvpobrjixiovpyrjcras] i.e.
yrj

36.

human intellect, The nappLeyedes
seems
to

e.g. §§ 13, 32,

Kara

biavoiav

iv

Trj

£a>a

cpoircovra,

which have

therefore

have the same

been already mentioned out of their
proper place.
i

4.

eWfcAeio-ei/]

inclosed
:

within

their proper
tcl

bounds'

see above § 20
this

to

TrepiKeipeva avrrj KkeWpa. e£ox(0TdTov k.t.A.] Is

an

accusative

after

enXaaev,

avOpairov

bearing as Trj a/caraAr/Vro) clvtov avveorei above. John of Damascus indeed takes the sentence otherwise, but he omits kcltcl bidvotav. 5. nappiyeOes] The word does not occur either in the lxx or in the G.T., but is found in Symmachus Ps.
lxvii
(lxviii).

Or is it a being in apposition? nominative absolute, referring to the whole sentence which follows, avdpconov. .xapaKTrjpa
.

31

crvvodcp
11.

nappeyedoip
p. 204).

(Field's Orig.
6.

Hexapl.

dpcopois]

'faultless'.

See the
quo-

?

On the construction
i

note on
7.

p(i>poo~KOTrr)6ev, § 41.

to

adopted depends the sense assigned Kara biavoiav which will mean
respectively either (1) in intellectual

noirjo-(op,€v k.t.A.]

A broken
i.

tation from the

LXX Gen.

26, 27,

clauses being left out.
8.

capacity', referring to man; or (2) 'as an exercise of His creative intelli-

etKova, opoionxLv]

These words
Syn.
1st
ser.

are distinguished in reference to this
text
§

gence*) referring to God. The former appears to be generally adopted ; but

by Trench N.
«

T.

xv

the latter seems to

me preferable
Hamlet's
'

;

for

a sentiment like noble in reason
faculty
!'

How
in

!

how

infinite

Dorner {Person Christi I. p. 100, Engl, trans.) considers it probable that under the expression clkcov Qeov,
'

is

somewhat out of place on

whose x a P aKTr)p a man bears, we are

xxxiv]
10 toy'c.

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
Tclvtcl ovv TravTO.

103

TeXeuvcras
kai

eirriveo'ev

avTa

Kai.

r]v\oyt](T6P Kai
jji€v

elirev

AylANecGe

nAHGyNecGe.

G'ldo-

otl ev epyois ayadoTs ttclvtes eKOcr/uDjdricrav 01 SiKaioi* Kai auTos ovv 6 Kvpios epyois eavTOv KOO~jur]cras
e-fcoVTes

e^a/)^.

ovv tovtov tov
6e\tifj.aTi

v7roypafjLfjLov
e'£ bAtjs

clokvws
tj/uicov

15 TTpoceXdcofjiev

tw

avTOv,

Icr^vos

ipyacrw/ueOa epyov

hiKcuocrvvt]<z.

XXXIV.
Damasc.
10
eirrjvecreu]

'O ay ad 6s epyaT)]? fxeTa
8 eUbva]

7rapprio-ias \a/uit

Damasc adds
Leont
;

Tj/JLertpav

AC;

eiraiveaev

iiroliqcrev

and omits Damasc.
Wdofxev]

after dfioicoatv.

II Av^dveade]

av^aueadai A.

ir\r)dvvecFde] irXrjdvvecrOcu

A.

Young
A.

(marg.);

tdtofxev

ACS.

12 otl]
iKoifXTjdrjaav S.

CS

;

add rb A.
13 odv]
I.

tpyois] eyyoccr

eKoa/xrjOrjaav]

AC;
A;
to

A;

CS.

gpyois]

A; add
/ecu

ayadois CS.
iax^os]

See above,
ttjs

§ 30,

and comp.

pp. 126, 141.

15 e£]

A;

CS.

iax^os C.

understand the Son'.
is

Though

the

text in Genesis

so interpreted

by

credited by the fact that the scribe's attention was flagging here, for he
writes eyyois for epyois

later fathers (e.g.

Clement of Alexandria and Origen), I see no indication in the context that this idea was present to the mind of the Roman See the remarks on the Clement.
1.

and

(as

we

On have seen) idcop-ev for ei§o/xei>. these grounds I proposed the omission in my first edition, and it has since been confirmed by our new
authorities.
14.
v7roypap,p,ov]

logos-doctrine above,
11.

p. 398.

lxx

Av^aveade Gen. i. 28.

k.t.X.]

From

the

See the note on

§5to re15.

E'l'8o[j.€v]

The sense seems

7rpoo-e\6(opev]

The verb

irpoo--

quire this substitution for tdcopev ; see the introduction 1. p. 120 for similar
errors of transcription.
fore,'

epxeo-dai

occurs

several

times

of

'We saw

be-

approaching God in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and in the imperative
npocrepx<op.€Ba iv. 16, x. 22.

Clement, 'that all the righteous were adorned with good works (§ 32), and now I have shown
says
that the
6

more

especially twice,
§

See also above
avT(o
k.t.X.
;

29

Trpoo~i\6oAp,ev ovv

comp.
re-

Kvpios

Lord God Himself etc' By is meant 6 $r)p.tovpybs ko.1
tSv
anavToov,

§§ 23, 63.

XXXIV.
ceives his

'

The good workman
:

deo-norr}?

appears from ovv and from ix^Pl taken in connexion with what has gone before
12.

as

(compare ayaXXtarat above).

but the boldly slothful dares not face his employer. The Lord will come quickly with His reward in His hand. He will

wages

on

k.t.X.]

If the

reading ro be
cog:

retained,

we must understand a

nate accusative such as Koapr^fxa Soph. El. 1075 tov del 7raTp6s
cttovov)

e.g.
(sc.
is

come attended by myriads of angels, hymning His praises. Let us therefore with one voice and one soul cry to Him, that we may be partakers of
all

beikaia arevaxovaa.
;

This

possible

but the reading of

A

is dis-

His glorious promises, which surpass that man can conceive'.

io4
fldvei

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT

[xxxiv

top dpTOv rov epyov avrov, 6 vwdpos kcu

irap-

eifjievos

ovk avrotyQaXfjiei tw epyoirapeKTrj avrov. oeov ovv e&Tiv TTpodvjJLOvs TJ/mcis eivai eis dyado7rouav* e£

avTOV yap

irdvTa' 7rpo\eyei yap y\\uv 'Iaoy 6 Kypioc, kai 6 micGoc aytoy npd npocoanoy aytoy, attoAoyfl NAI 6KACT0O KATA TO epTON AYTOYpOTp67T6Tai OVV Y\\Xa<Z
ecrriv to.
J

%

5

7ricrTevovTas e£ oArjs Ttjs Kapdlas err avTco fit] dpyovs eivai eirl irav epyov dyadov' to Kav/uf]Se irapeifjievovs
\r]ixa
i

Y\\±u>v
6 vioOpbs]

Kal

r\

Trapp^cia ecTw ev avTW'
3 i]pas]

viroTave£ avrov]

AC

;

6 de vu>9pb<; S.
if it

AC

;

vpds S.

AC.

S translates as

referred to irpoOvpovs v/xas k.t.X.

5 6 Ktfpios]
7 irKxreiovras]

Kvpios (om. 6) C.

6 npoTptrreTai] -wporpeicere A.
acorrjp

A; CS

;

Both these i. 6 vcoBpbs k.t.X.] words occur in the epistle to the Hebrews, and nowhere else in the N.T. For vcodpbs see Heb. v. 11, vi. 12; The comfor irapeipevos, ib. xii. 12.
bination appears in Ecclus.
vcodpbs
kcu
iv.

napayiverai SA) e^coi/ rov eavrov piadov, Ka\ ro epyov avrov (om. avrov A) npb npoo-coirov avrov but the
:

ending comes from Prov.
ci7ro8i8(ocriv eKacrrco

xxiv. 12 os

29

rrapeipevos

ev

rois

epyois

Kara ra epya avrov, unless (as seems more probable from the connexion) it is taken from Rev.
xxii. 12 18011

avrov,
2.
xii.

which passage perhaps Clein his

epxopai

rafti)

Ka\ 6 picr66s

ment had
14,

mind.

pov per

ep.ov drroSovvai eKacrrco cos

ro

avTocpOaXpel] 'faces', as

Wisd.

Acts

The word
bius.

xxvii. 15, Barnab. § 5. occurs frequently in Polyavrcorvelv

epyov ecrrai avrov. Clem. Alex. Strom. iv. 22 (p. 625) has the same quotation, but is copying the Roman

Comp.
i.

Theoph. ad

Clement.
7.
iir

Auto I.
vi.
2.

avropparelv Aftost. Const. For avrocpdaXpelv itself see
5,

avrco]

i.e.

rco p.icrd(o,

'

with

our reward in view\
of e£

The

position

25 (ed. Hammond). his employer'. I have ipyoTvapeKrrj] not found any other instance of
Lit.
p.
'

D. Jacob,

this

word, which
(Exod.
i.

is

equivalent
7, v. 6, etc.).

to

oXrjs rrjs KapBias is opposed to such corrections as eV avrb rb or eVi nor rb for the MS reading eV avrco does any alteration seem needed.
;

epyo$6rr)s.
epyodicoKrrjs
3.
rjpcov.

Compare
iii.

also epyo\aj3os,

e£ avrov]
'iSou
is

e.

rov epyoivapeKrov

napeipivovs k.t.A.] Comp. 21 els irav epyov dyadbv rjToipacrpLevov, ib. iii. I7 Tit. iii. 1, and The prjre after prj in see above, § 2.
8.
p,r)8e

2

Tim.

ii.

5

4.

6

Kvpios

k.t.X.]

The beIs.
xl.

A

ginning

a confusion of

10

p. 513,

l8ov Kvpios (o debs vpwv S) Kvpios (om. Kvpios sec. A) pera. io~x v °s epx^rai kcu 6 ftpaxiaiv add. avrov A) pera. Kvp'ias ibov 6 piaBbs avrov per avrov Kai ro
'

315) as to call forth the suggestion in my first edition that it should probably be read /x^Se
p.

was so suspicious A. Buttmann

(see

Winer

§ lv.

;

see the vv.
'27.

Eph. iv. Our new authorities have con11.

in

Luke

vii.

33,

epyov evavriov avrov,
Idov 6
crcorrjp
croi

and

Is.

lxii.

II

irapayeyovev

(aoi 6

firmed the justice of this suspicion. 12. Mvpiai k.t.X.] Dan. vii. 10 (Theo-

xxxiv]
10 crcojueda

TO THE CORINTHIANS. tw
OeXrjjuaTL

*05

avTOV'

KctTavoricrcojuiev
7T(jos

to

ttolv

7rArj6os

twv dyyeXwu avTOV,
aytoj,

tcq

deXti/ULctTi
r\

avTOV
MypiAi

XeiTovpyov&iv TrapecrTcoTe^* Xeyei yap
MypiAAec n^peiCTHKeiCAN
TOYN AYTO)'
Kai
ka'i

ypa(prj'

yjAiai

yjAiAAec eAeiToyp-

€K6KpArON'
kti'cic

A[-|OC,

ApOC, ApOC

KypiOC CA-

15 BaooO, hAh'phc ttaca h

thc AoIhc aytoyty\

Kai

^/xels

ovv, ev Ofjiovoia eVf

to avTo avva-^devTe^

o~vveiSrjcrei,

ws e^ eVos

ctto/ulcltos (ioricrcofxev 7rpos clvtov €KT€viios
rifjias

ek

to

/uLeTO%ovs
See
1.

yeveadai tcov fjieyaXoov Kai evho^cov
8 /«?5£] C, and so probably S; pr/re A.
12 Xei-

om. A.
both
this

p. 124.

Tovpyovacv] Xirovpyovaiv

A.
16 ry

13 eXeirovpyovv]

C

;

Xirovpyovv A.
15
/cricrts]

S translates
;

word and

irapeKXT-qKavav as presents.
crvveidrjcrei]

AS

777

C

with

LXX and Hebr.

AC

;

in

una

conscientia S.

dot.) yiKiai yikidhes eXeirovpyovv avrco (edepdnevov avrov LXX) kol pvptai pv-

sis for

such conjectures.
(Liturg.
d.

Probst more
drei
ersten
ex'

especially

piddes 7rap€L(TTT]K€LO-av avrcp, the clauses

Jahrh. 41 sq) emphasizes
nexion. pressly point to
sanctus',
it

this con-

being transposed by Clement. The order of the clauses in the Hebrew is the same as in the Greek versions. Yet Iren. Haer. ii. 7, 4, Euseb. Praep.

The phenomena which
are
(1)

the

ter

and more
Is. vi.

especially the

connexion of
10
;

3 with

Dan.

vii.

Ev.
viii

vii.
i?i

15 (p. 326), Greg.

Nyss.Hom.
Hier.

(2)

The
4,

expressions
Ign.
7, 8),

im

to avro
13,

Eccles.

(1.

p. 463), Cyril.

crwaxOevres (comp.

Ephes.

Catech. xv.

24

(p.

237),

and

others,

Philad.
I.

give the quotation with the inverted clauses as here but, as it is quoted
;

Smyrn. paros (comp. Rom.
p.

e£ evbs <tt6-

xv. 6), cktcvcos (see

385),

etc.;

(3)

The quotation
this
1.

with every shade of variation in different fathers and even these same fathers in some cases give the right order elsewhere, no stress can be
laid
to

6(p0a\p6s k.t.X. subject see the

For more on
introduction,

p.

386

sq. 16. ttj o-weiSijo-ei] H11 heart, in con1

on this coincidence which seems be purely accidental.
Kai eneKpayov]
Is. vi. 3.

sciousness'

;

comp. Eccles.
aov

x.

20 Kai ye

ev a-weidr/crei
i.e.

14,

A loose quotation
'EiceKpayov is

(3ao-tXea prj KaTapdar],

from LXX
imperfect

an

of a new verb Ke<pdyco formed from Kenpaya see Buttmann
;

'in your secret heart'. The presence of their hearts, and not of their bodies only, is required. The commentators however either translate

Ausf. Griech. Sprachl.

§111

(11.

p.

as though it were ev dyaOfj o-vveidrjcrei, or give rfj aweidijo'ec the unsupported
last is

The con15. Kai impels ovv k.t.A.] nexion of this passage with the liturgical

services

had struck

careful

observers, even before the discovery of the liturgical ending of the epistle
(§§ 60, 61)

sense 'harmony, unanimity'. This apparently the sense assigned to it by the Syriac translator ; see the upper note. Others have proposed to read arwdrjo-et. or o-vvadia.

had furnished a

solid ba-

io6
eTrayyeXiiiov

THE EPISTLE OF
avTOv.
Aeyei

S.

CLEMENT

[xxxiv

yap'

'O^OaAmoc oyk e?AeN

Ka'| OYC OYK HK0YC6N, Ka) eni KApAl'AN AN0poonoY oyk ancBh, OCA HTOIMAC6N TOIC YTTOMeNOYCIN AYTON.
i

'O00aA/xds]

A;

a 6(p6a\p.bs

CS

(with

i

Cor.

ii.

9).

3 oaa

rjToifxaaev]

A;

add. Kvpios CS.

rots vwofxevovcnv]

A;

rots dyairQaiv

AC; om. S. CS (see
S. Je-

the lower note).
O(f)6a\[xbs k.t.A.] This quotation occurs also in S. Paul 1 Cor. ii. 9 (where it is introduced by Ka6a>s yea 6(f)daXpbs ovk ypcnvrai), in the form
1.
y

The

passage,

if

we may trust

rome, occurred as given by S. Paul, both in the Ascension of Isaiah and in the Aftocalypse of Elias (Hieron.
in
IX.
Is. lxiv. 4, IV. p.

etdeu kcu ovs ovk rjKovo-ev kol eVi Kctpdiav dvOpocnrov ovk aveftr) ocra r)Toipao-ev o It is cited Qebs to7s dyanaaiv avrov.

p.

3).

And

761 Pro I. in Gen. Origen, in Matth.
;

xxvii.

again in

ii.

§ 11

(comp.

§ 14),

Mart.
;

9 (ill. p. 916), says that S. Paul ' quotes from the latter, In nullo re-

Polyc. 2, Clem. Eft. ad Virg. i. 9 see also Lagarde's Gesamm. Abhandl. p.
142.
It
is

gulari libro
nisi
(el
prj,

hoc positum invenitur,

Isaiah

lxiv.

apparently taken from 4, which runs in the
alcovos
77/u.cof

'but only') in Secretis Eliae prophetae'. This assertion is

LXX
crov

cltvo

rod

ovde oi 6(pda\po\
kcil

ovk -qKovaapev eidov 6e6v irk-qv

ra epya
'

o~ov

a

7rot7/o"€is

rots

but more nearly in From eternity they the Hebrew, have not heard, they have not hearkened, neither hath eye seen a god [or 'O God'] save thee (who) worketh
viropivovo-Lv eXeou,

repeated also by later writers (see Fabricius Cod. Ps. V. T. I. p. 1073) doubtless from Origen, but combated by Jerome (11. cc. and Eft is t. lvii. § 9, I. p. 314), who refers the quotation to Is. lxiv. 4. If it could be shown that
these apocryphal books were prior to S. Paul, this solution would be the

'(what) He shall do'] to him that awaiteth Him' (see Delitzsch
[or

most probable but they would appear to have been produced by some Christian sectarians of the second
;

ad

loc); combined with Is. lxv. 16, 17 ovk avafirjo-ercu avrcov eVi rrjv Kap8lav...ov pr) e7r£\6r) avrcov eVt rrjv KapClement mixes up S. Paul's 8iav.
free translation

century, for Jerome terms them 'Iberae naeniae' and connects them with

the Basilideans and other Gnostics

who abounded
also
c.

in

Spain

(11.

cc.

;

see

or paraphrase from
latter

Vigil. IL p. 393,

and comp.

the

Hebrew

(the

words

00-a

rjroipao-ev k.t.\.

being apparently the Apostle's own explanatory addition) with the passage as it stands in the LXX just as above, § 13, in quoting Jer. ix. 23, 24 (or 1 Sam. ii. 10) he condenses it after S. Paul. For a similar instance see above § 34 Ibov 6 Kvptos
;

Fabricius p. 1093 sq). If so they incorporated the quotation of S. Paul in their forgeries. For a similar instance of incorporation see the

notes on

Galatians

vi.

15.

At

all

events both these works appear from the extant remains to have been Christian. For the Aftocalyftse of

k.t.X.

The

passages, which Hilgen-

feld suggests as the sources of the

quotation (4 Esdr. x. 35 sq, 55 sq), diverge more from the language of S. Paul and Clement, than these

words of

Isaiah.

Elias see Epiphan. Haer. xlii (p. 372), who says that the quotation in Eph. v. 14 (which is obviously Christian) was found there and for the Ascension of Isaiah, this same father Haer. lxvii. 3 (p. 712), where he quotes a
;

xxxv]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
'W?
jjuxKapLa kclI Oav/uacrTa tcl
^corj

107

XXXV.
5

Swpa TOV

Qeov, dyaTTtiToi.

ev ddavcuria, Xafjarporr]^ ev Si-

passage referring to the Trinity. Indeed there is every reason to believe
that the

modern

work known

to

Epiphanius

critics have made of this reference to Hegesippus in Stephanus Gobarus, see Galatians p. 320.

and

several other fathers under this
is

For the connexion of this quotation
oCpdaXfios ovk eldev k.t.X. with the earlier liturgies, see the introduction,
I.

the same with the Ascension a?id Vision of Isaiah published first

name,

by Laurence in an yEthiopic Version and subsequently by Gieseler in a Latin. The two versions represent different recensions and the passage
;
'

p.

389

sq.

Fabricius
allel
los.

(p. 1073) quotes a parfrom Empedocles {Fragm. PhiI. p. 2, ed. Mullach) ovr eVidepKra

Eye hath not
Latin
(xi.

seen, etc' appears in 34)

ra8 avftpaaiv ovr eVaKoucrra, ovtc
TrepikrjTrTa.
3.

voa>

the

but not in the

^Ethiopic (see Jolowicz Himmelfahrt tc. Vision des Propheten Iesaia p. 90, Leipzig 1854). The Latin recension
therefore of Jerome

imop.ivovo-iv\

It

is

clear

that

Clement wrote vrropevovaiv from the words which follow at the beginning of
the next chapter rlva ovv apa eoriv ra
€Toip.a£6p,€va rots vTTop.evovo'Lv; where he picks up the expression according to his wont see the note on § 46
;

must have been
;

in the

hands

though this very quotation

show clearly that the ^Ethiopic more nearly represents the original form of the work (see Liicke
seems
to

rcov €k\€Kto>v fxov 8iao-rpiif/ai.

On

the

Offenbarung d. Johannes p. 179 sq). Both recensions alike are distinctly
Christian.

other
for

hand

S,

having broken
it

the

connexion by substituting

ayaTvwo-Lv

inropivovcnv, re-establishes

by
this

events a favourite text with certain early Gnostic sects, who introduced it into their formula
It

was

at

all

the expedient of adding ko\ ayaTva>vT<6v
to

vnopevovTcov

in

§

35.

On

reading (vTropivovaiv) see also
390, note.

I.

p.

of initiation and applied it to their esoteric teaching ; see Hippol. Haer.
v. 24, 26, 27, vi. 24.

XXXV.

'

Great and marvellous
!

This perverted
(as

use of the text was condemned by
their

are God's gifts even in the present How then can we conceive the glory

contemporary Hegesippus

reported by Stephanus Gobarus in Photius Bib/. 232), as contradicting our Lord's own words na.Ka.pioi 01 In other words 6tj)$dkfwt vp<ov k.t.X.

vants ? reward.

that hereafter awaits His patient serLet us strive to attain this

And

to this

end

let
:

us do
let

he complained that they would restrict to the initiated few the knowledge which Christ declared to be laid open to all. But Stephanus Gobarus himself, writing some centuries
later

and vainglory let us lay aside all selfish and unbrotherly Remember how in the Psalms sins.
strife
;

what shun

is

well-pleasing to

Him

us

God denounces

those

who hearken

and knowing the text only as it occurs in S. Paul, is not unnaturally at a loss to know what Hegesippus

not to His warning voice, who persist in wronging their neighbours, countHe tells us ing on His forbearance. that the sacrifice of praise is the path
-

of salvation'.
5.

means by this condemnation
\iyei k.t.X. ).

(ovk o tl Ka\ nadcov pdrrju p.ev elprjo-dai ravra

old'

XapivpoTrjs]

''cheerfulness,

alaPlut.

crity,
Vit.

On

the use which

some

strenuousness\ as e.g. Cim. 17, Polyb. xxxii. 23.

1

(see

io8
Kaiocrvvrj,

THE EPISTLE OF
dKrjdeia ev
dyictcrfJLUi*
rjjuitov.

S.

CLEMENT
tt'kttis

[xxxv

7rctpprj(rict,

ev 7r67roidri(rei,

iyKpctTeia ev
Tr\v Sidvoictv
juevct

kcu TctvTct vireTrnrTev Travrct viro

TLva ovv dpa early tcl eTOL^a^o;

toTs

vTro\xevov(Tiv

6

Srj/uLiovpyos

kcu 7rarr]p tcov
kcci 5

altovuov

6 7rctvctyios clvtos yivoocrKei ttjv wocroTriTct
v/mels

ty\v

KctWovrjv avTwv.
dpid/ULa)

ovv

dytovia'cciuiedct evpe6rjvcu

ev

tw

tcov virofJievovTOiv clvtov,

07rcos

/uLeTctAct-

j3cojUiev

twv

eTrriyyeXfJievaiv Scopecov.
ectv

wcos Se earou tovt)

TO y dya7Tf]TOL\
7TLG'Tecos

i(TTripiy juevri
ectv

rj

Sictvoia ^/ucwv
Tct

diet

7rpos

tov Qeov

iK^Too/mev

evapecTct
dvrjKOVTct
Travra.

10

Kai evirpocrheKTct avTto'
i eyKpareia] eyKparia
Triirrovra S,
-rrarrjp

ectv e7rtTe\ecro)iuev t<x
viriiriirTev Trdvra]

A.

A

;

viroTr'nrrei

C

;

U7ro-

some

letters

tlov alihvwv 6

having dropped out, Y"n"OTTlTTTe[iTT<\]NT<\. iravdyios] AS; rQv alwviov Kai irarrjp iravdyios C.
/cat

4

/cat

7 vir °-

fxevovruv]

AC;

add.

dya-rruvTuv S.

For the reason of

this addition see the note

on

§

34 ocpdaXfibs k.t.X.

avrov]

A; om. CS.

8 rQv eirriyyeXfJLevwv dcope&v]

TioveirrjyyeX/xevuvdojpaicov

A;

rCov dcope&v rCov eTrrjyyeX/xivcov C,

and so probably

S.

o dyawrjToi']

AC; om.
/cat

S.
5ta)

y

i)] T)t)

A;
;

i)

(om.

rf)

C.

did Triarews]
eK<7)Tu>fxev]

Young; per
C.
Kai einrpbo~-

fidem S; iriarews (om.
ret

A; marus
avTLpi]

C.

10

A;

eK^rjT^acofxev

evdpecrra

einrpoadeKra

AS

ra dyadd
less

/cat

evdpeara

ai/r<£

Schweigh. Lex. s.v. \apurp6s). Compare the similar word (paidpoTtjs. The position of Xap-trpor-qs here seems to
require this sense, for all the words in the parallel clauses far}, dXrjOeia, to the moral tt'kjtis, eyKpareia, refer

indeed the occurrences in4 Mace,
are earlier.
dia 7ricrTec0s]

vii. 4, xiv. 7,

9.

The reading
is

of the

unquestionably see I. p. 143. The omission of right dia in A may perhaps be explained by
;

Syriac

version

consciousness,

not to any external
nenoidqaei]

the neighbourhood of didvoia.

Hil-

advantages.
1.

tt'kttis

ev

See the

note above, § 26. 2. /cat ravra k.t.X.]

genfeld and Gebhardt read ttkttcos. Lipsius (p. 15) defends Trio-Teas, translating cogitationes JideV, but this
'

'These,' Clement argues, 'are already within our cognisance. What then are the joys in store for those who remain stedfast to the

would require
11.

al didvoiai tt)s Trio-Teats.

evTrpoadeKTa]

See the notes on

§ 7, 4o.
13. iracrav abiKiav k.t.X.] The whole passage which follows is a reminiscence of Rom. i. 29 sq noielv to. fxr)

end?' Comp. 1 J oh. iii. 2 vvv reKva Qeov eo~p.ev /cat ovtt<o e(pavepwdr) ri eaop.eda.

Kadr)KovTa...Trao~ri adiKia.

Trovrjpia irXeo-

navdyios] Apparently the first instance of the word, which afterwards
5.

ve£iq...epibos doXov KaKorjdeias, yjsidvpicrtcis

KaTaXakovs

6eocrTvyels...v7reprj(f)d-

prominent place in language of Greek Christendom
takes

a

the
;

un-

a\a£6vas ...eTriyvovTes oti oi Ta ToiavTa Trpdao-ovTes d$-ioi Bavarov elaiv,
vovs

xxxv]
Trj dfjLWfJLw

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
fiovXrjffei

109

avTOv

kcli

dKoXovdrjcoojuev rrj

6Sw

t^5 dXr]6eias, diroppi^savTes
kcci dvofJLLaVy

d<p'

iavTwv Traaav ddiKLav
kcci

re irXeove^iav , epeis, KcxKorjdeias

hoXovs,
virepr]-

15 ylsidupi(riuLOvs

re

kcli

KaraXaXids, Beocrrvyiau,
KevoSo^iav T€
kcci

(paviav re Kai dXatyveiav, peviav.

d(piXo-

Tavra yap

ol

Trpdarorovres arvyrjTOi

virdpyovariv ov jjlovov Se ol tt pacer ovtes ol ffvvevSoKOvvres clvtoTs. Xeyei yap r\ ypacptj' Toj Ae 20 AMApTCoAco efneN 6 Oedc* "Ina ti cy Aihth ta Aikaicomata
moy, kai anaAamBangic thn AiaGhkhn

tw Oew aura, dXXa kcci

moy eni ctomatoc coy;
Adroyc Moy
i.

cy Ae Imi'chcac haiAgian, kai e'leBAAAec Toyc
5eKra C.
14
avofjLiav]

eic

A;

irov-qplav

CS

(comp.

Rom.

29).

TrXeove&av]

AS; om.
A.
v.l. in

C.

15 /caraXctXids] /caraXiXiacr A.

vireprjcpaviav re]

AC;
This

/cat

virepiqcpavLav S.

16 d\a£oveiav] aXafovia A.

dcpiXo^eulav}
e/cSiTryf?
;

CS
S.

;

(piKo^eviau
is

18 fidvov] /xov A.

20
21 eVt]

dnjyrj]

A;

C; dub.

a

the

lxx

crov] fjiov

A.

<ua CS with the LXX. Hebr. ?V) So the MS seems clearly to read (as even the photograph shows),
also.

A

(as the

though Tisch. gives
1.

it <xov.

22

<xv

5e k.t.X.]

C

omits

all to 6 pvo/mevos (p.

i

n,

After the omission comes Kai ev ry r£kei dvaia alveaeus k.t.X. iratdiav A. e£e/3aXXes] e^a/foXXea" A; e£e/3aXes S; def. C. iraideiav]
1)

inclusive.

OV

[X.OVOV aVTCL TTOIOVCTLV {V.

I.

7TOtOVVT€s)
I.

liness of their contributions towards

aAAa

Kai crvvevSoKovaiv (v.

o~vvev8o-

the needs of poor Christians abroad,

Kovvres)

rois

Trpdcrcrovcnv.

On

the

though they

may have

failed in this

reading noiovvTes, crvvevdoKovvres, supported by Clement's language here,
see Tischendorf 's note.
16.

respect also (see the note § 38). The duty of entertaining the brethren

from

plest

emendation of the reading of A on firj ar^eXeiVco § 38), and it is now confirmed by our new
(see the note
authorities.
Sibyll. viii.

dcpiko^eviav]

This was the sim-

foreign churches was a recognized obligation among the early In former times the Christians. Corinthians had obtained a good report for the practice of this virtue
(^
I

The word
304

occurs Orac.

to fieya\o7rpe7r£s

rijs

(piXofjevias

ttjs d(pLko£evir)S ravrrjv

vficov tfSos),

but

now

TLO-ovo-i

rrpdne^av.

Other

proposed

Hence

the

stress

was changed. laid on the hosall

readings were
(piKoveiKiav.

(pi\orip:Lav, (piXoSot-iav,

suggestion of Lipsius (p. 115), that the Corinthians had failed in the duty of providing
for

The

pitality of (§ 11), of

Abraham Rahab (§

10),

of Lot
for
this

12);

virtue cannot

have been singled out

in all three cases without

some

special

others,

appears to

be correct.

reference.
19.

But the word seems
to their

to point rather churlishness in not entertaining foreign Christians at Corinth, than (as he maintains) to the niggard-

the

Tw §e LXX Ps.

dfiaprcoXS k.t.X.]

1.

16

— 23, with slight va-

From

riations, of

which the more important

are noted below.

no
ta
dni'coo.

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT

[xxxv

moi'xoon

ei eGecopeic KAenTHN, cysieTpexec aytco, kai mgta thn Mepi'AA coy eTiOeic* to ctoma coy enAeoNAceN

KAKIAN, KAI H rAOOCCA COY TT6p I6TT Ae K€N AoAlOTHTA'

KA6HM6NOC

kata Toy AAeAchoy coy katgAaAcic,

kai

kata toy yioy thc
ka'i

MHTpdc coy
yrreAABec,

en'G.eic

ckanAaAon* tayta enomcAc
oti

cciVhca* 5
ce
ka'i

anomg,

ecoMAi

coi

6'moioc

eAe'r^oo

TTApACTHCOO

KATA npOCCOTTON

COy.

CyN6T€

AH
(he

TAYTA,
AeooiM,

01
ka'i

eniAAN0ANOMeNOi toy Oeoy, mhuotg ApnACH
2 iw\e6va<rev~\

A;

eirXedvafcv S.

avofiai

A;
;

dvo\xiav S.

See the lower note.
erou S.

6 dvo/xe] 4 ddeXcpov] a8e\<pova A. 7 ere Kara irpbauirbv aov] A;
10
aura;]
17]
;

Kara irpbawrrbv aov ras a/zapWas
see

See the lower note.

LXX (BS)
avrols S.

below

rjv

ACS
p.ov

(with

some mss of the lxx).
13
curflep etas]

AC

tov Qeov]

AS;

C.

aadeviaa A.

14

toi;toi/|

C; TOyTOy

3.

Ka6rjfX€vos\
;

Implying deliberate

conspiracy
6.

see

Perowne on
dvop,iav (B)
it is
;

Ps.

i.

1.

avofxe]

LXX

but S

bring thee face to face with thyself show thee to thyself in thy true light.' The ae is omitted in BS of the lxx

has avope, though

afterwards cor-

and doubtless had no place
original text
'

in the

rected into avopeiav (dvoptav). 'Avofiiav is read by Justin Dial. 22 (p.
240),

of this version which

798)
iv.

Clem. Alex. Strom, vi. 14 (p. but dvope Clem. Alex. Strom. 24 (p. 634). The Syriac does not
;

agreed with the Hebrew, I will lay in order (the matter) before thee'.
Justin Dial. 22 (I.e.) and other writers supply an accusative ras dpapTias
aov,

favour avope (as Wotton states), except that the existing pointing inThe reading of terprets it thus. our MS A here shows how easy was
the transition from the one to the
Other, avopai (dvop,e)
p.iav).

which
of

is

found also in a large
(see
'

number
Parsons).
8.

MSS
i.e.

Holmes and
he seize you

cos Xecov]

lest

and avopid ( = dvoSee the notes on dvaaTr] aopai

and r] 8el£co just below. Though makes better sense, the original reading of the lxx here must have been dvopiav (not dvope as Wotton for the translators must thinks) have misread rPIIK nvn ITCH 'Thou
§ 5,
avop.e
;

were a lion\ The words cos Xecov are absent from the LXX (and Justin Dial. 22 p. 402), as also from the Hebrew. They must have come from Ps. vii. 3, either as a gloss in
as
it

Clement's text

of

the

lxx

or

as

inadvertently inserted

thoughtest,
?T>nK

I

shall surely be', as if

by him in a made from memory. quotation 10. fj bel^co] As fj is read in the LXX (BS) and in Justin 1. c, and as the

rmn rvm 'Thou

thoughtest

destruction (or iniquity), I shall be', since nilH is elsewhere translated by
dvop[a, Ps.
lvii. 2,

parallelism in the opening of the next chapter (rj 68bs ev r) evpopev to
acoTrjpiov
I

k.t.X.)

seems
it

to require

it,

xciv.

20

;

and Theo-

have restored

for

rjv.

For similar

whose version agreed with the Field's Hexapl. ad loc), must have read it in the same way. / will 7. TvapaaTr]aco ae k.t.X.]
dotion,

LXX

(see

see § 15 avacorruptions in the MS aTrjaopev (note), § 36 oacov, § 4 1 avveidrjaiv,
ii.

A

§

6 aixpakcoaiav.

'

retained, acoTrjpwv

If rjv be must be taken as a

xxxvi]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
c e
i

1 1 1

mh
iooAoc

\

"3

5

h

o

pyoM6NOc.
Aei'lco

OyciA

AiNeceooc

/

AolAcei

Me,

kai

gkci

h

ayto) to cooTHpiON toy OeoY-

XXXYI.
(TCOTtjplOV
ij/ULCOV

Avtt]
'

r\

6$os, ctya7rriTol, ev

rj

evpojJLev

to

IrjCTOVV

XpiffTOV TOV dp^LCpea TOOV 7TpO(Tfiorjdov Trjs dcrdeveias
to.
ii\jsri

(popoov
tjiutov.

ti/uoov,

15 $LCt

ovpavwv TOVTOV eVOTTTpL^Ofdeda TY[V Ct/UKJOJULOV KCLl V7repT(XTr]V b^siv avTOv' $ia tovtov rjveco^drjo'av tJ/ukjov 01 ScbdaX/uol
Ttjs

tov irpocTTaTriv kcu $ia tovtov ctTevicrcojuev eis

tcuv

KapSias'

Sta

tovtov
A

r\

dcrvveTOs

Kctl icrKOTcofjievr]

Sid-

(the superscribed Y being prima mantt) A; tovto S, and so 11. 15, 16, but not 1. 17, or p. 112 1. 2. a.T€viau}fj.€v'\ contemplemtir (or contemplabimur) S; drevi^ofxev C. 16 rjve&15 evoiTTpL^ofxeda] AC; videatmis (or videbimiis) tanquani in speatlo S.
;

xQt\gojv~\
Tio/uLeurj]

AC;

A; ave&xQycM C; et aperti sunt iaKOTi<T(j.4vr} Clem 613.
in apposition with 686s. ' this path let us tra-

S.

-rjfxdv]

AC;

vjjl&v S.

17 cctko-

nominative

tin Dial. 116 (p. 344).

XXXVI.
vel.

On

This salvation

is

Jesus Christ

our High-priest. Through Him our darkness is made light, and we see the Father for He is the reflexion of God's person. He has a place far above all angels, being seated on God's right hand and endowed with
:

'guardian, patron, and pleads our cause'. To a Roman it would convey all the ideas of the Latin patronus,' of which it was the recognized rendering, Plut. Vit.Rom. 13, Vit.Ma13.
TTpoo-Tdr-qv]

who

protects our interests

'

rii

5.

Comp.

irpoo-Tdris

Rom.

xvi. 2.

rfjs

dcrdeveias]

In connexion with

and made triumphant over His enemies. These
universal dominion

the
in

work of the great High-priest, as Heb. iv. 15.
Christ
is

enemies are they that resist God's will.' 12. tov apx^pia] This is founded on the teaching of the Epistle to the

15. ivoTVTpi^opeOa]

the mir-

ror in

whom
comp.
(i.

is

reflected the faultless

countenance of
rov)
;

God

the Father (aviii.

Hebrews

(ii.

17,

iii.

1, iv.

14, 15, etc.),

of which Clement's language throughout this section is an echo. See

18 ttjv bo^av Kvpiov KaroTtrpL^opevoi, Philo Leg. 11.

2 Cor.

A

iii.

again §§ 61, 64. Photius (Bid/. 126) alludes to these two passages in his criticism of Clement, dpx^pea kcu
npoaTaTTjv tov Kvpiov r/ua>v 'irjcrovv i£jovop.d£cov ov8e tcis Beonpeircis kcu v^rrjXo-

p. 107) urjde Karoirrpio-aiprjv iv aXXa> riv\ rrjv arjv I8eav tj ev o~o\ rat
;

33

Qecp

comp. John
'

i.

14.
c

auco/jLov]

faultless',

fleckless\ be-

cause the mirror

is perfect.

meaning of
17. 81a

apcopos, see the note

For the on

Tepas dcpijKe nepl avrov cpeovds (see the

ua>p.oo-K07rr)dev, §

41

-

dpxiepevs is very frequently applied to our Lord by the earliest Christian writers of
note,
§ 2).
all

The term

tovtov

k.t.X.]

Quoted in Clem.
(p.

Alex. Strom,
irpos

iv.

16

613) o iv

rfj

Kopivdiovs
'irjcrov

inicrTo\r]
77

yiyparrTai,

schools
12,

;

Phil.

Test,

Ign. Philad. 9, Polyc. xii Pair. Rub. 6,
i.

Aia

Xptcrroi)

dcrvveTos...f}p.ds

yevcracrBai.
rj

Sym.

7, etc.,

Clem. Recogn.

48, Jus-

davveTos

k.t.X.]

Rom.

i.

21

koi

112
voia
r\\xu)V

THE EPISTLE OF
avadaWei ek to
6

S.

CLEMENT
avrov]

[xxxvi
(pcos'

\6avfJL<x<TTOV

dia

tovtov
ij/xa?

r\6e\r]<T6v

SecrTroV^s

t^s

dOavarov
OCGO

yvcoffecos

yevcracrdar
TOCOyTCp

oc con attaytacma thc MerAAtocYNHc ay6CTIN

toy

M6IZ00N

AfTeAoON,

A ACpOpCOTepON
I

onoma KeKAHpoNOMHKeN.
nYpoc cpAorA.
Seo"7roT^5*
'E.7TI

yeypawTai yap
kai
vlaj

OVTW

'0 170ICON

5

toyc ArreAoyc aytoy ttn6Ymata
Se
tco

toyc Agitoyptoyc aytoy avTOV ovtcos et7rev 6

Yidc moy
6M0Y, KAI

e? cf,

er<*>

THCAI
i

TTAp'

AtOCGO

COI
i

CHMepON rereNNHKA ce* aFGGnH THN KAHpONOMIAN COY,
Pet.
ii.

to davfiacrTov avrov <pQs]
2 ttjs

A

(with

9);
;

rb 0cDs

S with Clem; to

dav/xaarbv (pus C.
yvibaeus),

where

1-77$

adavdrov yvuveus] AC mortis scientiae S (davdrov has been absorbed in the preceding syllable of deo-rrorrjs and

davdrov
§ 19,

is

written for adavdrov.

For an instance of ddvaros
for ddvaros Ign.

for dtfctj/aros see

ii.

and conversely of dddvaros

Ephes.
i.

7.

5 &>o/ia Ke«:\?77 7rupos

pov6/uL7]Kev]

A

;

KeKXrjpovo/xyjKev 'ovofxa
i.

C

(with

Heb.

4).

0\oYa]

A
CS
for

(with
;

ii. 13 r£ deXr)p.ari avrov] 18). 7); <pXbya irvpbs C (as Rev. A, as correctly read by Tisch. The lacuna has space rudeK-qixariTudeK-riiAa

Heb.

r$

seven letters and should probably be deXrjfiari being written twice over.
17

filled

up (with Tisch.) navrov, the words 18 €iktiku)s] eKriKios C; leniter

earKoriadr]

Ephes.

iv.

dcrvvcTos avrcov Kapdia, 18 io-KOTa>p,evoi [v. L Ictko-

Tiv\x.ivoi\ rfj diavota.

These passages

Epistle to the Hebrews, from which expressions, arguments, and quotations alike are taken see esp. i. 3, 4,
:

are sufficient to explain how Clem. Alex, in quoting our Clement writes io-KOTicrp:4vr],but not sufficient to justify the substitution of this form for eovcoSee A. Jahn's rcoixevr] in our text.

For the meaning see the On commentators on that epistle.
5,

7,

13.

'

ovofia,
ii.

title,

dignity', see Philippians

9.
5.

'O TToiwv k.t.X.]
It is

From LXX

Ps.

Methodius
1.

II.

p.

77, note 453.
'

dvaOaXkei

k.t.X.]

i.e.

Our mind,

like a plant shut up in a dark closet, had withered in its growth. Removed

quoted exactly as in Heb. i. 7, rrvpos (pXoya being substituted for ivvp cpXeyov of the LXX (BS, but
civ. 4.

A

thence by His loving care, it revives and shoots up towards the light of
heaven.'
ctkotovs

Comp.
v/jlcis

1

Pet.

ii.

9 rod e*
to
6av-

has irvpoa cpXcya which shows the reading in a transition state). 8. Ylos nov k.t.X.] From LXX Ps. ii. 7 word for word, after Heb. i. 5 comp.
:

KaXicravros

els

fiaarbv avrov (pas.

See also Clem.
117) npbs to dtdiov

Alex. Paed.

i.

6

(p.

33 (in S. Paul's speech at the Pisidian Antioch), where it is again quoted. In both these passages

Acts

xiii.

dvarpexop-evov
§

cpcos

and the note on
rjp,as k.t.X.

59 below

eKaXeo-ev

It is

the 7th verse only is given adds the 8th, airrjarai k.t.X.
ii.

;

Clement
ex.
1

strange

that

editors

should

wished to
3.

alter dvaddXXci,

have which con-

Kddov

k.t.X.]

From LXX Ps.
Heb.
i.

word

for word, after

13.

tains so striking an image.
os <op k.t.X.]

XXXVII.
soldiers

'We

are fighting

as

The whole passage

is

borrowed from the opening of the

under our heavenly captain. Subordination of rank and obedience

XXXVIl]
IO KAI

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
KATAC)(eCIN

113
r"HC.

THN

COY

TA

TTepATA
ek

THC

KCLl

7T(x\lV

Xeyei

irpos

avTOV*

KaGoy

AcIioon

moy,

eooc

an

e 00

toyc e)(0poYc coy y'ttottoAion toon ttoAoon coy-

Tives o vv
deXri/uari

T

e^dpoi avrov.
r

01

;

ol

(pavXoi

Kctl

dvTLTaa'O'OfJLevoL

tw

5

XXXVIl.
/UL6TCL

CTpaT€Vo~(jbfJLeda
etcTeveias

ovv,

avdpes

dSeXcpoi,

7rao~r]s

iv toTs

dfjiaifjLOis

TrpocrTayfjiacriv

avrov*
/UL6VOLS

KaTai/orjcrco/uLev
Y\\1WV,
7TC0S

tovs o-rparevo/uevovs toIs riyov-

eVTCCKTCOS, 7TU)S s'lKTlKCOS, 7TC09 V7TOT6'

The first part has originally (placide) JV&CD"! S; 6YCKTII... A, as I read it. been written cickt, but the is prolonged and altered into an y> an(i ar is
1

*

'

superscribed between e and

k,

so that

it

becomes

eueiKT-.

So

far I

agree with

more

After this he reads co ('non Integra'); it seems to me Tischendorf prol. p. xix. with a stroke of another letter which might be K, so that I read the like an
1

part before the lacuna

euet/crt/c.

speak confidently. is an objection to

The lacuna seems
eue£/crw[cr],

is so worn, that it is impossible to too great for a single letter, and this again But the uneven length of the the reading of Tisch.

But the MS

lines diminishes the force of this objection.

See the lower note.

to orders are necessary conditions in

i.

42

ro\<5

iv avrfj 'Pa>p.aiois

.

.

.iicijpv^ev...

an army. There must be harmonious So it is working of high and low.
with the

o~Tpa.Tevo-€iv eavToi
is transitive).

(where arparevo'eLv
'concessively'.

human

body.
feet

The head
and the
feet

18.

elKTLKcos]

In

must work with the
safety of the whole.'
i.

with the head, for the health and
1 Tim. 1 5. 2Tf)aT€va-a>ixe3a] 2 Cor. x. 3, 18, 2 Tim. ii. 3, 4, Ign. Polyc. 6.

former edition I had proposed, with the evidence then before me, to The adverb eueiV read €V€iktikg>s.

my

tojs is

recognized in the Etym. Magn.,
eveucros the Lexie.g.

and of the adjective
Cass. lxix. 20.

17. Karavorjaco^iev k.t.A.]

So Seneca

cons give several instances,

de

Tranq. An. 4 Quid si militare nolis nisi imperator aut tribunus ? etiamsi alii primam frontem tene-

'

On

the other

Dion hand

bunt, te sors inter triarios posuerit, inde voce, adhortatione, exemplo,

of €V€iktlk6s, -teas, though legitimate forms, no examples are given in the But in the light of the lexicons.
recently discovered authorities,
tlkcos
el<-

animo,
rois

milita'.
'

seems

to

me more

probable.
to read
cktikcos

TJyovfMevoLs

^/xcoi/]

under our
5.

The
€ktikcos

alternative

would be

temporal
other
see §

rulers.'

For

this sense of

with C.

The word
and

ol ijyovfievoi

see the note §
ol yyovfxevoi is

On

the

means
liarly',

'habitually',

so 'fami-

hand
1

used

else:

where of the
(note).

officers of the

Church

For the dative

after

o-Tpareveadai see Ign. Polyc. 6 dpeo~/cere <u arpaTeveadc, Appian Bell. Civ.

'easily', 'readily' (i.e. 'as a matter of habit'); comp. Epict. Diss. iii. 24. 78 truXkoyitrfiovs iv dva\vo~r)s eKTLKcorepovy Plut. Mor. 802 F cktlkcos
t]

rexviKws

rj

diaiperiKas,

Porph. de

CLEM.

II.

8

114
Tcty/uLevoos

THE EPISTLE OF
eTTLTeKovaiv
tcl

S.

CLEMENT
ov

[xxxvn
iravTes

^laTacrcofJieva.

eiaiv

ovhe tKaTovTapyoi ovle eirapxoi ovle xi\iapxoi ovSe to Ktxde^rjs' d\X eKa&TOs ev Tip TrevrnKOVTap-fcoi
ifiiio

viro tov fiao-iXews kcu Tciy/maTi tcl eTTLTacrcrofxeva
rjyov/uievcov

tiov

eTTLTeXei.
oi

o!

Mer^Aoi

Ai'x*

t<x>n

mikp^nS
cyr-

ov ivvavTai ehai, ovte
KpACIC TIC 6CTIN €V
i

MiKpoi Ai'x* tcon Mer^AcoN*

TTOiOriV,

eTTireAoucrtv]

A

;

re\ov<n

KCU €V TOVTOIS Xp7<T£9. ActfilOtcl dLaraaao/xeva] AC; irdvra to. C; dub. S.
j

S adopts the Greek word Virapxoi, but it 2 eVapxoi] AC 4 imraaaofieva'] does not necessarily imply any variation in the Greek text.
diarcKraonepa S.

Abst.
e'hrois

iv.

20 to

aiTiov tov

crvppeveiv

tion to get a

av kol tov inTiKcos

diapbiveiv,

Diod.

sense

;

word with an adequate but on the whole it seems

Sic. iii. 4 fxeXeTj] ivo\vxpoviod <a\ pvrjpr] cktikcos eKacrTa yvp-vd^ovres Tas -^/vx^s
T<£>v

more probable that he had giktikcoc in his copy, and not cktikcoc as read
If so, cIktikms has the higher claim to be regarded as the word It is difficult to used by Clement. whether the rendering in S represay In the Pesents cIktlkws or €KTt,KG>s. shito Luke vii. 25 fcCO"l stands for fxaXaKos, and in the Harclean Mark Thus it seems xiii. 28 for dnakos. nearer to elKTucais than to €ktiko>s. The word et/criKoy occurs Orig. de

yeypappevoav

dvayivoto-KOvcn,
is

1.

e.

in C.

•'fluently'

(where he

speaking of

reading the hieroglyphics). So here, if the reading be correct, it will mean 'as a matter of course', 'promptly', The adjective is used in 'readily'.
the
18.

same
4

el ti Tvoifiv

sense, e.g. Epict. Diss. ii. The eOekeis cktikov.

reading of

C confirms my account

of

A
he

as against Tischendorf's, though
still

adhered

to his first opinion

Princ.

iii.

15

(1.

p.

124),

and occathese ad-

after

my remarks. There can

doubt now, I in my upper note is correct; for the reading of Tischendorf has no reThe ey lation to the £ktik<os of C. (altered from ei, as it was first written) must be explained by the preceding
ey of evTciKTos catching the scribe's eye as he was forming the initial letters of either gktikooc or eiKTiKooc.
this point
ei, and at he was misled by the same conjunction of letters ncocey just Whether this ei was the bebefore. of eiKTiKooc, or an incomginning

be little think, that the account

elsewhere. jectives in -iKos see
sionally
p. 228.
1.

On

Lobeck Phryn.

ov 7rdvT€s k.t.A.]
29, 30.
eirapxoi k.t.A.]

Comp.

1

Cor.

xii.
2.

21

KctTao-Trjo-eis [avrous-]

See Exod. xviii. en avTwv xtAt-

He had

written as far as

dpX°V$ KOL €KaTOVT(ipXOVS KCll 7T€VTrjKOVTcipxovs kol deKabdpxovs (comp. ver. 25). The reference here however is to Roman military organization as the context shows comp. Clem. Horn. x.
;

14 ovnep yap Tponov els ecrriv o Keucrap, e^ei fie vn avTov to\>$ dioaaJTas (vnaTikotjs,

plete 6K as the beginning of gktikcoc, may be doubtful. In the latter case

X°vs,
k.t.X.

endpxovs, ^iXiap^ouy, etcaTovTapdeKaddpxovs), tov civtov Tprnrov

The

eirapxoi

therefore

are

we must suppose
written

that the second
line,

1,

'prefects', ewapxos

being used especi-

above the

liberate (and perhaps later)

was a deemenda-

ally of the 'praefectus praetorio', e.g. Plut. Galb. 13, Otho 7; comp. Dion

XXXVI 1 1]
/zei/

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

115

to

i&TLv,
10

r\ (TcofJia tj/uwv K6<paXrj Si^a tcou 7rodcov ovSev ovtcos ovcHe ol 7roSe§ Sl^a ttJs KecpaXrjs' to, Se

eXa^icrra
Xprjo'Ta
kcli

^.eXrj

tov

crcojuaTOS

rificov

ctvayKcua Kat evavvirvel

etCLV

bXw tw cw\xaTi
/una

dXXa iravra
a-w^ecrdai

v7T0Tayrj

xprjrai

eis

to

oXov to

aoo/ua.

XXXVIII.
A;
viroTaacrofieva C.

Co)^eo"6co
The converse

ovv

rifjiiov

oXov to

o~<jofjLa

ev

Tacraofievoi for viroraaaofievoi..

n
Cass.

ffwirvet]

A;

avfiirveL

C

error appears in the MS of Ign. Ephes. 2 eiri8 ovdfr iarcv] and so prob. S eanv ovSev C. 12 XPy™ L ] A; xp^rat C: see the note on ii. § 6.

A

;

Fragm.
i<JTi,

(v. p.

203 ed. L. Dind.)

quotation,

Kalcrap, eKaTovrdpx<o ae oiaXeyecrOai tcov ewdpxcov e£o> tarcoTcov.

aiaxpov

seems

to

and indeed Clement's text embody some anapaestic

fragments.
6. aiiyKpaais k.t.X.] This seems to be a reference to Eurip. Fragm. JEol. 2 aXX eari tls o~vyKpao~is coot' ex eLV

xtXlapxoi, eKarouTapxoi, again are the common equivalents for 'tribuni',

The

'centuriones', respectively.
I

for 7revTr)K6vrapxos

But do not know any
'
'

corresponding term in the Roman army. If it represents the optio the
lieutenant or the signifer 'the ensign'
(see

Euripides is there speaking of the mutual cooperation of rich and poor: see the passage quoted from
kciXus, for

the context of Euripides on 6 nXovo~ios k.t.X.

Lohr Taktik

u.

Kriegswesen

p.

just

below

§ 38.

Cotterill

41), the

numerical relation of 50 to 100 has become meaningless. eKCHTTOS K.T.X.] I Col'. XV. 2$ 3.
o"e

(Peregrinus Proteus
that
this

extract

points out appears in close
p. 25)

€Kchttos

ev

ra

I8ia>

ray/xari

;

comp.
13 sq

below
4.

§ 41.
ftaaiXecos]

proximity to the passage from Sophocles quoted in the last note in Stobasus Floril. xliii. 18, 20 (p. 82 sq,

Comp.

i

Pet.
;

ii.

Meineke).
o Qeos
7.

Comp.
to

1

Cor.

xii.

24 dXXa Sug(comp.
to.

€LT€

/3acrtXet...en-e

The offiJoh. xix. 15, Acts cial title of the emperor in Greek
was avroKparap, but
in
fiao-iXevs is

rjy^jxocnv xvii. 7.

comp.

avueKepacrev to
Aaftcofiev
1

aa/xa.
k.t.X.]

crco/ua

gested by

Cor.
;

found

Rom.

xii.

4)

12 sq see esp. ver. 22
xii.

80-

parlance, though the corresponding 'rex' would not be used

common

except in gross
5.

flattery.

KovvTa peXrj tov aco/xaTos dadeveaTepa For Xd^oDjxev vTvapx^iv dvayKcud io~Tiv. see above, § 5.

ol /xeyaXoi k.t.X.]

See Soph. Aj.
kcl'itoi

158 (quoted
pvpLa

by Jacobson)

07x1-

Kpo\ peydXcov ^copis o~(paXepov Tvvpyov TreXovrai k.t.X. (with Lobeck's

note), Plato Leg. x. p. 902 E ovde yap avcv apiicpcov tovs peydXovs (paalv ol XidoXoyoL Xidovs ev KelaOai, with the

remarks of Donaldson, New Crat. I have there§ 455, on this proverb. fore ventured to print the words as a

'So therefore let the body be our aim. Let weak and strong, rich and poor, work together in harmony. Let each man exercise his special gift in humility of heart and without vainglory, remembering that he owes everything to God and giving thanks to Him for His goodness.'
health of the whole

XXXVIII.

8—2

n6
XpKTTCQ
clvtou,

THE EPISTLE OF
'IfJO-OV,

S.

CLEMENT
€Ka<TTOS

[xxxviii

KCll V7rOTa(TO'6(rdu)

TW

7r\f](TL0V

Kadcos
fJLfi

Kal iredri

ev

tw

yapia-^aTi aurov.

o

lo"Yvpd$

dTri/meXeLTO)

tov

da-devfj,

6 Se dcrdevtis ev-

TpeTrecrda)
7TT(J0XU) y

tov la"xypov

6 Se 7TTO)%OS eiJ^«|OtCrT€iTW

6 irXovarios eTn^opnyeLTw T <? TW ©6GJ, OTL 6?)U)KeV 6 o~o<pos

$

avTw

Si'

ov dva7rXfipco6fj
ty\v

avTOii to vCTepri^a.
ccvtou
/mrj

ev$eiKvuo-6(x)

voty'iav

ev

Xoyois

dXX' ev

eavTw papTVpeiTa), epyois dyadoTs* 6 Taireivocppov-wv jmrj 6 dyvos dXX' eaTco v<p' eWepov eavTOV /mapTV peIo-6 ai.
}

ev t?i vapid t]TO) Kal
i

/mrj

otl io dXatyveveo-dco, yivtoo'KWv
2

'Iijo-oO]

A

;

om. CS.

Kal]
fiij)

A

;

om. CS.

3

^

arnfiekelru]

/xrjTfxfieXeiTco

A;

T-qp.eXeiTw (omitting

CS.

it already disappeared from their prototype as obliged to erase the counterbalancing negative

Obviously the a of arTjueXelTU had has from A, and the transcribers are
fir]

in order to restore the sense;

see above,

I.

p. 143.

ivrpewiadco]

C;

ivrpe-rriru)

A, retained by Gebhardt
ev X6yois]

;

but

it is

a solcecism.

evducvwrdw 7 evdeiKvvcrdo)]

A.

AC

;

Xoyois

ixbvov

while conversely §pyus C, thus omitting ev here, S has it in both, but no stress can be laid on the where it does not occur in the Greek; fact, as the translator repeats the preposition 8 raireivocppovCov] A, and so prob. S; raireivocppuv C Clem; see 1. p. 137. see above, § 19. fiapTvpeiru p.7) eavry Clem. eaur£ /xaprvpeiTio] AC

Clem 613. Clem has omitted

h

Zpyois]

A

;

it

in ev Xoyois.

M

;

1.

v7roTaaaeadoi
v.

eKacrros
1

k.t.X.J
5.

Ephes.
2.
1

21

;

comp.

Pet. v.

kci6g>s

ko\ ere6r)] SC. 6 irX-qcriov,

according as he
;

was appointed with
comp.
1

here confirms the conjecture that in the earlier passage Clement has the words of Euripides in his mind. 6. avcnik-qpaOf) k.t.X.] For the expression see
1

his special giff
exacrro?

Pet.
I

iv.

10

Cor. xvi. 17, Phil.
i.

ii.

Kadws e\a(3ev x<*pio-p.a,
'idiov

Cor.vn.

30
to

:

comp. Col.

24.

7 eKdCTTOS

Rom.
rrji>

xii.

6 e'xovres

ex ei X <*P l(r fxa 6> * x a P^ (r lxaTa

© eo ^>
KClTa

6 aocpos k.t.X.]
rrjv

iyKpdreiav
iv.

X®P IV T V V SoBeicrav -qplv diacpopa. p) aTrjne\eiT(o] This reading makes better sense than 7rXr)ppeXeiT(o
3.

Alex. Strom,

This passage down is quoted in Clem. 16 (p. 613) between

extracts from §§ 40, 41 (see the notes
there).

(for

Clement
for

ciation
easily

condemning the depreof others) and accounts more
is

For this emphatic use compare Ign. Ephes.
'

10.

rjT<o\

let

him

be

4

it''.

the

corruption

;

see the

omission of a in dcpiXogeviav § 35. 6 nXovaios k.t.X.] See Eurip. 4.

\ovvra

15 apeivov ecrriv cnoonav Kal eivai 77 Xaeivai, Iren. ii. 30. 2 ovk fMrj
e v rco eivai. 6 Kpeirrcov

ePT(3 Xeyeiv aXX'

Fragm.

s£ol. 2 (of which the context is cited above, § 37) a p,r) yap eari ra a o 01 nXovSi'Scocr 7revr)Ti, nXovcrios
'

rovvres

ov

KeKTr/pieBa,

rolaiv

nev^ai

I have preferred deUwo-dai ScpeiXei. Laurent's happy emendation tJtco to o lyarco which has also been suggested, both because it better suits the vacant

Xpvfievoi OripufxeOa.

The resemblance

space

in

A, and because

it

is

the

XXXVIIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
67T L)^0

117
'

€T€pOS ECTTLV O
Aoyio-tofAeda
iroioi
Kctl

prjy CO V CLVTCp Tt]V eyKpLXTeiCLV.
e/c

AvCL-

ovv,

d$e\(f)oi,

irolas

v\t]s

eyevridnfjiev
e'/c

rives

elcriXdafiev eU rov koc/uop'
rifjias

ttoiov

Ta<pov Kai
15 etcrriyayev

(tkotovs 6 TrXaa-as

kcli

Sri/unovpyrjo-as
rets

eU rov
avrov

koo-julov

avrov, 7rpoeroi]udcra£
yevvr]6rjvai.

evepyecrias

irplv

77/xas

ravra ovv

iravra e£ avrov e^ovres
pia-Teiv avTtp'
djurjv.
9 edroj]
to
r\

6<pel\ofj.ev

Kara irdvra ev%aalcovas rcov alcovcov.

ho^a eU tovs

ACS

;

ev

r£ Clem.
;

ixp'

irepov iavrbv]

A;

avrbv u0' irepov Clem;

iavrbv u0' irepov
Tupelo-dw)

C

S translates the sentence sed ab
eavrbv]
Tjrco]

aliis

testimonium detur (pap10 ev]

super
S.

ipso.

AC;

avrbv Clem.

AC;

om.

Clem; dub
p. 142.

Laurent

(his earlier

f. Luther. Theol.

In

A

XXIV. p. 423). CS Clem the margin of the parchment
to

suggestion had been eVrw, Zeitschr. omit the words rjra) Kai: see above, I.
is

cut

off,

so that nothing

is visible.

There seems however
13 Kai rives] C 15 rov Koafxov]

have been room
;

for i?tw, as the size of the letters is often
1 1

diminished at the end of the lines
;

see below.

eyKpdretav] eyKpanav A.

(torn...

A; om.
has hunc

S.

eio-qKdapev] ...arjXdapev

A;

eio-qXdopev C.

AC; S
;

mundum,

but

it

probably does not represent a

various reading see the critical note on ii. § 17 6<peiXop<ev] o^Xopev A. 19. Kara irdvra] AC ; om. S. evxaptarelv] evxapiori A.

§ 48.

form found elsewhere Hort suggests

in

Clement,

the allusions of Epiphanius

and

Je-

paring 1 Cor. vii. 37. a line it is not safe to speak positively about the number of letters to be supplied, as there the letters are

comAt the end of
o-t^tco,

rome (quoted above,
which
p.

pp. 170, 173), doubtless refer to the spurious

1.

Epistles on Virginity;

see above,
Pet.
i.

I.

408
13.
T]

sq.
iroioi Ka\ rives]
I

some-

II els

times

much

yond the under any circumstances too long
to

smaller and extend beline ; but aiyara seems

TLva

TTolov Kaipov.

elcrrjXOapev] § xiii. p. 86.

For the form see Winer

be at all probable. Hilgenfeld's reading, 6 dyvbs ev 777 crapKi Kai [avrbs] p.rj dXa^oveveadai, supplies the lacuna in the wrong place. For the senti-

€< noiov rd(pov k.t.X.]

Harnack

re-

fers to Ps. exxxix (cxl). 15 to oo-tovv p.ov...e7ioirjcras ev Kpvcpfj Ka\ rj VTrocrracris

pov ev rots KarcoTarois
15.
7rpoero1.pa.o~as

rfjs yrjs.

ment see

Ign. Polyc. 5

e'i

tls dvvarat

ev ayveiq p.evew els riprjv rrjs crapes tov Kvplov, ev aK.av)(r}0~Lq peverco' eav KavxycrqTai, d7ra)'Xero (see

See the fragment from 'the 9th Epistle' of Clement of Rome in Leontius and
k.t.X.]

above,
'

I.

p. 149),

Tertull. de Virg. Vel. 13

Et

si

a

Deo
quid

confertur

continentiae

virtus,

John Sacr. Rer. ii (Mai Script. Vet. Nov. Coll. vii. p. 84) given above, 1. p. 189. Though it has some points
of resemblance with this passage in our epistle, it cannot have been taken

gloriaris, quasi

non

acceperis', pas-

sages quoted by Wotton. Clement's language is not sufficient to explain

from

it.

Il8

THE EPISTLE OF
XXXIX.
'

S.

CLEMENT
KCtl

[xxxix
jULCOpOt

A(ppOVe$

KCLl

O.CTVV6TOL

KCLl

ct7ralSevTOL ^Xeva^ovcrip rjjuas kcli fiVKTf]pi(^ov(riv,
(SovXojJievoi

iavTOvs
tl

eTralpecrdca
tj

tcus Siavoiais
;

civtoov.

yap
KAI 5

Svvarai
T

Qvy\t6<*\

r/s ia-)(ys yrjyevovs

yey pairrai yap*
AAA'
H

K

HN

MOpCJ)H

TTpO
Tl

OCbQAAMCON

MOY'

Ay'pAN

0OONHN HKOYON. Kypi'oY; h And toc>n
ttaiAoon

MH KA0ApOC 6CTAI BpOTOC 6NANTI |"Ap; eprooN aytoy amgmtttoc anh'p; ei kata

aytoy of mcTefe', kata Ae AfreAooN aytoy ckoAion
AS;
d(ppoves
/cat airalb'evToi /cat

i

"A(ppoves...aTrai8evToi]

p-upol

C.

2 /xvKrrjpi-

favcriv] fxvKTiprj^ovcnv
it

A.

6 Kadapbs]
:

AC;

fcs?2n corruptor S, perhaps connecting
I.

with nadaipeiv, as

if /catfatper^s

see above,

p. 140.

The

translator

however may

have had
evavTiov
this is

(pdopos in his text.

ec/rat]

AC

;

ianv S.
S.
1.

Zvavri]

A

(with

lxx SA)
S,

;

C

(with

LXX

B).

7 el]

AC;

rj

8 iraldw]
p. 138.

AC;

operum

but

due

to the false pointing; see above,

avrov]

A;

eavrov C.

XXXIX.

'

What

folly is the arro-

Clem. Alex.
iv.

Paed.'i. 12 (p. 156),

Strom.

gance and self-assumption of those who would make a mockery of us Have we not been taught in the
!

6

(p.

577).

In classical writers

the y-qyevels are the fabled giants, the sons of Uranus and Gaea, and rebels
against the Olympians (e.g. Soph. Track. 1058 6 yqy evqs arparos yiyavrcov,

Scriptures the nothingness of man ? In God's sight not even the angels

are pure

:

how much
!

less

we

frail

Aristoph. Av.
...

824

ol

6eo\

creatures of earth

A lump

of clay,

rovs

y-qyevels

KadvTTeprjKovTio-av,

see

a breath of air, the sinner is consumed and in a moment by God's wrath
:

the righteous shall inherit his forfeited blessings.'
1.

Pape Worterb. d. Griech. Eigennam. s. v.). Connected with this idea is the translation of D^EH, where it means 'the shades of the dead', by
yqyevels in the LXX of Pro v. ii. 18, ix. 18 ; while in these and other pas-

"Acppoves k.t.A.]
ix.

Comp. Hermas
aavveros.
Ps. xliv.
1

Sim.
2.

14 dcppaiv

el /cat

xkeva^ovaiv

K.r.X.]

4

(V. 1.),

lxxix. 4, fXVKTTJpLO-fJLOS KCU ^XfU;

aa-[xos

comp.

Aftost. Const,

iii.

5 p,v<-

sages the other Greek translators (Theodotion, Symmachus) render the same word by ylyavres or 9eop.dxoi
:

In C eavrovs rqpiaavres ^Xevacroucri. is connected with the preceding words

see Gesenius Thesaur.

s. v.
'

NQ"|

on

the connexion of
giants.

'

by punctuation.
is

Altogether

Rephaim and the we may say that
'huorigin',

yqyevovs] As a LXX word, yqyevqs a translation of DIN in Jer. xxxii. 20. In Ps. xlix (xlviii). 2 ol re yqyevels kcu ol viol rwv dvdpcoTTcov is a rendering of 'OH D3 DIN* 'On DJ where the next clause of the verse has nXovo-ios
4.

the word
mility
(2)

(1) signifies originally

and meanness of

and

connotes 'separation from and hostility to God'.
yeypmrrai
yap]

WW

A

long

Kal nevrjs.

In Wisd.

vii.

1

Adam

is

called yqyevqs npeoroTrXaaros. The word occurs Test, xii Pair. Jos. 2,

from the LXX Job iv. 16 v. 5, the words ovpavos be. .avrov being inserted from Job xv. 15 (see below). The variations from the LXX are for the
.

passage

xxxix]
ti

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

119

10 Ae, 01

eneNOHceN- oyp<\Noc Ae oy KAGApdc eiMcbniON aytoy" eA katoikoyntgc oiki'ac tthAi'nac el wn kai aytoi 6K toy
kai
atto

aytoy tthAoy ecMeN* enAiceN aytoyc chtoc TpdnoN,
npooi'OeN
eooc

ecrrepAc

oyk

gti

gicin*

ttapa to

mh AynacOai
eTTIKAAeCAl

aytoyc gaytoTc BohGhcai attgoAonto' eNed)YCHceN ayto?c kai
6T6A6YTHCAN, TTApA TO MH
*5 Ae,
ei

e'x6IN
ei'

AYTOYC COCplAN.

tic

coi

YTTAKOYceTAi, h

tina ap'oon ArreAooN
TTeTT A AN

dyH*

KAI
ov]

TAp

ACJ)pONA
S.

ANAipe?
-mareijei]

OpTH,

HM€N

N

Ae

0ANATO?

AC; om.

AC;

iriaTevvei S.

11 iiratcrev aurovs]

AC

(but

S; see above, I. p. 140. 0-77x05] o-rjrov stands in (as I read it), by a transposition with the termination of the next word. Tischendorf gave arjTocr, but afterwards acquiesced in my reading of the MS. rp6irov~\ CS
;

A

eireaev); 'iireaov avrov

A

rpoirocr
0-06]

A;

see the last note.

12 eVi]
;

A, and so prob. S (with lxx BS)

AC; om. S. <xov C (with lxx

15 e? pri]

AC;

rj

S.

A).

o^y] A;

6\pec

C.

most part slight. Ovk r)v fiop(f)r} 5.

K.r.X.]

The words

of Eliphaz reproving Job.

He

relates

more, ye that dweW. In the lxx BS read rovs de KaroiKovvras, but A ea de rovs KaroLKovvras let alone those that
'

how a voice spoke
pure in God's

to

him

in the

dead
is

of night, telling him that no
sight.

man

The lxx

differs

The latter is a better rendering of the Hebrew and must have been the original LXX text. Symdwell'.

materially from the Hebrew, but the general sense is the same in both. The ovk is not represented in the

machus has
lent,
10.

ttoVoj

paXkov, to which

ea with this construction is

an equiva-

Job

xv. 16, xxv. 6.

Hebrew, and it may have been inby the LXX to avoid an anthropomorphic expression but the translators must also have read the preceding words somewhat differently.
serted
;

oIklos 7rr)\ivas~\

The houses of

clay in the original probably signify men's bodies comp. 2 Cor. v. 1 77
:

7.

ft

Kara iraibwv

'

k.t.X.]

seeing
is dis-

that agai?tst
trustful,

His servants He

rov aKrjvovs, called before (iv. 7) ocrrpaKiva crKevrj. But the LXX by the turn which they give to the next clause, e£ wv Ka\ avrol
eivlyeios rjpwv OLKia
k.t.X.,

and against

(to the discredit

seem

to

have

understood
of the

it

of)

His angels He

noteth some de-

literally,

'We

are

made
;

same

pravity?
9.

ovpavbs 8e k.t.X.]

From Job

xv.

clay as our houses' e| cov being explained by €K rov avrov tttjXov.
11.

15 (likewise in a speech of Eliphaz) Kara ayicov ov TTLcrrevei, ovpavos fie ov The fact that Ka.6a.pos evavriov avrov.
el

Kai otto npoitOev k.t.X.]
'

ko\ is

found in BS but omitted in A. By ano npaiOev K.r.X. is meant in the
course of a single day'
xxxviii. 12, 13.
14.
;

nearly the same words occur as the first clause of xv. 15, which are found
likewise in
this
iv.

comp.

Is.

to insert the

18, has led Clement second clause also of

ereXevrrjo-av]
all

In the

LXX
;

A

SO

reads with

authorities here

but

same verse
it

to

which

in the other passage does not belong.
'

BS

have

e£;r)pav8r)crav.

ea 84, ol KaroiKovvres]

hoiv

much

£7X0?] i.e. indignation against God, such as Job had shown.
opyrj,

16.

120
zhAoc.
Oeooc
ay'toon

THE EPISTLE OF
erco

S.
C

CLEMENT
I

[xxxix
eyyio\

Ae

eoopAKA AchpoNAC piZAC BaAontac, aAA
Ay-rcoN
h
Ai'aita.

eBpoaOH

ndppco
eni

reNoiNTO

01

And cooTHpiAC KoAABpicGemcAN
ecTAi
6

OypAic hcconoon,
htoi'mactai,

kai

oyK

eSAipoyMeNOC

a

r^p eKeiNOic
T

AlKAIOI eAONTAI*
i

AYTOI Ae €K KAKOJN
Pakovras]

K

elAl'pGTOI

6C0NTAI.

5

5e]

AC

;

om. S.
eidiws]

A;
;

/SaXXovras
evdds

C

(with LXX), and S also has

a present.
T\Toi}XQ.GTQ.i\

A (with LXX BS)
S
:

C

AC
'

;

eKeivoi rjToifj.acrai'

for the

LXX

(with LXX A). see below.
'

4

eKelvois

5 e£cu'peroi]
'

2.

SiWa]

their abode*
22,
xi.
'

;

as

e. g.

brew, where

at the gate

means

'

in

LXX Job
3.

viii. 6,

14, xxxix. 6.

court, in judgment'.

Ko\a(Bpi(r0eir)(rav]
viii.

mocked, in-

sulted\ as Athen.
fipi^ovcri

tovs
'

p. 364 A *aXaoiKeras, a.7reikovcn toIs

a yap iiceivois /c.r.X.] In the LXX 4. (BS) a yap eicelvoi avptjyayov (edepicrap A), SiKaiot ebovrat
€(Tourai
k.t.X.

For

etjalpeToi

noWo'is.

Suidas after

others

says

A

has e^epe^o-oirai

-^evacrOelr], iKTivaxdeirj, oLTifxacrBelrj- KoXafiposyap koi K.dXa(3pos,
Ko\a(3pLcrdelr)

pedrjo-ovrai).

The LXX

e£aiin this verse
(i.e.

6 piiKpbs x°^P 0S

'

agios

vop,iaOeLTj.
ii.

a.wl tov ovdevos Xoyov And so Bochart
c

diverges considerably from the Hebrew, egalperoi here has the some-

what rare sense
e.g.
'

Hieroz.

§ 57,

I.

p. 707,

KoXa(3pi£eiv

Hellenistis contemnere, quia porcello

apud Judaeos nihil fuit contemptius'. But this derivation cannot be correct for (to say nothing else) the word was
;

rescued, exempt] as Dion. Hal. A. R. vi. 50. XL. This being plain, we must do all things decently and in order, as our Heavenly Master wills us. The

'

not confined to Hellenist Jews. The same Athenasus, who furnishes the only other instance of the verb KoXaKoXafipiCco, has also two substantives,
(3pos or KaXafipos (iv. p.
'

appointed times, the fixed places, the proper ministers, must be respected in making our offerings. So only will they be acceptable to God. In the law of Moses the high-priest, the
priests, the Levites, the laity, all their distinct functions'.

697 c)
ftpio-p.6s

164 E, xv. p. a licentious song', and icaXa'a certain (xiv. p. 629 d)

have

The

offence

of

the

Corinthians

Thracian dance'.
fined

The
(iv.

latter is de-

by Pollux
icai

100)

OpaKiicbv

opxypa

Kapatav.

PI ere therefore

was contempt of ecclesiastical order. They had resisted and ejected their lawfully appointed presbyters and
;

the derivation must be sought. The jeering sallies and mocking gestures of these unrestrained songs and dances would be expressed by KoXaftpiThe reading of in the LXX £eii>.

as

a necessary consequence they held their agape and celebrated their
eucharistic
feast

when and where

A

they chose, dispensing with the intervention of these their proper officers.

o-Ko\afipio~delr]o~a.v,

paicifciv,

compared with <tkomight seem to favour the
suffi-

There

is

no ground

for sup-

other derivation, if there were cient evidence that KoXaftpos

ever

meant x 0ip'^ l0v
eirt

-

posing (with Rothe Anfange p. 404 sq), that they had taken advantage of a vacancy in the episcopate by death to mutiny against the presbyters.

at the doors Ovpais rjo-o~6v<»>v\ of their inferiors\ There is nothing corresponding to rjacrovcov in the He-

l

Of bishops,

properly so called,

no mention is made in this epistle (see the notes on §§ 42, 44) and, if the
;

xl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
XL.
npo§Y]\u)v ovv
eis
rifjuv

121
teat

bvTOiv
delas

tovtlov,
yvcoffecos,

/ce/cfffloTe?

TO.

flctdri

t^s

iyiravTa
e/ce-

Ta^ei
Xevcrev
e^eperoi.

TTOieiv

6<pei\ofj.€v

bcrct

6 SecnroTtis eiriTeXeiv
tcls
613.
8

Kara Kaipovs
A.
6
i)fuv

TeTay/uievovs'

t€ 7rpoo~(popas
tovtui>]

ovrwv]

AC

;

ovrwv

i)jxii>

Clem

AC

;

add.

&5e\<poi S.

ey/ce/a'0ores]

AC;

eKKCKvcpores

Clem.

6(fieL\o/j.ev] cxpikofiev

A.

oca]

AC

;

sicut (ws?) S.

government of the Corinthian Church was in any sense episcopal at this time, the functions of the bishop were not yet so distinct from those of the presbyters, but that he could still be regarded as one of them, and that no special designation of his office was

which afterwards became the watchwords of the Gnostic sects and were doubtless frequently heard on the lips of their forerunners his contemporaries.
(3d6r)
:

On the late necessary or natural. development of the episcopate in Corinth, compared with the Churches of Syria and Asia Minor, see the dissertation in Philippians p. 213 sq, and Ignat. and Polyc. 1. p. 562 sq, ed. 1
(p. 579, ed. 2).
6.

belongs ra (comp. 1 Cor. ii. see S. John's language in Rev. ii. 10) 24 otrives ovk eyvcoaav ra fiaQia rov 2arava, cos Xeyovaiv, which is
this class
rfjs

To

yvcoo-etos

illustrated
'

by Iren. Haer. ii. 22. 3 profunda Dei adinvenisse se dicenii.

tes',

28.

9 'aliquis eorum qui

alti-

IlpoSq'Xcoi/ k.t.X.]

This passage

Dei exquisisse se dicunt', Hippol. Haer. V. 6 eireKaXeaav eavrovs yvcoartKovs, (pdaKovres povoi ra /3 d #77
tudines
ytvcoo-Keiv; compare the description in Tertullian adv. Valent. 1 ' Si

as far as Kaipovs reraypivovs is quoted in Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 16 (p. 613).

over\

''peered into, pored See below §§ 45, 53, Polyc. Phil. 3, Clem. Horn. iii. <?. In all these passages it is used of searching
ey/cacvcpoTes]

bona

fide

quaeras,

concreto vultu,

the
T€iv,

Scriptures.

Similarly irapaKim1

suspenso supercilio, Altum est aiunt', and see Galatians p. 298. It is significant too that yp&ais is a favourite word with Clement: see §§ 1, 36, 41,

James

i.

25,

Pet.

i.

12.

The

and especially § 48
tgeurelv (with

fjrco

Swarbs

yvacriv

word
tion.
7-

eKK€Kv(poT€i in

Clem. Alex, must

be regarded as an error of transcripra
(3adr] rfjs

the note). Again in § 34 he repeats the favourite Gnostic text 'Eye hath not seen etc.', which

deias y^a'creooy]

The
of

they misapplied to support their principle

large

and comprehensive

spirit

of an esoteric doctrine.

See

Clement, as exhibited in the use of the Apostolic writers, has been already pointed out (notes on §§ 12, Here it is seen from a 31, 33, 49).

the note there.
9.

have
the

ras re 7rpocr(popas K.r.X.] Editors failed to explain the reading of
satisfactorily.

MS

Two modes

of

somewhat different point of view. While he draws his arguments from the law of Moses and his illustrations from the Old Testament, thus showing his sympathy with the Judaic side of Christianity, he at the same time
uses freely those forms of expression

punctuation are offered. The main stop is placed (1) after eKeXevo-ev, so that we read Kara Kaip. rer. ras re npocrcp. K.r.X. ; but in this case we get

an unmeaning repetition, Kara. Kaipovs reraypivovs and (apiapevois Kaipols K.r.X.
belonging to the same sentence: or

122

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT
teal

[XL

Kai Xeirovpyias eV^ueAws

eTriTeXe'icrdai

ovk

eiKrj

r)

ctTaKTws EKeXevcrev yhecr6ai, dXX' (jopKr/uevois KaipoTs Kai iopaLS' 7rov t€ Kai $ia Tivodv ewLTeXeicrdaL deXeiy avTOS
wpicrev Trj i)7repTaTto clvtov fiovXrjcrer

iV ocriws iravTa

yivo\ieva

ev

euSoKtiaei

evTrpocrheKTa

eir\

tw

deXtj/uaTL

5

avTOv.
1

01 ovv toIs Trpo&TeTayfjLevois Kaipols 7roiovvT6s
A.
eVijueXcDs]

om. ACS. The reasons AC om. S see below. 2 dXX'] A; dXXd C. S translates as if it had read upais ri 3 uipais irov re] AC. 7rou. 4 vTrepTaTcp] A; virepTdrri C; see the lower note, ?nd above, 1. p. 127. iravra rd C. For S see below. S travra] iravraTa A 5 iv evdonrjcrei] AC translates the sentence, ita ut, qimm omnia pie fiant, velit ut acceptabilia sint volunXetTovpyias] Xeirovpyeiaa
conj.
;

for the insertion are

given below.

iir it e\eia 6 at

Kai]

;

:

;

:

tati sttae,

thus apparently taking evevdoKrjaei (one word) as a verb and reading

(2) after eVireXettr^at, in
€7riTe\elo-0ai
6<p€iXofxev.

which case must be governed by

But, with this construc-

tion (not to urge other obvious objections) there is an awkwardness in

readings in our authorities, see I. I should have preferred ras 8 e npoacpopas, as Tischendorf deciphers A, but (unless I misread it)
p. 143.

using the middle eTriTeXeladai in the same sense in which the active eirireXcIv has occurred just before
;

certainly has re, as also have CS. the Christian sense of 7rpoa4>opa\ see the note on TrpocreveyKovTas ra
it

On

dcopa § 442.

though the middle
stand.

in
iv.

itself
2,

James we have alrfiv and
(In
side.)
/xeXeos-,

3 alreiaOai side

might however
by

Kaipols kol copais]

A

pleonasm,
(p.

as in Dionys. de Isocr. 14
iv Kaipco yiveadai prjd* ev

561)

p?)

copa,

Plut.
oIkcIov

I have therefore inserted eW supposing that the omission was due to the similar beginnings of the two words (as e.g. atcoviov for aivov cuooviov ii. § 9 see also the note on ii. § 10 evpelv); comp. 1 (3) Esdr. viii. 21 TvavTa Kara tov tov Qeov vofxov
;

Ages.

36

tov

koXov

Kaipov

elvai Kai copav.

The words

differ

only

so far, that Kaipos refers to the jituess, <opa to the appointedness, of the time.

Demosth.

Olyiith.

ii.

p.

24

p-rjdeva
'

Kaipov p^S' G>pav Tvapdkz'irrcov that <opa does not refer to the

e7rireXecr^r;ro)

eVi/AeXcos

r<5
xii.

0e<»

of the day', as

this

shows hour use of the word

tw

vyj/iarcp,

Herm. Maud.

3

ttjv

8iaK.oviav...Te\ei eVtpeXcos.

Thus the
intel-

passage reads smoothly and
ligibly.

was only introduced long after the age of Demosthenes. 4. vnepTaTG)] I have not ventured
even
tives

would be to omit emTeXelaBai (and this is done by the Syriac translator), as having been inserted from below (Sid rivatv eVtreXeur&u), and to take rds re
alternative
irpoafpopas Kai Xeirovpyi'as in apposition with ocra, but this does not

An

to alter the reading to vnepTari], since in classical writers compara-

and superlatives are sometimes of two terminations; e.g. Thucyd. iii.
101, v. 71,

seem so good

for

more than one

See Buttmann anm. 5. navra yivopLcvci] I have struck out rd before yivopeva as a mere repe89,

no.

Griech. Sprachl. § 60

reason. For the growth of the various

tition

of the

last

syllable of navra

xl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

123

rck 7rpocr<popas avTtov evTrp6ar$6KToi re Kal \xaKapioi y §6(T7rOTOV (XKO\ovdovVT£S OV TOiS yap VOfJLLfJLOL^ TOV
hiafdapTavovcTLV
10 SeSojuevai
.

eicriv,

tw yap Toh Kal
Kal
A;
add. iravra

dp^iepeT
iepevcriv
iSiai

iSiai

XeiTOvpyiai
6

ihios

tottos
eiTLKeiv-

7rpocrT6TaKTaL 9
elvai for
etrj.
;

Xev'iTais

SiaKOViai
it

el'77]

C

(thus repeating

a second time in the

sentence)

6 irpo<TTeTayp.evoLs] ; irpoaTayeTori C. This is probably due to a misapprehension of 9 apxiepe?] AC; dpxtepeveiv S. the translator or of a scribe who supposed that the Christian bishops were meant. S translates as if it had read 15Lols tottols. 10 6 tottos] A ; tottos (om. 6) C.
for

S see the

last note.

A

11 Xei/tTcus...e7ri'/ceu/Tcu]

AC

(but eiruavTca A); levitae in ministeriis propriis po-

nuntur

S.

and as

The omission
the Syriac.
5.

interfering with the sense. of ra is confirmed by

by some

(e.g.

Lipsius p. 25) that, this

iv evboKTjo-ei] SC. tov Qeov.
2.

the note on §

See But possibly we

should

here

for

nPOCAGKTA nPOCAGKTA
lxx.
9.

read
;

eYAOKHCGI6Y6YA0KHCei6Y-

IO

(p.

822)

evftoicrjaei

as in Epiphan. Haer. Qeov.

being so, the analogy notwithstanding extends to the number three, Christ being represented by the highpriest (see the note § 36), the presbyters by the priests, and the deacons by the Levites. But to this it is a the Highsufficient answer that
priesthood of Christ is wholly different in kind and exempt from those

yap dpxiepel k.t.A.] This is evidently an instance from the old dispensation adduced to show that God will have His ministrations perT(S

formed through definite persons, just as below (§ 41) ov iravTaxov k.t.A. Clement draws an illustration from the same source that He will have

very limitations on which the passage And again why should the dwells. analogy be so pressed? It would be considered ingenious trifling to seek out the Christian equivalents to evdeXe^tcr/iou
7/

TrXrjppeXeias
k.t.X.

€vx<»v V "Kepi dpaprias Kal below (§41), or to eTrapxoi,

them performed in the proper places. There is therefore no direct reference
to the Christian ministry in dpxiepevs,
tepetf,

Xikiapxoi, eKaTovrapxoi, nevrrjKovTapxoi,

Aevlrm, but

it is

an argument

by analogy.

the analogy then extend to the three orders ? The an-

Does

swer to this seems to be

that,

though

above (§ 37) nor is there any reason why a closer correspondence should be exacted from this passage than from the others. Later writers indeed did dwell on the analogy of the threefold ministry but we cannot
;
;

the episcopate appears to have been widely established in Asia Minor at this time (see Philippians p. 209 sq with the references given above, p.
121),

argue back from them to Clement, in whose epistle the very element of

which gives force to such a comparison, is wanting.
threefoldness,
10. Ihios 6 tottos k.t.X.]
'

this

epistle

throughout only

The

office

recognizes two orders, presbyters and deacons, as existing at Corinth (see esp. the notes on eTno-KOTTcov § 42,

assigned

to

the priests

is

speciaV.

On
§

this sense of tottos

comp. below

and on

iav

Koipr]da>o~iv,

di.a$e£<0VTai

IBpvfievov avTols tottov, and see the notes on Ign. Polyc. 1 etcdUfi

44 T°v

k.t.\. § 44).

It

has been held indeed

(TOV

TOV TOTTOV.

124

THE EPISTLE OF
6 Xa'iKos
av6p(07TOs

S.

CLEMENT
AaiKofe

[xli

Tar

to?s

7TpO(TTa'yjJLaa'LV

heSeTai.

XLI.
2 548erai]

f/

G/cao"T05
A;
845otcll

vjulcov,

dSeXcpol, iv
A;
7]/iuv

rw

idiw
4

ray^ rw ]
5
/atj

CS.

3 vp,<2v]

CS.

ei)x a P t o"r

A;
1.

ei'djoeoTeirw

CS.

See the lower note.

crweiS^cret] avvecdrjaiu

A.

XatKoy]

Comp. Clem. Horn. Eapap-

though not

pist. CI. § 5 ovtcos eKoarco Xa'iKG)

solely, to the principal act of Christian thanksgiving, the celebra-

ria ia-riv k.t.X., Clem. Alex. Strom. kclv iii. 12 (p. 552) kov npeo-fivTepos fj
v. 6 (p. 665) In TertulKcoXvpa Xa'iKrjs dmo-TLas. lian 'laicus' is not uncommon, e.g.

tion of the Lord's Supper, which at a later date was almost exclusively term-

Siclkovos Kav Xu'ikos, ib.

ed
is

de Praescr. 41
cerdotalia

'

nam

et

laicis

sa-

munera
Xaos
is

the

LXX

In injungunt'. used not only in
'the

evxapf-crria. The usage of Clement probably midway between that of 5. Paul where no such appropriation of the term appears (e.g. 1 Cor. xiv. 16, 2 Cor. ix. 11, 12, Phil. iv. 6, 1 Tim.
ii.

1,

etc.),

contradistinction
(see

to
§

Gentiles'

Epistles {Philad. 4,
Justin (Aftol.
41, p. 260)
i.

and that of the Ignatian Smyrn. 7) and of
§ 66, p. 97 sq, Dial.
it

the note

on

29
(1)

above), but

also as
e.g. 2
'

opposed to Chron. xxiv.
priests
',

'The

rulers',

10,

xxx. 24, (2)
Is.

applied.

where For the

is

'Lhiov

especially so raypa of the

The

e.g.
(viii.

Exod.
1),

Neh.

vii.

J2>

xix. 24, xxiv. 2 ;

people at the eucharistic feast see
Justin Aftol. i. § 65 (p. 97 d) ov (i.e. tov 7rpo€aTcoros twv dbeXcpwv) crvvreXettcls

comp. Jer. xxxiv (xli). 19 tovs dpxovTas 'louSa Kal tovs bvvdo~Tas Kal tovs lepeis
Kal rov Xaov.

From
is

this last contrast

aavros ras fu'^ay Kal ttjv eu^apiori'ai/ 6 Xaos inevcprjpei Xeycov 'Apijv...
€Vx a P lo
"rr J°~ aVTOS

comes the use of adjective however

Xulkos here.

The

be tov TrpoevTtoTOS Kal

not found in the lxx, though in the other Greek versions we meet with Xa'iKos laic or
' '

€7rev(pr]p.T]o-avTos

navTos tov Xaov

k.t.X.,

and again ib. § 67 (p. 98 e). See Harnack Der Christliche Gottesdienst
etc.

'profane' and Xa'inovv 'to profane', Deut. xx. 6, xxviii. 30, Ruth i. 12, 1 Sam. xxi. 4, Ezek. vii. 22, xlviii. 15.

XLI. 'Let each man therefore take his proper place in the thanksgiving of the Church. Then again, in the law of Moses the several sacrifices are

(Erlangen, 1854). the reading evapeareiro) is simpler, evx a P to"rfl T&) is doubtless correct comp. § 38 with Rom. xiv.

Though
;

'

6,

1

Cor.

xiv.

17.

For

another

instance of confusion between cvapeara.v

and

evxapto-relv in

our authorities,

not offered anywhere, but only in the temple at Jerusalem and If then transafter careful scrutiny.
gression was visited on the Israelites of old with death, how much greater shall be our punishment, seeing that

see § 62.
iv
1, 1

ayaBrj

avveidi]o-€i]
5,

Acts
iii.

xxiii.
:

Tim.

i.

19,

1

Pet.

16, 21

comp. KaXr/ avvetdrjais, Heb. xiii. 18. For an explanation of the reading aweidrjo-Lv in A see above § 15.
6. Kavova] Compare the metaphor 2 Cor. x. 13, 14) Kara, to \xiTpov tov Kavovos and v7repeKTeivop,€v: see also

our knowledge also
4. evxapiorrcLTco]
is

is

greater'.

The

allusion here

plainly to the public services of the

Church, where order had been violated.

the note on §

7.

Thus

tvxapiiTTui will refer chiefly,

npoo~(pepovTai]

The

present tense

XLl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

12

liaTL ev^apLCTTeiTW Oeto eV dyadfj (rvveiSticrei virapywv^
5
\ir\

TrapeKfiaivwv tov

(jopior/ULevov

Ttjs
,

AeiTOvpytas ccvtov
dSe\cj)oi, 7rpo(r<p€7repi ct/uapTias

kclvovcL) ev crejUivoTrjTL.

Ov TravTayov
r\

povrai Qvciai &vheh£yjL<T\io\)
irapeKpaivcav]
7tO(T

evycov
et

r\

Kal

AC

(but irapaiKfiaivuv

A)

;

A.

6 Trpoacpepourai]

AC; om.

perficiens S. S. 7 evxwv]

Xeirovpylas] \irovp-

A;

irpovevxQv C.

has been thought to imply that the sacrifices were still offered and the
temple yet standing, and therefore
fix

p.

480 sq.

See also

Grimm in Zeitsch.

f

to

Wiss. Theol. xiil p. 28 sq (1870) with reference to the bearing of this

the date of the epistle before the destruction of Jerusalem, i.e. about the close of Nero's reign. To this very early date however there are

phenomenon on
Epistle
to

the

date

of

the

the

Hebrews.

Comp.

insuperable objections (see the introduction, I. p. 346 sq, and notes on §§ 1, therefore must use 5, 44, 47). Clement as implying rather the 7rpoa(fiepovraL permaiie?ice of the record and of the
lesson contained therein than the continuance of the institution and practice
itself.

Apost. Const, ii. 25 dnb twv Ovcrtatv Koi anb 7rdo~rjs 7r\rjixp,iK€ias koa Trepi dp.apTia)v, where parts of the context

seem

to

be suggested by

this

passage

of Clement, though the analogies in the O. T. are interpreted after the

fashion of a later age.
'

7

ev8e\€xicrp.ov]

of

continuity,

that his
if

Indeed it will be seen argument gains considerably,

peipetuity\ the expression used in the LXX for the ordinary daily sacrifices, as a rendering of "PftD (e.g.

we suppose the practice discontinued; because then and then only is the sanction transferred from the Jewish sacrifices to the Christian
ministrations, as the true fulfilment If any one of the Divine command.
let

Exod.

xxix. 42,

Neh.

x.

33)

;

and thus

opposed to the special offerings, of which the two types are the freewill offerings {evx&v) and expiatory offerings (jrepl dp.apTLas r) 7r\rjp,pe\eias). Of the last two words dpapTia denotes
the sin-offering (riXDn) and TrXrjppe\eia the trespass-offering (DS^N). similar threefold division of sacrifices

doubts whether such usage is natural, him read the account of the Mosaic sacrifices in Josephus Ant. iii. cc. 9, 10 (where the parallels to Clement's
present tense npoacpepovTai are far too numerous to be counted), remembering that the Antiquities were published A.D. 93, i.e. within two or three
years of our epistle.
7 sq, Epist.

A

is

given by Philo de

Vict.

4
tit.

(11.

p. 240)

to okoKavrov, to
rias,
r)

o~coTT)piov,

to nepl ap,apiii.

and by Josephus
r)

A

9.

1

sq

oXoKavTcoais,

xapiaTijpios

6vo-La,

r)

Comp. Barnab.

vnep dpapTadcov (passages referred to in Jacobson's notes) see also Ewald
;

ad
is

the present

Diog?i. 3, where also used. This mode of

Alterth. des
for

Volkes Isr.

p.

52 sq.

Here the Svala
the

eVSeXe^io-ynov

speaking

is

also very

common

in the

oXo/cavrco'jLiara

stands generally, as
;

Talmud

;

comp.

Friedmann

and

being the most prominent type
in the

and
as

Graetz Die angebliche Fortdauer des jiidischen Opfercultus etc. in the Theolog. Jahrb. XVII. p. 338 sq( 1848),

same way the dvaia

eir^oGy,

a part for the whole, represents the peace-offerings {aaTr]pLa in the LXX

and the references in Derenbourg VHist. et la Ge'ogr. de la Palestine

and Philo) which comprised two
cies (Lev.
vii.

11

17),

the

vow

speor

126

THE EPISTLE OF
*

S.

CLEMENT
ptovrj'
/ca/cel

[XLI

7r\riwA€\6ias, d\A'
ev rravTL tottco
7rp09

rj

ev

lepovaaXtj/u

Be ovk

7rpocr(pepeTaL, dA\' e/u7rpocr6ev
/uLco/uoo'KOTr^dev
kcli

tov vaov

to

OvcriaarTripiov,

to

7rpoo~(pep6-

\xevov Sia

tov dp^iepeco^
ovv irapa

twv

TTpoeipr^xevo^v XeiTOvp5

ycov.

ol

7roiovvTes ti
i

to KadrjKOv Trjs fiovXrjcrecos clvtov Qolvcltov to irpovTiixov e^ovariv. 'OpctTe,
A;
7tXtj /x/xeXyj/JLaTwu
if).

Tr\7)fjLfj.e\das] TrXrjp./j.eXiacT

C.

S has a singular.

V-bvrj]

AS

;

om.

C

(as

a pleonasm after d\\' 4 tuc] AC; C; dub. S.

2 irpocrcpepeTcti]

AC

;

offeruntur

sacrijicia S.

ceterorum S.
7 ocry]

5 (Hovkriaeus]

A;

(3ov\t]s

AC;

XeirovpyQv] Xirovpyuv A. add. yap S. Karij-

free-will offering

selected)
type).

(which Clement has and the thanksgiving-offer-

occurs in one instance. In Ps. lxi (lx). 6, where the word is T13, the LXX
(with

ing (which Josephus takes as the On the other hand, when

Symmachus) have

7rpoo-ev\w,

ment

speaking of expiatory offerings, Clegives both types. The v. 1. TTpoaevx&v has ew^oof/]
parallels
in
10,

Ephes.

James Rom. 9.

v.

15,

16,

Ign.

but Aquila more correctly evx&v, thus preserving the fundamental meaning of the Hebrew word, though the connoted idea of prayer is so prominent in the context as to explain the LXX
' '

It is

by the tendency to common word for a less common. Here evxcov is unquestionably right for more especially in the later lan'

explained substitute a

rendering.
2.

ep.7rpocrdev K.r.A.]

The

vaos
;

is

;

here the shrine, the holy-place the Ovcnao-Trjpiov, the court of the altar see the note on Ign. Ephes. 5. The
:

guage, while Tvpoo-evxn is a prayer in the more comprehensive sense, In the ex>xn is 'a. vow' specially. LXX irpocrevxn is commonly a rendering of rten, but evxh of th or -itj. For evxrj 'a vow' see Acts xviii. 18, In the only other passage xxi. 23. in the N. T. in which it occurs, James v. 15, the idea of a vow may possibly be present, though it is certainly not prominent, and in the context (ver. 14,

'

tion

Upov comprises both. This distincof vaos and Upov is carefully observed in the N.T. see Trench
:

N. T. Synon.
3.

1

st ser. §
'

iii.

ixcopboo-Konr) 6ev\

after inspection \

with a view to detecting blemishes. flaw or blemish, which vitiates a person or thing for holy purposes, is in the lxx pcopos. Doubtless the choice of this rendering was partly

A

determined by
to the

its

similarity in

sound

and prob.
used

16) irpoo-evxevOat of the same act. But, though

ver.

is

cvxv might undoubtedly be said of a 'prayer, supplication', it is not so evident conversely that npoo-evx^ could be used of a vow specifically. In

DID, for otherwise it is not a very obvious or natural equivalent. [A parallel instance is the word ancr/vi], chosen for the same reasons, as a rendering of Shechinah, and carrying with it all the signifi-

Hebrew

Numb.

vi.

distinctly

4 sq, where a vow is meant, the word occurs

cance of the

latter.]

Hence

ap.cop.os

intheLXX
being
ing.

many

times in the same context and
is evx*}s

signifies 'without blemish', applied to victims and the like,

the form

throughout, though an ill-supported reading npoaevxrjs

and diverges from its classical meanHence also are derived the words

XLIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

127

d$e\(poi, offtp TrXeiovos KaTrj^LcodrjjULev yvaio-ecos, toctovtco

/ULaWoV

V7TOK€llUL€6a

KlvSvVCp.
rjfjiiv
'

XLII.
10

01

(xttocttoXol

evrjyyeXio'drjcrav diro

tov

Kvplov

'Iticrov

XpiCTOv,

Irj&ous

6

Xpio-Tos

diro

tov

Qeov

i^eire/uLCpdr].

6 Xpi&Tos ovv diro tov Qeov, kcu 01
it,

j-tuOrj/iev']

KaTa&wd-qfxev A, as Tisch. (prsef. p. xix) reads

but I could not see dis-

tinctly.

Hilgenfeld 9 evTjyyeXiaOrjaav'] AC ; evangelizaverunt (active) S. 10 6 Xpiarbs] A; xpiaTos wrongly gives the reading of C evayyeXiadrjaav. ii i^€TrifX(pdr]...aTr6 tov Qeov] AS; om. C (by homceoteleuton). (om. 6) C.

pcop,ocrKo7ros, pcajxoo-KoiTelv,

which seem tobe confined to Jewish and Christian writers: Philo de Agric. 29 (1. p. 320)
ovs evLoi pcopoaKonovs ovopd^ovo~iv, \va
afxcofia kcu daivrj TrpocrayrjraL

among many

instances of the excep-

tional character of the Attic dialect, for ivpoo-Tip.ov occurs as early as

rw

j3u>pS

ra lepela

k.t.X.,

fx,(0[xoaK07r€7rai,

Polyc. Phil. 4 itcarra Clem. Alex. Strom, iv.
tcus tcov dvcnau
lepeicov

18 (p. 617)

rjcrav de kclv

7rpo(raya>yais napa. rco vopco 01
uoofMoo-Kouoi,

Apost.

Const,

ii.

3 ye-

Hippocrates see for other examples Galatians vi. 6 and p. 92 (p. 89, ed. 1), Philippians i. 28, ii. 14. In the inscriptions it is a very common word for a fine. This sentence is Opare k.t.X.] quoted by Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 16
;
c

ypcmTdL yap, McopocrKOTrelade tov p.eXXovra els Upaxrvvqv irpo-%€ipi£eo-6ai (a paraphrase of Lev. xxi. 17).
4.

(p.

613).
7.

yvcoo-ecos]

See the note on to

fiddr) ttjs deias yv(6o-eoos § 40.

dpxiepecos]
'

Wotton

suggests

quum sacerdotum inferioris ordinis potius quam summi sacerdotis
Upecos,
sit

rds 6vo~La$

,

p.(^p.oo-K(me'iv

;

but

dia.

tov dpx^pecos k.t.X. belongs rather to 7rpocr(pipeTai than to ixcopocrKonrjOev, as

the order seems to show. conditions are (1) that

The
it

three

'The Apostles were sent was sent by the Father. Having this commission they preached the kingdom of God and appointed presbyters and deacons in every place. This was no new institution, but had been foretold ages
by
Christ, as Christ

XLII.

must be

ago by the prophet.'
'

offered at the proper place, (2) that it must be examined and found with-

9.

evrjyyeX'iadrjaav]
xi.

the Gospel', as Matt.
22),

were taught 5 (Luke vii.

out blemish,
sacrificed

(3) that it must be by the proper persons, the

Heb.

iv. 2,

6

;

for the first aorist

The priests. dia tov dpxiepicos k.t.X. is comprehensive, so as to include all sacrifices.
high priests or other
5.

apparently is always passive, being used with a nominative either of the person instructed or the lesson con-

veyed
sakes\
in the

;

and
It

fjplv

will

be

'•for

our

to KaBfJKov k.t.X.]
will."
1

'

the seemly or-

might be a question however
rjp&v, as
§ 44.

dinance of His
tive

For the genip.

whether we should not read
opening of
11. egenepcpdrj]

comp.
to

Plut.

Mor.

617 E e*

tS>v

'Oprjpov
6.
5

decop-qpa

tovto Xauftdvcov

This

is

attached by

Ka6r)KovT(ov.

to Tvpoo-Tipov] 2

Mace.

vii.

36.

the editors generally to the following sentence. Yet I can hardly doubt
that
it

E7Tirifi.toj/

'Attikco?, npocrTiuov 'EXX^s.

belongs
for (1)

to

the

preceding

vikcos

Mceris

v.

imTipiov. This

is

one

words;

The

position of ovv

128

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT

[XLII

tov Xpio'TOv* eyevovTO ovv djucboTepa evTccKTWs €K OeArifJiaTOS Qeov. 7rapayye\ias ovv AafiovT€s kcci 7r\tipo(popri6evT6s $ia Trjs dvao'Tao'ecos tov Kvclttoo'toXoi CL7ro

piov

r\fxcov 'Irjo'ov

XpicrTOv Kac TricrToodevTes iv

tw Aoyco
5

tov Qeov

/uL€Ta 7r\r}po<popLas TrvevfJLctTOs

dylov eprAdov,
ep-

evayyeXi^ofJLevoi
yeo'dai.
kcitcc

ty\v

(Sao-iAeiav

tov Qeov fieWeiv

^copccs ovv kcu 7roAet.s KripvcrcrovTes kccOclvtcov,
KCLL

io~Tavov
jULCtTl,

tccs

dirapyas

SoKi/uiao-avTes

tw

irvev-

eU

67TLCrK07rOVS

SlCLKOVOVS

TtoV

/UeWoVTCOV

2 \a(36vTe$]

AC;

add.

(pD being

the

common
;

ol dirbaroKoL S. 4 rjpuv] A; om. C; dub. S rendering of 6 Ktipios as well as of 6 Ktf/nos rjpCov).

seems to require this (2) The awkward expression that Christ was taught the Gospel by the Father'
'

4.

irio~T(x>6evTes\

2

Tim.

iii.

1

4

p.ive

iv ols epaOes kcu e7riaTcc6rjs.
5.
l pera nX-qpocpopias k.t.X.] with conviction inspired by the
:

thus disappears;

(3)

We

get in

its

firm

place a forcible epigrammatic paralFor the lelism 6 Xpiaros ovv k.t.X.
ness,

Holy Ghosf
nvevpaTi
7ToWfj.
7.

comp.
kcll

1

Thess.

i.

5

iv

aylco

[iv]

irXrjpocpopiq

omission of the verb to gain terseand for the form of the sentence
see
0*077$-,
I

generally,
ttLo~tis

Rom.
77

x.

de

d/corj

17 apa 77 dia prjparos
v.

used in

KaQlo-Tavov] The same word is Tit. i. 5 KaTaaTricrrjs Kara noXiv

Xpicrroi),

Cor.

iii.
;

23

vp.els de Xpio-rov,

7rpeaj3vrepovs. Both forms of the perfect KaBlo-ravov (from lo-ravco)
Ka6io-T(ov

im-

and

Xpiaros 8e Qeov 18, 1 Cor. vi.

comp. also Rom.
13,

(from

laraxo) are

Gal.

ii.

9.

My
by

at least in the later

language

admissible, see
;

punctuation has been accepted by

Gebhardt

and

Harnack and

Hilgenfeld (ed. 2), and is now confirmed by the Syriac version. For the thought see J oh. xvii. 18 Kada>s
ipe a.7r60~Tei\as els tov Koo-pov, Kayco aTveureCka avrovs els tov Koapov, XX. 21 Ka6u>s aneo-TaXKev pe 6 7raTtjp, Kayat
TiepTToa

Veitch Greek Verbs p. 299. But I cannot find any place for either of the readings of our MSS, Kadearnvov

and

Kadio-rav.

Xvpas]

posed
Joh.

to

iv.

as opcountry districts towns comp. Luke xxi. 21, 35, Acts viii. 1, James v. 4.
, ;

'

7

See also the notes on Ign. Ephes. 6 and comp. Tertull. de
vpas.
; '

the ancient title x^P^^^o-Konos; see Philippians p. 230. the first8. ras dnapxas avrcov]
'

Hence

Praescr. 37

in ea regula

incedimus,

ecclesia ab apostolis, apostoli a Christo, Christus a Deo tradidit'

quam

fruits of'their p7'eaching' or perhaps avTG>v refers not to the Apostles but to the x<*>P ai K°t rroXeis, and is like the
;

'

(quoted by Harnack).
2.
l

genitives

in

Rom.
I

xvi.

5

os

io-nv

TrapayyeXias]
1

word of compassed on to
ii.

dnapxv

rrjs

'Aaias,
rrjs

Cor. xvi. 15
-

on

mand

,

received as from a superior
it

iariv anapxr)

'A^atas

,

which pasin his

officer that

may be

others
2. 27.

;

as e.g. Xen. Cyr.

4. 2, iv.

sages Clement mind.
doKipdo-avres]

may have had
I

Tim.

iii.

10 8oki-

XLIIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
Kai

129
Srj

10 7ri<TT6veiv.

tovto ov
Trepl
r\

Kctivcos,

6K

yap
kcli

7ro\\wi/

Xpovcov
ouTcos

eyeypairro

eV lckottcov

ZictKovvov
Itti-

yap

ttov

\eyei

ypatprj*
kai

Katacth'coo toyc

cKonoyc aytwn In Aikaiocynh
€N
*5
1TICT6I.

toyc

Aiakonoyc aytoon

XLIIL
7ri(rT6u66VT€s

Kai

tl

OavfjLaa'TOv

el

oi

iv

XpKTTco

irapa

Qeov epyov
birov Kai
Mcovo'r]^
Kaduxrav C.

tolovto

KaTecrTrjo-av
OepA-

tous
ttoon

7rpoeiprj/UL€vovs^

6 [xaKapLOS ttictoc

In

oAcp

to)

oTkco

Ta OLaTETayjueva avTw
8 ry irvev[xaTi\ AC; spiritu 10 kcuvws] AC; Kevws S.

7

Kadiaravop] Kadetrravov

A;

sancto (or rather sanctos, for the

word has

ribui) S.

12 otfrws]

AC,

but Bryennios tacitly writes ovtco; see the note on § 56.
BiaKOveiTcoaav
:

fiasco- 6d) o~av npcoTov, e Ira

see

below

§

44
l

diadeijoiVTai

erepoi

ness'; i.e. 'there shall be no tyranny or oppression For inio-KOTTos, 'a
5 .

de80KLp.acrp.evoL civbpes.

to
is

by the Spirit \ which the great searcher, 1 Cor. ii. 10.
nvevfiaTi]
eVio-KOTj-ovs]
i.e.

task-master', see Philippians p. 93. XLIII. 'And no marvel, if the Apostles of Christ thus ordained ministers, seeing that there was the precedent of Moses. When the au-

9.

irpeafivTepovs

',

for
kcli
i.

Clement thrice mentions
hiciKovoi in

iirio-Konoi

conjunction (as in Phil,

thority of the priests

was

assailed,

he

and it is impossible that he could have omitted the presbyters, more especiI

avv

inLCTKOTrois Ka\ BiaKovois),

took the rods of the twelve tribes

and placed them within the tabernacle, saying that God had chosen the tribe whose rod should bud. On

ally as his one object is to defend their authority which had been as-

sailed

(§§ 44,

47,

54).

The words

e7rio-K07ro?

and

TrpecrfivTepos therefore

morrow when the doors were opened, Aaron's rod alone had budded, and the office of the priesthood
the

are

synonymes

in Clement, as they

was

vindicated.'
*

are in the Apostolic writers. In Ignatius they first appear as distinct titles.

16.

mo-revOevres]
in
S.

entrusted with?
tl
iii.
ii.

.

The
1 1

construction TricrTeveaOai

is

See Philippians

p.

93 sq,

p.

191 sq.

common
Cor.

Paul
ii.
i.

:

Rom.

2,

12. Karao-r^'o-co] Loosely

quoted from
crov iv

ix. 17,
i.

Gal.

7, 1

Thess.

4,

LXX
iv

Is. lx.

17 dcoaco roiis apxovrds crov

Tim.
17'

ii, Tit.

3.

tlprjvrj

Ka\ tovs enMTKOTVOVs

ttlcttos
iii.

OepaTfcov

k.t.X.]

From

biKaioavvrj.

Thus
is

the introduction of

Heb.
is

5 Maivcrrjs p,ev ttlcttos iv 6Xg>

the

hiciKovoL

due to misquotation.

too o'ik(o

Irenaeus also {Haer. iv. 26. 5) applies the passage to the Christian ministry,

avrov (os depcnrcov, where there a reference to Num. xii. 7 o\>x

ovtcds o Oepdncou fiov Mcovafjs iv oAto
T(p
o'lkco

but quotes the LXX correctly. The force of the original is rightly given in the A. V., 'I will also make thy officers [magistrates] peace and thine
exactors
[task-masters]
II.

pov

ttlcttos io~TLV.

On

OepaTTcov

For the combination see above § 4. of epithets here comp. Justin Dial. 56
(p.

274) Meovo-r/s ovv 6 paxdpios Kai

righteous-

ttlvtos depcuro&v

Qeov

K.r.X.

CLEM.

9

130
ttclvtcl

THE EPISTLE OF
e(rrjiuL6io)(raTO

S.

CLEMENT
/3//3\oi9,
to

[xliii kcll

ev

tolls

iepcus

€7rr]Ko\ov6t](rav ol Xolwol 7rpo(f>rJTaL (rvveirLfJiapTvpovvTes toTs V7T avrov vevojJLo6eTf]iJL6voL<z. 6K6LVOS yap, ZriXou

eiXTrecovTOs wept Trjs ieptocrvvris
(pvXtOP OTTOLCL CLVTLOV
Vrj,
€Lrj

kclI

crracrLa^ova'cop tcov
5

Tip ivSo^tp OVO/ULCLTL ZCe/COCr/X^C-

€K€\eV(T€U

TOVS

(UtoSeKCL

(puXap^OVS
iKacrTfjs
kcll

7TpO(T6V6yKe7v
(bvXtjs

avTco
bvofjLcc

pafidovs
kcll

eTTLyeypa/uLjuevas

kcit

Xafiiov

auras

€$r){rev
KCLL

ecrippdyicrev
CtVTCLS
6LS

TOh
TY\V
m

ScLKTvX'lOLS TtoV (pvXctpxtOV,
(TKr}vr]v
kcli
Tft)S

CLTTedeTO

tov juapTvpLOv
TG£S
KCLL

fcAe^cras Tr\v o-Krjvrjv
KCLL

iwl rrjv Tpdire^av tov Qeov icrCppdyLcev tccs KXelSas cocrav€L7T€V CLVToTs*

I0

dvpCLS'
h

"ANApGC

AAeA(])Ol',

hc

an

c{)yAhc
eic

pABAoc

BAacthch,
kai

taythn

eKAe'AeKTAi

d

Oeoc
I

to

iepATeyeiN
A.
[tov]

AeiToypreiN
S.

aytco. A;

irptOLas

io-rjueiuxraTo] ea-fj/xiuaaTo

2 eir-qKoXoidrjcrav]

7}KoXovdv<xav C.

5

<pvXuv]

8 auras]

AC; add. 7racru)v AS avrbs C.
;

'lapcnjX

KeKoaixruievq] KeKoafMrnnevw

A.

rots]

A

;

kv rots

tacppdyivev.

11

/cXet'cras]

KXiaaa A.

C, a repetition of the last syllable of 12 dvpas] S papdovs AC.
;

See
1.

I.

p. 140.
'

15 tov]

A; om.

C.

16 iirede^aro] ...oet£aro

A;

sign''',

recorded as a ds Kplu.a km els 07)fA€La>o-iv nao-ais tms yeveais ylvovrai. So in the narrative to which Clement
eo-rjfieiocxraTo]

see above § 36.
7.

comp.

§

11

UdaTns

<pv\ijs]

For the geni-

here refers,
y

Num.

tive of the thing inscribed after eniypdcpeiv comp. Plut. Mor. 400 E tov

xvii.

IO dnoBes

rrfv

evTavOa tovtovl Onvavphv eVtypctyai
iroXeoas.

r^s-

pafibov
dvrjKoav.

Aapa>v...crr]p.€7ov toIs viols

t&v

lepals]

On

Here however cpvXfjs might be governed by kqt ovofia.
8.

this epithet see below,

e8

W

ev

k.t.X.]

This

incident,

o 53ol Xourol TrpocpfJTai] Moses appears as the leader of the prophetic band, who prophesied of the Messiah, in Deut. xviii. 15, as emphasized in
2.

following eo-<ppdyt,o-ev t&s KXelbas coaavTas, is not given in the biblical narrative (Num. xvii). It

with

the

seems however
Josephus
(I.e.)

Acts
3.

111.

21 sq,

to be intended by r&v t6t€ (re?) dvbp&v

Vll.

13.

i<dvos yap «cr.X.] The lesson of this narrative is drawn out also by

Ka.Taar)pr]vapev(ov auras, olnep eKopigov,

km
is

tov

ttXt'/Oovs,

though his language

Joseph. Ant.
Vit.
5.

iv.

4.
(il.
'

2,

and by Philo

Comp. Xen. Hell. iii. 1. 27 KaTeKXeiaev avTa km Kareo^^varo
obscure.
(pvXaKas KdTevTTjaev.
II.

Moys.

iii.

21

p. 162).

km
km

dvofxaTi] i.e.
;

ttjs Upa>o-vvr)s

dignity, office', sc. as § 44 eVt tov 6v6p,aTos

uaavTvs km] So also

opoicos

TVs eTno-Konfjs.

On

this sense of oVoua

Ign. Efthes. 16, 19, Trail. 13. ' 18. npoelXev] took out\ For this

XLIV]
15 Se

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
(rvv€K(x\€(r€V

131
'

y€vojJL6VY]s

TravTCL

tov

lo-parjX,

TCt£

iPaKoo'ias ^iXidBas

twv

dvdpcov,

Kal enehei^aTO

to?s

(pvXdp%ois r«5 (rcppayldas Kal rjvoL^ev Tr\v aKrjvrjv tov t«9 pafldovs' Kal evpidt] r\ juiapTvpLOv Kal irpoeTXev
pd/3$os
20

'Aapcov
iyovcra.

ov
tl

\xovov

f3e(3\a(TTf]KvTa

dXXa
ov

Kal

KapTrov
Mtovcrijs

So/ceZre,
ecreo-dai

dya7rtiTol;
;

7rpori$ei

tovto

/ueXXeii/

iidXicrTa
tco

rjdei

dXX'

tva

jurj

aKaraoTTao'La
eis

yevrjTai

ev

'IcrpatjX,

ovtws

eTTolncev
fdovov
25 d/uLrjv.

to io^affdrivai to ovofxa tov dXr]6ivov Kal

Qeov'

w
Kal

r\

So^a

els

tovs alcovas tcov alwvoov.

XLIV.
Kvpiov
e7re5ei£e

ol

aTTo&ToXoi

rifiiav

eyvnocav Sia tov
eo~Tai
€7rl

ij/ucov
C.

'IrfO'ov

XpiGTOv, otl
AC
;

epis

tov
A; A;
had
A.

17 ras acppayWas]

om.

S.

18 TrpoelXev] irpoe ....

irpoelXe

C; sustulit S. dare C and so apparently

20
S.

So/cetVe] So/cetrat
is

A. S

23 eh to]

The

variation

to be explained

by the uncial

letters,
it

eiCTO, coctg.

24 Qeov] S; def.

A;

Kvptov C.

translates as if

read tov fxovov aXrjdivov Oeou.
io-Tai]

27 Kvpiov] «y
ia-Tiv.

CS

;

XY A.
7repi

^pts] epeta

AC;

but S seems to have read

em] A;

C, and so app. S.

sense of the active npoaipelv see Judith
xiii.

sin of which

you are guilty

in ejecting

15

npoeXovaa

ttjv Ke(paXrjv in

tt)s

men

so appointed,

when they have

nrjpas.

tively seldom,

use, e

occurs comparaa strictly classical see the compe?iu promere

Though

it

it is

;

discharged their duties faithfully. Happy those presbyters who have departed hence, and are in no fear of

mentators on Thucyd. viii. 90. The much commoner form is the middle voice with a different sense, TTpoaipelo-This passage is loosely quoted or rather abridged and paraphrased by one Joannes. The quotation is given in Spicil.
Solesm.
xvii. 3.
1.

removal from their proper
26.
tcov
vp,cov
rjp.eov]

office.
iii.

,

Comp.
vfioZv

2 Pet.

2

ttjs

aTToaToXcov

evToXrjs,

where

6ai fti-aeferre, eligere. 20. ov Tvporjbei k.t.X.]

(not -qpicov) is the correct reading, as quoted by Hilgenfeld ; so that it is an exact parallel to Clement's expres-

sion.

See the note on rovs ayaOovs
5-

anoo-ToXovs §
27.

p.

293 (see above,

I.

p. 187).

23. tov dXrjOivov K.r.A.]

Comp.

J oh.

See Tert. de Bapt. 17 'episcopatus aemulatio scisepts eo-Tai k.t.X.]

matum mater
'

est',

quoted by Har-

XLIV.

So likewise the Apostles

nack.
tov 6v6p:a.Tos k.t.X.]

foresaw these feuds. They therefore provided for a succession of tried persons, who should fulfil the office
of the ministry.

On

ovop.a

see

above §§
is

36, 43.

The
1.

e7riaK0Trr)

here

of course the 'office of presbyter',
1

Thus

it is

no

light

as in

Tim.

iii.

132
ovo/ulcltos

THE EPISTLE OF
Trjs

S.

CLEMENT
Trjv

[XLIV

eiriCKOTrri^.

Aid ravTt]v ovv

airiav
7rpoei-

7rp6<yviti(riv
i

ei\ti(poT€$
;

TeXeiav KareorT^cav tovs
3 fiera^v] fiero^v

odv~\

AC

om.

S.

A.
etc.

iirifjt.ovrjv']

einvoixrjv]

A

;

emdofiTiv C.
doKLfxrj)

S

translates et in medio (interim) super probatione
ita

{e-wl

doKifirjv

or

etrl

dederunt etia?n hoc

ut

si

homines ex Us

See the lower note.

2.

tovs 7rpoeipr)pevovs]

SC.

iniCKo-

Alex. 35) or poison (^Elian
32), (2) 'a

H.A.

xii.

7TOVS KOL diaKovovs, §
'

42

*

3.

nerai-i)]
els

after•wards''

;

comp.

Acts xiii. 42 Barnab. § 13
7TV€VfiaTi

to fxera^v

<ra(3[3aTov,

elbev §e 'laKa>/3

Tvnov rw

bandage' Galen xviii. 1. p. 791 (Kuhn) and frequently (see Hase in Steph. Thes.). It might also consistently with its derivation have the
sense 'distribution, assignment', like
emvefir)a-is.

tov \aov tov fxeTa^v,
i.

ad Autol.
the

8, iii.

21, 23.

Theoph. See also

If

it is

to

references in
1.

Meyer's note to
'

have the choice

(1)

be retained, we of assuming a

Acts

c.

have BedwKaatv] to the office' permanence
enifiovrjv
:

given comp.

secondary meaning 'injunction', derived from the possible (though unsupported) sense 'assignment' (so Lipsius p. 19 sq) or (2) of giving to iirivopr) the known meaning of em;

Athenag. de Resurr. 18
Soxrjs $ia
ttjv

heh-ai be 81a-

tov yevovs

diafiovrjv.

For

inifjiovrj

(which occurs occasion-

vopis, 'an after

enactment', 'a codicil'
;

ally also in classical writers of this age) see Epist. Gall. § 6 in Euseb.
v. 1,

Rothe Anfdnge p. 374 sq see the note on KoiprjBao-iv). Of these
(so

Tatian ad Graec. 32. This reading was adopted by Bunsen, but he wrongly interpreted it 'life-tenure' (see Ignat von Antioch. etc. p. 96
it

Hippolytus I. p. 45 2nd ed) and has consequently found no favour. The original author of this emendation Itvi\iovt]v is mentioned by Ussher
sq,
;

alternatives the former is preferable, I have but both are unwarranted. the less hesitation in making so slight a change in the reading of the chief MS, because p.eTo£v before and
e8a)Kao~iv after

show

that the scribe

of

wrote carelessly at this point. Hilgenfeld (ed. 2), not knowing the
S,

A

(Ignat. Epist. proleg. p. cxxxvii)
*"

who

reading of

conjectured eVi

Soki/jl?},

quoting the passage adds this note in his margin; hripovrp D. Petrus

which

koL explains fieTa^v ('jam conditis ecclesiis') «ri Soki/jlj}
ehcdKCLV

he

Turnerus [Savilian Professor

at

Ox-

(to

OVOfJLCL

TJ]S eTTLCrKOTTrjs)

07TCOS

ford, t 165 1] hie legit, ut continuatio episcopatus ab apostolis stabilita

('hac ratione inducta') k.t.X., adding 'jam ecclesiarum al dnapxal spiritu
probati episcoporum et diaconorum munera susceperunt, post eos sola probationis ratione episcopi constitute

significetur
kcli

;

j3e/3ata

fievet,

quod Athanasiano illi, bene responded.
eirikoyrjv,

Other suggestions,
7rijv,

eniTpo-

i7no~K07rrjv, e7rio-To\r)v, anovonrju,

en

sunt'.

But notwithstanding

are either inappropriate or diverge too widely from the authorities. It seems impossible to assign any fit sense to the reading iirivoprjv convofjiov,

the coincidence of this conjecture with S, I do not think that a reading
so harsh

can possibly stand.
is
it

The

word emvoprjv

retained
'

by Laurent,
emvofxr)

formably with usage or derivation. The word elsewhere has two meanings only; (1) 'encroachment or ravage', e.g. of the spread of fire (Plut.

who

explains

adsignatio muneris

episcopalis'

(a

meaning of

though possible is unsupported, and which even if allowable

which

XLIV]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
**• ^

133
O7rcos,

prijuei/ous,

kul

lueTa^v

67rifJLOvr]v

SedcoKacriv

eav

KOLfJLt]6co(TiVy

%ia%e£(ji)VTai

eTepoi

SeSo/a/xacr/xeVoi

avipes

deduKacriv] edcoKaaiv

A;

'ibwKav C.

4 KOifxrjdQcnv]
its.

A
it

;

tlvcs KOipydwaiv C,

and similarly S
in
itself
;

inserts

homines ex

dvdpes]

AS; om.

C.
is

here)

would be very awkward and in their first edition by Gebhardt and Harnack, where it is

For
ther

edaxao-iv

a question whe-

we should read dedcoKaaiv or The former involves a less eda>Kav.
change, and the transition from the
aorist

interpreted 'dispositio, praeceptum'
(a

meaning which would be adequate indeed, but which the word could

{Kareorqaav)

In ed. not, I think, possibly have). 2 however Harnack expresses a belief

{SedcoKaaiv) fact that the

may be

to the perfect explained by the consequences of this
sc.
01

second act are permanent.
4.
i.e.

that the

word

suggests eVt/3oXr/i/. mische Kirche p. 684) conjectures ' d. h. wenn diese Form des i7r1vofj.Lv, Accusativs von eirivofxis nachgewiesen

corrupt and Hagemann {Rois

KoifiT]0&<riv]

irpotip-qpevoi,

generation of presbyters appointed by the Apostles themselves; and avrcov too will refer to these
the
first

same persons.
both
to

Rothe
Apostles

(I.e.)

refers

werden

konnte';

and

Hort

quite
'

independently suggested to me eVtvofiida, or conceivably but improbably eVtVo/xii/, as we have both ^apiTa and
X^pi-v, vr)o-Tiba

themselves. He assumes Clement to be here describing the establishment of episcothe
'

and

vrjarLv,

KXclda

and

kXcIv

',

and

refers to Philo de Creat.

Princ. 4

(11. p.

363 M.) where Deu-

teronomy
rer.

is

so called (comp.
51,
I.

Quis
509).
'

pacy properly so called, and supposes which he translates after€7rivop.r], enactment', to refer to a second Apostolic Council convened for this purpose. I have discussed this theory
at length elsewhere {Philippians p. 199 sq). Of his interpretation of this

div.

33,

pp.

495,

Donaldson conjectures enidopa
45),

an

addition' {Theol. Rev. Jan. 1877, P-

and Lipsius

eVirayqi/ {Jen. Lit.

particular passage it is enough to say that it interrupts the context with
irrelevant matter.

13 Jan. 1877).

The Apostles,

says

quotation of Joannes Diaconus (i.p. 187) contains the words 'hanc formam tenentes apostoli etc.', and Card. Pitra {Spicil. Solesm. I. p.
293) considers that 'forma' here represents Ittwo\xt) (so too even Ewald

The Latin

Clement, first appointed approved persons to the ministry {KaSio-ravov
8oKLp.daavres § 42), and afterwards {pera^v) provided for a succession so that vacancies by death should be
filled

by other approved men

{ere pot

congratulating himself that the sense of irnvofxri is late Latin parathus decided. phrase would be worthless as an authority, even if this view of its meaning were correct. But a comparison of the order of the Latin with the original
p.

Gesch.

vil.

269),

The presbydedoKipao-pevoi avdpes). ters at Corinth, who had been rudely
ejected from office, belonged to these some were appointed two classes
:

A

directly by the Apostles Uarao-TadevTas vn €K€Lva>v) ; others belonged to the

of Clement shows that the words mean
set

'the Apostles following this precedent by Moses', and that 'forma' there-

second generation, having been appointed by the persons thus immediately connected with the Apostles
{KaTaaraOevras
dvdpcov).
vcp'

iripcov

eXkoyipcov

fore has nothing to

do with

imvop.ri.

134
ty\v

THE EPISTLE OF
Xeirovpyiav avTwv.
fj

S.

CLEMENT

[XLIV

tovs ovv KctracrTadevTas V7T

etceivwv

cruveverepoov eWoyifJioov dvSpcov, SoKrjo-do-rjs Trjs €KK\rj<rias 7rdo-rjs 9 Kal \eiTOVpyr\cravTas

fiera^y

v(p'

dfAefJLTTTcos

tw

TTOifJivicp

tov Xpicrrov fxerd Tcnreivo(ppo5

avvns

tjcruxcos

Aols xpovois

Kal dfiavaixrcos, lue/maprvprj^xevov^ re 7ro\1)77-0 7rdvTcov, tovtovs ov diKaicos vopi^ofAev
A.
dvbpwv]
add. iK\e\ey^vovs S. 3 \enovpfxefxaprvpr]d^avaiaws] afiavdaus C. 6 tovtovs] AC; add. re] AC; om. S.
;

1 /xera^v] fiero^v

AC
5

yqvavTas] XiTovpyrjaavraa A. fifrovs] p,e/xapTvp7]/xeuoia A.
1.

tovs

ovv

KaracrTadivTas

K.r.X.]

Arist.

Eth. Nic.
the

ii.

7,

iv.

2,

fiavav-

This notice assists to determine the
chronology of the epistle. Some of those appointed by the Apostles had died (ol 7rpoodonropri(TavT€s), but others were still living (pi Ka.Tao~Ta6evT€s vn See the introduction, 1. p. cucivav).
349. Here again ixera^v means afterwards', as above.
'

excess of p,eya\o7rpeTT€ia lavish profusion ', the result of vulSomewhat similar is the garity.
aia
'

is

sense which the word has here and in the passages quoted, vulgar self'

assertion
8.
ii.

'.

dp.ip,iTT(i)S

Kal ocricos]

So

I

Thess.

10.

2.

avvevdoKrjaao-rjs
'

k.t.X.]

Wotton

TrpoaeveyKopras

rd

ScGpa]

What

quotes Cyprian's expression 'plebis suffragium referring to the appoint-

does Clement
gifts (Scopa)
to

by and offerings (7rpoo-(popds)?
sacrifices,

mean by

ment
(p.

of

Church
lxviii

officers,

243),

(p.

292).

Add

Epist. lv also
Epist.

the

more important passage

where the part of the laity in such appointments is deSee also the account of the scribed.
lxvii (p. 288),

In what sense are the presbyters said have presented or offered the gifts? The answers to these questions must be sought in the parallel passages § 18 Ovala rep 0ew nvevpa o-vvT€Tpip.p,e;

vop, §§ 35,
fxe

36 dvcria
odos
77

alvecrecos do£do~ti

appointment of Polycarp
Polyc. 23.
4. to)
7roip:vicp

to the epis-

Kal

e/cei

detijcd

avrco to

crcoTrj-

copate in the spurious Pionius, Vit.
tov Xptcrrox)]

piov tov Qeov' avTT] f) obos, ayanr]Toi } iv y evpop,€V to acoTrjpiov ijfxaiv 'irjcrovv

The

XpiaTov tov dpxi*p* a r
i]p,a>v,

<*>

v

7rpoa(popG)v

phrase occurs again §§ 54, 57 (comp. See also Actsxx. 28, 29, 1 Pet. § 16).
v. 2, 3.
i

tov 7rpoaTaTT)v kou fiorjdov tt/s dadevelas rjp\(ov, § 4 1 eKCurros vp.a>v,
aSeXcpoi, iv raj Idico Tayp.aTi evxapio-©ecu iv dyaOfj avvetdrjaei t€lt(o T(o

a^avavaoii\ zinassu7ningly\ adjective occurs Apost. Const,
5.

The
ii.

3
to

vnapx^v,
Trjs

prj 7rapeK(Sa.ivc£>v

tov copLapevov

ecrro)

Se evanXay^vos, dfidvavaos, dya-

nrjTiKos,

where again

it

refers

XetTovpyias avrov Kavova, § 5 2 6vaov rep 0eo) 6vo-iav alveaecos Kal

the qualifications for the ministry. See below § 49 ovBev fidvavaov iv
dya.7rr),

ovdev xmeprjcpavov, Clem. Alex.
iii.

vnobos tw v^iaTco Tas ev\ds crou k.t.A. These passages are illustrated by Heb. xiii. 15, 16, 8t uvtov ovv (i.e.
81a tov dpxieptMS 'irjaov,

Paed.

6pa>7TG>s,

6 (p. 273) p.eTadoTeov cpikavov fiavavo-cos ovde d\a£ovina>s, 26 (Theod.)
viol

W.

dvacpepcopev Ovaiav

alvicreoos

II, 12) did nav-

Job

xli.

fiavavalas

tos

(Heb. yr\W 'pride, arrogance').

In

tg) Geo), TovTeaTiv, Kapnov ^eiXeo)j/ TTjS OfXoXoyOVVTCOV T<0 OVOfJLUTL O.VT0V
'

XLIV]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
rrjs

135

airofiaWeo-dai
Y\IUV

€<TTCU 3

6CLV

d^apria yap ov juiKpd AeiTOvpylas. TOlk dfJL€fJL7TTU)$ KCLl OCTKjOS 7rpOO~€V6y\iaKapioi
eyicapirov
oiTives

kovtcls
10 ol
teal

Ta

Stopa rrjs e7TiO"/co7r^s d7ro(3a\w^L6v,
7rpear(SvT6poi>

7rpooSoL7ropricravT€£

TeXeiav eo"% ov T *l p dvaXvariv ov yap evXafiovvTai
7 airofiak\e(rdai\

ovv S.
in S.

C;

cnro(3aXecrdcu

A.

It is

rendered by an active verb

See the lower note.
ecrriv

Xeirovpyias] Xirovpyiacr
^ua/edpiot]

A.

8 tcrrai]

AS

;

C.

9

AC

;

add. yap S.

8e evnouas Kal Koivcovtas
vecr6e, toiclvtcus

p.rj

eTrCXavOd-

time and in

the

right

place

and
first

yap

Bvcriais evapecrrel-

through the right persons.

The

Tai 6 Geo's, to
is

which epistle Clement The largely indebted elsewhere. sacrifices, offerings, and gifts thereare

day of the week had been fixed by Apostolic authority not only for common prayer and breaking of bread
alms
the

fore

prayers and thanksalms, the eucharistic elements, the contributions to the
the
givings,

the

(Acts xx. 7) but also for collecting (1 Cor. xvi. 2); and the pres-

byters, as the officers appointed

by

agape, and so forth. Apost. ii. 25 at Tore
Kal
deijcreis

See esp. Const.
Bvcriai vvv ev%al
at

kcu

ev^apLurlaL,

Tore

authority, were the proper persons to receive and dispense the contributions. On the whole subject

same

drrapxcu Kal oV/carat Kal dcpaipepaTa Kal da pa vvv 7rpoa(popal a I dia tcov oo-ia>v in tar K07T <dv 7rpocr(pep6pe-

vai Kvpico
Kal

k.t.X.,

§

27

TrpoarjKei

ovv

see Hofling die Lehre der altesten Kirche vom Opfer etc. p. 8 sq (Erlangen 185 1). 10. eyKap-rrov k.t.X.] The same com-

d8eX(poi, Ovcrias vpcov rjroc npoa-cpopas tco eTvitTKoircp npoacpe-

vpas,

peiv cos apxiepei k.t.X., § 34 tovs Kapnovs vpcov Kal ra epya tcov \eipcov
vpcov els evXoyiav vpcov npoacpepovTes avrco (sc. tco eVt(rico'7rco)...ra dcopa vpcov didovres avrco cos lepei Qeov, § 35 H-V'

bination of epithets occurs again § 56 ecrTai avrols eyKapnos Kal reXeta 7; npos tov Qeov k.t.X.
11.

TeXeiav] i.e. 'in mature, ripe
it

age ', so that
ttov).

has borne

fruit (eyKap-

Comp. the compound
(e.g. Hist.

TeXeio-

Kaprrelv

which occurs several times in

Ken

idcras

vpds

(6

Qeos) Bveiv aXoya

Theophrastus
Cans.

PL

i.

13. 4,

£coa...ov dr)7rov Kal tcov elocpopcov

vpas

PL

iii.

6. 9).

The work

of these

~qXev6epcoo~ev cov 6<peiXeTe toIs lepevcnv Kal tcov els tovs Deopevovs evnoucov
k.t.X., §

presbyters had not, like those Corinthian elders whose cause Clement
pleads, been rudely interfered with

53 Scopov de
ko.1

io~Ti

Qeco

rj

eKaarov

npocrevxr)

fv'xaptcrrta.

These pas-

and prematurely ended.
'

sages show in what sense the presbyters might be said to 'offer the gifts They led the prayers and
'.

tt]v

dvdXvo~Lv]

their departure';

thanksgivings of the congregation, they presented the alms and contributions to God and asked His blessing on

comp. Phil. i. 23, 2 Tim. iv. 6. The metaphor seems to be taken from the breaking up of an encampment (see
Pliilippians I.e.), so that suited to TvpooboiTToprjo-avTes. ovk evXa(3ovvTai fear lesV comp.
:

it

is

well

them
body.

in

the

name

of the
is

c

prf]
1

they have no
iii.

whole

Hence

Clement

Mace.
xxiii.

30, xii.
evXafit)-

careful to insist (§ 40) that these of-

40

(v. L).

In Acts

10

ferings should be

made

at the right

Bels is

a false reading.

136
fjiri

THE EPISTLE OF
Tis

S.

CLEMENT
tov
l^pvfjievov

[XLIV

clvtovs
opco/mev

juerao'Trjcrr]

diro

clvtoTs

T07rov,

yap

otl eviovs

v/meTs

jieTtiyayeTe kccXws

XeiTOvpylas.

XLV.
TCOV

&i\6veiKOi e<rre 9 dSe\(poi,
€LS

ko.1

ZrjXwTai wept

5

dvY]KOVTU)V
tccs

O'00Tr]ptaj/,

6VK6KV<paT€

eU

TCCS

ypa<pds,

aXrjde'is,
A.

rds [&a] tov 7rvevjuaro^
3 irdkiTevofievovs]

tov
C.

1 fxerrjydyeTe] inerayayere
d/uLefjLTTcos]

AS

;

irdXiTevaaiie'vovs

AC
A.

;

om.

TeTL/i7)/x£i>r]5.

?<rre]

ecTai

perhaps from a feeling that it was not appropriate with 5 QCkbveiKoC] (pCKoviKoi A. 4 \e it ovpy Las] \irovpyeiaa A. 6 tQv <xv7}k6vtwv\ C (as I had conjectured); .avyKovruv A.
S,
. .

S

inserts a negative.
el

See the lower note.

evKeK^xpare] ev

re

A;

eyKeKixpare

ras ypa<pds] A; ras lepas ypa<f)ds CS. This is probably taken from § 53 eirlaraaBe ras lepas ypa<pas...Kal ey k€K1j (pare k.t.X. 7 ras 5ta No better way of filling the lacuna in see the lower note. rod] CS ; def.

C;

iyKeKvcpaTe S.

A

:

A

2. tottov] On the place of the departed see the note on § 5. There is here also an allusion to the other office see § 40 (with the sense,
'
'

serve') a thing for a person' (comp.
e.g.

Eur.

Orest. 828

Trarpcoav
;

rip,cov

;

note).
'

X<*pw with Soph. Ant. I.e.) and thus they afford no countenance for a pas' sive use Ti/jiaaOai tlvl to be bestowed

3.

fTeTLpirjfxevrjs'f]

them\
I

So

all

respected by the authorities. But
:

as

an honour on a person
the
passive,
in their note, all

'.

The

in-

stances of

which are
against

disposed to read rer-qpr^pevqs I Thess. V. 23 dp.ipiTT<x)s .TrjprjMy emendation was accepted Belrj. by Gebhardt (ed. 1), and indeed it seems to be required notwithstanding the coincidence of our existing In their second edition authorities.

am

quoted

make

COmp.

.

.

this interpretation ; e.g. Euseb. H. E. X. 4 yepapa (ppovrjaei irapa Qeov reriprjpeve, Const.

Ap.

ii.

26 6

€7ri<rK07ros

...Qeov d£iq. Teriprjpevos. If Teriprjpevqs can stand at all here, it must

mean

however Gebhardt and Harnack
turn to
cio
T€TipLT]fX€vr)s,

re-

explaining

it 'offi-

respected ', i. e. duly discharged'. Hilgenfeld (ed. 2) speaks favourably of Terrjpripevqs.

'

'

quo inculpabiliter ac legitime honorati erant', and supposing that
Tifxav tw'i tl

can mean 'aliquid tamquam honorem tribuere'.

alicui

But

'Your zeal is misplaced, Search the Scriptures. You will indeed find that God's servants have been persecuted, but their

XLV.

my

brethren.

the passages quoted by them, which seem to favour this meaning, Pind.

Pyth.] iv. 270 Tlaiav re aoi ripa Soph. Ant. 514 *<*iv<o dv(rcre(3fj TLfxas x<*P lv [comp. also Aj. 675], are highly poetical. Moreover even in these the expression must be referred to the original meaning of npav, to respect (and so to scrupulously ob01.
[1.

cpdos,

persecutors are always the impious and unholy. Did pious men shut up Daniel in the lions' den ? Or cast the three children into the fire? This

was the deed of the wicked who knew not that God mightily shields His
faithful people. And so He has crowned the sufferers with everlasting re-

'

'

nown and

honour.'

XLV]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
67ri(TTacrd€

137

dylov
fjievov

yeypaiTTca

otl oudev cl&ikov ovhe 7rapaTT67roir]ev ccvtcus. ov% evpri&eTe SiKaiovs
dcriiav

10
cLTrofSefiXrifjLevovs
tcaioi,

diro

dvSptow

iSico^drjcap

Si-

d\X

V7r6

dvofJivov'

e(pv\aKi(rdti(rav,

d\\'

viro

dvocricov

eXiddcdnaav
KCLl

v7ro 7rapavofX(x)v

d7T€KTav6t](rav

V7TO TCOV fJLiapOV
occurred to

CtSlKOV ^fj\0V dv€l\t1(pOTCt)V.
rets tov.

TCLUTa

me

in

my first
8

edition than

I

saw
is

that the p^crets of all previous

editors could not stand, as the usual expression
irvev/xaros tov dylov.
e7rt<rra<r^e] eiriTaadat

either irvevp.a.Tos dylov or tov

A.

9 y^ypa-rrrat]
see
1.

A;

yiypairro

C.
v6/j.(x)v~\

evprjo-eTe]

C;

...vprjaeraL

A;

invenitis (a present) S.

12 virb irapa142.

C; vwoira
tQ>v

.

.vofnav

A;

c£\\' virb

irapavbixuv

S

:

p.

13 virb
fiiapbv]

twv\
(as I

A; dwb

C;

ct\A' virb (or ct7r6)

tQv S.

See the

last note.

C
p.

had conjectured,
ravra]

ed. 1); p.LapQv
;

AS.

&5ikov]

AC

;

ddlKtov

S

:

see

I.

143.

AC

ical

ravra S.

$i\6v€ikol etrre k.t.A.]
TG>v dvriKovTwVy

By

readdvrj-

tors.

It

is

ing

instead of

p.r)

extent than

I

confirmed to a greater could have hoped by

(by which previous editors supplied the lacuna of A), I changed
k6vt(ov

CS, which have Tas 81a tov nvevpaTos. It is difficult however to see how
there was
left

from an indicative to an imperaContend zealously, if you will, but let your zeal be directed to things
ecrre

room

for so

many

letters

tive

'

;

in the lacuna of
for Taa-diaTov

A
is

;

for the space at most half a

pertaining to salvation
iv. 17,

'

;

18,

1

Pet.

iii.

13.

comp. Gal. There is a
also a

letter

more than is taken up in the next line by otlovS, i.e. six letters.

Geov Qeov

£t)\os,

and

in

some sense

cf)t\ov€iKia.

My

conjecture was

approved by Tischendorf and accepted by Gebhardt, and is now confirmed by C. S translates eare as an
indicative, and is obliged in consequence to insert a negative with avrjkovtcdv,

Since the lacunas here are at the beginnings, not (as commonly) at the ends of the lines, there can be no unI have certainty about the spaces. therefore placed dia. in brackets.
'

8.

7rapa7T€7roir}pL6vov]

counterfeit,

spurious\
Basil.
(?)

For the metaphor see
fi

thus falling into the

as
§

the editors.
17 ikirifci fxov
lit)

same trap Compare Barnab.
"fyvxr)
rrj

in Esai.

prinov Kifihrjkos

i. 22 (1. p. 416 e) dpaxM, tovt4oti} p.rj-

??

iniOvp'ia

tvov doyp,a 7rapcnre7roir]p.evov,

with the

p.ov

7rapa\e\oinevai ri ratv dvrjKovTcou els (TcorrjpLav. For dvrjKeiv els see also
Ign. Philad.
13.
1,

whole context
is

in

For

to.

Polyc. Phil. dvrJKovra with a dative

Smyrn.

8,

developed. Dial. 69, 1 15, 7rapa7roLr)cris Iren.
II.
e(pv\aKio~8r]o~av]

which the metaphor So irapanoielv Justin
i.

9. 2.

Many

editors
is

see §§ 35, 62.
6.

read

ivecpvXaKlardrjaav,

but this

open

iVKCKvcpare]

See the note above

§ 4°7.

to objection, for there seems to be no authority for a verb €p.<pv\aK.i£a>;

ras dia tov nvevfxaros]
7rvevfxa.Tos,

The emenI

and indeed such a compound
not from
(pvXaKr]

is

hard-

dation Tas tov

which

pro-

ly possible, for (pvXaKifa is derived

posed somewhat hesitatingly, was adopted by Gebhardt in place of
the prfaeis 7rv€vp.aTos of previous edi-

but from

<fiv\a£.

13. p.iapbv\

for paapav)

The emendation {piapbv which I made in my first

133
7rao"^oi/res
<poi
;

THE EPISTLE OF
ei/fcAews

S.

CLEMENT
yap
eiTrcojuiev,

[XLV

t]veyKav.

tl

ctSeA-

Aclkkov AeovTtov
v7ro

AavirjA vtto tlov (po^ov/uevoov tov Qeov ifiArjdri eU 'Avavias kcli 'A(^apias kcli MiGarjA t] ;
kccI

tlov OprjcTKevovTcov Tt]v fJieyaAoTrpeTrrj

evdopov

dprjcTKeiav
/uf]6ajuw£

tov

v\fri(TTOV Kareip^Qr](Tav

eis kcl/ullvov irvpos', 5

tovto yevoiTO.

Tives ovv oi tclvtcl Spdcavkcckiccs irAripeis

res

;

oi crrvyrjTol

Kai rraatis

ek toltovto

cocrre tovs iv octlcl kcli dfALOfjLw TrpoQevei e^rjpicrav Bvjuov

SovAevovTcts tlo Qeco
I

eis aitciav
etTrw/xev']

fwepi^aAeTvfy
;

juir]

eicHoTes
S.
is

evuXecos] evkXaiUff
v\J/i<TTov]

A.

enrofiev

present text of S has doubtless a corruption of KD'Hftl tov v^'lo-tov. o~au C. 7 (TTvyrjTol] CS ; arvrjTOL A.
5 tov

AC.

The

A; etiroifxev C dicam (elVw) K*HD1 tov Kvplov, but this
KaTeipxdrjcrav]
ets]

A; Kadeipx^V

AS

;

om.

C
;

(owing to
jaciant S.

the last syllable of the preceding

word

-ets).

9

irepifta\eiv~\

AC

the confusion of o and

C. For w in A compare einofxev just below, and see above, I. p. 120. Here the immediate neighbourhood of rco v would suggest the

edition

is

now confirmed by

If the

reading be correct, the idea of
(as

the preposition

in

TrepLn'nrTeiv)

must

be

change'.

'sudden and complete But I cannot find any

change
§
I

to

a transcriber.

Compare
3

parallel; for in Eur. Hel. 312 cpoftos yap is to de7p.a 7repi/3aXcoV /a' ayei the

fxiapas Kai avoaiov aTaaecos, § £fj\ov adiKov Kai a<T€J3fj dveikr](poTas.
5.

meaning of the word
ent.

is

wholly

differ-

Elsewhere (see Schweighauser

6pr)(TKeiav\

The word

is

here

used

N.

in its correct sense (see Trench T. Sy?t. 1st ser. § xlviii) ; for the

Lex. Polyb. S.v. nepLfiaXkeo-dai) 7repi/3aXXeti/ has been substituted for napafiaWeiv,

incident turns on an act of external

worship.
6. pLrjOajiws k.t.X.] i.e. 'Let us not entertain the thought, let us not so

and this may possibly have been the case here. So Heb. xiii. 9 7rept.(pep€o-de and TrapacpepeaOe are confused.

Comp. § 55 TrapiftaXev. Our Greek MSS however are agreed in
rrepifiaXeiv here.
10.

pervert facts
8.

'.

reading
''persisted in strife'.
§ 56 ovk egepiaas dXX'
ii.

e^picrav]

So
olov

Plut.

Pomp.

virepfxaxos K.r.X.] 'Yneppaxos is said of God, 2 Mace. xiv. 34 (comp.

fjTTrideU,

Appian. Bell. Civ.
egepio-Trjs

Wisd.

x.

20)

:

vTrepaa7rio-Trjs

is

fre-

151 (piXoveiKorepoi 8e toIs i^epi^ovcriv
ovres.

So too

Eur. Suppl.
§
1

quently so applied (especially in connexion with j3ot]86s), Ps. xviii. 2, xxviii.
7, 8, xxxiii. 20, cxiv.

894, egepHTTiKos Diog. Laert. x. 143.

17, 18, 19, etc.;

For the whole expression comp.

COmp.

§ 56 7TOCT09 V7T€pa(T7nO~p.6$ etJTLV.

elsTocrovTovdrrovoiase^eKavo-av. Hilgenfeld reads i^piOiaav, but this, besides

11. iv KaOapa avveidtfo-ci] The same expression occurs 1 Tim. iii. 9, 2 Tim.
i.

being unsupported and unnecessary, would give a wrong meaning, for epeOi£a>,

3

;

navapeTco]
14.

comp. Ign. Trail. 7. See the note on
'

§

1.

egepeOifa, are transitive.
'

i'yy pacpoi]

recorded,

9.

7repi/3aXeu/|

to

drive round\

famous\

The word

notable, occurs also in a

XLVl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
kcli

139

10

otl 6 b\jsicrTOs v^ep/ma^os
ev

virepacnrKTTr]^ etTTiv tcov

Kadapa
oi

trvvei&ritTei
CO
Y\

fACLTl
dfjiviv.

CLVTOV'
Se

XaTpevovTcov tco iravapeTto ovo61S TOVS aitOVCLS TCOV CLILOVCOV. So^CL
ev
7re7roi6r](r€L

v7rojULevovTes

So^av

kcli

Ti/uirjv

€K\t]pov6fJLr](rav , e7rrjpdr]CTav

t€

kcli

15

vovto dwo tov Qeov ev
alcovas tcov alcovcov.

tw

jULvrjjuocrvvcp

kyypacpoi eyeclvtcov as tovs

dfjLt]v.

XL VI.
tj/mds §e?,

ToiovTOis ovv v7rodeiy fiatr iv KoWridrjvai

kclI

d§e\<poi.
.

yey pairTai yap' KoAAacGc
.

toic atioic,

12 tQ>v aiuvtov] S; rwvai

.

.

A; om.
p. 424);

C.

C

(as conjectured

by Laurent
S.

ewacppoi

See above, § 32. 14 e'yypcupoC] A. For Zyypcupoi eyhovro S has
16
afAr/v]

scripti sunt.

15 avriov] 18

17 ovv]

AC; om.

A; avrov CS. KoWaade] KoWaadai A.
fjioo-vvov

AC; om.

S.

fragment ascribed to our Clement in Joann. Damasc. Eclog. i. 49 (11. p. 752 ed. Lequien) oQev eyypacpov rrepl avrov
(i.e.

avTcov (and indeed the general use of the genitive with p.vr)p,6crvvov in the LXX of the persons whose memorial is

rov

'A/3paa/u)
;

Icrroplav

yeveo~8ai

preserved) points distinctly to

(oKovonrjo-ev

but see especially Herm.
77

avTwv.

Sim.
ro3

v. 3 ecrrai

Bvcr'ia crov deurr/
rj

rrapa

XLVI.

'Copy these bright exam-

Geco kol eyypacpos carat

vqo~TeLa

avTr)
els

(comp.

Vis.

i.

3

evypacpijcrovraL

Cleave to the righteous, to the ples. To what end are these elect of God.
strifes

rds (SifiXovs

rrjs £o)fjs),

Aft OS
p.rj

t.

Can.

and divisions?
5

Have you

for-

§ 19

yap eprrnrXSv cora
6

voovvtos
to)

eyypacpos Xoytcrdrjaerai napa
§

Qeo},

gotten that as there is one Gpd, one Christ, one Spirit, so also there is one

29

yap

6r)o~avpL£a>v ev

ttj

(3acriXeia

body?

eyypacpos epydrrjs
r(o

Xoyio-Br/crerai

napa.
Test,

limbs?

Qea (Lagarde's

Rel. Jur. Eccles.

Would you rend asunder its Remember how the Lord denounces the man through whom the
offences shall come. Already have your feuds been a scandal to many,

pp. 78, 79, see Hilgenfeld
extr.

Nov.

Can. IV. pp. 102, 104; this writing elsewhere bears traces of the influence of Clement's epistle, e.g. in § 23 which reproduces the language It is however unof Clem. § 40). necessary to substitute vtvo for dno with Hilgenfeld; e.g. in this very

and yet they
18.

continue.'
k.t.X.]

KoWaade
is

This quotain the

tion

no where found
vi.
;

Old

Testament.
Ecclus.
koXXtjOt]tl.

The nearest approach is

J

1

chapter we have dTTofiefiXr]p.evovs drrb see also 1 Cor. i. 30, oaluiv dvdpav James i. 13, with the examples in
:

34 ris crocpbs avrco TvpocrSimilar words however occur in Hennas Vis. iii. 6 p.rjde koXXcopevot to7s dyioLS, Sim. viii. 8 oi ev
rais
tt

pay pare iais

ep.TveCpvpp.evoL /cat

p.i]

Winer

§ xlvii. p.

389.

The phrase

to pvqpbcrvvov avrov, or avrav, is common in the LXX. It might be a

KoXXojpevot Tols dyiois, Sim. ix. 20 ov KoXXcovTai toIs BovXois tov Qeov.
It is perhaps another of those apocryphal quotations to which Photius alludes (see the notes on §§ 8, 13, 17,

question here whether we should read avrov or avr&v, but § 26 to p.vrj-

140
OTI
01

THE EPISTLE OF
KOAACOMGNOI
AYTO?C

S.

CLEMENT
.

[XLVI

Ap AC

H CON T<M

KCtl

7ra\lV

€V

€T€pO) T07TW

M6TA

\6y6l* MeTA ANApOC A0COOY A0COOC €CH KAI CKACKTOY CKACKTOC 6CH KAI M€TA CTpeBAOY AlAKoWtjOcofxeu

cTpeyeic.
elcrlv
dvfjiol

ovv

toTs

ddwois
'

Kal
tl

Slkcuois*
epeis

Se

ovtol €k\€ktoI tov Qeov.

ha

Kai

5

vfjuv

;

Kal Sixoo'TacriaL Kai (T^icrfJiaTa 7roAe/uos re ev Qeov e^ojjiev Kal eva XpurTOV Kai ev i) ov'xl eva
re]

6 ToXefxos

AC;

S has the plural

(as

determined by ribui)

irbXeixoi re

and

NHI^DI, which probably represents /ecu fxdx^h word elsewhere stands for pdxcu (e.g. James iv. i, Pesh., Hcl. ;
adds
et contentiones

since the
2

same
23,

Tim.

ii.

23, 29); or possibly Clement is giving from memory the sense of some canonical text or texts. This passage is imitated by Clem. Alex. Strom. v. 8 (p. 677) yiypairrtu de, Mera dv8pbs

stronger than a-Taons § 51: as developes into dixoaraaia, so biXoo~Taar'ia widens into axicpa.
it

is

o~Tao~is

6.
iv. 1.
7.

noXepos Tc ev vplv] comp. James

dBcoov

dOatos
earj

eickeKTos
crrpe-^/eis'

Kal peTa eKXeKToi) peTa o~Tpef$Xov diaKoXXaaBai ovv rots dyiois
eery

Kai

iv.

ovx 1 * va Qeov K •'•XJ From Ephes. 4 sci €V crSpa Kal ev nvevpa,
Kal eKXr/BrjTe ev

KaBa>s

pia eXnidi

ttjs

npocrrjKei otl 01 KoXXoopevoi avrols dyiaa-

where the change of form suggests that the Alexandrian Cle6i)o-ovTai,

KXijo~ea>s vpu>v' eis Kvpios, pia nio~eis Qeos...evl de tls, ev fidnTicrpa,

eKao-Tco

77/xtov

edoBrj
ix.

77

xdpis

k.t.X.

;

ment did not recognise the source of the quotation in his Roman namePart of this passage is loosely quoted also by Nicon thus KoXXr]6ccpev
sake.
:

comp.
also

1

Cor.

viii. 6, xii.

Hermas Sim.

12 sq. See 13 eaovrai els

ovv rols dBcoois Kai diKaiois' elal 8e ovtol ckXcktoI tov Qeov'

ev nvevpa, els ev aSpa.-Kal r\v avrav ev nvevpa Kal ev aa>pa, ix. 1 8 ecrrat rj e'KKXrjo-la tov Qeov ev crutpa, pia (ppovqo~is,

yeypanTai yap' KoXXao~6ai (KoXXaaBe) to7s dyiois, otl

eis

vovs,
7.

pia

nicrTis,

pia dyanrj,
XpicrTos,

Ign.

Magn.

oi KoXXcopevoi avTols dyiaadrjo-ovTai (see

This

mention

of

Qeos,

above

§ 14).

2. Mera dvdpbs k.t.X.] An accurate quotation from Ps. xviii. 25, 26: but the application of the passage by S. Clement to the influence of good or

nvevpa, has a parallel in the reference to the Trinity quoted by S. Basil {de
Sftir.

Sanct. xxix,

III. p.

16) as

from

bad companionship is wholly wrong. The 'Thou of the Psalmist is God Himself, and the passage teaches
5

our Clement, but not found in our MS and probably belonging to the lacuna from § 58, £fj yap 6 Qeos Kal £rj 6 Kvpios
XpiaTos Kal to nvevpa to dyiov. parallel, I have taken ev nvevpa as an accusative and connected it with the preceding words, rather than as a nominative, in which case it would be attached to the following clause, Kal pia kXtjo-is ev Xpicrrw ; but the construction is doubtful. The construction and punctuation has
'lr]crovs

Owing to this

that

He

deals with

men

according to

their characters.

The words are aran ascending scale; see the notes on Galatiansv. 20, 21. Qv'outbursts of wrath/ as in I.e. /xol are Aixoo-Taaia is weaker than axicpa, as
5.

epeis k.t.X.]

ranged

in

XLVl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
Trjs

141
rjfjid^
;

Trvevfia

%dpiTOS
;

to

y

€K-)(y6ev

e(p

Kai

fxia

k\?](tis eV

XpicTTw

iva tl SteXKO/uiev Kai

c^icunroojjLev t<x

10

nieXrj

iSiov,

tov Xpio~TOv, Kai (TTaaia^ofJiev Trpos to o-to/ua to Kai eis TOcavTtjv dirovoiav ip^o/ueda wctte iirim

Xa6eo 6ai

fifjids

otl

/ueXr}

ecfiev

dXXrjXcov'^
eiirev

HJLvtjcrdrjTe

TOdv Xoycov 'hio"ov
Tit.
iii.

tov Kvpiov

r\jjiiov*

yap* OyVi

9,

Hcl.).

The connecting
it

particles in the

an addition; but
9 Sie'XKopev]
7}P<jov

is

suspicious, as being perhaps

Greek are favourable to such borrowed from James iv. 1.
i]p<2v~}

AS

;

di^XKoipev C.

13 'lrjaov tov Kvpiov

A;

tov Kvpiov

Irjaov

~ xP l0 T °v CS.

been confirmed by the Syriac, since I first proposed it.
12. peXrj icrpev] Rom. xii. 5ot7roAAo < ev crapd icrpev iv Xptcrro), to 8e Ka6'
eis aXXrjXcov peXrj.
1 3. Oval K.r.A.] Two different sayings of our Lord are here combined. The
v

to.

dyaBa iXdelv
opolcos
tie

del,

e'pxeTai'

Ka\

paKapios 8e SY ov to. KaKa avdyKrj
S. Cle-

eXOelv, oval

81

ov ep\erat,

ment here may be quoting from our canonical gospels (confusing them
from oral tradition, or possibly (though this seems the least probable supposition) from some written account no longer extant, e.g. the Gospel of the Hebrews. The first solution presents no difficulties;
together), or
for the insertion of 77 eva tg>v iKXeKTcov

V

Ji?-st is

recorded in Matt. xxvi. 24,
xiv.

Mark

eKeivco 81

21, oval 8e tS av6pa>ira ov 6 vlos tov dvdpoo7rov irapatjv

8L8oTai' KaXbv

avTOi
;

el

ovk

iyevvrjdrj

6

avOpamos eKelvos

and more

briefly

in

Luke

xxii. 22, irXrjv oval tq3 dvOpatircp

pov

crKav8aXio-ac is

not a more violent

€K€ivta 81

ov TrapadldoTai.

The second

runs in Matt, xviii. 6, 7, 04- 8' av crKaveva t&v piKpav tovtcov tcov 8aXlcrr]
7rio-Tev6vTO)v els ipe, avpcpepet avTo3 iva

change than is found in many of his Old Testament quotations; e.g. the perversion of Is. Ix. 17 at the end of § 42. See also the fusion of different
passages in §§
5°j 5 2 > 5318, 26, 29, 32, 35, 39,

KpepaaOfj pvXos ovlkos nep\ tov TpdX^Xov avTov Kai KaTanovTiaBfj iv tco
TreXdyei ttJs 0a\do-o~r]s. .ovai t&> dvdpccmco 8i* ov to CTKav8aXov epx^Tai in Mark
. :

The
iii.

Alex. Strom,

18

quotation of Clem. (p. 561) is not an

ix.

42, os av

o~k.

e.

t.

p. r. r.

tt.

els

ipe,

koXov

io~Tiv avra>
iv.

paAXov

el

7Tepl-

KeiTai p. ov.
els tt)v

t.

Tp.

avTov Ka\
tcl

/3e/3Ar7rat
1, 2,
prj

OdXaaaav: in Luke

xvii.

independent authority, for it is evidently taken from the Roman Clement. I have no doubt that the Syriac has preserved the right reading and
;

dvevdeKTov icrTiv tov

o~Kav8aXa

this

for

three

reasons.

(1)

This

iXdelv, 7rXr)v oval 8l ov ep^erat' XvcriTeXel avTco el XlBos pvXiKos 7repiKeiTai r. Tp. avTov Kai tppmrtu els tt)v 7T.
6dXao~o~av, rj iva o~Kai'8aXlarj tg>v piKpa>v Hermas Vis. iv. 2 has tovtcov eva.

reading is farther from the language of the canonical Gospels and therefore more likely to have been changed; (2) Clement of Alexandria, Strom. iii. 18 (p. 561), so read the passage in
the

oual toIs aKovaaaLV to pijpaTaravTa Kai napaKovaaaiv' alpeTcorepov tjv avTols to and in Clem. Horn. pr) yevvqOrjvah xii. 29 a saying of our Lord is quoted,
i

Roman Clement;
explains

(3)

The word
sequel
it

8iao-Tpe>\rai

the

to

ax^orpa vpaiv 7roXXovs 8uaTpe\}/ev ('per-

verted not one, but many'),

being

142
to)

THE EPISTLE OF
<\N0pdbncp
TOON
eKeiNCp*

S.

CLEMENT
ei

[XLVI

kaAon hn aytco
KATATTONTIC0HNAI

oyK ereNNH0H, h

€NA

eKA€KTO)N

MOy CKANAAAl'cAl
KAI

TTepiTeOHNAI
H

MyAON

Kp€?TTON HN AyTtp €IC THN 0AAACCAN,

6NA TOON 6KA6KT00N MOy AlACTpeyAI.

TO

G")^L(TfJia

VJULGOV
5

7roA\ous Steo'Tp6\fr6u 9 7roWovs eis dOvfjilav eftaXev, 7ro\Aofs 619 SiCTTayjuoi/y tovs iravTa^ Y\\xa% els \v7rr)V kcli
€7t//XOJ/OS
I /jlov

VfJLCtiV

IcTTlV

f]

0~TCt(riS.

ovk ]

A

;

fir]

C.

4 rwv €kX€ktwv ywou Stacrrp^ai]

S Clem

;

tow
;

/xiKpuv

cncavdaXiaai

AC.
ijfids]

See the lower note.

6
II

ro!>s

TraVras]

AC
A;

tovs 5e
/cat

Travras S.

AS;

u^as C.

atrrou Te...'A7roAAu)]

eai;roC

after Clement's manner to take up and comment on a leading word in

k.t.X.

58 ivaKaTao-KrjV(oo~oip.€V 7r€7roi6oTes I have collected these ex-

his quotations; e.g. §i4AN0p<joncf> e p h n k c<3 followed by § 1 5 koXXt)i
i

6Sp.ev

rots

fxer

evo-efteias

elprjvev-

amples, because this characteristic determines the readings in three passages of interest (here and §§35,
57 ; comp. also §51), variations.
6.

ovaiv, § 27 d>N oyxi akoyontm followed by § 28 7rcWooz/ ovv fiXenofievcov

where there are

KalaKOvofxevcdv,
§

§29er€NH0H
fol-

dio-Taypov]

Mepic Kypfoy...&ri^ atiwn
lowed by
r)

but occurs in
Plut.

The word is rare, Hermas Sim. ix. 28,

30 'Ay iov ovv p,epis, §

Mor. 214
'

F.

3oOedc...AiAcociNXApi n followed by ois %dpis dno tov Qeov dedorai, § 34 OCA, HTOIMACGN TOTc yTTOM6NO yc n &yto n followed by § 35
1

rlva ovv apa ioTiv to.

iroipa^o/xeva
§

to7s V7rop.e vov

o~iv;

35

0A0C
r)

H

to ccothpion toy Oeoy followed by § 36 avrrj 6b6s...
Aeflco
ev
A,yTCj5
77

evpop,€V

TO

aCOTTj

piov

rjfx&v,

the epistle which Paul the Apostle wrote to you long ago. See how he condemns strife and party spirit in you. Yet then you had this excuse, that you chose as leaders Apostles and Apostolic men. Now even this palliation of your offence is wanting. It is sad indeed that two or three ringleaders should
sully the fair

XLVI I.

Read

§ 36
k.t.X.

ecoc an 86j Toyc ex0poyc followed by rives ovv ol e^dpoi,
(just

fame of the Corinthian Church and bring dishonour on the
of Christ.'
ttjv €7no-ToXrjv\

mgta ANApoc kai mbta ckAcktoy ckAcktoc ecy followed
§

46

above)

name
8.

<\0Cjjoy

A0t3oc cch

It

must not be

by KoWrjdwpiev ovv to7s ddwois...
elalv 8e

ovtol

^kXcktoI tov Qeov, §

48<\noiIat6 moi nyAAC Aikaiocy n h c k.t.X. followed by noXXcov ovv
nvXaiv dvecoyvLciv
avTY) icrriv, §

inferred from this expression that Clement was unacquainted with the 2nd Epistle to the Corinthians; for exactly

the same way Irenasus (i. 8. 2) writes iv t§ npbs KopivOiovs (where the
in

50

AnoM A
1

1

k.t.X.

iv diKaioavvrj r) N A(J>€0HCAN A followed by § 5 1 ocra
(I)
I

present Latin text specifies 'in prima

ad Corinthios
(iv.

27.

3)

epistola'), and again 'in epistola quae est ad

ovv

7rap€7recrap,€v...d£i(oo~(Dfxev

d(pe6rj-

KATACKHNC0C6I 6TT eAniAi nenoi0coc followed by §
vai rjplv,§57

Corinthios', and (iv. 27. 4) quotes 2 Thessalonians as 'ea quae est ad

Thessalonicenses epistola'.

So also

XLVIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
'

*43

XL VII.
io

AvaXafiere

ty\v

€7ri(rTo\r}u

tov

/uLctKapiov

llauAov tov diroo'ToXov.

tl irpwTOv vfjuv ev dp^fj

tov

arTeiAev v/uuv Trepi Sia TO KCLI tote
airoXXu
the
kcll K-rjcpa,

evayyeXiov eypa\js€v ; eV dXrjdeias 7rvevfjL<xTuc(Jos hireavTOv re kcu Krjcpd te kcli AttoWco,
TrpoarKXicreis v/uds 7r€7roirjo-6ai*

dXX'

Y\

same order

as

S has C, thus conforming the order to i Cor. i. 12 (comp. iv. 6). 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, 1. p. 137). 12 7rpo<TK\i<jeis] A; divisiones S ; irpocncXrjcreLs C. For this itacism see above § 21.

Orig.

(firjcn,

63 iv rfj npbs Tifxodeov npbs Qeo-aaXoviKels, Method. Symp. iii. 14 (p. 22 Jahn)
c.
i.

Cels.

Tepov,
9.

and even

in later writers.

iii.

20

rfj

TTpu>Tov\ ''first

a?id fore7nost\ re-

Xa/3eVa> 8e

perd x ei P 0S ° ftovXopevos
e7ricrTo\rjv,
iii.

ttjv

ivpbs

Kopivdiovs

Macarius

ferring to the position and prominence assigned to this topic in the First Epistle to the Corinthians. It

Magnes Apocr.
Kai iv
rrj

36

(p.

131 Blondel)

npbs
de

KopivOiovs de inio-ToXrj

explain the
in

does not seem to be quite correct to word with different com(1)

Xeyei Ilepi

twv napdevav iinTayrjV

mentators either

Of time

purely,
to iv

Kvpiov ovk e^ay k.t.X., Hieron. Epist. Iii. 9 (1. p. 264) 'lege Pauli epistolam ad Corinthios, quomodo diversa membra unum corpus efficiunt', Anast.
Sin.

which case

it

adds nothing
',

or (2) of quality purely, as if it signified the primary value and excellence of the injuncdpxfi tov evayyeXiov
tion.

Hodeg. 12

(p.

97) i<

ttjs

npbs

Kopivdiovs, and Chrysostom in his preface to the Colossians (xi. p. 322 B, ed. Bened.) refers to 2 Timothy as
fj

iv apxfi k.t.X.] i.e. in the first days of the Gospel, soon after your conversion.' The expression occurs in
S. Paul himself, Phil. iv. 15. also the note on Polyc. Phil. 1

'

V

irpbs TipoOeov

(eVtcrroA?/).

Where
which

See
1
'

the

context
is

clearly

shows

in

meant, no specification is needed. On the other hand I have not observed any distinct traces of the influence of 2 Corinthians on Clement's language or thoughts.
epistle

principio'.

It is

quite impossible that

dpxv tov evayyeXiov can mean (as Young, Cotelier, and others suppose), 'the beginning of his epistle' as
containing his evangelical teaching
(Iren.
iv.

paKapiov] Polyc. Phil. § 3 tov paKapiov

34.

1

HavXov, ib. § II 'beatus Paulus.' This passage of Clement is perhaps the earliest instance of the specially Christian sense of paKapios comp. Rev. xiv. 13
Kai
ivbotjov
:

quod ab apostolis

'legite diligentius id est evangelium

nobis datum'). 11. nepl avWov re k.t.X.] I Cor. i. 10 sq. The party whose watchword

was

iya>

Xpio-Tov is passed over in

p,a.Kciptoi

01 v€<po\ 01 iv

Kvpico dnoBvij-

In § 43 he applies ctkovt€9 dndpTi. the epithet to Moses; in § 55 to The word continues to be Judith. used occasionally of the living, e. g. Alex. Hieros. in Euseb. H. E. vi. 1 1
Sta

by Clement, because the mention of them would only have comMoreover it plicated his argument.
silence
is

not probable that their exact theo-

logical position was his contemporaries.
12. Trpoo-KXlo-eis]

known

to

him

or

KXqpevTos

tov ficiKapiov npeo-^v-

See above on

§ 21.

144
7rp6(TK\i(ris

THE EPISTLE OF
hite'ivr]

S.

CLEMENT
v/uuv

[XLVII

y]ttov d/uLapriav
clttoo'toXois

7rpoa'r]veyKev*
kcll

7rpocreK\i6r]T6

yap

fjLenapTVpviJLevois

dvdpi SeSo/cf/xao"/xeVo) Trap clvtoTs.
TLV6S
vfjids

vvvi Se Karavor](TaTe
Ttjs

dieorTpeyfsav kclI

to

(te/ulvov

7repi(Sor]TOv
kcll 5

<pi\a$e\<pla$ vjjlwv

€fJLeioio~av.

aio'xpd,
777s
koll

dya7rr]Tol 9

Xiav

alo")(pa,

kcli

dva^ia

eV

XpLCTtv

dycoyrjs,
e'fc-

aKOveadai
K\rjo~ictv
m

ty\v (5e(5aiOTaTt]V

dpyalav KopLvdltov
CTTacria'Ceiv

$1

ev

rj

$vo
kcli

TTpocLOira
r\

irpos

tovs

7rp6o ($VTepovs.
1

avrt]
C;

aKorj oi \xovov eis 77/xas i^coA.
eirfyeyKe
tittov]

7rp6(TK\icns] irp6(XK\rj<ns

irpocrKKrjcreis

A;

rjrTova C,

and
S.

so

apparently

S.

7rpoar]veyKev]
TrpoaeKkrjdrjTe

A;

C,

and so apparently

2 irpoaeK\idr]Te]

A;

C.

pepLapTvprjpevoLs]
for

AS;
in

dedoKipaapivois
the

C,

which reads conversely pepapTvprjptvu)

bedoKLpaa[ievo3

next

line.

3 Trap' aureus]
/3ej3cuoTaTr)v,

AS;

Trap'

clvtQv C.

4

7repi(3or)Tov]

AC;

om. S translating
alcrxpd, dya7r?7Toi]

as if ^ej3aioTTjTa.

5 epeiioaav] epicocrav

A.

AC;
2.

om. S.

6 Xpicr7<£]

AC;
fa-

add.

irjaov S.

dywy^s]

AS;

0,701^775

C.

'

pepaprvpr/pevois]
1
:

attested,

mous
Eph.
3.

see the note on § 17. So Ign. 12 Tlavkov... rov pepaprvpr/pivov.
di/dpi
is

commonly of any systematic disciplinary or scholastic training.
7.

aKov€crdaL~] i.e. 'It is

a disgrace-

oVSoKip.acrp.ei'co]

Apollos

ful state of things, that it

should be

therefore
stle
4.
;

not regarded as an Aposee Galatians pp. 96, 98.
to crepvov
k.t.X.]

reported] the

word aKoveadai being

Comp.

§

I

co'crre

ro arepvbv

kcli Tvepifior)TOV kcl\

ttckjiv

dv-

dpconois aiziaycurqTOV bvopa vpcov peydka>s j3Xaa(pr]pr]di]vai.

dependent on alaxpd...Kal dvd^ia. I mention this, because the construction is generally mistaken some editors wanting to understand Sel
;

alo~xpa Kal A/ai> aicrxpd] Comp. teal kciXgHs tnio-raoSe. § 53 enLcrrao-Oe See also Theoph. ad Autol. i. 17 *aXa
5.

aKoveo-Oai.
K.r.k.

and others substituting dKoverai for For the plural alcrxpo.

kol Kaka Xiav, Hippol. p. 36 (Lagarde) navra pev Kaka Ka\ Kaka kiav ra rov GeoC, Clem. Recogn. iii. 25 Ignoras, O Simon, et valde ignoras', and per'

see Jelf's Gramm. § 383. dpxaiav] This epithet seems not to be consistent with the very early date

which some

critics
:

would assign
p.

to
sq,

Clement's epistle see I. and the notes on §§ 5, 44.
8.
f

364

haps Hermas Mand.
ravra
Trovrjpa eluai
;

viii.

ov BoKel

0-01

ir

poo-ana]
;

'persons',

or

rather

ko.\

kiav TTOvqpa roTs

ringleaders'

as in §

1.

See the

dovkots rov Qeov

(if

this

be the right

note on Ign.
9.

punctuation). The very words alaxpd kcu kiav alo-xpa occur in Maximus (?)

on Jude
1576.

7

in
l

Cramer's Catena
'

p.

Magn. 6. Thus it was a rumour or report which had reached the ears of Clement and the Roman Church reaKorj]

dyuyfjs]

editcation''\ '~trai?iing\

specting the feuds at Corinth; like those earlier accounts of irregularities
in the

as below § 48.

The word

is

used

same Church which reached

XLVIIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

145
d(p'

10 prjcev
rifjitov,

dWd
oicrre

kcli

eU tovs 6TepoK\iveTs vTrap-^ovTas

kcci

Kvplov Sid

TY\v vfierepav d(ppo<rvvr]V)

/3\acr(briiuLias iiricpepeo'dcu tgT ovo/ulclti eavrdls Se klv^vvov

eire^epya^eadaL.

15

'Gpapw/mev ovv tovto ev Ta%ei Kat Trpocrireawfjiev too ZecriroTf] kclI KXavcrw/mev iKerevovTes ccutov,
077-0)9

XLVIIl.
I'Xecos

yevd/uevos 67riKctTaWayfj

r\\xiv

kcli

eiri

ty\v

<re/uivrjv

t/7? (f>L\a$e\<picts r\fJnov
Y\\id<z.

dyvrjv dyooyrjv diroKaTa-

CTTr](rr]

irvXri
S.

yap
tj/xQiv]

SiKaio(Tvvris

dvewyula ek ^wrjv
12 eaurots Se]

7 /cat]

AC; om.

n
eirl tt]v

AS;

v/xQv C.

A;

eavroTs
77/xu/]

re

C;
;

etvobis ipsis S.
vfuv C.

16
k.t.X.]

I'Xews yevop.evos]

A;

yevo/uevos iXews

C.

AS

S

translates loosely restituat nos
et

ad priorem

Mam

modestiam nostram amoris fraternitatis
18 ijpas]

ad puram

Mam conversationem,
17
i^fiCov]

but this
vfx&v C.

probably does not represent a various reading.

AS;
CS.

AS;

v/xas

C.

aveyyvia

els £ut}v\

A;

elf frarjv

dveipyvla

the ears of S. Paul
aKOverat
k.t.X.,

(1

Cor. v.

1

oXas

on

§ 32

and Winer

§ xxii. p. 163.

k.t.X.,
i.

xi.

1

8 cikovco crx'io'paTa
It is

XLVIIL

'Let us put our sin away.

comp.

11).

quite a mis-

take to suppose that the Church of Corinth had formally and by letter asked advice; see the note on § 1
vop,[£opev k.t.X.
10.
erepofcAii/eiy]

Let us fall on our knees and implore God's pardon. Righteousness in Christ is the only gate which leads Is any one faithful, wise, to life. learned, energetic, pure ? He should

See the note on

§ II 1 1
f
.

be the more humble in proportion as he is greater. He should work for
the

eocrTe.

.

.(3Xaa(pr)pias erncpepeo-Bai]

common

good.'

so that

you heap

blasphemies'''; ern-

1 6.

eTTiKaTaWayfj]

While no other

being middle as frequently elsewhere, and the subject being vp,as
cpepeo-6ai

instance of the verb erriKaTaXXdcro'eiv is given in the lexicons, the substantive appears in Theophrast. Charact. 26 tov ^oXkoO rrjv e7riKaTaXXayr]v, where it seems to signify 'the discount*.
rrjv

ras.

or possibly tov? eTepoKXivels virapxovComp. Rom. ii. 24 to yap ovopa
tov Qeov 81 vpas {SXao-cp-qpelTai ev rois
edveaiv,
12.

Kadws yeypcnrrai. i.e. the danger of incurring God's wrath, as § 14 klv8wov VTVoicropev p,eyav, § 4 1 tocovtco p,aXXov
Kivbvvov]
e7re£epya£eo-0ai] withal to create'; for this is the force of eVt, as in Demosth. de Cor. p. 274 ev 6° ine^eip13.
'

is

crepvr)v k.t.X.] The expression copied by Clem. Alex. Strom, iv.
r\

17 (p. 613)

aepvr) ovv rijs (f)i\av0pu)-

\moKeipe6a Kivbvvw.

irias kclI dyvr/

dyayrj Kara tov KXr/pevra to KoivcofpeXes ^rel, where the insertion

ydaaro tolovtov o
erreBrjKe rekos.

7ra.cn

Here
II.

rois Trporepnts eavrcns will be
:

of koX relieves the sentence. Comp. the words at the close of this chapter. i see 'Ayayrj is co7iduct\ as in § 47 also 2 Tim. iii. 10, Esth. ii. 20, x. 3,
:

equivalent to vpuv avrois

see the note

2

Mace.

iv. 16, vi. 8, xi. 24.

CLEM.

IO

146
aiiTfjy Kctdcos
i'na

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT

[XLVIIl

yeypa7TTac 'AnoiIatg
eN

moi tty'Aac Aikaiocynhc,

eiceAOooN

ayta?c

elOMoAorHCOOMAi tw Kypi'or
eiceAeYCONTAi eN ay'th.
r\

ayth
7roA-

h

nyAH toy

Kypi'oY, Ai'kaioi

\wv ovv
r\

7Tv\u)v dvecpyviwv,
r\

ev hucaiocrvvri avTtj eottiv

ev XpLCTToo, ev
1

\xaKapioi

wavTes
S.

ol

eicreXdovTes
oW£ctre]

kcli 5

avT-rj]

A

;

karlv avrri C,

and so apparently
I.

AC
AS

;

aperi S.
i^ofxoXo-

1 IVa]

S Clem

;

om. AC.

See the next note. See above,
p. 143.

itjo/JLoXoyrjo-u/jLcu

;

yrjcrofAai

C

with Clem.

5

r/]

AC

;

om. S apparently.

9

Sta/cpiVet]

C;
it it

Sta/cpta/cptcret

as the c

he appears to
CIN.

me

A, as read by Teschendorf; see prol. p. xix. As far to have deciphered the MS correctly. Jacobson, instead

of cei, reads could not see

This seemed to

me more
sit

like the traces in the MS, but I
77'rw

distinctly.
;

Clem

(see

below)

tjtio

See below. S has ayvos AC.

70/3765 ev Zpyois,
fidelis,

TJTb)

ayvos]

homo (quispiam)

sit validus,

1. 'Avoigare k.tX] From the LXX Ps. cxviii. 19, 20, word for word. This

of the later Clement

is

much

too

passage, as far as
is

rfr<o yopybs ev epyois, loosely quoted with interpolations of his own by Clem. Alex. Strom, i,

loose to be a guide here, and he probably inserted the Iva to improve the grammar of the sentence.
3.

7roAAe5i>

ow

ttv\g>v K.r.A.]

Per-

7 (P- 338 sci)> wno gives his authority as 6 KXrjfirjs ev ttj npbs Kopivdtovs eViElsewhere Strom, vi. 8 (p. aroXrj.
772), after quoting Ps. cxviii. 19, 20,

haps a reference
Matt.
5.
77

to our Lord's saying,

vii.
rj

13, 14. ev Xptorcp]

John

x.

9

eyu> elpu

he adds (by a lapse of memory)
yovfjievos

i^-q-

6vpa, Hermas Sim. ix. 12 77 nvXr) 6 vlbs tov Qeov earl (and the whole section), Ign. Philad. 9 avTos a>v 6vpa tov narpos, Clem. Horn. iii. 5 2 ^ ia tovto avros aXrjdrjs cov npoCprjTTjs eXeyev, E-yto
elp.1
77

8e

to

prjrov

tov

rrpoCprjTOv

Bapvdfias

emfpepei,

UoX\a>v

7rvXa>v

dveG)yvia>v...ol elcre\66vTes, though a few sentences below he cites the words
ecrrco

nvXr) rfjs

£0)779 k.t.X.,
ii.

tolvvv

ttio~tos ...
'

(hat, as from to the Corinthians'.

p.aXXov p,ei£o£>v Clement in the letter

in

Euseb. H. E.
77

Hegesipp. 23 dirdyyeCXov

qplv ris
6.

6vpa tov

'Irjo-ov.

His two quota-

tions do not agree exactly either with the original text of Clement or with

The usual combination of oatos and diKaioy. See the note 'on ii. § 5.
6o-i6tt]ti k.t.X.]

one another. clear that he

These

facts

make

it

7.

tJtco

tis 7tio~t6s k.t.X. ]
gift,

'

i.e.

If

a

mory, and mind in using his quotations to correct the text of the Roman Clement.
2.

cites chiefly this must be

from meborne in

man
not

has any special
it

let

him

employ
as

for the

common
of

good, and

a

means

self-assertion.'

e^ojAoXoyrjo-Gifjiai]

The

best

MSS

of

the
is

LXX have

e^ofioXoy^o-o/xai,

substituted for the conjunctive by most editors here, but e£ofioXoyqacofjiai will stand; see Winer
>5

which

The same gifts of the Spirit are enumerated, though in the reverse order, in I Cor. xii. 8, 9 fiev yap 81a tov nvevfiaros didoTai Xoyos aocpias, aXXca 8e Xoyos yvcoaecos Kara, to avTo Ttvev fia,
<*>

eTepat

TTifTTlS

ev tco

avT(p

nvevfxaTi.

Hilgenfeld inserts Iva before elaeXOwv, following Clem. Alex. Strom, i. 7 (p. 338); but the quotation
xli.

p.

300.

Unless Clement is using this language without warrant, the temper of the factious Corinthians of his

XLVIIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
ty\v Tt]v

147
0(Ti0Tr\Ti
rJTCo
kcci

KCLTevOvvovTes

Tropeiav wopeiav

avTwv

ev

diKaiocruvr], aTapd^co^ iravTa eTTiTeXovvres. 7ri(TT0s, t]Tco Svvaros yvwo'iv e^ei7reTv, rjTco

tis
ev

o~o<pos

SiaKpicrei
10 TOcrovTio

\6yeov,

ijro)

yopyos

ev

epyois,

t\tco

dyvos*
ocrco

yap

fxdWov

TaireivocppoveTv

6(f)ei\ei,

scientiam possideat (possidebit), laboret {laborabit) sapiens in interpretatione verborum, sit purus in operibus. This represents substantially the same Greek with

AC,

except that

tJto}

dvvaros yv&cnv

e^eiiretv,

tJto}

crocpbs

k.t.X.

must have been

corrupted into tjtw dvvaros, ypwrip e£ei, irovdroo <ro0os, as Bensly points out. touovtov tis Anton Max. 10 TOGotiTu) yap] AS ; Clem tocto^tc^ (om. yap) C
;

yap]

AS

;

om. C.
S.

Taireivocppovelv ocpeiXei]
ocpeiXei] ocptXei

AC

Clem

;

ocpeiXei Ta-weivocp'povelv

Anton Max.; dub.

A.
t)e

oVoj]

AC

Clem; (Sow Anton Max.
ii.

time must have closely resembled that of their predecessors in S. Paul's
age.
8.
'

ftpabvTepov, Epict. Diss.

16.

20

ev

pev
el,

tt)
iii.

axoXfj
12.

yopyol

K.a\

KaTa-

yXcocrcroi,

IO
6

acTKrjcrov,

el

yopk.t.X.,
el,

yvcocrtv

e^eiirelv]

to

utter, ex-

yos

Xoidopovp,evos dveyecrQai
xii.

pound a

yva>cris\ i.e. 'to bring out the hidden meaning of a scripture'. For this sense of yvuxris see the note on The possession of Barnabas § 6. yvaxris was an old boast of the fac-

M. Antonin.
TavTrjv

el

ovv yopyos

Bepcnrevcrov.

The departure

in the later usage of the word from its Attic sense 'terrible' is noted by

tious Corinthians,

1

Cor.

viii.

1,

10,

11, xiii. 2, 8; and the vaunt has not without reason been attributed especially to the party among them which claimed as its leader Apollos, the learned Alexandrian, 'mighty in the

The pasthe old lexicographers. sage is twice quoted by Clem. Alex., Strom, i. 7 (p. 339) avTiKa 6 KXrjprjs ev
Trj

7Tpbs KopivSlovs e7rio~ToXr)

Kara Xe£iv
tcov

(prjal,

Tas
Trjv

diacfiopds

eKTidepevos

KciTa

eKKXrjcriav 8oKip.cov, *¥ltco

tis

tticttos, iJtco
tjtco

dvvaTos tls yvcocriv e^enrelv,
ev
diaKpicrei

scriptures' (Acts xviii. 24).
9.
(if it

diaKpiaei]

The reading

of

A

croCpbs

Xoycov,

tjtco

be correctly given biaKpiaKpicnv) a corruption of diaicpicnv ( = diaarose out of 81aKpia-T) which itself and this out of dicucpio-ei see Kpicri for other instances of a like error the
is
:

yopyos iv epyois, and Strom, vi. 8 (p. 722 Sq) eCTTCO TOIWV TVICTTOS 6 TOLOVTOS,
eo~Tco

dvvarbs yvcocriv e^enrelv,

tjtco

cro-

Cpbs ev diaKplcrei Xoycov, tjtco yopyos ev toctovtco yap paXXov epyois, r/Tco dyvos'

Tcmeivoqbpovelv ocpeiXei,

ocrco

doKei pdXrfj npbs correction

note on

dvao-Trjcropai §

1

5.

Otherwise
(see above,

Xov

/xei^cov elvai'
(pr]crL

6 KXrjprjs ev

SLaKpio-eaiv

might be read

Kopivdiovs

The

1. p. 120, for similar corruptions), as the plural diaKpicreis occurs Rom. xiv. I Cor. xii. IO I diaKpicreis dia.Xoyio-p.c2v,

adopted in the text (after Hilgenfeld) seems to be justified by these two It does not however quotations.
find

diaKpiaeis Twevparcov.

any support

in our existing au-

yopyos] 'let him be energetic In later writers yopyos is active, quick, strenuous'; e.g. Dion. Hal. de Comp. Verb. p. 133 (Reiske) to
r)T<x>
.

1

'

of the MS explained as arising out of a confusion, the transcriber's eye passing from one similar ending to anthorities.

The reading

may be

p.ev

avTcov

[rcov

kcoXcov]

yopyorepov to

other.

IO

—2

148
So/cel
TTOLCTIV

THE EPISTLE OF
/ulclWov
KCtl
fJLYl

S.

CLEMENT
tyjTeiv

[XLVIII

/uLeifav

eivai,

ical

to KOivwcbeXes

TO iaVTOV.
ApicrTw
7roirj(raTU)

ALiJLA.

(J e^oov aya7Tf]v ev

tcl

tov XpicrTOv 7rapayyeXjj.aTa, tov tov Qeov tis o^vvcltcli i^yricracrdaL
KaXXovfjs avTOv
tis

hecrfjiov Ttjs
;

dycnrris
5

to

fJLeyaXetov Trjs

dpiceTos

e^enreiv*,
4cttiv.

to

i/a/^o?

eh 6

dvayei
rifjids

fj

dyairr]

dveKdiriyrjTOV

dyairr]

KoXXa

Tw

Oecp'

dyawrj

KaXviTTei

wXrjdos

d/uapTtwv
ovSev /3dCS.

dycnrt] irdvTct dve%eTai, iravTa juaKpodv/uel'
i

fielfav"]

AC

Clem; om. Anton Max.
it

3 iroiri<jaTU>\
Trjp-qvaTbi.

So

also

Teschendorf reads A, but other collators give
myself.

I

On

TroLrjaaTOJ.
1

the first two inspections There are various readings

I inclined to TTjprjaaTco,
iroiufxeu,

could not satisfy but on the last to
supported) in

Trjpu/xev (both well

6 apKerbs] ACS. Joh. v. 2. but this is a lapse of the pen.
I.

Bryennios represents
7 eariv.
ayairr)']

C

as omitting apKerbs,
earlv
r)

A;

dyairrj

C.

fiaXkov

fielgoDv]

See Matt,

xxiii.

Koiva>(pe\es.

For the double comparative see the note on Philippians i. 23. An11.

XLIX.
us to
is

'

Who

shall tell the
?

and the beauty of love

power Love unites
:

tonius Melissa Loc.

Comm.

ii.

73 (34)

and Maximus Serm. 49 both quote this sentence as from Clement in a somewhat different form, toctovtov tis
paXkov
dcpelXei Tcmeivotypoveiv, ocrov but they cannot 8oKel fiaXKov elvcu
:

love is all enduring love from pride and vulgarity love brooks no strife or discord. In love all the saints were perfected.
:

God

free

:

be regarded as independent authorities for omitting pelfav, since in such
collections of excerpts the later
piler generally

com-

God took us to Himself. In love Christ gave His body for our bodies and His life for our lives.' O e'xav k.t.X.] This resembles 3. our Lord's saying in John xiv. 15 eav
In love
c

borrows directly from
:

ayanare
aere
(v.

pe, Tas
1.

evroXas ras epas
:

Trjpij-

his predecessor
251,

see Philippians p.

r-qprjaare)

comp.

I

Joh.

v.

note 2. The Syriac connects paKkov with hoKei.
fyrelv
K.r.A.]
I

1—34.

tov Beo-pov]
avvdeo-pos
is
1

i.e.
iii.

Cor.

X.

24

prjbels

power': comp. Col.
o
ecrriv

to eavrov

^r)TeiT(o

aWa
p.rj

'the binding 14 rr)v dydrz^v
reXeiorrjTos.
'

and

id.

ver. 33

to tov erepov, fyrcov to ip,avrov

ttjs

This clause
Ephes.
iv.

avp.(popov
CrjTelv

dX\a to

tg>v

ttoW&v.
I

For
xiii. 5,

quoted by Jerome ad (vn. p. 606) Cujus rei et

to eavrov see also
ii.

Cor.

Phil.

21.
l

Clemens ad Corinthios testis est, scribens Vinculum charitatis Dei qui
(quis) poterit enarrare ?
6.
'

the coimnon advantage" ; comp. Philo de Joseph. II. p. 47 M. dia to KoivwqbeXes (pOdvovra tovs aXXovs, M. Anton, iii. 4 ^topiy

to

Koiva>cpc\es]
'

apKerbs etjemeiv] Previous editors had misread the MS A, and written dpKcl, as edei, elnelv. For the

peyakrjs

/cat

Const,

vi.

Koiva>(pe\ovsdvdyKT]s,ApOSt, 12 o~v£r)TovvTes npos to

The word occurs

construction of dptceros see 1 Pet. iv. 3. also Matt. vi. 34,

XLIX]
10

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
dydirr)

149
aryiarixa

vavcov ev dya7rrj, ovSev V7repri(pavov

ovk e%ei, dyawrj ou CTcto'ia^eL, dyairt} iravTa woie! ev dfJLOvoia' ev Trj dydirrj ereXeiwdria'av Travres ol eKXeKTOi

tov Qeov* S/x a
ev

dyairr]
fjv

ovSev evapecrTOV ecTTiv rw ©ear did ty\v 7rpo(re\a(3eTO ijjuids 6 Secr7roTris
dydirt]**
9

15 dya.7rt]v,

ea"^ev irpos
'

fj/xas,

to

al/ua

avrov

eficoKev

virep r\\xwv

Irjcrovs

XpicrTos 6 Kvpios
V7rep
Trjs

fj/utov

ev OeXrj/uaTL

Qeov, Kal
^\rV^(Y\V

Tt\v

(rapica

crapKOS

tjfJLcov

Kal ty\v

Virep

TWV

\JsVX(jUV

tlfJLWV.
is

The whole
8
irXrjdos']

of the preceding passage AC; but S translates N"I1K> t

disturbed in

CS by

false

punctuation.

and so Clem (except that
8e8o)K€V

murum.' Deo he omits iariv)
;

evapearelv iariv Tip Qeip) S.

14

r/yuas]

13 ovdev...T(p 0ey] AC, placere ne??w potest (as if ovdevl AS; v/uloLs C. 15 ZdajKev] A;

C.

16 virep

TjfAwv 'ItjctoOs X/jicttos]

AS

;

Irjcovs

xP ia r ^
"

virep

ijfjbcov

C.

18 tQv \pvxvv]
x. 25,

AS
Vis.

;

ttjs

i/vxys C.

Hermas
vyjros

iii.

8.

to
rate

k.t.A.]

See

the

elabo-

the language of S. Paul and the language of S. Peter is a token of the
large and comprehensive sympathies of one who paid equal honour to

metaphor
XpiaTov

<pepop.evoi els to.
'irjo-ov

in Ign. Efihes. 9 dvavyj/r] Sia ttjs p,r]xavr}s

k.t.X.

The passage

of

Clement from
ttjs

this point, as

far as

$ao~iXeLas tov XpicrTov (§ 50), is loosely quoted and abridged by Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 17 (p. 613 sq).
8.

both these great Apostles (§ 5), though claimed them for their respective schools. See Galatians p. 323, with notes above §§ 12, 33.
rival sectarians
'

(Sdvavaov]

coarse, vulgar, self-as-

ayaivq KaXvnTei
1

'

k.t.X.]

throws
taken

serting, arroga?it\
dfiavavcrcos § 44.

See the note on

a veil over, omits
forgives
.

to notice, forgets,
is

The

expression

from 1 Pet. iv. 8 (comp. James v. 20), which again seems to be a loose quotation from Prov. x. 12, where the original has DWB"^3 'all sins' for
'a multitude of sins', and the lxx rendering is still wider, ndvTas 8e tovs fti) (piXoveiKovpTas KaXvnTet (piXia.

10. o"x_io~p.a ovk e%ei k.t.X.] The expressions are in an ascending scale 'knows nothing of outward (1)

schisms'; a factious
entire
12.

(2)

'does not even foster

spirit'; (3) 'nay,

preserves
6 8e

and universal harmony'. eTeXeioodrjarav] I John iv. 18

(pofiovixevos ov TeTeXeicoTai ev ttj dyanrj.

For
iii.

this

Hebrew metaphor
1,

of 'cover-

ing' see Ps. xxxii. yj
(iv. 6).

lxxxv. 3,

Neh.
imi-

John

9.

dydivq navra aj/e^erat]

An
77

81a ttjv dydnrjv k.t.X.] Comp. xv. 12, Gal. ii. 20, Ephes. v. 2. kol ttjv o-dpKa] Wotton quotes 17. Iren. v. I. I ra I8ia> a?p,aTi XvTpoiaap.e14.

tation

of

I
.

Cor.

xiii.

4,

7,

dydnr]

vov

r)pcis

tov

Kvpiov Kal dovTos

ttjv

p.a<po6v}iei. .travTa o-Teyei...7rdvTa
p.4v€L
:

vno-

^vxV v vnep
ttjv

tqzv -qpeTepcov y\rvx<H>v Kai

and indeed the whole passage

adpKa

Trjv

eavTOV dvTi tSv rjpeTepcov

is

evidently inspired by S. Paul's The juxtaposition of praise of love.

which seems to have been taken from this passage of Clement.
aapKoiv,

i5°
L.
ecrTLV
ri

THE EPISTLE OF
OpaT€ 9
ccyaTrr],

S.

CLEMENT
fxeya
kcli

[*

dycnrt]Toi,

7ra)S

Kal Trjs TeAeioTrjTOS

avT^
el

davjuaaTOV ovk ecTiv
jjlyi

ifcriyriarts'

tis Ikccvos ev avTrj

evpedijvai,

ov\ dv

KaTa^icocrj 6 Geo?; Secojueda ovv Kal aiToo/usda dird tov eAeovs auTOv, \va ev dyairri evpedco/uev Sl^a 7rpocicXicrecos

5

dvdpco7rivris
TrjcrSe

ducojuLOL,

'ASa/uL
2
r]

ews
ayairi]]

qjULepas
C.

yeveal 7raprj\6ov 9 d\A'
A; avrov
C.

al

irctcrai

dire)

ol

ev dyairr]

A;

ayairr]

avrrjs

S

translates ejusdem {ipsiics)

perfectionis.

It

seems to have had

clvttjs

and made

it

ovk

ecrriv k.t.X.]

AC

reading
et /XT]]

e^rjyTjais rts
;

S translates non est ser?)io ullus and making inavbs feminine.
;

sufficient

agree with reXeioTrjTos. ut inveniatur, thus
e^r]yr]crei(r

3 i^rjyyjais]

A.

S apparently adds ev aya-n-r) the translation of the whole context.
have rightly deciphered N is not distinct.
the last note.
'

AC

/ecu,

but a false punctuation has confused ovs civ Kara^iuxxr}] Teschendorf seems to

N

A

as reading oyCc\k<vtc\5icoch, though the superscribed see 4 /carafiuxr??] S ; /caracuoji;?? C. For the reading of

A

be&ixeda] supplicemiis S;

da A; deo/neda C; I had conjee -

L.

In this marvellous love let us
that

pray God

we may

live.

We

only do so by His grace. generations, thus perfected in love, now dwell in the abodes of bliss,

can Past

cltto tov Qeov, fcd/cei pixP L T V S dvaaTdaecos 0oira>cri, Trept,p,evovo~ai T-qv See also Apost. dvdo-Tao-Lv k.t.X.

avrals

pevos

for He has promised to raise them again. Happy are we, if we pass our time here in harmony and love. For then our sins will be forgiven us we shall inherit

awaiting His kingdom

:

41 x^P os tvo~efia>v dveiLebas-Waddington Asie Mineure Inscr. 168 evae^ewv x®P 0V be^aTo Traai (friXov. For x<x>P°v evcre(3a>v
viii.

Const,

k.t.X.,

Xa>pav

the existing text of Clem. Alex, has 'the country, the evo-eftatv,

:

the blessing promised to the elect of

realms of the pious', which suggests a more sensuous image, conveying a
notion similar to the 'Elysian fields'. The one might be translated 'locus
piorum', the other 'campus piorum '. But x^P os > rather than x^P a accords with the language of the Roman
i

God through
2.
iv.
1

Christ.'

rijs reXeiorrjTos k.t.X.]

See

I

8 ov TereXelcorai ev
eTe\eia>6r)0-av,
',

ttj ayairrj,

John above
iv
ii.

§

49

dyeing TeXeia>6evTes
5, iv. 12.

and below ol COmp. I John

iv avrfj evp.~\ Comp. Phil. iii. 9. al yeveal ndaai] Comp. § 7 els 6. tcls yeveas nao-as.
3.

Clement elsewhere. A place in Sinamed after two brothers famous for their piety, was called indiffercily,

ently
X^opos
lar.
9;

~Evo~e(3a>v

X°>P a

an<^

'E.vo-eficov

)(wpov evaefiwv] ''the place assigned to the pious\ like tov 6qbetX6pe8.

see Bentley's Dissert, on
p. 238, ed.

Phaxix.

v

(1.

Dyce).

vov tottov rrjs do£rjs § 5> or T °v ISpvSee the note pevov avrols tottov § 44.

iv

tji i7no~K07rr} k.t.X.J

Luke
aov,
I

44 tov Kaipov
ii.

Ttjs iTTio-KOTvrjs

Pet.

on § 5, and comp. by Wotton here)
els

Iren. v. 31. 2 (quoted
al

12 do^dacocriv tov Qebv ev tfpepq em-

^u^ou dnep^ovrai

o-KonfjS)
o-KOTTrjs

Wisd.
avroov

iii.

7 Kai ** Kaipco eVt,

rbv [aopaTov] tottov tov edpio~pevov

dvaXdp^ova iv Polycra-

L]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
Oeov x a P LV
e

151

TeXetcodevTes kcltcc ty[V tov
evcrefiwv'
10

X ov(Tlv X™P 0V
eic

oi

(pavepcoOriorovTai

ev ty\ eiricrKOTrr} tyjs /3a-

aiAeias
TAM£?A

tov Oeov,
MIKpON
KAI

yey pairTai yap'
OCON,
600C

EiceA0eTe
H
KAI

ta

OCON

of

TTApeA0H

0YMOC MOY,
Ymac
el

MNHC0HCOMAI HMepAC Af^QHC
0hk(2)n

dpTH KAI ANACTHCOO

6K

toon

yMooN.

[xaKapioi

f]fJL6V,

dyairriTOL^

15

Trpoa'TayfJiaTa tov Oeov eiroiovfjiev ev 6/uovoia dya7rrjs y eis to dcpedrjvai tj/ulv Si dyairr]^ ra? dfAapTias. add. dya-mjToi S. tured dew/jieda (ed. i). odv] AC alTufxeda] AS tov Qeou S. alroijfjLeda C. 7rpocr/cAtaecds] A; TpocrKX-fjaews 5 avrov] AC C adhaerentia S. On this itacism see above, § 47. 7 r^o-5e rj/xipas] A
;

ra

;

;

;

;

•7-775

Ti/xepas rrjade

C
I

;

while

Clem has

T77<r5e r-^s rjp.epas.

terminable. reads

\y

;

but

9 oi'] AS; ol de C. could only see y> the

10
first

The reading of S is indeQeov] CS; .y A; Tischendorf
being hopelessly blurred. A read eiaeXde with the
11 Tap-eta] rapaa

letter

elaeXdere]

CS

;

eiaeX....

A.

It

is

quite possible that
to eio-eXOere.
6 fluids

LXX, but the other authorities point
rap-ieia C.

A;
A.

12 6vp.bs] 6v...
;

A;

C.

i^'W^] CS
''the

;

eo^e;/

15

i]pui>~\

AS

iV'" C.
11.
"Tin.

tes in
ttjv dirb

Euseb. H. E. v. 24 nepipLevoov twv ovpav&v e7no-K07rr)v ev rj e<

ra/xeta]

imier chamber'^

On the form see Lobeck Phryn.
Paral.
p. 28.
1

veKpav dvacrrrjaeTai. 10. ElaeXdere k.t.X.]
of passages.

p. 493,

The same
before
et

ten-

A combination
is

dency
chief

to elide the

The opening
Is. xxvi.

taken

in vyeia § 20.

appears In §21 however our
x.

from the LXX
ra ra/xela
irapeXOrj
aTTOKpyfirjOi
r]

20

e'laeXBe els

MS

writes

rap-ieia.

crov, aTroKXelcrov ttjv
p.iK.pbv

Bvpav

crov,

ocrov ocrov]

Comp. Heb.

yj (with

ocrov oo~ov,
I

ecos

av

Bleek's note).
dpyr)

dpyr]

Kvpiov

the close pro-

am
' i

6vp,6s~\ dpyr) is
;

the settled

bably from Ezek. xxxvii. 12 dva^co The invp,as e< twv p,vrjp,a.Ta>v vp.a>v. termediate words Kal pLvr/adrjo-opLai r)p,epas dyaOrjs are not found anywhere. They may possibly be intended to give the general purport of the promise which they introduce see a parallel instance in § 52. The combination of the two passages from different prophets was probably
:

anger' 6vp.6s the sudden See the distincoutburst, wrath'. tion in Trench's N. T. Syn. 1st ser. § xxxvii, and to the passages there collected add Joseph. B. J. ii. 8. 6 opyfjs rapi'iai biKaioi 6vp,ov naOeKriKoi, Hermas Aland, v. 2 e< de rfjs

temper,

niKpias 8vp.os, e<
K.T.X.

t)e

tov

8vp,ov

dpyr],

14.

e7roiovp.ev]

If the

suggested by the verse in Isaiah which immediately precedes the words quoted, dvacrTijcrovTai ol venpoX
Kal eyep6r)o~ovTai ol ev tols p.vr)p,elois (Is. xxvi. 19). Comp. 5 Esdr. ii. 16 'et

correct, the point of time
eo-piev

reading be denoted in
life

must be the second advent, so
are

that the deeds of this present regarded as past.
ev 6p.ovoiq dydnr/s] §
7roiei ev 6p,ovoiq.
'

49

^y^V

"ndvra

resuscitabo mortuos de locis suis et

de monumentis educam

illos etc.'

15.

t)i

dydrrr/s]

through God's love\

152

THE EPISTLE OF
yap'
Makapioi
Al

S.

CLEMENT
ai

[*

yeypaiTTai
CON

wn AQ>e6HCAN

anomiai

kai

MAKApiOC ANhip of oy MH AOTICHTAI Ky'piOC AMApTIAN OyAe CCTIN 6N TCp CTOMATI AY"t[oy] AoAoc. ovtos 6 fjLaKapKTfJLOs iyeueTO eirl tovs e/cAeAeyeneKAAyc|)6HCAN

AMApTIAT

fJLSVOVS
tj/utov,
i

V7TO
to
r\

TOV OeOV Sid
els

'

IrjCTOV

XpKTTOV TOV KvpLOV
aicovcov.
There
is

5

Zopa
5

tovs aitovas tcov
A.
i ov]

d/mrjv,
the same
/cat

^a/cdptot] fxaKaxapioi

A; y CS.
7

v.

1.

in

the LXX.

CS

;

Trape.../j.ev

A.

Qeov C. rod Qeov] ; See the lower note.
10
rrjs

A

irapeiriaaixev
t)/juj>]
;

iiroirjcra/xev]

8

a(j)edrjvaL

CS, and so proit

bably A.

See the lower note.

iXwidos]

AC

spei nostrae S, but
1 1

probably does not represent a different Greek

text.

<po(3ov]

AC

;

add.

of which

we become partakers by There is ourselves living in love. the same transition from the beto

self

f de litera B adhuc conspicua', suggested that the reading of A was not 7rapej3r)p.€v but TrapeTrecrayLev and

liever's love

God's love

in

§

49

that the following words
p.ev

/cat

cVoi^o-a-

St'^a dya7rr)s k.t.X.
i. MaKapioi k.t.X.] From the lxx of Ps. xxxii. 1, 2, word for word, as

were omitted owing

to

homceoteis

leuton, for there certainly room for them. I believe he

not

is right.

read in A (S writes acpeidrjo-av). For In Rom. iv. 8 it is a ov B has co. question whether ov or a is the correct reading.

Suggested where after quoting the same passage from the Psalms
4.

oiiTos 6 piaKapicriJ.6s]
iv.

by Rom.

9,

S. Paul continues, 6 paKapicrp,6s ovv For ovtos eVi rrjv TvepiTopyv k.t.X.
p,aKapicrp,bs
iv.

thus directed to looked at the MS again. I could not discern a B but saw traces of a square letter which looked like n followed by a curved letter which might be e. Not satisfied with my own inspection, I wrote afterwards to Dr E. M. Thompson,

Having

my attention
I

the matter,

see also

Rom.
Ka\

iv.

6, Gal.

now chief librarian of the British Museum, to obtain his opinion. He
read the
letters

15 (note).
7.

independently exactly

7rapeTrecrap.€v

€7roir]crap,ev]

as

I

There can be no doubt about the reading of our two new authorities;
for

that

had done, and says confidently the reading was 7rape7recrap.ev.

though the

last

word indeed, as
.^i*^^

This reading is favoured by the words which follow koXov yap dvdpcona) e£opoXoyeio-Qai 7rep\ ra>v 7rapa7TTcop.a.Ta>v (see the note on § 46), as also by

now read

in the Syriac MS, is

transgressi sumus, the diacritic point has been altered and it was originally
•J.l^a*. fecimus.

But what was the

the loose paraphrase of the younger Clement Strom, iv. 18 (p. 614) fjv 8e
KO.I

7T€ pi7T€0~7) CLKltiV TOiaVTT) TLVL 7T€pi-

reading of A? hitherto given
older collators

The

editors
;

have

crracrei dia

rds

7rapep.7rTa>o~eis

tov

olvtl-

7rape(3r)p,ev

but the

Young and Wotton

where •nepmicrr] seems to have been suggested by the associaKeipevov,

professed only to see 7rap€...p.ev, and after C was discovered, Gebhardt

tion of sounds. LI.

'We must

therefore ask par-

observing that nothing was said either by Tischendorf or by my(ed. 2),

don

for our sins.

Above

all

ought

the leaders of these factions to deny

LI]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
LI.
c

'53
e7roir\(rafjiev

Oaa

ovu

Trapeireaafjiev

Kai

Sid

tlvos

twu tov

avTuceifJievov ,

d^i(jb(T(iifj.€v

d(pedrjvai

rifjuv

Kai eKeivoi Se, dlrives dp^rjyol crracretos Kai Si^oa'Tao'ia^ 10 iyevriOrio'av, to kolvov Trjs i\7riSos ctkott€iv, ocpeiXovcriv
01

yap

/ui€Ta

<p6/3ov Kai dyairt]^ TroXirevofxevoL iavTOvs
aiKiais Trepnr'nrTeiv
rj

deAovcriv /udAAov
dei S.

tovs

7rAr]a'LOVy
olklcll<t

12 OeXovaiv]

AC;

cogunt (coarctani) S.
it is

aUias]

A.

Teschendorf
I

(prol. p. xix) considers that

altered into aiKiaia

prima manic, but
irX-qviov S,

which

could not distinctly see this correction. tovs TrXrjcriov] AC ; reus also omits 8e eavruiv, thus throwing the syntax into confusion.

themselves for the
It
is

common

good.

always to confess our wrong-doings, and not to harden our hearts. Let us take warning by
well

the fate of the factious opponents of

Moses who were swallowed up

alive

in the pit, and by the fate of Pharaoh and his host who were overwhelmed in the

took exception and said 'Emendatione veteris scripturae vix opus est [crt;y]'yi'a>jn[?7i>] literarum yv<op. pars superior in codice superest, quapropter de vera lectione vix dubito dubitat vero Lightf. et dicit He took no notice of my etc' grammatical objection to this con;
:

Red

Sea, because they har'

dened

their hearts.'

8id twos K.r.X.] by a?iy of the 7. wiles (or of the ministers) of the adversary'\
8.
i

struction of dtjiovv. I had urged that the instances where dtjLovv appears to govern an accusative of the thing

tov dvTLKeip.evov~\
c

Pet. v. 8,

So 6 avri&iKOS and perhaps 6 dvrevepyav

claimed (e.g. Dan. ii. 23, Esth. v. 6, ix. 12, Xen. Mem. iii. 11. 12) are not I decisive. might have added a
in the

Barnab. § 2. O dvTiKelpevos itself is not so used in the New Testament (except possibly in 1 Tim. v. 14), but occurs Mart. Polyc. 17, and in later
writers.

further lexical objection ; for neither LXX nor in the N.T. nor in the

Apostolic Fathers are avyy lvw a kclv, avyyvcopr], ever said of God. The fact is that the MS is eaten into holes here

and nothing can be
t)/x!v]

read.

The

letters in-

dfaOrjvai

So the lacuna
in

in

A

can only be conjectured from the

is

now

supplied

our

new

authorities

in place of avyyv(6p.rjv. other suggestions I had proposed dcpeOfjvai in my notes ; comp. § 5° € ' s TO dfaOrjvai r\plv...yiypaiTTaL

Among

Dr E. M. Thompdentations left. son of the British Museum whom I consulted and whose practised eye I
should trust

much more
it

than
into

my
that

own, gives
avyyvcoprjv

as his

opinion
fit

yap'
is

MaKapioi

a>v d(pedr}o~av k.t.X.

It

would not

these

entirely after Clement's

manner

to

indentations but that

a(pe6r]vairjp[iv}

take up the key word of a quotation and dwell upon it see the instances
;

might.
9.

dixoo-Tao-ias]

See the note on
eXnibos]

collected above, § 46. There can be no doubt therefore that Tischendorf

§ 46.
10.

to kolvov
I

ttjs

Comp.

misread

A. Nevertheless he reiterated the statement to which I

vnep tov kolvov dvop-aros Kai ekiridos with the note.
Ign. Efthes.

*54

THE EPISTLE OF
ce iavrcov
r\}xiv

S.

CLEMENT
rj

[LI

fxaWov
yap twv
f]

SeSo^xeurjs

kccAws

KaTayvcocriv (pepovcriv Kal SiKaicos
7repl

Trjs

irapakccXov

o/ucKpcovLas.

dvdpu)7rcp
r]

e^OfJioXoyeicrdai

tcov

TTapaTTTUifJid-

orKXnpvvai rrjv KapSiav avrov, Kctdws i(TK\ripvv6r] tov KapcHia toov crrao-ia^ovTOdv 7rpos tov

depdirovra

5

Qeov Mcovarfjv cov to Kpi/uia 7rp6Srj\op eyevr\dr]. Kareek ahov (^wvres, Kal Oanatoc ttoiman6i $r)(Tav yap
aytoy'c.
ol

<Papaio

Kal

r\

CTparid
ta
Te

avrov
kai

Kal
oi

iravres

r\yov{A€voi

Alyvirrov,
tlvol

a'pmata

anaBatai
eis

avrwv, ov Si aWrjv Xaacrav epvdpav Kal
5

aiTiav ifivdiffdtiarav

6d-

10

a7rco\ovTO,

dWa

Sid

to

cr/cA*/-

A GTaaiavTwv CS, but there is a tendency in S in these cases by a past where the principal verb is a past, as here. depdSee the lower note. ttovtol] AS; avdpuwov C. 9 Aiyiirrov] S; ...vtttov A avrov C. Perhaps the archetype of C was partially erased here and ran a..v.rov. 10 ov] ol A. 12 clvtup] here A; after Kapdias C. dva^draC] dpafidrais C.
aTaata^ovTbiv]
;

to translate

;

13 yf) Alyvirrov] yycuyv...

A;
8,

AlyvTrrcp

CS.

14 Mtovaetos]

p-tovaeco

A;

2.
ix.

Ka\6v...lj]
;

Matt,

xviii.

Mark

32, 23 tfvoixdrj
...Kai

fj

yrj

Kal

KaTemev avrovs
Kal
oara
io~Tip

43, 45

see

Winer

Gram?>i. § xxxv.
Ps.

K.aTe(Sr]o-av

avTol

p. 255.
4.

aKkrjpvvai
iii.

ac.t.X.]

xcv.

8;

comp. Heb.
5.

8, 15, iv. 7.

reading in C.

tov 6epa.7TovTa\ See the various Moses is called avI,

avT&p (copra els a8ov. Comp. Apost. Const, ii. 27 AaSap Kal 'Afteipcov £copres KaTe($r)o~av els adov Kal pdjSdos /3Aa<rTrjaao-a k.t.\. (comp. § 43) ; see also
ib. vi. 3.
7.

6pco7rosTov Qeov, Deut. xxxiii. xiv. 6, 1 Chron. xxiii. 14, 2

Josh,

rroLpbavet]

Clement

is

quoting

Chron.

from Ps.

xlviii (xlix).

14 as npofiara

xxx. 16, Ezra iii. 2. Familiarity with the phrase (which is especially

ev a8r] eOevTO, ddparos ivoip.avel avrovs.

The reading could not have been
and the lacuna in was supplied with Kareiriep, before our new authorities revealed the true reading. Ta Te dpp,ara Kal ol ara/3arat] 9.
foreseen,

prominent
it

where prefaces the Song of Moses) would
1,

in Deut. xxxiii.

A

lead to

introduction here. ElseC alters the designation QepaTTcov tov Qeov in another way. On the other hand Oepdnwp tov Qeov is itself a common designation of
its

where

(§ 53)

The expression

is borrowed from the Mosaic narrative, where it occurs several times, Exod. xiv. 23, 26, 28,

Moses (see the note on § 4), and might well have been substituted for But the the other expression here. preponderance of authority must be
considered decisive as to the reading. 6. KaTefirjcrav yap K.r.A.] Num. XVI.

comp.
ii.

xv. 19, Jer.

Ii

(xxviii). 22,

Hagg.

22.
12.
tcis

1.

21

eoKOTLaBr]

davveTovs Kapdias] As Rom. davperos avrccp 77

Kapdla.

LI I.

'The Lord of the universe

LIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

!55

pvv6r\vai

avTwv ras dcrvverovs KapSias /ueTa to yevear6ai tcc (TYifj-eia Kai tcc repaTa ev yfj Aiyv7TTOv §ia tov depaTTOVTos tov Oeov Mwvcrecos.

15

LIL
twv

'A7rpoo~$€fis,

d(He\<po'i,

6

^eo'iroTf]^
61

virapyti

d7ravTU)v,

ovhev

ovdevos
(prjcriv

XP*!^
6

6L

W

TO

fjioXoyeicdaL

avTw.
to)

yap
OnAAC
'

€k\6ktos
aytco

£°~ AaveiS'

'EIomoAothcomai
N60N

Kypicx),

kai

Apecei

ynep mocxon
TTTCDXtH

KepATA GKCbepONTA

KAI

lAGTOOCAN

KAI

20 ey4)pAN0HTOC)CAN.

Kai iraXiv \eyei
tco

OycoN

Tcc
C

Oeco 0YCIAN
°Y'
tov C.

AiNeceooc
/uwaecos C.

kai

attoAoc

yY'Cto)

tac

eyx^ c
to]

K

^
The

e n| -

\6 ovdev] ..5ev

A; om. CS.
;

A;

ovdev

has obviously been omitted by carelessness before ovdevbs, and thus has necessitated add. fxovov S. the further change of to into tov. AaveLS] 17 aury] AC

5dd

See above, § Tuaav] AS; om. C.
21

AC.

4.

19 uiov] vcuov A. 19, 20 KepaTa...ev(ppavdr]2 /cat eTriKd\e<jai....8o^daets /xe] AS; om. C. 21

e7ri/cd\e<rcu] e7n/ca\e<re

A.
ing with the
Stoics.

wants nothing.

He demands of us only confession. He asks no sacrifice, but the sacrifice of praise and for so the Psalmist thanksgiving teaches us/
; ' '

The

parallel

passages quoted above would support the connexion of twv dirdvTuv either with a7rpoo-8er)s or with 6 8eattottjs.

1

5.

Arrpocrdcijs]

wants nothing beviii. 4.

The latter seems more forcible and more natural here, besides that
a common phrase in Clement, §§ 8, 20, 23- It is however connected with 6 8eo-TroTr)s
o deanoTTjs tcov a-rravTozv is

sides^.

Comp. Joseph. Ant.

3

yap to Oelov dirdvTcov (with the context), Act. Paul, et Thecl.
dirpoo-dees

§ 17 (p.
(ov

47 Tisch.) Geos dnpoo-berjs, Clem. Horn. xi. 9 6 Qebs yap dvevderjs
avTos
ovdevbs
delTai,

in the Syriac.
18. ^'E^opoXoyrjaopai K.r.X.] Comp. Ps. lxix. 31, 32, Kai dpecrei r<5 Qeco xmep

Kpist.

ad

DlOgn. 3
yijv Kai

ndvTa

o TVOLTjcras tov ovpavbv kcu ttjv to. ev avTols...ov8evbs av

KepaTa eK(pepovTa Kai ottXds' IdeTcoo-av k.t.X. The introductory
p.6o~)(ov veov

avTos

ivpocrbioiTO

tovtcov

k.t.X.,

Airav-

words

e£opoXoyrjo~op,ai tco

Kvpico are

thenag. Suppl. § 13 6 Tov8e tov

tos 8r]p.iovpybs Kai 7raTrjp...dvev8er)S Kai dnpoo-derjs, § 29 dvev8ees...To Qeiov,

not found in the context, though they express the sense of the preceding verse alvio-co to ovofxa k.t.X., and occur
frequently elsewhere.
20.
Qiio-ov
k.t.X.]

Resurr. § 12 navTos yap ecniv drrpoo-8erjs, Tatian ad Graec. 4 6 yap ivdvT(ov

The

first

part

dvev8erjs
evdeijs,

ov diafiXrjTeos

v(p'

rjpa>v

6vo-ov...8o£do-eis pe
(1).

occurs in Ps. xlix

as

dvevderjs

ad Aut. ii. 10 See also Acts xvii. 25 with the passages from heathen wriTheophil.
mv.

14, 15

word
crov

the second

for word, except that is omitted in some
is

MSS
Ps.

:

the last clause
17 Svaia
tco

taken from

ters

collected

there

by Wetstein.

Ii.

Qeco nvevp,a ctvv-

This was a favourite

mode

of speak-

T€Tpip,p,€VOV.

156
KAAecAi'

THE EPISTLE OF
Me In

S.

CLEMENT
ka!

[lii

HMepA
r<*p

OAi'yetoc
tco

coy,

eZeAoyMAi' ce,

ka\

AolAceic Me* 0yciA

Oeto niMeyMA cyisiTeTpiMMeNON.
eirlarTacrde
eis

LIII.

'

€.7ri(TTa(rd€

yap Kal KaAws
ovv

t«s

iepas ypa(pas 9 dya7rrjTol 9 Kal eyK6KV(paT€

tcc

\oyia

tov 06ov'
crews

els

dvaixvY\(Tiv

ravTa

ypacpo/uev.

Mwvev

5

yap dvafiaivovTOs ek to bpos Kal iroi^cavTOs
fifjiepas

Tecr&epaKOVTa
vrjcrreia

Kal

TeororepaKOVTa
elirev

vvKTas

Kal

Taweivcoo'ei,

irpos

avTov 6

©eos*

MooycH, MooycH, kataBhBi to taxoc eNTeyQeN, on hnomhc6n 6 Aaoc coy oyc elHr^rec eK thc AirynToy nApeBHCAN taxy io
i

aov]

A; om.
A.
is

S.

3 eiriuTaade] eTncrraaOai
1.

A.
4

7<*p]
/cat

AC;
I,

add.

d5eAc/>ol S,

omitting dyaTrrjToi

20; see above, §

1.

e7/ce/cy0are]

CS

;

..

eKvcfxxre

5 ypdcpo/xev]

CS.

In A. only the
'

final stroke

being

part of the N,

visible (though

Tischendorf says
est').
1

tum, non
the
first

1

avaftavTos as Jacobson

quod Jacobsonus videre sibi visus would read; for the

ante Mwucrecos praecedit punc6 avafiaivoPTos] A, not

is

distinct

and cannot have formed

stroke of N as he supposes; avafiavTos C. a point its authority cannot be urged. As usual do not seem appropriate; see above, I. p. 126.
eis) S.

S has a past tense, but on such C alters the tenses where they
els]

C;

...<r

A;

cos 7rp6s

(or ws

7

TeaaepaKovra] reaaapaKOPTa

word

is

mutilated in A, so that

we

both places. In either case the cannot determine the form, but the preference
in
little

C

of this

ms

for the

forms in e can leave

doubt.
lepds

1. igeXovpai] For this future see Buttmann Gr. Sprachl. II. p. 100, Winer Gramm. § xciv. Clem. Alex.

tcls

ypa(pds]

Comp.

Polyc.

Phil.

12

'

Confido enim vos

bene
et
iii.

exercitatos

esse in sacris Uteris

Strom,

iv.

18

(p.

614), after did t&s

nihil vos latet'.
[to]

So

2

Tim.

15

napepLTTTwo-eis tov avTiKtipevov (already

Upd
the

ypdpLpLCLTa,

the only passage

quoted

p.

152),

goes on

piprjcrdpevos

in

New Testament
is

where

this

rbv AauiS •v/mAei 'E^o/xoAoy^cro/xai k.t.A.

epithet
It
viii.

applied to the Scriptures.

the

same quotations as

avvTeTpLppivov, stringing together in this chap-

occurs above § 43, and in 2 Mace, 23, and is so used both by Philo
eyK€Kv(paTe]

ter of the

Roman
I

Clement.
in the

and by Josephus.
4.
6.

LIII.

'You are well versed
therefore quote

See the note on
''spent] as

§ 40.

Scriptures.

them

only to remind you. Remember how Moses entreated God for the people,

noirjaavTos] times in the N.T.

several

See the references
Test. s.v. iroiiiv

in
11.

Grimm's Clav. Nov.
d, p.

accept no honour for himself, but asked to be blotted out with them, if they might not be forgiven.'

how he would

For the form of the sentence see the note on § 47
3.

enicTTao-de

k.t.\.~\

527 (ed. Thayer). 8. einev npbs avTov k.t.A.] The first part, as far as p,d\\ov 77 tovto, is taken from Deut. ix. 12 14, which however commences somewhat differently

Kai elne Kvpios irpos p.e
firjdi

'

'Avdo~TT]0i,Ka.Td-

cutrxpa, dyanijToi, Kal Xlav ala^pd.

to rdxos, the remainder following

LIIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
thc
oAoy
KCLI

157
IaytoTc
)(oo-

Ik

*c

eNGTeiAoo

aytoTc,

enomcAN

KvplOS 7TpOS CCVTOV* AeAAAHKA TTpOC ce attaI kai AerooN, 'EoopAKA ton Aaon toyton, kai lAof 6CTIN CKAHpOTpAyHAOC* 6AC0N MG €20A€6peYCAI AYTOYC, KAI
N€yMATA.
ellTeV
Aic
*5 el&Keiycti
noif-'coo

to

onoma aytoon
meta

fnoKATO^GeN
kai

toy
kai

ce eic IOnoc
kai
TO)

Oaymacton

oypanoy kai ttoAy maAAon
th n

h

toyto.

elneN Mooychc
AAO)

AMApTIAN
toon.
(3

TOYTOp

b

MhGamooc, Kfpie* Acpec KAM6 elAAeHfON 6K BlBAOY

Z03N-

/u€yd\f]£ dya7rrjs,

w

TeXeioTrjTOs dvv7rep(i\r]TOV

9 MwuVt}, Mcavafj] ...a-rj/jicovcrrj A; pwvrj, puafj C (this MS is most capricious, and both before and after this uses the other form pcovafji) om. S. joe/f yfjs
;

AiytiirTov]

C

;

eKyrjcr

v

A

;

e£ AIjjjtttov S,
;

with the Hebrew.
S.

11 eiroi-qaavW

AC
LXX.

(lxx

A

with the Hebr)

X^ve^ara]

AC
t

;

LXX

A has xwev™, B

x^ vev Jia

appears in B of the x&vwf10 (owing to the absence of ribui) S. In the with the Hebr. 14 eanu] def. A; eVrt CS with
Kai eiroi-qaav
-

The

Kai

The editors (myself included) following Young had supplied the lacuna in Aa6s from the LXX (ISov \abs aKK-qpoTpax^^ eariv), though Potter (Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 19, p. 617) had warned them that Clement of Alexandria supplied
Clem.

A with

the right
Zaaov.

word

{eariv).

£acrov~)

AC;
;

Kai 'iavov S.

In the
;

LXX B

has Kai vvv
-Xodpeijcru))

evoked pevaai] ....eOpevaai
1

A;

e^okodpevaai
elire

C

i&Xedpeijaw (or

S apparently.
hoc S.
19

7 elireu] def.

A

C.
(om.
a;)

rr\v ap-apriav]

AC;

peccatum

w

peydXrjs]

A

;

peyaXrjs

C.

the

LXX

Exod.

xxxii. 7, 8).

very closely (compare also After fiaKXov rj

both writers from Exod.
16.

iii.

4.

6avp.aaTov]

So quoted

also

by

tovto the parallel narrative in Exod. xxxii is taken up, and the substance

of vv. 10, 31, 32 is given in a compressed form. See Barnab. § 4 \eyei yap ovtcos Kvpios, Mcovafj, Mcovafj, KaTdfirjOi

Clem. Alex., but it is laxvpbv in the The combination uiya koi LXX. davpaaTov occurs also §§ 26, 50.
7roXi>

paWov

rj

tovto]

i.e.

nXeTov

tovtov,

to rdxos,

on

rjvoprjaev 6 Aaos

aov ovs i^r/yayes gk yfjs AlyviTTov, and again § 14 eiirev ~K.vpi.os npos Mcovafjv, Mcovafj, Mcovafj, Karafi-qBi to tA^os otl 6 \aos aov ov i&qyayes e* yfjs AlyvnTov The coincidence in the rjvoprjaev. repetition of the name Mcovafj, Mcovafj, is not sufficient to show that the one
writer

an attempt to render the Hebrew idiom iJftft n*t, 'greater than it'. See ii. § 2 from Is. liv. 1. Clem. Alex., Strom, iv. 19 (p. 617)
avTiKa
ox>x

o

Mwiitr^f

k.t.X.,

para-

phrases the remainder of this chapter from kol tlnev k.t.X., giving the same quotations as the Roman Clement.
the
<» a>] According to the rule of grammarians the interjections should be so accentuated, not &>, <»

19.

was indebted Hilgenfeld seems to
;

to the other (as

think, here
is

and

;

p. xx)

not repeated at this place in either of the Mosaic narratives, it may very easily have been inserted independently by
for,

though the name

see

Chandler
246

Greek
sq.

Accentuation
editors here

§ 904, p.

The

vary.

153

THE EPISTLE OF
depaTriov
irpos

S.

CLEMENT
curreiTai

[liii
m

TTappy\(TiaXeTaL

Kvpiov,

a(peo iv

tw tU

7r\ridei

rj

LIV.

Kal eavTOV e^a\ei(p6r)vai jul€t avTwv d^ioT. Tis ovv ev vfjuv yevvaTos ; tU evo"7r\ayxvos ;
dycLTTYis
;

7T67r\r]po<poptiiui6vos

enraTixi'

Gl

01

e'^ie

Kal epis Kal a^KTfiara^ eK^copw, a7rei\ii vtto to. ttolco fiouXrio'de, Kal 7cpo(TTa<TG'oi±€va
(TTCLcris

ov eav

5

tov

7rArjdovs

m

jjlovov

to

irol}iviov

tov

Xpta'TOv

eiprjveveTO)
iroir]-

/u€Ta T(ov KaGecTTafdevoov irpecrfivTepwv.
i

tovto 6
C.

depairwv]

AS

;

deairor^s C.

3 vfxiv]

AS

;

tj/juv

4

ireTrXrjpocpo-

prj/jievos]

AC

;

plains {implehis) S.

See the lower note.
6 fiovk-qade] ^ovK-qadai A.

5 e/cx wpw]

AC

;

eyio eicxupG)

(apparently) S.

Kkaioa A.

10 to7tos] roTcoa A.

12 icoKirelav tov GeoC]

A;

9 /cAe'os] rod GeoC

I. Qepcnreov] Bryennios adopts the reading of C $€o-7t6tt}s, i.e. 'as a master'; but this does not represent the fact and cannot be right.

being consecrated by S. Peter, may have acted as he here advises others to act, and have refrained from active
ministrations
till

{Tvapair-qo-ajxevos

rjpyei)

LIV.

'

Is

any one noble, tenderLet him declare

hearted, loving?

the deaths of Linus and Cletus. Compare Cic. pro Mil. § 93 (to which
Fell
refers)

his willingness to withdraw, that the flock of Christ may be at peace. He

'Tranquilla

republica
illis

cives

mei (quoniam mihi cum
licet) sine

not want a place of retirement. The whole earth will be ready to receive him, for The earth is the
will

Lord's and the fulness thereof. This has been the conduct of the true citizens of God's kingdom in all
ages.'
3.

sed per me tamen, perfruantur ego cedam atIt would seem (from que abibo.' the reference to patriotic kings and rulers in the next chapter) as though Clement had read this passage. There are several echoes of this

non

me

ipsi,

;

Tls ovv k.t.A.]

This passage, as

far as

quoted preserved by an anonymous writer in
Syriac
;

Kadeo-TapLevcov 7rpeo~(3vTep<ov, is in a collection of extracts

see above,

I.

p. 183.

Epiphanius also {Haer. xxvii. 6, p. 107) quotes a few words, but incorrectly and at second hand (see above, He had read them in I. p. 408 sq). certain \mopvqiiaTio~ixoi, which I have
(1. p. 327 sq) given reasons for supposing to have been the 'Memoirs' (inrofivqixaTo) of Hegesippus.

passage in John of Ephesus (iv. 13, 48, 60), as pointed out by Bensly. If these be not accidental he probably got them from the v7vop.vqpaTLapo\ which supplied Epiphanius with his quotation, or from the collection which the Syriac writer had before him. In the New 4. Tren'krjpocpoprjpevos] Testament this verb has only the
following

senses:

(1)

'to

fulfil',

2

elsewhere

suggests to Epiphanius difficulty attending the lists of the early Roman bishops. He conjectures that Clement, after

The passage

a solution of the

Tim. iv. 5, 17; (2) in the passive 'to be fully believed' (e.g. Luke i. 1), or 'to be fully persuaded' (e.g. Rom. iv. 21). Here, if the reading be correct, it must be equivalent to TreiiKr)papevos, filled full though natural in
'
'

;

itself,

but of this sense, the lexicons

LV]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

159

eras
10 7ra?

eavrw /ueya fcAeos eV Xpicrrw iref>i7roir]<TeTai, Kai tokos Several avrov toy 7«p Kypioy v i~h kai to
TCLVTCt ol 7ro\lT6VOfJL6VOl Tf\V dfJL€Ta[X6-

TTAh'pOOMA AYTHC.

\y]tov 7ro\iTeiav tov

Oeov

e7roirj(rav Kal iroinarovcriv\

LV.
7roWoi
15

*'

Iva

Se

Kal

vTrodety/uaTa

eOvcov

eveyKOdfJLev

fiacriXels Kal ^yov/uevoi, Xoi/ullkov tivos evorravxpyicr/uLOcHoTridevTes

to? Kaipov,
TroXiTeiav C.

7rapeSo)Kai/

eavrovs
;

els

/xara C.
reges ct

ev^/cw^ey]

13 inrodeiyfjuxTa] AS {ribiti add. vobis S. ;

however being omitted)
14
7r oXXol.../ccupoO]

virop-vrj-

AC

C; multi

magnates

e

principibus populorum, qui

quum tempus

afflictionis vel famis

alicujus instaret populo S. represent a various reading.

This

unusually paraphrastic, but perhaps does not There is however a confusion of Xoijuos and \i/xos.
is

do not furnish any example nor have
I

free will
factions.

withdrawn into

exile to lull

succeeded

in

finding a distinct

Among

ourselves
to

many

In the only passage however where it occurs in the LXX,
instance.

have become slaves
feed others.

ransom or to Even women, strength-

Eccles.
vla>v

viii.

II

eTrKrjpocpopri 6rj

Kapftia

tov avQpwirov iv avrols tov 7roirjo~ai to Trovrjpov, the corresponding Hebrew
is

ened by God's grace, have been brave as men. Judith and Esther by
their patriotic courage delivered the from slavery and destruction.'

2b

'

ti!?D,

the heart was
to

full to

do

people
14.

etc'

The word seems

be confined

7roXXoi

Pao-ike'is

k.t.X.]

Such

almost exclusively to biblical
ecclesiastical writings.
8.

and

feats of patriotism as

were exhibited

KadeaTafxevcov] ''duly

appointed]

as described in the earlier chapters, § 43,44 (tovs KaTacTTadevTas vn iiceivav).

by Codrus, by Bulis and Sperthias, by M. Curtius 'Quantus amor patriae Deciorum in pectore, quantum dilexit
;

noble tov yap Kvplov k.t.X.] He retires application of Ps. xxiv. 1.
10.

A

Thebas,

si

Graecia vera, Menoeceus.'

The

God's cause, and there is room for him everywhere on God's earth.
in
11.

the these deeds of heroic self-sacrifice.

\oip.iKos tis Kaipos is a type of sort of crisis which called forth

Origen
refers
§e
Kal

7T0\lT€V 6p,€VOl ...7ro\lT€ta.V~]

The

(in Joann. vi. § 36, iv. p. 153) to this passage, p,ep,apTvprjTai
ivapa
toIs
e'Oveaiv

idea of a spiritual polity to which the several members owe a duty is prominent in the context (e.g. vtto tov
nXr/Oovi),

otl

7roXXot
iv

Tives,

Xoip-tKcov

€VO-Kr)y\ravT(ov
voo-r]p.aTcov,

Tals
"

eavTtvv

naTpio-i

eavTOVS

further developed by the comparison with secular states and statesmen in the following chapter.
is still

and

acpdyia vnep tov kolvov 7rapa§e6\»Ka(n
ovk.

kcu 7rapa^€x^Tai tcivO' ovtcos yeyovevai

o d\6ya>s 7rio~T€vo-as tols laroplais
K\rjp.r)$ virb

12.

nokiTeiavTov Qeov]
ttjv

Comp. Mart.
ovtov
tto-

maTos

HavXov papTvpov-

Polyc. 17
XiTeiav.

aveTrih.r}TTTOv

In several other passages also pevos. Cels. i. 31, 1. p. 349; in Joann. (c.
xxviii. § 14, IV. p.

LV.

*

Even heathen

nations have

393

;

ad Rom.

iv.

set bright

examples of this self-denial. Kings and rulers have died for the commonweal statesmen have of their
:

§ 11, IV. p. 541)

he uses similar language, but without mentioning Clement's name.

i6o

THE EPISTLE OF
'Iva

S.

CLEMENT

[LV

davarov,
TroXiras.

pwcovTai $ia TOV iaVTCOV ai/ULCLTOS TOVS ttoWoi e^e^copriorav ioiwv 7ro\etov, \va \ir\
eirl

(TTaariatycHTiv

wXelov,

eiricrTaixeQa ttoXXovs ev

r\\xiv

TrapaSeScoKOTas eavTOVs eis decr/ua, ottws eTepovs XvTpcogovtcli. TroWot iavrovs wapeScoKav eU SovXeiav, KCLl 7ro\\ai Xa/36vres Tas ri/ULa? avTcov eTepovs iyjsooiuLKTav.

5

yvvcuKes
C
9

ev^vvafjajodeiaaL

Sia
;

Trjs

xaptTOS

tov
A;

Qeov
8ov\eias

5 irap48a)Kav]
(see
ttjs

A
;

Bryennios Didache p. py'). urbe sua S. 7r6Xews] AC

and so S (apparently) i&dwKau C. S has a singular.
12
di'

8ov\eiav]

8 'lovdid] tovdeid A.

ay air r]u .. ,\aov]

AC

;

propter

amorem

ttoXXoI l^i\(£)pr]<jav k.t.X.] Like Lycurgus at Sparta, or Scipio Afri1.

of ona>s with a future

is

possible (see

Winer
not

canus

at

Rome.

Of

the latter
'

it

is

§ xii. p. 304), occur in the

though it does New Testament,

remarked by Fell that

Clementis

nostri fere verbis urbi valedixit, di-

quam]
86).

cens Exeo, si plus quam tibi [tibi expedit crev? (Seneca Epist.
Iv

where ha is several times so used. But we ought perhaps to read \vrpa>cravTai, though both our Greek MSS have XvTpcoarovTai.
6.

raj

'

rifxcis

avrav]

the Value

of

Gtmdert {Zeitschr. f. rifxlv] 3. Luther. Theol. 1853, p. 649 sq) explains this 'among us Romans,' supposing that Clement is still referring to examples of heathen self-devotion. This view is adopted by Lipsius (p. But, 155), Hilgenfeld, and others. whatever may have been the miseries inflicted on the Roman citizens by the civil wars and by imperial despotism, the mention of slavery and ransom seems to be decisive against this inHere, as in the parallel passage § 6, iv ypuv may refer indeed to Romans but to Christian Romans,
terpretation.

themselves?

The form

avrav (adopt-

ed by Hilgenfeld) rejected from the

must certainly be

New

Testament,
:

and probably from Clement also see above 9, 12, 14, 30, 32. tyafxHTav] The word is used several times in the LXX and generally as a translation of 7'OXn 'to give to eat comp. also 1 Cor. xiii. 3.
5
:

Like so
iv.

many
it

ra^eaOai,
12),

other words (e. g. x°P~ see the note Philippians has in the later language
;

lost the

sense of ridicule or meanness,

which belonged to it in its origin and Coleridge's note on its 'half satirical'

of

whom

a considerable

number

be-

longed to the slave class and the lower orders. The ransom of slaves and the support of captives were regarded as a sacred duty by the early Christians generally, and the brethren of Rome especially were in early times honourably distinguished in this respect: see the notes on Ign. Smyrn. 6 and on Rom. 1. 4. Xtrrp&Voi/rai] This construction

1 Cor. xiii. 3 (quoted Corinthians I.e.) seems to be overstrained. On the other hand,

force in

in Stanley's
it is

especially appropriate of feeding the poor and helpless, the sick man or the child.
7roXXai ywcuKes k.t.X.]

The whole
Judith

of this passage about

and

Esther Strom,
after

paraphrased by Clem. Alex. iv. 19 (p. 617), immediately the paragraph relating to Moses
is

LV]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
'lovdld
r\

161
/uctKctpia,

eireTeXecavTO TroXXa dvSpeia.
(rvyKXeicrjULcp

ev

over]?

rfjs

7ro\ew5,

r\Tt]G'aTO

irapa twv

io

Trpe&flvTepwv iadfjvcu avrrjv e^eXdelv eU Trjv irapefjifioXtjv twv d\\o(bv\wir wapahova'a ovv eavTrjv tw klv-

§vvw e^rjXOev $i dydirriv tov ovtos ev (rvyKXeiciuooy
(pepvqv ev
civitatis

Trjs
kcli

TrarpiSos kcu

tov Actou

TrapeiccKev Kvpios
f\

'OXo-

x eL 9

L

6f]Xeias.

ov%

\]ttovi kcli

reXeict kcltcl
A.

patrum suorum
drjXiacr

et propter populum S.

14 drjXeias]

A.

tJttovi] rjTrovei

A

;

13 avy KXetafx^] qrrov CS.

<jvyKXi<r/ia)

(already quoted p. 156); and sometimes he gives the very words of the elder Clement, e.g. 77 reXela Kara tt'uttiv But he does not acknow'Ecr^p.

Lipsius (Zeitschr.
1859,
II.

f Wissensch. Theol.

ledge his obligation in this passage, though in the preceding chapter he

39 sq) and Hilgenfeld (ib. 1858, I. p. 247 sq, 1 861, IV. p. 335 sq), who both have directly refuted Volkmar's theory; and indeed the date
p.

and authenticity of Clement's Epistle
are established on
stantial

has directly quoted the Roman Clement. 8. 'lou§{#] This passage has a critical value as containing the earliest

much more

sub-

reference to the

Book

of Judith,

grounds than the shadowy and fanciful argument by which it is attempted to postdate the Book of Judith. On this book see also an article of Lipsius Jiidische Quellen

which was apparently unknown to, as it is unmentioned by, Josephus.

zur

Judithsage [Zeitschr.

f

Wissensch.

Volkmar (Theol. Jahrb. 1856 p. 362 sq, and 1857 p. 441 sq, Einl. in die Apokr. 1. I. p. 28, and elsewhere), followed by Baur (Lehrb. der Christl. Dogmeng. ed. 2, p. 82, and in other
places), Hitzig (Zeitschr. fur Wissensch. Theol. i860, III. p. 240 sq),

on
I.

For more Theol. 1867, X. p. 337 sq). this subject see the introduction,
p.

353

sq.
'

tov \aov~\ the chosen people* (see the note on § 29), and thus op12.

posed to
14.

dXXoCpvXoi.

iv

x €W l

and Graetz

(Gesch. der

Juden

vo?n

Judith
iv

xiii.

ftfXdos] Taken from 15 iirdra^ev avrbv 6 Kvpios

Untergang etc. p. 132 sq, ed. 2, 1866), places the writing of that book after the Jewish war of Trajan, and as a consequence denies the authenticity of the Epistle of

X €LP L ^tA^' ?) XV i' 5 KuptOS 7TCLVTOKparcop rjOerrjcrev avrovs iv x.eip\ Br/Xeias.

The

expression
to

would seem

iv x €l P therefore be the common AraL
:

Clement.

More

sober

critics

however date the Book of

Judith about the second century before the Christian era, e.g. Fritzsche Einl. p. 127 sq, in the Ktirzgef. Handb. zu den Apokr. Ewald Gesch. des Volkes Isr. IV. pp. 396, 541 sq,
,

see the maism, equivalent to did note on Galatia?is iii. 19. On the other hand the construction napaBovvai iv

x €l P

l

(

or

* v X*P°~' ) LV

is

com ~

mon

in the

LXX

rrapabovvai els

as an equivalent to x (l P as Q 'S- the same
'

expression

T2

flTI

is

translated

first

Westcott in S?nith's Dictionary of the Bible 1. p. 1174, besides R. A.

kcu irapehaKev iv
TvapebonKev els

x eL P L (A) and then

kcu

x ( ^P as

m Josh. x.

30, 32.

CLEM.

IT.

II

l62

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT

[LV

7tl(ttlv 'Gcrdrjp

Kivdvvw kavTr\v irapefiaXev, \va to ScoSetov 'IcrparjA /ueXXov diroXeadai pvo'rjTai' Sia Ka(j)vXov yap Trjs vrjo'Teias Kal tyjs Taweivcoo'ecos avTrjs ^icocev

tov

7ravT67r67TTr)v ^ea7r6Tf]Vy
TctTreivov
Trjs
\frv^rj^

Qeov toov

alcovcov

6? IScov
5

to

avTrjs

epvcaTO tov Xaov, wv
tcov
ev
tlvi

X a P LV

eKLV'h^vvevcrev.

LVI.

Kal

ridels

ovv evTv^wfJiev
«/

Trepl

7rapa7TT(i)/ULaTi

vTrapyovTuav^

07ra)s Sodrj

avTOis €7ri£LK€La
jur]

Kal TaweLVOCppoorvvrj ek to ei^ai avTOvs
i

rifjuv
tt)s

dXXa
S had been
wv x&P iV

to 5wdeK&(pv\ov]

A;

dojdeK&cpvWov
4
becnrbr-qv']

A;

TCLTreivwaeoos

C.

C tribum S. A; om. C obviously by
;

3

t anew uveas']

homoeoteleuton.
the order

has spectatorem tcniversi et deawoTTju rCov ai&vwv Qeov.
iiavdijvevcrev]

dominum saeadorum
5
;

deu??i,

as

if

epijaaro]

A;

eppdcraro C.

AC

(but eKivSvvevae C)

ex Us propter quae erat [poptdus] in pcri7 T&v...virapxbvT(j)v~\

culo S, probably only a mistranslation.
I.

AC

;

qui appre-

to bcoBemcpyXov]
1
;

7,

Protev. Jacob. §
'

So Acts xxvi. see above to

(2

Ephes.

d(ob€Kao-KT]7rTpov § 31
3.

with the note.

(Ign. 4) of this age or ason (tov See also the passage alcovos tovtov).
19)

Cor.

iv.

or

the

ruler

entreated\ with an accusative of the person and without any dependent case or clause expressing the thing asked as e.g. I Mace. xi. 62 kcu ^[a>aav 01 dno Ta^s
TJ^iaxrev]

desired,

in Clem. Horn. xx. 2 sq.

LVI.

'Let us intercede for offen-

ders, that they

may submit

in

meek-

:

ness and humility.

tov 'la>vd6av

KM
iii.

Clem. Horn.
crrjTe.

ebaxev avrols deltas, 55 npw avTov a£icoinfinitive or

a final use of d^iovv Tiva is more common. On another more questionable construction of dgiovv
clause

With an

added

this

Let us be ever ready to give and to take admonition. The Scriptures teach us that chastisement is an instrument of mercy in the hands of God, that He inflicts it as a fatherly correction, that it is a
blessing to be so chastised, that the

man who
from

see above § 51.
4.
TvavTeTTOTTTrjv]

restored again,

endures patiently shall be shall be delivered

So below

§ 64,

all perils, shall

end

his days in

Polyc. Phil.
in the

7,

Clem. Horn.

iv. 14, 23,

v. 27, viii. 19.

The word is not found LXX or New Testament. In the
Sibyll.

peace, and be gathered into the garner like the ripe sheaf, in due season.'
7.

ev tivi TrapanTcopLaTi k.t.A.]
vi.
i,

See

Orac.

procem. 4

naveTroivT^s:

oTTTrjs is

occurs; and in heathen writers nava common epithet of Zevs. Qeov tuv alcovcov] the God of all
i
1

of which this passage is perhaps a reminiscence. The impels
Gal.

and

rjfilv

seem

the rulers of the

to refer especially to Church and to con-

the ages'

:

comp.

7rar?)p

tcov
I

alcovcov

§ 35, 6 ftaaikevs tcov alcovcov

Tim.

i.

trast with the vpets, the leaders of the feuds, at the beginning of § 57.
8. emeiKeia] a spirit of concession See the notes on § 1 eVtetK^ and § 13
'

17;
devil

comp. Ps.

Cxlv.

13

rj

(3ao-i\eia

'.

crov /3acrtXeia tvovtcov tcov alcovcov.

The
god

on the other hand

is

the

enieUeia.

The

context here points to

LVl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
deXrj/uaTL
Kctt

163

10

tw

tov Qeov.
r\

Kapiros

TeXeia
fjiveia.

7rpos

yap ecrTcu avToTs eytov Qeov kcli tovs ayiovs julst
TraiSeiav,
y\

ovtcos

oiKTip/ucov

dvaXafitofjiev

i(f>'

r\

ovfieh
ttoiov-

6(pei\€i dyavctKTelv, dytx7rrjToi.

vovdeTtjo-is,

rjv

jueda
15

ek a\\r/Aow, KaXt]

io"TLv kcli

virepdyav

tacbeXijiio^

KoXXa yap

tj/uds tcc deXtj/uaTL

tov Qeov.

ovtcos

yap

<pr}CLV 6 dyios Xoyos' TlAiAeyoaN enAiAeyceN Me 6 Kypioc, kai TO) Ganatco of TT<\peAooKeN Me. "On r^p ataha Kypibc
hensi stint S (comp. Gal.
vi.
1).

8 eirielKeia] evieucta

A.

10 ovtcos]

AC.

Bryennios here, and again six lines below, tacitly reads ovtco, and is followed by C however has its usual contraction for -cos, not for -co, and therefore Hilgenfeld.
agrees with

A

in
it

sanctos S, as if
Tip/Muv
fjLveia]

both places. had read ?)...•?)

1 1

ij

-jrpbs...

ayiovs]
tov]

AC

;

sive in

deum

sive in

for koX...ko\.

A; om.
A.

C.

12 oik-

oiKTeipixcovixvia.

A.
A.

iraidelav] irachav

13 ocpeLXei] otpiXei

A.
its els

vov6^t7]<xls] vovderrjcreLcr

derivation
10.

and primary meaning,
act. A.
ical

to eiijai avTovs
eytcapnos

oi ayioi frequently has, e.g. Job xv. 15, Zech. xiv. 5, Ecclus. xlv. 2,

TeXeia]
is

See the
the

Tobit

viii.

15,

1

Thess.

iii.

13 (pas-

note on § 44, where there

same

combination of epithets.
11. tov Qeov k.t.A.] i.e. The fj irphs record of them before God and the

sages quoted by Hilgenfeld). This is a possible interpretation (comp.
I

Tim.

V.

21

hiap.apTvpop.at
'Irjo-ov

evcomov
kol tcov

tov Qeov Kal XpicrTov

Church will redound to their benefit, and they will receive pity. The expression
rj

npbs tov Qeov

p.veia is al-

most equivalent to the Old Testament phrase pvr)p.6o~vvov evavri Kvpiov, Exod. xxviii. 23, xxx. 16, Is. xxiii. 18, Ecclus. 1. 16, comp. Acts x. 4. See
also § 45 eyypacpoi eyevovro dno tov

eicXeKT&v dyyeXcov), but the comusage of ol ayioi in the Apostolic writings is a safer guide. 12. 'let US avaXa.ficop.ev iraiheiav]

mon

receive correction'j

comp. Heb.

xii.

7

els Traibeiav vTropeveTe k.t.X.

13.

fj

vovOeTrja-is]

On

the difference

between

vovOeaia

{vovOerqiris)

and

Qeov

ev tco pvf]poo~vva> avTcov.

toijs ayiovs]

'the Christian brother:

naideia, see Trench N. T. Syn. 1st ser. the § xxxii ; comp. Ephes. vi. 4.

On

hood', as in the Apostolic writers
20.

forms
16.

vovOecria, vovdeT^ais, see
p. 512.

Lobeck

comp. Ign. Smyrn. 1, Mart. Polyc. See 2 Cor. viii. 21. Two other interpretations have been proposed
:

Phryn.

Tlaidevcov k.t.X.]

From

the

lxx

Ps. cxviii. 18
17.

word

for word.
k.t.X.]

the beatified dead, npbs tovs ayiovs pveia is supposed to refer to invocation of saints. It is needless to say that this idea would be an anachronism in Cle(1)

l

the saints',

i.e.

*Oy yap dyana
iii.

in

which case

77

Prov.

12

word

but for

7raideveL

From LXX SA; B has eXeyxei. The
for word, as

Syro-Hexaplar text wavers, giving the
equivalent to naidevei in the text and tne mar gi n to ekeyx et In Heb. xii. 6 it is quoted with 7rai8evet, as

ment and
l

for

some generations

after.

m

-

(2)

the holy angels', a sense

which

IT

—2

1

64

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT

[lvi

nAiAeyei, MACTiro? Ae ttanta yion on TTApAAexeTAr fTAiAeycei

Me

r^p, <pr}(TiV, Ai'kaioc In eAeei

kai eAerSei

Me, *)*eAeoc*)" Ae

AMApTOOAcON MH AlTTANATCO THN KCCpAAHN MOy.

Kai

TTClXlV

Makapioc AN6poonoc on HAerSeN d Kypioc, Noy0eTHMA Ae TTANTOKpATOpOC MH ATTANAl'NOy AyTOC T^p AAre?N
Aeyei*
noie?,
kai
ttaAiim

5

attoka6i'cthcin

*

enAiceN,

ka'i

ai

)(eTpec

aytoy iacanto.

cSakic el anatkcon €leAe?TAi

ce,

en

Ae tco

eBAoMcp OYX aT€tai c °Y kakon* gn Aimco pyceTAi ce Ik Ganatoy, eN noAeMOo Ae ck x el poc ciAhipoy Aycei ce* kai atto

mactitoc tAoScchc ce Kpyyei, kai oy mh cj)oBh0h'ch kakcon io e'nepxoMeNOON* aAi'kcon kai anomcon KATAreAACH, And Ae
i
diKcuos]

AS

;

Kijpios

C.

£Aeos] eAcuo<r

A

;

ZXeop

(i.e.

ZXaiov)

C and

so S.

See the lower note.

afxapruAov C, and so S, but the singular depends on the absence otribui. 4 6V] A; ov &v C. There is nothing to represent b\v in S. 5 airavaivov] AC; rejiciat (or rejiciamtis) S, and so the Pesh. 8 ox>x o-^erai] ovKorpercu A; ov firj a\p7}Tcu C; non attrectabit S. Both readings
3 afiapruXQv]
;

A

are found in the MSS of the LXX.
cpo(3r]d7js']

h

Xi/xcp]

AC;

add. 8e S.
in the

12 ov

/jltj

A;

ov

<po(3r]dr]o-7}

C.

Both readings are found
all

MSS of the LXX.

here: in Rev.

iii.

19 both

words are

existing

MSS of the LXX, the Hej££>
;

combined,
(p.
is

eyco bo-ovs iav (piXm, e'Aey^co Kai 7rai8eva>. Clem. Alex. Paed. I. 9

brew being

but eXaios

(i.e.

eXeos)

145) has rraibevci, but his quotation

perhaps not independent of the Roman Clement. On the other hand
p. 544)

Philo de Conj. Enid. grat. § 31 (1. quotes it with eXey^ei. This, which corresponds with the Hebrew, was probably the original reading of
all the texts with tvciiperhaps have been derived directly or indirectly from the quotation in the Epistle to the Hebrews.

might not unnaturally be substituted by some early transcriber on account of the preceding iv eXeei. It is therefore not impossible that Clement found this reading in his text of the
error above, § 18 (note). For the curious confusion of e'Xeos- (eXaios)

LXX; same

see

another instance of the

the LXX,
bevei

and

and eXcaov

(eXeov)

in

the liturgies

may

see Swainson's Greek Liturgies pp. xliii, 90, 127, 265, 331; where the answer of the people, eXeos, dprjvq,

I.

ILaihevo-eL k.t.X.]

From

Ps. cxli.

becomes by expansion eXeov
elp-qvqs,

(eXaiov)

5,

word for word, if we read eXaiov. Our chief MS however has eXaiocr, i.e.

dvaiav

alveo-ecos.

The sym-

eXeo? (for so the scribe generally writes On the the word; see I. p. 121).

bolism of the olive as denoting peace, and the manifold ritual uses of oil
(see Aiitiq. p. 1453 sq)

other hand, the original reading of the LXX was unquestionably eXaiov (eXaiov is the oil, eXaios the olivetree

Smith-Cheetham Diet, of Christ. would assist in this

confusion.
4.
v.

and therefore out of place here) as it is in SBA, and apparently in

17

—MaKapios 26 as read

k.t.X.]

in

From LXX Job BS, with slight
The

and unimportant

differences.

LVIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
Arpi'ooN

165

GHpi'ooN

oy Mh

(J)oBhOhc.

coyciN cor
AlAITA
15

c?ta

tncoch, oti

Gfipec r^p Arpioi eipHNeyeipHNeycei coy d oTkoc* $ Ae

THC CKHNHC COY Oy Mh
Ae

to cnepMA coy, ta

AMApTH, |-NC0CH Ae OTI TTOAy tckna coy tocnep to ttamBotanon
TAcbcp

toy ^rpoy* eAey'cH Ae eN
KAipoN

cocnep cTtoc copiMoc kata Ghmconia aAconoc kaO* copAN GepizoMeNoc, h cocnep
/3A.e7T€T€,
d<yairr]TOi.>

cyNKOMicGelcA.
/uos

iroaros VTrepao'Triarm

i&Tiv toTs

iraL^evofJievoL^ vtto

tov Sea 7roTOv
eXerjdrjvai Tafias

TraTr\p

20

yap dyados

oov 7rai$evei

eU to

Sia Trjs

dcria? TraiSeias clvtov.

LVIL
yap]

c

YfjieLs

ovv, 01 ty\v KaTafioXrjv Trjs (TTcto'ecos

AC;
om.

8e

S
C.
<rv

13 elprjvefoei] 14 aov]

AC;
C.

elprjveva S.

r}

8e 8iaiTa...a/xdpT7)]

AC;

S.

AS; om.
16
iXevarj]

15 irap.(3oTavov]

LXX;

ravov

A;

Tra/x(3rjravov

18 (Twno/juadeicra}
...7]6t)vcu

adeiaa

A;

but Bryennios tacitly prints iXefoet. 20 iXeiqdTJvai] CS; <rvyKOfii<rdeiaa C.

AC;

A.

Tischendorf justly remarked on the

common

restoration vovdeTrjdrj-

vai; 'id vix recte,

syllabae non ita dirimi solent [i.e. vovdeT\r)dr)vai\. 21 7rcu5eias] C; 7r..5taa- A. quiritur potius simile verbum ac irTo\7)dit}v(u?

quum

Re-

text of

A presents

considerable varia-

different.
15.

tions, chiefly in adding clauses which are found in the Hebrew but wanting

to irapiftoTavov]
It
till

'the
to

herbage'.
\ey6p.evov

seems
quite
in

manifold be a dna£
period.

BS. The points in which Clement's quotation agrees with A, as against BS (e.g. ovx a\^erat for ov fxrj ayjrrjTai),
in

a

late

There

is

nothing

the

Hebrew

(2B>y) to explain the

adoption of so
for els

are insignificant.

unusual a word.
16.
Ta(fiov
;

For this Hebraism 7. igaias k.t.A.] where two successive numbers are given to denote magnitude and increase,
xi.

iv

Ta(j)cp\

A
1'

Hebraism

see another instance on § 55

7rape8coK.ev iv

X elP

see Prov.
;

vi.

16 Hebr.
v. 5,

(six,

17.

dr)p.oc>via]

seven, as here)
(three, four)

Micah
;

Eccles.
5, etc.

pear, almost

2 (seven, eight)
;

Exod.
xxxiii.

xx.

though
Od.
v.

6r)p.a>v

it would apconfined to the LXX, is as old as Homer,

A word,

Job

29 Hebr.

368.
'

(two, three).
10.

18.

vTr€pao~nio~nos\

protection',

2

Kaicav]

The lxx

text prefixes
Kaneov

dno (SBA).
ddiKcov is

In the Syriac version

made dependent on

'the evils of the unrighteous'. 12. dijpesyap k.t.X.] As in the vision
of

It does not occur in the New Testament. See the note on v7repaa7no-Trjs above, § 45. 20. dyados coj/] of His kindness
'

Sam.xxii. 36, Ps. xviii. 35, Eccles. xxxi (xxxiv). 19.

Lam.

hi. 64,

'

Hermas
is

Vis.

iv.

1,

2,

where the
\

wild beast
13.
7)

thus pacified. the abode' de 8iaiTa]
'

(as e.g. Ps. lxxiii. 1), corresponding to ov yap dyaua k.t.X. above.

see

above

§ 39.

The Hebrew

is

quite

LVII. 'And do you leaders of the schism submit to the elders, and ask

1

66

THE EPISTLE OF
vTTOTccyfjTe
fJL6Tavoiav>

S.

CLEMENT
teal

[lvii

7roiri(ravTes,

toTs

7rpecr(5vT6pois
tcl

7raiTrjs

$evdrjT€

as

KdjULyjsavTes

yovaTa
vjulwv

Kaphias

v/ulcov
kcci

/ddOere viroTdo'creo-dai,
vTrepr\(pavov
Trjs

dirodefievoL ty\v

dXdtova
Seiav

yAwcrcrt]?

avda-

afjieivov

yap

icrriv

v/uuv

ev

tco

Troi\xvm
r\

tov
Kad'

5

XpLCTTOv
V7T€pO")(flv

juiKpovs

Kal

iWoyl/uov^
6K

evpedrjvai,
Trjs

^OKOvvras
y\

iicpKprjvai

i\7ridos

avrov.

ovtws yap \eyei
4 aKd^ova]
yi/xovs]

TravapeTOs croipia'
S.

'lAoy npot-'coMAi
6 eXXo9
13 v^iVa
.

AC;

aka^ovdav

yXdaarjs']

A;

A; add. vfias C. 5d£w]AS; 5l5&£cu C. C; A; si {rjv) S.

S

is

doubtful.
vTrrjKoicraTe]
v/juv pri.]

8 'I8ov]

AC;
S.

yXuTTrjs C. add. yap S.

dir
ch/]

10

AC;
;

vTrrjKouere S.

A; om.

S.

otclv]

14 orap A.

AC
16

fyicD?'

0\b/taf\

A;

./077 15 7ra/)^]C; add. Kai arevoxupia C, a

far better that

pardon of God on your knees. It is you should be of no
account, so that the flock of Christ

rfjs

(ttov,

eXnidos avrov] i.e. rod Xpieither a subjective or an ob'

may have peace. sternly Wisdom
obedient in the

Remember how
rebukes
the
dis-

jective genitive, the hope which He holds out 5 or 'the hope which reposes
in

Him
8.
rj

5

.

She

will

Book of Proverbs. laugh them to scorn when
cometh
as

destruction

a tempest.
5

navapeTos o~o(f)ia\ The Book of Proverbs, besides the title commonly prefixed to the LXX Version,
UapoipiiaL or ILapoip.iaL SaXo/xcoiros', IS frequently quoted by early Christian writers as /} navaperos o-o(pi.a 'the Wis-

They mocked

at her counsels before,

and she will not hear them then. 1. wot. rols 7rpfo-/3.] The same
pression occurs,
1

ex-

Pet. v.

5.

2. Ka^avres k.t.X.] Compare the expression in the prayer of Manasses (Apost. Const, ii. 22) vvv kXlvo) yovv So too Greg. Naz. Carm. ii. KapbLas. 50, ver. 58 ovnore aoi Ka.p,yp-a> yovvar

comprises all virtues (for Travaperos comp. § 1); see esp. Euseb. H.E. iv. 22, where speaking of Hegesippus he says, ov fiovos 8e ovros dXKa Kai ~Elprjvalos Kal 6 nas
toav

dom which

5

dp)(aia>v

x°P os navaperov aocpiav

iyajs Kpabirjs

946, Caillau), and similarly Sir C. Hatton to Q. Eliza(ii. p.
'

ras'2oXop.a>vos 7rapoip.ias eKaXovv.

Some-

times

it

bears the

name

aocpla sim-

J

beth (Froude's History XI. p. 166) I can use no other means of thankfulness than by bowing the knees of my own heart with all humility' etc. A
strong oriental metaphor like girding the loins of the mind (1 Pet. i. 13), or 'rendering the calves of the
5
5

ply; e.g. in Just. Mart. Dial. § 129 (p. 359 a), Melito in Euseb. H.E. iv. 26, Clem. Alex. Protr. § 8 (pp. 67,68), Paed. ii. 2 (p. 182 rj Beta o~o(pia),

'

lips
4.

(Hosea

xiv. 2).

d\d£ova Kal vnepijcpavop] See Trench N. T. Syn. 1st ser. § xxix.
7.

doKovvras]

''held

in
ii.

repute' \
2.

Strom, ii. 18 (p. 472), Orig. Horn. xiv i7i Gen. § 2 (11. p. 97), besides It is a others quoted in Cotelier. probable inference from Eusebius and Heges(11. cc.) that both Melito ippus derived the name from Jewish sources, and this is borne out by the
fact that the

see the note on Galatians

book

is

called

HEOn,

LVIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

167

YM?N 6MHC T1NOHC pHCIN, AiAaIOO Ae YMAC TON 6MON AOTON'
10 eneiAh

ofx ytthkoycatc, kai eleTeiNON AoroYc kai oy npocei'xeTe, aAAa akypoyc enoie?Te tac cmac BoyAac toic Ae smoic eAerx oic i-'neieHCATe* Toir^poYN kaYoo

IkaAoyn

kai

th YMeTepA AnooAeiA enireAACOMAi, kataxapoymai Ae hni'ka AN IpXHTAI YM?N OAeOpOC KAI OOC AN A(b|KHTAI ^mIh AC{)NCO
15 OdpYBOC,
h

Ae

KATACTpOCpH
GAi'yic

OMOIA KATAITlAl
ecTAi
35.

TTApH,

P

OTAN

epxHTAi ymin
angustia

kai

noAiopKiA.
Rom.
ii.

r^p,

otan eniKA(&OV71X)
et

familiar combination in S. Paul,

9,

viii.

S has

afflictio

(K^IUI) quae a

proelio (SO"lp

jft*1);

where

afflictio

and angustia quae a proelio is a paraphrase of 7ro\top/ct'a. angustia qtiae a proelio represents o-re'oxwpta /cat TroXcopKia, treated as a ev 5ta dvoiv, is not The space in will not admit /cat crrei'oxwpta, and these words are likely.

represents d\i\pis The alternative that

A

wanting also in the LXX.

e7rt/ca\ecr77(70e]

einKa\e<rr](r9cu

A.

'Wisdom', by rabbinical writers (see Fiirst Kanon des Alien Testaments,

Hieron. Prol. in Libr. Sal., ix. p. 1293, etc.). Joannes Damasc. de Fid.
Ortli. iv. 17
(1.
77

The personification 1868, p. J3 sq). of Wisdom in the opening would lead
designation; e.g. 1, Philo de Ebr. 8 (I. p. 362), though Philo himself quotes the book as irapoip-iai ib. § 20 Whether the epithet (1. p. 369).
Iren. iv. 20.
3, v. 20.

p. 284)
Hotfiia

says
<

r)

iravdpe-

tos, rovricrTLv

tov 2okop.a>vTos

naturally to

this

tov Tt/o-otj, thus including rj 2,o(fiia both these apocryphal books under the term, but excluding Proverbs which he has before mentioned as
Kai
Tra.poip.iai
;

and so Jerome Praef. in
'

Travdperos

was first used by Clement and derived from him by later writers,
or not, it is impossible to say. At the same time the title fj rravaperos

aocpia is given, not only to the canonical Book of Wisdom, but also to the

Fertur et Sirach liber et alius yjsevdeTTLypacpos qui Sapientia Salomonis inscribitur'. Moreover the name of 'Wisdom' is occasionally
Libr. Salotn. (ix. p. 1293)

navaperos Jesu

filii

given also to Ecclesiastes (Fiirst
p.

I.e.

apocryphal Wisdom of Solomon (Method. Symp. i. 3, ii. 7, noted by Hilgenfeld Epiphan. de Mens, et Pond. § 4, 11. p. 162 ed. Petau Greg.
; ;

91)

and

to the

(Fiirst I.e. p. 85,

Song of Songs and Cotelier here).
the third

And

still

more generally

Nyss. c. Eunom. vii, II. p. 638, Paris 1638; [Athanas.] Synops. §45, II. p. 132 F, rfjs o~o(pias ^oKop&vros rfjs \eyopivr)s iravapkrov
its title
;

group of the Old Testament writings, the dyioypacpa or ypa<£eta, is sometimes called
I.e. p. 55),

nDDn 'Wisdom'
it

(Fiirst

and others

in the list of
(rotfiia

to

A is

and books prefixed
:

apocryphal

and to the r) navaperos), Ecclesiasticus or Wis'

comprises Proverbs and the allied books, as it is elsewhere called yfrdkpoi or vp,voi (see above § 28) from another most important component element.
'iSojj

because

Jesus the son of Sirach (Euseb. Chron. Ol. cxxxvii quern vocant Panareton, Dent. Evang. viii.
of
2 p.

dom

/c.r.A.]

A

close
i.

from the LXX Prov.

23

—quotation The 33.
and not MS and

variations are unimportant,

393

'irjcrovs

6 tov

Setpo^ 6

rrjv

KaXovp.epT]v

navaperov aofpiav avvrd^as,

greater than between one another of the LXX.

1

68
Me,
KAI

THE EPISTLE OF
erco

S.

CLEMENT
ymoon*
T^p

[lvii

AecHcGe

Ae

oyk

eicAKOyxoMAi

zhtj-'coycin
CO(j)IAN,

M€
Ae

KAKOI

OYX

eypHCOYCIN*

eMICHCAN

TON

4>dBoN

toy

KypiOY

oy npoeiAANTO,

ofAe

i-"6eA0N

cmaic

npoceyeiN BoyAaTc, cmykthpizon Ae €moyc
OYN
eAONTAI

eAerxoYC TOirApKApTTOYC,
KAI

THC

CAYTOON

OAOY

TOYC

THC

5

c'aytoon
hi'oyc,

AceBeiAC ttAhcGhcontai*
(j)ONeY0HCONTAi
;

ka'i

eleTACMdc

anG' con r^p hAi'koyn nhAceBeTc oAe?* d Ae

cmoy
XAcei
i

akoy'oon

KATACKHNobcei en' eAniAi nenoiGooc, kai hcy-

AcbdBooc

And ttantoc kakoy.
C;
£r)T

^T]Tr](Tov(TLv] faT7)<Tov(ri

A

;

fyrovcnv

(?)

S.

3 rod]

A; om.

C.

TrpoelXavTo] 7rpoei\a...

A

(as

in the

lxx; Tischendorf who formerly read

irpoaiXa

afterwards accepted

my

reading of A); irpodXovTo

C

(see above,

I.

p. 127); elege-

runt S.

impiorum perdit ipsos S. 8 ireiroidiis] confidens S, using the same expression which occurs just below (§ 58) see the lower note. as the rendering of Treiroidores om. C 10 iravaylip] C;
7 e^era<xp.bs aae(3e?s 6Xe7]

C;

inquisitio

;

:

6.

7i\r)(T6r}(TovTai\

Our

principal

MS

(A)

fails

us at this point.

The

letters

Alex, however clearly so quotes it, Strom, ii. 22 (p. 501 sq) 77 iravaperos
"2o(pia Xeyei' 'O 6 e ijxov aKovcov
(TKtjvcccreL
v

end of iv\r)<j6r](Tov occur towards the the last line in a page, fol. 167 b. The margin is torn, so that a few
letters

Kararrjs

eV

iXnldi

7T€7roi6<0s'

rj

yap

have disappeared. It resumes again at the beginning of § 64, a leaf having been lost ; see the introduction,
7.
1.

eXnldos anoKaTaaTao-is opoovvpas iXnls Eipijrai' dia. [1. 816] tov YLaraaK-qvwaei
rrj

Xe£-ei nayicaXoos
;

7Tpoaidr)ice

to Ile-

7roidcos

p. 118.
'

(p.

though elsewhere, Strom, ii. 8 449), iv. 23 (p. 632), he has
elpijvrjs
{-vrj) Treiroi6a>s.

i^rao-fxos]
7

'enquiry',
6.

'investi-

avanavaeTai in
It is clear

gation

,

i.e.

'trial
iv.

and judgment',

that nenoLdcos

is
;

genuine
since he

as in Wisd.

The Hebrew
'security',
i.e.

in the text of our

Clement

however

is

ni?EJ>,

which the LXX translators seem either to have misread or to have connected with 7NC,
'false confidence';

the

dwells upon it in the beginning of next chapter, KaraaKijvcocrcopev

nenotOoTes k.t.X. For other examples of this manner of emphasizing the

'to

part

In the earlier enquire'. of the verse the LXX departs widely from the Hebrew.
ask,

8. tt€tvol6(os\ This word does not occur in the great MSS of the LXX nor indeed, so far as I know, ( SB A)
;

key-word of a quotation see the note on § 46. From the manner in which Clem. Alex, begins his quotation from Prov. i. 33, it may perhaps be inferred that the passage of his elder namesake was in his mind.

is

the reading KaTao-Krjvdxrei

eV

(v.

1.

iv) ikiridi nenoLdcos

found

in

any MS

iv
it

of this version, though dvcnravo-tTcu in place of elpr/vr) n^iroiOuis appears
in no. 248

(Holmes and Parsons),

LVII I. 'Let us therefore obey, we may escape these threatened judgments, and dwell in safety. Receive our counsel, and you will never have occasion to regret it. As surely
that

this last

being a Hexaplaric reading (see Field's Hexapla ad loc). Clem.

as
all

God

liveth, he that performeth His commandments shall have

LVIIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
e

169
kcli

10

LVIII.
ovofJLctTi

Y7raKOV(TcoiJ.ev ovu

tw

iravayivo

avTOVy

(pvyovTes

ras

7rpoeipr]fJL€vas

eVSo^o) hia ttJs

crocbias tchs direidova'iv

ct7rei\cts,

\va KaTacK^vcoaoojUieu

7T€7ro£0OTes 67tl
ovojJLa.

to ocnwTaTOV
ty\v
^fj

Trjs juieyaXaycrvvrjs
ijfixcov,

avrov
ecTTai

Se^ao-de
vfjuv.

avfJi^ovXnv

kcci
£Vj
tj

15 djU€TajUie\t]Ta
'Irjcrovs
kcci
r\

yap

6 Geo? kcu

6

Kvpios
T<x7rei-

XpiffTos

koll

to

TrvevfJict

to aytov,
6

re TncTL^
ev

iXwh

tcjov

eKAeKTtov, oTi

7T0Lrja'a^

vo<ppoo-vvri
S

fieT

eKTevovs
In
§

eTrieiKeias
is fully

djueTafxeXrjTco^

ra
C;

translates as if ayL(p.
(?)

35 iravayios

rendered.
as
if octlov,

n

(pvyovres]

(peijyovres

S.

13 ocnwraroj']

C; S renders

but the translator's

practice elsewhere in rendering superlatives is so uncertain, that no inference can /ecu be drawn as to the reading. 14 t)/aQv] add. dde\(poi [p<ov] S.
jfi\

CS

;

Basil omits this second
next.

£rj.

Kijpcos] twice in S, at the

end of one

line

and the beginning of the

a place among them that are saved through Jesus Christ, through whom is the glory unto Him for ever.'
navayico] So also above, § 35 see the note there.
10.
11.
ttjs
<ro(f)ias]
;

in the

LXX,
1

e.g.

1

Sam.

xx. 3, xxvi.

16, xxix. 6,
v.
£co

20,
e'-yo),

etc.
Xeyei,

Kings xxii. 14, 2 Kings So too Rom. xiv. 11
Kvptos,
is

otl

ipo\

k.t.X.

(where

S.

Paul
23,

quoting loosely
it

Wisdom

is

re-

from

Is.

xlv.

combining
e-yco
i.

howof
Is.

presented as the speaker in the passage of Proverbs just quoted. Moreover this name 2o(pia was given to
the whole book
12.
;

ever with the
xlix. 18);

£co

k.t.X.

comp.

2 Cor.

18,

and see

see above, p. 166.
'

dwell inpeace\ As the common LXX rendering of for which purpose it was chosen p£J>, doubtless in part owing to the similarity of sound (see the note on pa>p.oa-Konr]6ev, § 41), it implies the idea of
'

Kara(ricr)v(6(roi)fjL€v]

Rom. II. p. 242 sq, III. For a similar reference to the Trinity see above, § 46. Here They are described as 'the faith and hope (i.e. the object of faith and
Fritzsche
187.
p.

hope) of the elect'; for rj re ttlo-tis k.t.X. are obviously in apposition to the preceding words. For eX^is,

'rest, peace'.
15.

meaning

'the object of hope', see the

somewhat dpeTapeXrjTa] favourite word of Clement, §§ 2, 54.
So
apeTapeXrJToos,

A

note on Ign.
Trjs

Magn.

11 'i^croO Xpio-Tov
1

iXnidos

rjp,a>v;

comp.

Tim.

i.

1.

below.

For the
II.

On
is

the other
different

hand the sense
in

oiirio-Tis

plural see Kiihner

Gramm.

p.

59 sq.

Ign.
'irjaovs

Smyrn.
Xpicrros

10

rj

£7 yap k.t.X.] This passage is quoted by S. Basil, de Spir. Sand. 29 (ill.
p. 61)

TeXeia

tticttis,

(see

the note there).
17.

where the For the form of quotation is given. adjuration £j} 6 Qebs...oTi, 'As surely
;

see above,

1.

p. 169,

tcov

€kX€kt<ov]

A

favourite
46, 49,

word with Clement,
52, 5918.
p.€T

§§

1, 2, 6,

as

God

liveth...so surely',

comp.

$7

iKTevovs

erne iKc'ias] § 62.

The
It

Kvpios on... which occurs frequently

phrase occurs again below,

170
V7r6

THE EPISTLE OF
tov Qeov

S.

CLEMENT

[lviii

heSo/uteva hiKaaofJiaTa kcli
teal

ovtos iureray/uevo^

TrpocTayiAara, ecrai eU tov dpid^ov iWoyi/uLOs

twv
y\

crcoto/uevMv Sid 'Itjcrov

XpiCTOv,

$1

ov ecrriv clvtco

hopa els tovs alcovas tcov altoveov. d/uriv. LIX. 'Edv Se Tives direidrio'coo-iv toTs
fijJLwv

vtt

clvtov

5

$1

6ipr)fJL6vois y

kivSvvoo
1

ov /uuKpa
7rpocrrd7/xara]

yivcoo-KeTworav otl 7rapa7rTcocrei kcu iavTOvs evStjaovo-iv, r\fiels Se ddoooi
;

/ecu

C

om.

S.

1 1

ctdpavcrTov]

C

;

add. deus S.

is

a sort of oxymoron, or verbal paradox, like 'strenua inertia', 'lene torfor emeiiceia involves the mentum
'
:

the

number of His elect through Jesus Christ, who called us from darkness to light. Open our eyes,
Lord, that we may know Thee, who alone art Holiest of the holy and Highest of the high ; who settest up who bestowest and bringest low riches and poverty, life and death ; who art the God of all spirits and of
;

idea of 'concession'; comp.
iv.
1 1

1

Thess.

(pi\oTip,el.o-6a.i

r/o-vxafcw.

So

Greg. Naz. Orat. iv. 79 (1. p. 116), speaking of Julian's persecution, says
eVietKcos ifitaCero.

The substantive eVt-

eUeia occurs also §§ 13, 30, 56: the
adjective imeiK^s, 1, 21, 29. The frequency of these words aptly indicates

the general spirit of the letter; see the note on § 1, and the introduction,
2.
I.

flesh; whose eye is all-seeing, and whose power is omnipresent; who multipliest the nations and gatherest together Thine elect in
all

p. 97.

Christ.

We

beseech

Thee,

Lord,

Used here, as in § 57, for those who have a place among the elect of God: see also Comp. Plato Phileb. 17 E §§ 44, 62.
e\\6yipos]

assist the needy, the oppressed, the Let all the nations know feeble.

that

ovk iWoyipov ovd' evapidpov. tov dpidfxbv] As above §§ and below § 59, with the note.
3.

Thou art God alone, and Jesus is Thy Son, and we are Thy people, the sheep of Thy pasture.'
Christ
5.

2,

35,

vn

avTov\

i.e.

tov Qeov.

In
to

the

same way they again claim

tcov

o~co£op,evcov\

are in

the

way
Acts
15.

of those that of salvation\ as
ii.

'

be speaking with the voice of
',

God

Luke
2

xiii.
ii.

23,

47,

1

Cor.

i.

18,
ol

Cor.

The

opposite

is

tmoWvpevoi, i Cor. i. 18, 2 Cor. ii. 15, iv. 3, 2 Thess. ii. 10. Comp. also Clem. Horn. xv. 10, Apost. Const. In the Apost. Const.viii. viii. 5, 7, 8.
5

below, § 63 toIs v0' rjp.cov yeypappevols diet tov dyiov nvevpaTos comp. § 56 p) rjpiv aXXa tco OeXqpaTi tov Qeov. See also Ign. Philad. 7 to

nvevpa ov nXavaTai, dnb Qeov ov... eKaXovv Qeov (peevy, where a similar claim is made.
6.
'

(comp.

v.

15) the

words are tov

7vapa7rTcocrei\

'fault',

trans-

dpidpov

tcov aco(opevcov as here.
'

If any disobey our counsels, the greatest peril they while we shall have absolved our-

LIX.

gression '; Dial. 141

Jer. xxii. 21.

Comp.

Justin

will incur

;

selves from guilt.

that the Creator

And we will pray may preserve intact

It does not occur (p. 371). elsewhere in the LXX, nor at all in the N.T., though TrapdnTcopa is common. Polybius uses it several times comp. also Sext. Empir. adv. Math. i. 210.
:

LIX]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
dirb ravTris
TY\V
Ser/O'LV

171
alrt] orofxed a >
]

e&ofjieda

Trjs

d/ULctpTiav

Kal

6KT€vfj
10
dpidfJidv
6\(jo

Kal

iK€0~laV

7T0l0VfJL€V0l,

07rO)5

TOV
ev

tov

KaTy]piQ\xr\ixkvov

twv

6k\€kt(jov

clvtov

Tto

KO&iucp

hiaCpvAct^ti

adpavcTOV 6

SrifMOvpyos

tcov diravTtov Zia

tov

r\yairv]\xe.vov 7rai$os
*?/xas

avTov

'

Iticrov

XpiaTOv,
diro

Si

ov eKaXecev
els

diro ctkotovs ei? (poos,

dyvoocias

kirlyvtociv

So|^s
fyxas]

ovopiaTOs
;

avTov.
is

13 XptaTov] C ; add. domifzi nostri S. a clerical error in transcribing the Syriac
7. ddSoi] As above, § 46. For the whole expression, dOcoos eivai cmo

C

me S
14

;

but this

doubtless

suffix.

cltto]

C

;

koX airb S.

that these expressions

6 rjyaTv^pivos

(dyan-qTos) ttcus ctov, 6 irals

aov, occur

dpapTias, comp. Num. v. 31. See tov dpiQpbv K.r.A.] 9.
vii.

Rev.

4

sq.

The same phrase

tov dpid-

several times in the prayers in the Apost. Const, viii. 5, 14, 39, 40, 41. Comp. also Epist. ad Diogn. 8,

pbv twv €k\€ktoov avTov has occurred In one of the prayers already § 2.
in the
last

Constitutions

book of the Apostolic have 6 ttjv (viii. 22) we

and Mart. Polyc. 14, where it is twice put into the mouth of Polycarp, who was certainly a reader of
tion

tov Koapov avo-Taaiv 81a tcov evepyovpevcov (pave p on oirj eras kol tov dpidpov tcov enXeKTcov o~ov Bia(pv\aTTcoVj where

Clement's Epistle. This designais taken originally from Is. xlii. 1, quoted in Matt. xii. 18 l8ov, 6 nals
jjpeTicra,
rj

pov ov
is

6 dyaTrrjTos

pov

[ei?]

the expression here

combined with another which occurs below (§ 60)
is

ov evdoKr]o-ev

"^v^r}

pov

;

where

rrals

;

'servant, minister' ("DJJ).
iii.

Comp.

thus clearly showing that the writer

borrows directly or indirectly from Clement. 11. aOpaxxTTov] The word does not It is occur in the LXX or N.T. however not uncommon in classical Dion Cass. liii. 24 writers: e.g.
dBpavcTTOv
illustrates
Kal

But the higher sense of vlbs was soon imported into the ambiguous word 7™!?
Acts
13, 26, iv. 27, 30.
:

Apost. Const, viii. 40 tov povoyevovs aov Trcudbs 'irjcrov Xpio-Tov, Epist.
e.g.

ad Diogn.
dycmr)Tov
•na.Tr)p.

8,

Iren.

iii.

12. 5, 6,

etc.;

and probably Mart. Polyc. 14
iraibbs
o~ov
Irjcrov

6 tov

oXoKkrjpov tco SmSo^a)

Xpicrrot)

ttjv ttoKlv 7rapedc0K€v,

which passage
here.

its

sense
viii.

Comp.

Clement seems have used the word here.
so
13.
ii.

And

to

Apost.
ao~eio~TOV.

Const,

12

diacpvXd^rjs

eKahecrev

k.t.A.]

From
The

1

Pet.

6 brjfiiovpyos k.tX] The same phrase For occurs above § 26 comp. § 33. drjpiovpybs see the note on § 20.
;

9 TOV €K CTKOTOVS to QavpaaTov avTov

VpCLS KoXicraVTOS els
(bees.

epithet

v/

12. tov r)yam)p.kvov Txaibbs k.t.X.]

So

again lower down in this chapter, did 'irjo-ov XpiaTov tov r\ycmr) pevov
naibos
ctov.

Bavpacrrbv which is wanting here is supplied by § 36 (as read in the Greek MSS) dvaddXXei els to 6avpao-Tov [avTov] (pcos, where however

the epithet

o~ov,

and

'i^o-ous Xptcrro? 6 ttcus

and

in

is omitted in the Syriac Clem. Alex.

It is worth observing in connexion with the other coincidences,

14. dyvcoo-ias] 'stubborn ignorance'\ a stronger word than dyvoias comp.
:

172

THE EPISTLE OF
[Aos
rifMV,

S.

CLEMENT
to apxeyovov
Trjs

[lix
irao'Y]^

Kvpie\ y eXirl^eiv

eirl

ktio"6cos bvofjia ctou,
tjfxtov eis

dvol^as tous 6<pda\fjiovs

KapSlas

to

yivijocriceiv cre,

ATION
1

£N

ATIOIC

tov \iovov y^icton en yyhAoic, ANAnAYOMeNON, TOV TAHeiNOYNTA yBpi N

Ads yiuv, Kvpie] om. CS ; see below. 2 ovop.d gov] C; nomen ejus see below. ; Kapdias] cordium S. vif/rfKols] 3 ere] C ; eum S. edv&v] vipiarois C; see the lower note. 5 diaXvovra] dissipantem S.

sanctum S

I

Pet.

ii.

15.

It

occurs
1
ii.

also

Job
47,

is

xxxv. 16, Wisd. xiii. 1, See also Cle?n. Horn.
iv. 8, xviii.

Cor. xv. 34.
6,
iii.

13, 18.

obviously wanted, it must be accented apxeyovov, not apxeyovov, as by Bryennios comp. [Aristot.] de Mund. 6 (p. 399 Bekker) 81a
:

Comp. Apost. bid Xpio-rov Krjpvypa yvcocrecos $ovs rjpiv els iniyvoacriv rfjs crfjs do£r]s Kal tov ovofxaros crov. The language of Clement here seems
els eiriyvoHTiv doi-rjs]
viii.

rr)v

TTpdrrjv

Kal

dpxaioyovov

alrlav,

Const,

II

6

where again we should accentuate
dpxaioyovov,
for

the

expression

is

to

be inspired by Ephes. i. 5 sq. e\irl£eiv\ Some words have been omitted in the Greek MS, as the first editor has correctly seen. The words
1.

synonymous with 6 navrcov rjyepcov re Kal yevercop which follows immeSo too perhaps even diately after.
vi. 16 (p. 810) apxeyovov r\pepav, for just below it is defined as irpwr^v tg> ovti epeoros y eve a iv but in Clem. Alex. Protr.

in

Clem. Alex. Strom,

rrjv

supplied in the
will
suffice.

text,

Aos

ijfiivj

Kvpie,

:

The same omission

5 (P- 56) to 7rvp cos
it

apxeyovov aefiovres

existed also in the text from which

may

the

Syriac Version was made. In consequence of this, aov, o-e, <xe, aov,

is

be doubtful whether the fire regarded as a pri?icipinm prin-

enaidevaas, rjyido-as, eriprjo-as, are there altered to avoid the abrupt transition

cipians (apxeyovov), or a principium principiatiun (apxeyovov). In Greg.

from the third person to the second and at length words are inserted
;

Naz. Op. 1. p. apxeyovov o-kotos.
also Iren.
9.
i.

694 we
(twice),
I.

have
5.

t6

The word occurs
2,
1.

I.

1

introduce the second person. On the recurrence of lacunae in our authorities see above, I. Hilgenfeld gets over p. 145 sq. the difficulty in part by substituting avoitjov for dvoifjas: while Gebhardt
before
'A^iovpev
to

the exposition of the Valentinian system, where likewise the accentuation may be doubtful. It
3,

in

is

and Harnack deny

that the text

is

not found in the lxx or N. T. Editors seem universally to accentuate it dpxeyovos (see Chandler's Greek Accentuation § 467) ; but, I

either defective or corrupt, and attempt to justify the transition by

think, on insufficient grounds. 2. rovs dqbdaXpovs k.t.X.] suggested

such passages as Acts
etc. (see

i.

4, xxiii. 22,

by Ephes.
rov,
rrjs

i.

Winer § lxiii. p. 725). But the phenomena of our two authorities show that Bryennios was right. apxeyovov] i.e. Thy Name which
'

ne(p(OTiapevovs

17 sq iv eiriyvdaei avrovs ocpdaXpovs

k.t.\.

Kap8ias vpa>v els to eldevai vpas See also above § 36 ^vecoxOrjrjpcov

o~av

01

6(p6aXpol

rfjs

Kapdias.

origin of all creation', Tvacr-qs KTiaeas being governed by apxeyovov. As an active sense
the
first

was

Comp. Mart.
vii. 39.

Polyc.

2,

Apost. Const.

3,

yivcoaKeiv

/c.r.X.]

Comp. John

LIX]
5

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
TOV AlAAYONTA AopCMOYC
eic

173

YTTepHC^ANOON,

eGNOON,

TOV

noi-

oynta TAneiNoyc

fyoc

kcli

to

t

c

y^haoyc TAneiNOYNTA,

TOV nAOYTIZONTA
zhn
noioyNTA,

KAI

nTOO)( IZO N TA,

TOV

ATTO KT6 N
I

NTA

KAI

fAovov

evepyeTrjv

7rvevjudTcov
gn

Kal

Oeov
tov
evepyk-

7racrf]£

o~apK09,
(

tov eniBAenoNTA
S.

taic

aByccoic,

C;
ttjv]

dvOpiVTcov

= avu)v)

8

ffiv

ttolovvto] redimit et vivificat S.

C
3

;

evpeTTjv S.
yivcoerKcoeriv
ere

xvil.

iva

tov

uovov
viii.

Taneivov.

See also Matt,
nXovTi^ovTa

xxiii.

12,

dXrjBivbv Qeov.

Luke
Apost. Const,
.

xiv. 11, xviii. 14.

tov uovov
5

k.t.X.]

7.
I

tov
ii.

k.t.X.]

From

6 cov uovos v^rio~Tos KOTOIKCOV.
\n\no~Tov k.t.X.] 15 o vyj/ierTos

.

.0

iv v^rrjXdis

7 Kvpios 7rTco^t^et Kal ttXovComp. also Ti£ei, Tarreivol Kal avv^rol.

Sam.

From
6

the

lxx

Is.

Luke

i.

153.

See Greg. Naz. Orat. 42
6

lvii.

olkcov

tov
avTco,

alcova,

iv v^rrjXols kcitiv ayiois dyios iv

§5

(i.

p.

751) 6 7rT0ixiCa>u Kai 7rXovOavaTcov
ko.1

ti£g>v
K.T.X.

Qeos,

{cooyovcov

ovoua
Const,

v\\ricrTos

ayiois
1

ava-

iravouevos.
viii.

So
1 1

in the prayer Apost.

tov drroKTeivovTa k.t.X.] Deut. xxxii.

tn/acrre iv vx/z^Xois , dyie

39
I

iyco
ii.

drroKTevco

kcu

(jjv

ttoitjctco,

iv dylois dvanavoueve, doubtless

taken

from

Clement. Similarly the expression o iv ayiois dvanavouevos in other liturgies, D. Marc. pp. 178, 189,

6 Kvpios OavaTol Kai ^cooyovel: comp. 2 Kings v. 7 6 Qeos iyeb tov
SavaTcoerai kcu ^cooTroirjcrai;
8.

Sam.

evepyeTrjv]

Comp.

Ps. CXV. 7

iiri-

D. Jacob,

p.

49 (comp.

p.

29),

S.

crTpe^rov, ^rv\r)

uov...oti Kvpios evrjp-

Chrysost. p. 94 (ed. Hammond). I have substituted v\jrr]Xo7s, as the reading both of the LXX and of the

yeTrjae
p.

ere.

So too Liturg. D. Marc.
evepyeTa.
k.t.X.]

188

-fyvyjqs

TvvevuaTcov

Modified

from

Apost. Const. here translates

KDIIIDI ND'HE), iv vyfrrjXols, in the Hexaplaric Version of Is. lvii. 15 thus using two different words. This however is not de:

Moreover the Syriac by the same words, which render v^io-tos,

Num.
§

62

See also 22, xxvii. 16. tcov rrvevpaxeov Kal beerTroTr/s
xvi.

with the parallels Kvpios irdo-qs o-apKos, in the note. Comp. Liturg. D. Jacob.
p.

45
9.

uvrjadr/Ti, Kvpie, 6
Trderrjs

Qebs tcov

rrvev-

uaTCOv Kal

erapKos.
k.t.X.]
yfj

cisive in itself.
4.

tov i7ri(3Xe7rovTa
18,

Ecclus.
aaXevdrj-

tov
xiii.

TcmeivovvTci
II
vj3piv

k.t.X.]

From
Tanei-

xvi.

19, afivoro~os
ttj

ko.1

Is.

vTreprjepdvcov

erovTai
oprj

iv

imerKOTrfj

avTOv,
yrjs

aua Ta
iv
tco

V(dCT<D.

Kal

to.

BepeXia
S.

Ttjs

diaXvovTa] Probably from Ps. xxxiii. IO diaerKet)d£ei (3ovXds iBvcov, dOeTel be Xoyiauovs Xacov.
5.

tov

iTTiftXeyj/ai els

avTa Tpopco
dpovov
'to

o-vero~e'iovTai.

Comp. Liturg.
Ka6r}uevos
(SXeTrcov
iir\

Basil,
do£r]s

p.

106 6
iiri-

Kal

TOV

TTOLOVVTa

K.T.X. ]

Job
els

V.

II Kal

dfivcrerovs.
iv,

For the unusual
look
ii.

tov TTOiovvTa

Taneivovs

vyjsos

imfiXeTreiv
'at',

into',

or

drroXcoXoTas i£eyeipovTa, Is. x. 33 raTreivcodrjaovTai oi vyjsrjXol,
iTa7reLva>o~as

comp. Eccles.

11,

2

Chron.

Ezek. xxi. 26
Ka\
iyco

xvi. 9.

to
ib.

vyjsrjXov

v^coaas
Kvpios 6

tov inoTTT^v
(xxxiii).

to Taneivov,
Tarreivcov

xvii.

24

£vXov v^tjXov

ko.1

v\j/cov

£vXov

may

See Ps. xxxii k.t.X.] which passage Clement perhaps have had in mind, as
13,

174
Ittotttyiv
($Or\6oV,

THE EPISTLE OF
dvdpco7riv(t)v

S.

CLEMENT
twv
COOTHpA,

[lix

epycov,

tov

klvSwevovtcov

TOV

TWV AHHAniCMeNOON
kcu
KCtl
'

TOV

7TCIVTOS

7rv€VjuaTOs
edvrj
67TL

kt'io~ty]v

e7rlcrK07rov 9

tov

7r\r]6vvovTa

ytjs

€K

TTCLVTCDV

€K\€jZafJL€VOV

TOVS dya-

TrusvTcts

ere

Sta
rupees

Iti&ov

XpLCTOv tov
BohOon
iJjulwv

rfya7rt]fJievov
eTLfJLY]oras.

Tra&os
<*£}'

5

aov, eY oi
ov/uev
rifjLwv.
i

eVa/Sefcras, tjyiaoras,
yevecrdai
orcocov'

ere,

h^ecnroTa,
iv

kai

antiAhtttopa

toiis

6\i\jsei

tous Tcnreivovs

tQiv KivdvvevovTcov]

phrase.

5

ere]

C

;

illonim qui affliguntur S, but it is probably a loose para6 aov] C;ejus S. turn S. i]fj.as eiraidevcras,
et sanctificavit

rjyiaa-as, erlixrjaas]
fxev k.t.X.]

instruxit nos

nos

et

honoravit nos S.

d£iou-

S;

S prefixes et dicemus Mi cum stipplicatione. 7 <re] so apparently om. C. It seems to be required, as Hilg. and Gebh. have seen. SeWora]
earlier

he has already adopted an
verse of the
text.

same Psalm

in this con2

For eVo7m79 comp.

Mace.

vii.

See the prayer Apost. Const, viii. 12 ert d^iovp-iv ere... on cos ttclvtcov iirinovpos
6.

d^iovfiev k.t.X.]

in

the

35

tov navTOKparopos iiroTTTOv Qeov, Esther v. I tov TravTccv inoTrrrjv Qeov.
I.

yevr],

TvavTccv

(Sorjdos

kcu

dvTLkrjTTTcop
is

(with the context), which

evidently

TOV
ix.

TG>V

Klv8vVCv6vTG)V
eXciTToveov
et

K.T.A.]
ftorjdos,

Judith

II

indebted to this passage of Clement. Comp. Ps. cxviii (cxix). 114 (3or)06s
[J.OV

avTtXrjTTTOip acrdevovvToov, dneyvGiO-fxevodv
o-Kenao-Trjs, airrjk'rvio-jxevwv acoTijp.

For

8.

KCU aVTlXrjTTTCOp p.ov el o~v. roiis iv BXtyei k.t.A.] Compare
1

comp. Is. xxix. 1 9, a.7rr)\7rio-p.evoi See also Liturg. Esth. iv. ad fin. e'A7ris rcoV d-rrrjXD. Marc. p. 181
77

the prayer in Liturg. D. Marc. p. 185 XvTpcoaai decruiovs, i£e\ov tovs iv dvdyKciis, TreivcovTas xopTacrov,

TTLcrixivcov

(comp.

p. 122), Act. S.
'

Liturg. S. Basil. Theodot. § 21 (in RuiChriste,

oXiyoyj/vxovvTas

irapaKaXecrov^
>

7re7r\avr]p.ivovs e7ricrrpe\//
Ticrp,evovs (pcoTaycoyrjaov,

oi>,

e'enco-

nart)

Domine Jesu

spes
I

TrenTUiKOTas

desperatorum'.
3.

eyeipov, Zech. XU.
voo-rjKOTas

7TV€Vp.ClTOS KTlCTTrjv]
.

aaXevo/xevovs o~Trjpi£ov, velacrai (ppovpbs ijfxcov

Kvpios. .7rXao~cra>v 7rvevp,a dvdpconov iv
avTa>,
Is.
lvii.

16

nvevaa nap'
nvofjv
iv.

ip,ov
e'yco e'yco

e'^eAeucrerai,
eVoi'770-a.

Kal

naaav

Kai dvTi\ij7TTa>p KaTci irdvTa yevou€vos, where the coincidences are far too numerous and close to be

In
(

Amos

13

we have

accidental.
ii.

See also Apost. Const.

...KTifav nvevp-a,

where

it

apparently

6.

means the wind,' but might easily be understood otherwise. $6 iniCTKOTTr] €7TLO-K07rOv] Job X. 12
7]

IO.

dcre/3eT?]

Comp.

§ 3 £fj\ov adiKov

kcu dcre/3^ dveiXrjcpoTas.

The

reference

o~ov icpvXa^e p,ov to nvevp-a,

I

Pet.

ii.

in dcrefiels is not to unbelievers, but to factious and unworthy members of

25

TOV

7TOLp.€Va

KCU
i.

iniCTKOTTOV

TCOV

y\rvxo> v vptov,

Wisd.

6 o Qebs...Trjs

the Church. For this word Gebhardt {Zeitschr. f. Kirchengesch. I. p.
307,

KapSias avTov eVt'crK07ros d\r)6r)S. Comp. Liturg. D. Marc. p. 181 inio-Koire
Trdarjs arapKos.

and ad
this

loc.)

and
of

may have been

conjectures daOc-vels the reading
;

vS.

But the occurrence of tovs

LIX]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
tovs
7r€7rTWKOTas

175

eXencrov
10

eyeipov

roh

Seojuevois

€7ri<pavti6f tovs do~e(3e7s iaaai*

tovs TrXavuyjjLevovs tov Xaov (tov €7ri(TTpe\lsOV yopTavov tovs TreivwvTas* XvTptticrai tovs Seo-juiiovs tjiuuiv e^avdcrTriarov tovs dcrdevovvtcls*

can

ore

TrapctKaXecrov tovs oXLyoy^v^ovvTas' rNooTooTravra ta gOnh, oti cy e? 6 Oedc monoc, teal
(TOV,
KCLl

15 'IflCrOVS

XpLOTTOS 6 7TCUS npoBATA THC NOMHC COy.
do77iine bone S.

HM6IC

AAOC

COy

KAI

8 tovs Tctireivovs i\e7]crov]

om.

S,

owing

to the homceoteleuton.
?)

10 iiTKpavrjdi] C; €7riaTpd(pr]di S. S; see the lower note. 14

aaefieh]
<re]

C;

aegrotos (audeveh or vocovvtcls
p.

See Bryennios Didache

py

.

It is unre-

presented in S.

156
below
this
is

7rcus <tov]

add. dilectus

(6 rjya7n)fxivos) S.

do-devovvras just
difficulty,

a serious
I

and on

account

have

early Church in the ages of persecution: comp. Heb. x. 34, xiii. 3,

hesitated about accepting it. It is not sufficient to answer with Harnack,
dcrdevovvTes animo, dadevels corpore imbecilles sunt'; for both words are used indifferently either of physical
(

and see the note on

A

Ign.

Smyrn.

6.

prayer for those working 'in the mines' is found generally in the
early liturgies; comp. Apost. Const. 10 V7rep t5>v iv fieTaXXois Kal i£oKal
decrpols
ovtcov

V111.

or of moral weakness.

Supposing

that da€J3e7s were the original reading, the rendering of S may represent either do-Bevels (a corruption of or vevoarjKorcis (a substitution of a familiar liturgical form, as
do-efiels)

piais Kal (pvXaKals 81a to ovop.a tov

Liturg. D. Marc.
tcdis
77

Kvp'iov derjOcofxev, p. 1 8 1 tovs iv cpvXaH-* vovs

iv p.€TciXXois>.>ica.Tex

irdv-

tcis

iXerjaov,
p.

ndvTas iXevdepooaov, Lit.

D. Jac.
CpvXaKals,

44
tcov

p,vija6r]Ti,

Kvpie
tcov

appears from Lit. D. Marc. p. 185, quoted above). The Syriac word
here, Rn*TD,
is

Xpio~Tiavcov

iv

8ecrp,ols,

iv

the
2

same

as in the

Peshito Luke
vels (v.
PJlll.
fieva,
1.

ix.

laaai tovs da6e-

e£opiais, Kai ULKpais SovXeiais ovtcov rraTepcov Kal

Tav iv alxpaXeacriais Kal twv iv peTaXXois Kal (Saadvois
77/xcSi/.

dorOevovvras).

Comp. Polyc.
TO.

a8eX(pa>v
12.

6

€7Tl.(TTpe(fiOVT€S

aTTOTreTrXavr)-

i^avdaTrjo-ov
v.
i

k.t.X.]

Comp.

I

tovs dadevels, iTnuKeiTTopevoi which, so far as it goes, is in favour of Gebhardt's emendation. tovs nXavcopevovs k.t.X.] Ezek. xxxiv. 16 ro 7re7r\avr]fxevov eVtcrrpe^cB (where B has to nXavcofxevov a7ro(jTpe\^co).
11. XvTpcoo-ai tovs deo-jxlovs]

Thess.

14 7rapa uv6e'io-0e tovs oXiyo-

yj/vxovs, dvT6x*°~@ € T &> v dcrdevav,

quoted
viii.

by Harnack.
13.

yva>TG3crav K.r.A.]

I

Kings
Xaol

60
oti

07TG)S yv<oo~i

ndvres

01

ttjs yrjs

Kvpios o Qeos avTos Qeos Kal ovk
eTi,

The

re-

eo~Tiv
Tra.o~aL

2

Kings

xix.
ttjs

19 yvcoaovTai
yrjs

ference in this and the neighbouring clauses is doubtless to the victims of the persecution under Domitian;
see the note on § 1. The care of the 'prisoners' naturally occupied a large space in the attention of the

al

/SacriAeicu

oti

av

Kvpios 6 Qeos p.6vos (comp. Is. xxxvii. 20), Ezek. xxxvi. 23 yva> o-ovTai to. edvq
oti iy<6 a'/u xvii. 3.
15.

Kvpios

k.t.X.

Comp. John
Ps. xcix
(c).

rjp.els k.t.X.]

From

176

THE EPISTLE OF
LX.

S.

CLEMENT
/cocr/xou

[lx

Cv

ty\v

devaov

tov

<rv<TTct<riv

did

twv

crv, Kvpie, ttjv 6 7no"TOS ev Traccus rals yevecus, oiKOv/uevrjv eKTi&as,

evepyov/mevcov

e(pavepo7rolr](ras'

SiKctios ev toTs ev Icr^v'i kcll fieyaKpifJiacriv, 6avfJiao~Tos

\07rpe7rela,

Kri^eiv kcli (rvverds ev tco kcli tcl yevo/meva efipacrai, 6 dyados ev toIs optojULevois 7ri(TT09 ev to?9 7re7roi6o(Tiv eiri o~e, eAefiMON kai oikti'p6
(ro<pos

ev

tw

5

mon, a<pes
1

r\\xiv

ras dvo/mias
rod

^/ulcov

kcli

tccs
§ 20,

ddiKias kcu

Si>]

add. yap S.

dhaov] divvaov
k6<t[xov\
/cal]

C

;

comp.

where

C

writes the

word

in the

same way.
aocpbs (om. 6) S.

5 6 acxpbs]

C;

C;

add. hujus S, as in other passages. om. S. 7 wiarbs] mitis (benig-

mis), probably xp^cris, S.
12 koX diKdioavvri
/ecu

10 Kaddpiaov] Kadapeh

C

;

purifica S
S,

:

see below.
et

0,77X6x777-1]

om. C; restored by Bensly from
.

which has

2 yva>Te on Kvpios avros icrriv 6 Qeos. T^els [8e] \a6s avrov kcu 7rpo/3ara rrjs
.

'didst reveal the inherent constitution

vonrjs

avrov
'

:

comp.
7.

ib.

lxxviii (lxxix).

of the world by the succession of external events'; comp. Rom. i. 20.

13,

xciv (xcv).

The word
somewhat
3.

cpaveponoulv
rare.
k.t.X.]

is

late

and
9

LX.
in

the

didst create all things Thou that art beginning.

Thou

6

TTLorrbs

Deut.

vii.
. .

and righteous and marvellous in Thy strength, wise and prudent in Thy creative and sustaining energy, beneficent and stedfast to them
faithful

Geoff tvmttos 6 (pvXdcrcrcov diaBiJKrjv

.els

Xiklas yeveds.
6.

eh)pdo-ai\

Comp. Prov.

viii.

25

that put their trust in Thee, merciful and full of compassion, forgive us
all

Trpb tov opt] edpacrOrjvai. 6 dyadbs k.t.X.] i.e. 'He is benefi-

cent where
seen,

our offences.

Reckon not every
:

and

He

His operations can be is trustworthy where

sin against Thy servants but purify us with Thy truth and direct our

faith takes the place of sight'.

The

contrast here

is

between the things
;

Make Thy face to shine upon us, and protect us with Thy mighty hand and Thine outsteps in holiness.

which are actually seen and the things which are taken on trust comp. Heb. xi. I ecrriv de maris...
rrpaypdrcDV

stretched
us.

arm from them that hate Give peace to us and to all the

For

6pa>p,evois

ekeyxps ov (3Xe7rop.evcov. Hilgenfeld has e'peo-

inhabitants of the earth, as gavest to our fathers when
called
1.

Thou
they

/xevois;

lowed

Harnack and Gebhardt (folby Lipsius Jen. Lit. Jan.
read
o-co^op-evois,

upon Thee'.
2v
ttjv

13, 1877)

the latter
copicrI.

devaov k.t.X.]

The main

having previously conjectured
fievoi?

part of this sentence is borrowed in Aftost. Const, viii. 22 (quoted above

{Zeitschr. f. Kirchengesch.
;

on § 59 rbv Wisd. vii. 17
t)id

Comp. dpiOfxov k.t.X.). eiSerat o~vo~rao-iv Koo-p-ov
k.x.X.]
i.e.

kcu ivipyeiav o-xoi^eiW.
tL\v

Zahn proposes 6o-iov[ie'vois (Gott. Gel. Anz. 1876, p. 1417). There is no sufficient reason however for questioning the text. The idea, and
p.

307)

evepyovfxivoiv

in part the language, is taken

from

lx]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
TrapctTTTtofJLaTa Kai TrXyifJLfJLeXeias.
/utj

177
Xoyiarj iracrav
KaOdpiorov

Ta
10

d/uapriav SovXcov crov Kai TraiZiCTKcov,
Y\ixds

dXXa

tov KadapKTfJLOV
rjfjicov

Ttjs (rfjs

dXrjdeias, Kai katcyOynon

ta

AiaBh'mata

cn

ociothti

Kai

$iKaiO(rvvr]

Kai
kai

a7r\oTt]TL

KApAiAC
eNOOTTION

nopeYecGAi
crov

Kai

ttoicTn

ta

kaAa

GYAp€CTA
15
tjfJLCov,

Kai

evo37Tiov

twv

dp^ovTiov
coy
TJ/uds
I

vat,
eic

oeo"7TOTa,

eni(J)ANON

to

npdcoonoN

ecp'

HM,ac

ataGa eV
et

elp/jprj,

eh to
is

o~K67racr6i]vai
clue to

th
have

in jnstitia

in simplicitate.

The omission

homceoteleuton.

not inserted the prepositions, because it is a common practice of S to repeat 16 iv eiprjvr]] them, where they are not repeated in the Greek ; see I. p. 137.

pads S

;

but this

letter (1 for

is probably due to an error of Syriac transcription, since a single 1) would make the difference.

Wisd.
ovk

xni.

I,

€K tcov opcoptevcov

dyaBwv

Ps. xxxvi (xxxvii). 23, Prov. xx. 24.

L(T)(V(rav eldivat

tov bvra ovTe rots

The word
enced by
12.
o~v

8iafiijp,aTa, 'steps', is rare,

epyois 7rpoar)(6i>T€s iiriyvoiaav tov re)(The language in the latter virrjv.

except in the
it.

LXX and

writers influ-

part of the sentence is suggested by Ecclus. ii. IO sq tls iveiria-Tevcre
Kvpia)
pa>v
kci\

iv 6crioTr]TL k.t.X.]

idv 7ropevBfjs

i Kings ix. 4 ivcomov ipov, KaBa>$

Kai

K.a.T7](TxyvQri ;...8ioti

oiKTipdcfilr/cnv

inopevBr) Aavelft, iv oaiOTijTi Kapdlas.
13.

iXej]p.<DV o

Kvpios, Kai

noulv

k.t.X.]

Deut.

xiii.

18

dp.apTias.
7.

noieTv to KaXov Kai to dpecrTov ivavrlov

iXefjpov k.t.X.]

A

very frequent

Kvpiov tov Qeov
xii.

crov

:

comp.

ib. vi.

18,

combination of epithets in the LXX. 10. K.a6apio-ov~\ This is perhaps the simplest emendation of KaBapeh, the reading of the MS, which cannot stand KaBdpiaov having been written Kciddpeicrov, and the two last letters having dropped out. Otherwise we might read KaBdpys. Bryennios, Hilgenfeld, and Gebhardt tacitly retain
;

25, 28, xxi. 9.
I
:

15. iwicpavov] Ps. lxvi (lxvii). iTTKpavai to TTpoo~a>irov ovtov i(p* yp,ds

comp.
3,

7,

(xxxi). 18, lxxix (lxxx). So also 19, cxviii (cxix). 135.
ib.

xxx

Liturg. D. Marc.
viii. 18,

p. 179,

Apost. Const.
Jer.
/jlov

37.
els

16.

dyaOd]
els

See

xxi.

10
rrjv

icrTTjpiKa

to

npoo-coTrov

eVi

KaOapds.

For the expression comp.
18
K.a9apio~p.(0

7t6Xiv...ovk
ix. 4, Jer.

dyaBd;

comp.
els

Amos
9, etc.

Num.
11.

xiv.

ov

KaBapiel

xxiv. 6.
1.

For

dyaBd see
p.

tov evoxov, quoted by Bryennios.
tt}s

also

Gen.
.

20,

Deut. xxx.

xvii.
k.t.X.;

17

dXrjdeias] dyiao-ov avTovs ev
afjs

See John
ttj

Comp. Liturg. D. Jacob,
pvrjcrOrjTL.

44

dXrjBeia

comp.
to.

xv.

3.

.navTcov els dyadov. o-Keivao-6rivai\ For this connexion of

KdTevdvvov
KarevBvve
(cxix).

k.t.X.]

Ps. xxxix
p.ov,

(xl).

§iafi-qp.a.Ta

3 CXviii

133 Ta

§ta(3rjp.aTd fxov

KaTevBv-

comp. Is. Ii. 16 vno ttjv x eiP° s uov o-KeTrdcra) ere (comp. Wisd. v. 17, xix. 8), Deut.
o-Kend£eiv
crKiav
tt)s
i

The phrase vov koto, to Xdyidv aov. KaTevBvveiv to. diaftrfpiaTa Occurs also

xxxin.

27

aKendaei
:

cre...v7ro

ftpaxiovcov devdoov

and

lo~xvv for the anti-

CLEM.

II.

12

1

78

THE EPISTLE OF
COY
TCp

S.

CLEMENT
CCTTO
KCLl
Sos,

[lx

X eipi

TH

KpATAlA

KCLl

pvcdfjvai
TO)

7Ta<Tt]S

CtfJLCtp-

Tias
airo

BpAXIONI

COY

YYHAoV
ClSlKtOS.

pVGCLl
OfJLOVOlCLV

fj/XttS

TtCV

jULKTOVUTCOV

i]fJL(XS

KCtl

elpr]vr]v

rj/uuv

te

kcci

iraciv

to?s

KaroiKOvaiv

ty\v ytju,
(re 5

KCtdtOS

eStOKCCS

TO??

TTarpCKTlV

ij/ULCOV,

6TTIKAAOYMeNO)N

avTiov

oo-icos cn hictci kai

v7Tf]KOOv<s

yivo/uievous

aAhGcia, [cocrre (rco^ecrdai »j/xas] tco iravTOKpctTOpi Kai iravaperco

6 oo-tws] S ; om. C. This use of the adverb is characteristic of Clement ; otherwore aui'eadat. wise I should have hesitated to introduce it on such authority.
rinas]
etc.,

om.

CS

;

see below.

S renders

et

in veritate oboedkntes fuertmt nomitti tuo

thus connecting eu XkijOda with the following clause. 7 iravroin S, but this does not imply nparopi kclI iravapeTcp] The words are transposed

thetical x €l P l KpaTaia, fipaxiovi vyjrfka, Exod. vi. i, Deut. iv. 34, v. 15, vn.
26, xi. 2, xxvi. 8, Jer. xxxix (xxxii). 21, Ezek. xx. 2>3-> 3419,
ix.

iniKaXovpiv

{Jen. Lit. Jan. 13, 1877) would insert ere pvcrai tovs before iv
TravTOKpaTopi\

TVIO-TCL K.T.A.

So Hernias

Vis.

iii.

3

3.

T(OV

ptCTOVVTCOV
i.

K.T.A.]

Comp.
quoted

T(o

Justin. Apol.
pao-ovvras

14

(p.

61) tovs ddUcos

pypari tov TvavTOKpaTopos Kai ivAt first it had ocdotjov ovoparos.

TreiOeiv

Treipcopevoi,

by Harnack.
5.

emicaXoviievav

k.t.A.]

Ps. cxliv

curred to me to read navTOKpaTopiKq), as it occurred to Gebhardt, and as Hilgenfeld actually reads; comp. § 8
tco

avrov (cxlv). 8 nacrL rols iniKaXovpevois For iv niarei Kai akyOeiq iv akyOeia.

navTOKpaTopiKGi

/3oi»Ar//xaTt

avrov.

The

comp.
7.

1

Tim.

ii.

7.

This might be a loose accusative, referring to
vttt]k6ovs
k.t.A.]

expression TravroKparopLKov ovop,a occurs in Macar. Magn. Apoc?'. iv. 30 The omission of -k<u before (p. 225).

the datives ypuv re

ko.\

tvcktlv k.t.A.;

comp. Ephes.
nvevpa
tovs
o~o(pias

i.

17,

18

bay

vpiv

Ka\ would be easily explained, especially as the archetypal MS is shown to have been mutilated in this

7re(p(OTLapivovs
k.t.A.,

6cp6a\[jLovs

Acts xxvi. 3
arc

eVi crov piXkcov ar]pepov arrokoyeitrdtu,
p,aXio~ra

yvcoaryv ovra
§
xxxiii.

k.t.A.,

and
lxiii.

see

Winer

p.

290, §

pp. 709 sq, 716, Kiihner II. p. 667 sq. But a double transition, narpao-iv,
i7riKa\ovpevG>v,

neighbourhood. But the parallel passage from Hermas quite justifies the reading of the MS. In the LXX iravroKpaTwp seems to be always applied directly to God either as an epithet of Qebs or Kvpios, or independently;

very harsh

;

yevopivovs, would be and for reasons which
(1.

are stated in the introduction 145 sq), I cannot doubt that

p.

some

words have dropped out, such as I have inserted. Bryennios supplies Gebhardt reads kcu awaov ypas and Hilgenfeld yevopevois vnynoots alters the whole sentence. Lipsius
;

and so in Clement himself, inscr., 2, But the sense of to ovopa, as 32. almost an equivalent to 6 Qeis (see [Clem. Rom.] ii. § 13, and the note on Ign. Ephes. 3), explains the exceptional usage here and in Hermas. navapirco k.t.A.] For this expression comp. § 45, and for the word navdpetos the note
8.

;

on §

1.

rols

Te

apxovcriv

k.t.A.]

The

LXl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
o-ov,

179
rj/uwv

6vop.ari

roTs

re

apxovffiv

Kai

fjyov/uevois

ewi Trjs yrjs.
10

LXI.

Cv, SecnroTa, eScoKas
Sid

(TiXeias ccvtoTs

TOV KpCLTOVS
(rod

(TOV,

e^ovciav rfjs (3atov /ui€ya\o7rpe7rovs Kai dveicSiriyrj6*9 TO yiVWCTKOVTaS Tf]V V7TO tj/Uias

ty\v

avroh

Sedo^evrju

So^av kcu

ri/ur)u

v7roTao~creo-6ai

avToh,

fxti$ev

evavTiov/uevovs rco 6e\t]juari o~ov
p. 137.

oh

Sos,
if

Greek text: see above, I. any hrrlw, K")p*» (see § 3). But a single
different

Also iravapiTuj

is

translated as

letter

would make the

difference,

&H1TB
2, 45,

excelknti.

57);
irav-

Elsewhere hl2 "IJTB is the translation of vavdperos (see and the translator might here consider himself excused from the which occurs in both words. See also on
iravayly above, § 58.
i
;

§§

1,

repetition of

re]

C

8 rots
des S.

K ai

roh

S.

10
I

<!5u,Kas]

add.

illis

S.

4 dos]

precamur ut

punctuation, which

have adopted,
Hort.
It

was suggested
accords with

to

me by

Thy
art

favour.

O

able to do

this

Thou, who alone and far more

evapeaTa evcomov aov

the preceding words kol\ evumiov rcov
;

apXovTav
;

it rjiitov disposes of the superfluous avroh (see however § 21, and it throws 2v into its note) proper position of prominence e.g.
;

than this, we praise Thee through our High-priest Jesus Christ, through whom be glory unto Thee for ever'.
10. ttjs fiacriXeias] 'of the sovereignty i.e. 'of the secular power'. For the genitive comp. Dan. xi. 20
1 ,

§

60 2v

rr)v

aevaov

k.t.X.

and

§ 6l

7rpciacrcov

just

2v yap, SeWora k.t.X. See Athenag. Suppl. I evVe/3eVrara
below,
kci\

kcv

eV

bo^av (3acri\(ias, id. 21 avTov dogav (SaaiXelas.

e8u>-

The

fiacriXeia is

diGKeipevovs kcu diKatorara rrpos re to
Oelov
rrjv

vfierepav

(BaaiXeiav
i.

;

comp. Theoph. ad Antol.

11,

who

the secular as contrasted with the spiritual power; and, as such, it is frequently opposed to
lepaxrvvrj, e.g.

quotes Prov. xxiv. 21 Tiua, vie, Qeov Ka\ ftacriXea k.t.X. The previous editors have all connected the words to7s re apxovo-iv k.t.X. with the following sentence, as apparently does C. LXI. 'To our earthly rulers, O Lord, Thou hast given the power, that we may render them due obedience in entire submission to Thy will. Therefore grant them health,
peace,
stability.

Apost. Const,

ii.

34

Scrco

Y VXV
o-vvr]

v(tip.aTos KptiTTGiv, TocrovToa

tepco-

ftao-iXeLos

(comp.
21.

vi.

2),

Test.

Dnod. Patr. Jud.
13.

VTTOTaacrecTdai

civtoIs

k. t.

X.]

bee

I

Pet.

11.

13, 15

vnoTciyrjTe

7racrr]

dvOpconivr] KTicrei ha tov Kvpiov...oTt ovtcos io-Tiv to OeXrjua tov

Qeov;
av-

comp. Rom.
rfj

xiii.

2

6 avTiTacrcrSfievos

e'govaia

tt}

tov

Qeov diaTayfj

deCTTTJKev.

For

Thou,

O

Sovereign of heaven and King of
Eternity, givest honour to the sons of men

upon

and authority earth. So

dos k.t.X.] In accordance with 14. the Apostolic injunctions, Rom. xiii.
1

sq,

Tit.

iii.

1,

1

Pet.

ii.

13 sq

:

guide their counsels, that they may administer well the power thus entrusted to them, and may obtain

comp. Wisd. vi. 1 sq. See also Polyc. Phil. 12. For other passages in
early

Christian
for

writers

relating
rulers,

to

prayers

temporal

12

see

2

i8o
Kvpie,

THE EPISTLE OF
vyieiav,
eiprjvtiv,

S.

CLEMENT
evcrTadeiav,
eis

[lxi

dfiovoiav,

to

hieireiv ccvtovs ty\v
ctTrpocrKOTrods.

vtto

gov

Sedo/ueurju

avTofc tjyefiAOViav
(SacriKev

gv ydp,

^ecrTrora

eirovpdvie,

twv

aidvoiv, SiScos toIs viols toov dvdpcoircov
kcli

So^av Kai
GV,
5

Tifjiriv

e^ovGiav tcov

67rl

Ttjs yrjs VTTCtpyOVTltiV

avTtov kcltcc to kclXov k<xi Kvpie, Zievdvvov tvjv /3ov\i)v hieirovTes ev elprjvri Kai evdpeo-TOv evwitlov gov, ottws
vtto 7rpa'vTt]Ti evGeflcos Tt]v

gov

clvtoTs <$6$o[X€vr]v e^ov-

Giav

'iXeco

gov Tvy-^dvoiGiv.

6 {jlovos Svvcxtos irotiJGai
jULeff

Tctvra Kai wepiGGOTepa
9
i'Xew
<

dyada

io rnuwv, col e^o^o-

viously a paraphrase. The clause is translated in S

aov Tvyx& v J*<ri-v'\ tranquille compotes fiant auxilii quod {est) a te S, ob16 Kai] S ; om. C. 13 yevedv] C ; yevehi S.
et de iis (rebus) scilicet (JVD) quae in ea (religione), excellentiae qui volunt dirigere vitam (conversatione?n)
l
i

quae maxime

?itiles stint illis

et pietatis et juste, as if

evdpeT0P...8ievdw€iv.

At

the translator had read rCov u>0eXi uwTaTwi> 5?) (?) iv avrfi all events he must have had a text which a corrector
els,

had emended by

striking out or altering

so as to govern

fiiov

by

dievdvveiv

:

Bingham Ant.

xiii.

10.

5,

Harnack

Qebs

toov aloovcov.
is

Here the Eternal
tcov

Chris tl. Gemeindegottesd. p. 218 sq (Justin Martyr), p. 378 sq (Tertullian).

King
alcovcov

tacitly contrasted with the

temporary kings, the fiaaiXevs
with the
/3ao-iXeis

The

Apologists naturally lay stress on the practice, as an answer to the charge of sedition.
l l

tov

alcovos

tovtov (comp. Ign.
6.

Rom.

6).

I.

evardOeiav]

stability',

tra?i-

8l€v6wov] As above § 20. Otherwise it is not a common word, and

qiiillity\

comp.

§ 65.

The word may
'

mean

'firmness, steadiness' as a moral quality, or stability' as a
either

does not apparently occur at the LXX or N.T.
10.
7roifj(Tai

all in

jue#'

TJpcov]

As Luke

i.

72

material result.
xiv.

The
:

be intended here
6 ovk £a>vTes
0€ias

seems to comp. 2 Mace,
latter

ib. x.

eXcos p.€Ta tcov naTepcov 77/j.coj/, 37, and so probably Acts xiv. 27,
;

ttjv

(SaaiXeiav cvara-

xv. 4

comp.

Ps.

cxviii

rvxew, Wisd. vi. 26 fiaaiXevs (ppovip.09 evardOeia dtjpov.

XprjcrTOTrjTa €7roir)o~as p.era It is the Hebraism aov.
11.

(cxix). 65 tov oovXov

'without stumbling', 'without any jar or collision* as § 20 rr/v XeiTovpyiav avrcov dnpoa3.

airpocrKoTrois]
'

dpxiep(G>s k.t.X.]

UV HL^y. See the note

;

on

§ 36.
12.
rj

KO7TC0S

emTeXovaiP.

§ 20.

The phrase filaaiXev Tutv alcSvoov] occurs only 1 Tim. i. 17 in the N.T., and as a v.l. in Rev. xv. 3; but it is found in the LXX, Tobit xiii. 6, 10
;

k.t.X.] See the note on a favourite form of doxology in Clement.

o6£a

It is

13.

cts

yeveav

yevecov]

i.e.

'

the

see

also

Liturg.

D.

Jac.

p.

40.

the generation which comprises as Ps. ci (cii). 24 iv generations' yevea yevecov to. ctt] aov comp. Ephes.
all
;
'.

Comp.

§ 35 "narrjp tcov alcovcov, § 55

iii.

21 tov alcovos Toiv

alcovcov.

This

is

LXIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
Sid

181
tlov

XoyovfieOa
ylrvx">v
t)

tov

dp-^iepeco^

teal

7rpoa-rdrov
ctol
y\

nixusv

'hja-ov

Xpiarov, Si ov
kcli

$6£a
kcli

Kal

^.eyaXcocrvvri

Kal vvv
alcoucou.

eis

yevedv yevecov

ek

tous altovas toov
15

d/u/ju.

LXIL

flepl ixev

rwu dvrjKovrwv

rrj 6pt](TKeia rj/uwv,

Kal tlov oocpeXiULoTaToov eU evdperov (Ziov euo-eficos Kal SiKaiws SievOuveiv
[rr]v

roh

6e\ov(riv

Tropeiav

clvt<ov\

iKavws 67reG-reL\ajULev
7ri(rT6(t)s

v/uuv,

Kai
1.

iitTavoias

dvSpes dSe\(boL 7repl yap Kal yvt](rias dydwris Kal ey-

see above,

mTSCl, om. CS
:

i.e.

In the Syriac we should probably read nVTOHSQ for pp. 144, 145. in pietate ( = evcre^Qs) for el pietatis. 17 ttjv wopeiav avrtov] see below. if 19 iyKpareias] NJTPIjy bv super continentia
(as

v-wkp

iyKpareias) S, for another

wept.

preposition (7DD de) has been used before for Perhaps however the insertion of a different preposition is a mere rhetorical
first

device of the translator; or ?V may be an accidental repetition of the of the following word, as the Syriac forms of the letters would suggest.
safely infer a different

syllable

We cannot

Greek

text.

a rare
or

mode

of expression, the
Kal

com-

note there.
tji

moner forms being eh
eh yeveav

yeveas yeveav

dprjaKeia

f}p.a>v\

Comp.

yeveav,

which are
said

OprjaKevovTcov

rr/v

peyakoTTpenrj

§ 45 t<ov Kal

quite different in meaning.

LXIL

'Enough has been

This evbo^ov OprjaKeiav tov v^littov. passage explains the force of the

by us however concerning the things pertaining to our religion and necessary for a virtuous life. For we have left no point untouched concerning faith and repentance and the like,
reminding you that ye ought in all righteousness to pay your thanksgiving to God, living in harmony and peace and love like as our fathers behaved with all humility towards God and towards all men. And we have done this with the more pleasure, because we knew that we were speaking to faithful men,
;

words here that befit men who serve the one true God'. 16. ivaperov] See the note on Ign.
'
:

Philad.
17.

1.

btev6vveiv\

The
;

MS

is

ob-

viously defective here

supply

some

such

and we must words as t^v
to.

Tropeiav avTfov (see § 48), or

diafii]-

p.ara (§ 60), or

nios

tt)v

perhaps with BryenSee (iovkrjv avTwv (§ 61).
1.

the introduction,
18.

p.

145 sq.

Bryennios has called attention to the similarity of language used by Irenaeus, when
describing this epistle,
tovtov
ovv
iii.

iKavaJs eTrea-reiXapev]

who had made a
God's oracles'.
15.
rcoi/

diligent study of

3.

3 eVi

avrfKovTfov]
;

as in § 35

see
It

With a dative the note on Ign.

K\r]pevros, crTaaeios ovk okiyrjs Toh iv Koplvda yevopevrjs ddeXcpoh, in evTeiXev rj iv Pcoprj ckK.\r)crLa

tov

Philad.

1.

struction, dvrjKeiv eh, § 45.

has a different conSee the

iKav(£>Ta.Tt)v ypaqt>rjv

Toh Ko-

pivdiois.

182

THE EPISTLE OF
teal

S.

CLEMENT

[lxii

KpaTeias
Kal

o (t)(f>po(ruvris Kal
m

virofjiovf]^

nravTa tottov

e\jsri\a(prj(raiuLev,
cruvt]

v7rofMjJivr\crKOVT6s

helv

v^as ev SiKaionravTOKpaTopi
ev
5

dXfidela

Kal

jJiaKpodvfJLia

tw

Qew
ol

oo-iws

evapeareiv,

dfJLOVoovvras

d^vrjcriKaKw^

dya7rri ical

7rpoSedr]\a)iuevoL
tcl

eKrevovs €7rieiK6ias, Kadcos Kai elpr\vn fierd vraTepes rifxwv evrjpeo'Tf]crav Taireivo7rpos

(ppovovpTes
1

tov Trarepa Kai Qeov Kat ktktThe
S.

tottov]

add. scripturae S.
§ 41.
/cat)

same confusion above,
5

Kadus Kal] tcaOus (om.
{debv iray kt'ktttjv
is
?)

see the 4 evapearetv] S ; evxapwrelv C reading of S was anticipated by Hilg. and Gebh. creatorem 7 Qebv Kal ktlo-ttjv] universi
:

deum

S

;

comp.
rjdiov]

§ 19.
1.

8 7rpos] S

;

om. C.

The

authority

of S in such a case

valueless in itself (see

p. 137), but the preposition

seems to
text

be required here.
has translated
I.
it

9

rj

5i

c5j/

S,

which translates the
translator has

clause, et haec

tanto sint (erunt) per ea quae

momumus.

The

had a corrupt
kirzihr]

and

word

for

word, regardless of sense.
'

aa<pus ydeipev

ndvra tottov
topic*

k.t.X.]
;

we have

schisms,

who

are bidden to harbour

handled every

Bryennios adds by way of explanation, pdXio-Ta be twv
dyiwv ypacpcov, thus taking iravTa tottov to mean 'every passage'; and so it is rendered in the Syriac VerIn this sion, 'place of Scripture'.

no grudge.
5. p€Ta eKTevovs k.t.X.] See the note on § 58, where the same ex-

pression occurs.
6.

01

TrpoftedrjXoopevoi,

k.t.A.]

See
eboBrj

§§ 17, 18, 19;
\fj

comp. also
§

§

30

sense t6tto$ occurs above in the expression ev iTepa tottco, §§ 8, 29, 46. But this meaning does not seem at all natural here, where the word is

papTvpia] toIs Trarpdo'Lv r)pwv toIs

8i.Ka.iois,

and

31

an

ap-(fjs

yevopeva'

dvaTvXitjopev to. t'lvos X a P lv r]^~

\oyrj6rj

used absolutely. For tottos a topic, argument', comp. e.g. Epict. Diss.
1.

'

For

6 naTr/p r)pwv *A(Spadp; k.t.X. this use of TraTepes in speaking

7.

4

€TTlO~K€^lftV
11.

TlVa
Ij
.

7TOir}T60V
1

TG>V

TOTTOiV TOVTCOV,
€KTTovr)o~ri...Tbv

3

OTOV TOVTOV

of Jewish worthies, see the note on §410. eXXoyi/xcorarois] See the note

tottov,

and see other
For
-\rrfKa(pav

on

references in Schweighaeuser's index
to

comp.
4.

Epictetus, s. v. e.g. Polyb.
evapeo-Telv]

§ 58 eXXoyipos. eyKeKvCpoaiv] Comp. § 53 KaXa>s eTrio-Tao~de Tas Upas ypa0ay, dyaTrrjToi,
to. Xoyia tov Qeov, with the note. For the word eyKinrtciv see the note on § 40.

viii.

18.

4 ndaav

Kal iyK€Kv(paT€ els

iirivoiav etyr]\a<pa.

Doubtless the corit

rect reading, as

explains the sub-

LXII I.
regard so
to

sequent

eur/peo-r^crai/.

For another
the authorities,
§ 2 dp.vrio~iKa.KOi

'We ought therefore to many great examples, and

example of the confusion of evapeareu; evxapio~Telv, in see § 41.
dpvr)aLKCLK(A>s]

bow

the neck in submission; that

See

laying aside all strife we may reach our destined goal. Ye will make us happy indeed, if ye obey and

This word involves (with the note). an appeal to the sufferers from the

cease from your dissensions in accordance with our exhortation to

LXIIl]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
K.CLL

183
TCtVTa TO&OVTU)
t

TY]V KCtl 7TpOS ttclvtcls dvdpco7rous.
rjSiov
v7refjivt]crafJLev 9

eireihri

10

f)fJLas

dvhpdo~iv

7ri(TTo7s

Kai
Trjs

ypa<peiv Kai e'7/ceeWoyijULcoTarois
cracpws
irai^eias
ecrriv

fjdeL/uev

tol Kvcpoo'iv eis

Xoyia
m

tov Qeov.
toloutois
virodeivai

LXIIL
toctovtois

QejuiTov

ovv

toTs

Kai

v7roSeiy/uLaa iv

TrpoveXdovTas

tov

Tpa^rjXov kol tov
ypd<peiv]
iireidr]

Trjs u7rctKof]S
est iis ;

tottov ava7rX?ipa)cravTas
enim
(p-ev)

quia

scilicet
fj'

manifeste
efiei)

oportuit

ut scriberemus S,

i.e.

aacpus

rather a false
facility

yap ypdcpeiv k.t.X. Again a corrupt reading, or For the division of the words, has been translated almost verbatim.
5e? (or
jxkv

10 eWoyL/AWT&Tois] doctis S.

with which yap might be omitted or inserted before ypdcpw, see Ign. Rom. 7. 13 virodeivai tov rp&xv^ov] inclinemus collum
et
it/is

nostrum
clinemur
all

14 avair\7)pibo-avTas...iip.G>v~\ implentes insubjiciamus nos S. qui sunt duces animarum nostrarum S ; dvaTrX-qptoaai C, omitting
:

the other words

see the lower note.

peace.
ful

And we have men who have

sent to you faithlived among us

Ecclus.
'

vi.
;

26

6 TjpooreXOwv avrfj (i.e.
(f)6j3(p

rfj o-o<plq)

Trpoo~ipxeo~6ai

Kvpiov

unblameably from youth to old age, to be witnesses between us and you. This we have done, to show you how great is our anxiety that peace

to give

heed

to the fear of the Lord',
i.

LXX

Ecclus.

30

;

Tvpoaipxeo-Qat

pLrj-

dev\ tcov dprjp.€vcov

Philo de Gig. 9

(i.

p. 267)
c.

;

Trpoo-epxeo-Qai

tm

Xoyco, Orig.

may
you
'.

be

speedily

restored

among
word

12.

QefMirbv]

The use

of this

These senses are Cels. iii. 48. derived ultimately from the idea of 'approaching a person as a disciple'; e.g. Xen.
vnoQelvai

seems
ii.

to

be extremely

rare, except

Mem.

i.

2.

47
'

oWep
submit
'

with a negative, ov Bepurov (e.g. Tobit
13) or aOepnTov (see below). TOIS TOIOVTOIS K.T.A.] § 46 ToLOVTOlS ovv V7rodeiyp:a(Tiv KoXXrjBrjvai Kai r)p.as
del k.t.X.

ev€K(v <a\ ScoKpdrei irpoQrrfXOov.

tov
i.

Tpax^ov]
'

your
vp.a>v

neck \
vnodeTe
25),

e.
Ii.

to

the
tov

yoke

;

comp. Ecclus.
24,

26

TpdxqXov
lb. vi.
1.

For

tolovtois kol tcktovtois

virb

comp.
1

§ 19.
'

Epictet.

Cvyov (comp. Diss. iv.
801/Xov,

77

to,

3. Trpoo-eXOovras] having acceded attended to, assented to, studied \
;

napeScoKas tov Tpdxrp\ov.

aavTov

vTreOijKas

So too Acts
Tpdx^ov.

XV.

IO

as in § 33

comp.

I

Tim.
p\r)

vi.

3

ei'

entOelvai £vybv enl tov

The

tls erepoStSao-KaXet Kai

npoaepxerai So we find npoavyiaivovcriv Xoyois. ipXevdai apery 'to apply oneself to 16 virtue', Philo de Migr. Abr.
(i.

expression is used in a different sense in Rom. xvi. 4 vwep Trjs i/vxys puov tov eavTcov Tpax^^ov vnedrjKav,

where

it

means

'laid their

neck on

p.

449)

;

irpoo~epxeo~6ai rois vop.ois

'to
'

study the

laws',

Diod.

i.

95

;

the block', not 'pledged their lives', as Wetstein and others take it.
'

irpoaepxecrdai rrj arofpia, t[] cpiXocroCpta, to become a follower of wisdom, of

14.

tottov a.vankr)pcoaavTas]
*

to oc-

philosophy',
(p.
2),
iii.

Philostr.

Vit.

18

(p.

50),

Ap. i. 2 comp. LXX

cupy the place\ fulfil the function''; comp. 1 Cor. xiv. 16 6 dvaTTXrjpav where the 18 koto u, tov tottov tov

1

84

THE EPISTLE OF
toTs

S.

CLEMENT
dp^yol^ twv
CTaceco^

[lxiii

7rpo&K\idrivai

virdpyova'iv

\jsvxwv
kiri

rifjLwv, OTTOds rjcrvxacravTes Trjs jULotTaias

tov

7rpOKeijJL6vov rifjuv ev d\rj6ela (tkottov

Sr^a iravTos
r\\xiv

\±u>\aov

KaTavTrjcrco/ULev

.

yapav yap

kclI

dyaWtao'Lv
v(j)

irape5

^£T6, edv virr\KOOi yevofJievoi toIs

rj/ucov

yey pa jUL^evois
dde/uiTOV tov
e7roir]cra^.e6a

Sia tov dyiov irvevfJLaTOS eKKO^rjre

ty\v
r\v

fyXovs

v/ulwv 6pyr]v
teal

/cara Trjv evTev^iv

7T€pl eiprivris

o/uovoias ev Ttjde ty\ eTriCTo\r\.
tranquilli
S.

'&7T€/x-

i ^cruxaVavres] quiescentes et

3 pwpov] add. et scandalo S.

4 ayaX\la<ju>] add.

magnam

S.

5 yeypa/xpevocs]

add. vobis S.
is

7 tvTtv%t.v\

choice of this elaborate expression is probably a studied paradox to bring out the honourable character of a private station; tokos denoting
official

WBJ1 WQm
translation

Syriac

prVJVNT ])irb pim For piru I cannot

think of any word so probable as 7rpoo-K\i0i]vai, since p"i is a common
of nXiveiv, and in § 21 XDN1 XniJ^"); though trpocrKXivco~6aL, 7rp6o-KXio~is, are
npoo-KXio-eLs is rendered

position or dignity (see above,
i),

§ 40,

and the note on Ign. Polyc.
ldia>TT]s

while
this.

implies the opposite of

So too here the object may be to enhance the important fmiction of obedience. See Clem. Horn. iii. OO top epbv avairKripovvTa T07rov, and
comp. Joseph. B. J.
tov
v. 2.
5

§§ 47, 50, Acts v. 36,

rendered otherwise, but variously, in 1 Tim. v. 21. On
the other

hand

wnmD

'ductores'
It

might be variously rendered.
32, 37 in a

most
1,

crrparico-

commonly represents 6 qyovfievos(§§
;

tci^lv airoTTkrjpovvTa.

I. These npocncXtOfjvai k.t.A.] words are wanting in the Greek MS, and I have restored them by retranslation from the Syriac see
:

the critical note.

The

true partisan-

ship is here tacitly contrasted with the false; the rightful leaders with the wrongful. The language is ex-

double rendering, 55, Heb. xiii. 7, 17, 24) but elsewhere r/yepav, Ka6rjyr]TT]s, odrjyos, etc., even (SovXevTrjs. I have given dpxqyos, because it brings out the contrast which Clement seems to have had in his mind. In §§ 14, 51, however, dpxqyos is rendered otherwise, N^n, lOIP*^ and so

commonly.
2.
i.

plained by what has gone before; § 14 pvaepov £ij\ovs dpxqyols e£aKoXovdelv, § 5 1 (iceivoL olrives dpx^yol
ttjs

o-raVecos]

Comp. Clem. Horn.

o~Tao-€G)S

kol

aav, § 47 Sta to

dixoo-Taaias eyevrjdrj/cat rore npoaKXicreis

vpds

TreTTOLrjcrOaL ... Tvpoo-eKkiOrjTe

yap

4 faiv TotovTcov Xoyiapwv qo~vxd£eiv. This construction follows the analogy of verbs denoting cessation, etc. It is un(see Kiihner II. p. 341 sq). necessary therefore to read rjavxao-do-i]s,

k.t.X., §

lva * v dydnr} tvpedcopev di^a
a/xco/xot

as

Gebhardt suggests.

npoaKXiaecos dvdpconivqs
§ 2
1

(comp.

3.

CTKOTVOv]

Comp.

§

6

6TTI

TOV

TTJS

pr) kcito. 7rpoo~Khicr€is).

The com-

7rL(TTeG)s fiifiaiov bpop.ov KCiTavTr/aoopfv,

mand

to

choose the right partisan-

and

§ 19 enavadpapcopev
ijp.lv ttjs

iirl

top i£ dpxqs

ships here has

a parallel in § 45 (piXoveinoi eo~T€...7rep\ twv dvrjKovTcov the note). The els a(OTt]piav (see

napa$ebop.£vov
ter's

elprjvrjs

aKonov,

which explains the idea

in the wri-

mind

here.

The expression

LXIV]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
Se

l8 5

Kal dvSpas ttkttovs Kal (rco(ppoi/a^, diro veo10 TtjTOs dva<rTpa(p6VTas ews yrjpovs a/xe/UTTTws iv t)pLiv 9
y^afjiev
o'lTives

Kal /udprvpes kcrovTai /ueTa^v
Se
e7roiYi<rafjLev

v/ulcov

Kal

r\jJL(av*

tovto

\va

elSfjre

bri
eV

Tracra

r\ixiv

(ppovTh Kal yeyovev Kal ecrTiv ek to
elprtvevarai,
15

Ta^et

v/mas

LXIY.
twv

Aolttov 6 7ravT67T07rTris Geo? Kal Se<T7roT^9

irvevfJiaTwv Kal
et

Kvpiov Traaris aapKOS, 6 e/cAe^a9 5e
/cat]

supplicationem
rives Kal]

exhortationem S(om.
/cat)

S

;

5e

(om.

/cat)

C.

n
i.

o'i-

S;

otrives

C.

15 Aolttov]
10.

C;

..lttov

A;

Xoarbv 8e S.

itself is
xii.
I

perhaps suggested by Heb.

yrjpovs]

Tpe^oifxev

dy&va.

For
i

tov TrpoKeipevov r]plv vkottov comp. Phil. iii. 14.
defect*:

(the correct reading),

So Luke and
xiv.

36

yrjpei

in several

passages in the lxx,
14 yrjpei, 1 Ecclus. viii.

e.g. Ps. xci (xcii).

li(6fj.ov]

fault,

see

the

Kings
6, etc.,

4

yrjpovs,

note on pozpoo-KOTrqdev § 41.
lation of

In the

with more or less

Old Testament it is always a transDID 'a blemish'. a P^ v k-t.A.] As in Luke 4. 14 x
i.

agreement
also

in the principal
iii.

MSS; so

Clem. Horn.

43.

On

this

(comp. Matt.
also

v.

12,

Rev.

xix. 7);

see

Mart. Polyc. 18. nation of words \apd
6.

This combikcu

form see Winer Gramm. § ix. p. y^ sq, Steph. Thes. s. v., ed. Hase. Our MS has also yrjpei above in § 10, where A
reads
all

ayaWlacris

yrjpa. '
'

does not occur in the lxx.
dia tov
dy'iov

LXIV.
See
di

Finally,

may
flesh,

the

the note on §
rjfxoov

TrvevpaTos] 59 toIs vtt avrov
this

spirits

and

all

God of who hath

chosen us
all

elpr/pivois.

Harnack takes these
does

words with eK/cm^re, but
not seem so natural.
dOe/juTov]

in Christ Jesus, grant us graces through Christ, our Highpriest, through whom be glory and

honour
15.
ttov,

Acts x. 28, 1 Pet. iv. 3; and so too 2 Mace. vi. 5, vii. 1, x. 34. 7. ^'Xot/s] See the note on § 4. evrev^iv] This should probably be explained of the 'appeal' to the Corinthians themselves see the note on
;

to Him. Amen.' Aombv] For Xolttov or to Xotwith which S. Paul frequently

ushers in the close of his epistles, see Philippians iii. 1. The happy conjecture of Vansittart which I

adopted

in

my

first

edition

is

con-

[Clem. Rom.] ii. § 19. It might however refer to the foregoing 'prayer' to God for concord comp. e.g. 1 Tim. ii. 1, iv. 5, Herm. Aland, x. 2. 9. tivdpas] Claudius Ephebus and Valerius Bito, whose names are given
;

firmed by our
7ravTe7r67TTrjs]

new

authorities.

See the note on § 55. Qebs.-.Tcov 7rvevp,aT(tiv k.t.X.] Num. xxvii. 1 6 Kvpios 6 Qebs twv nvevpaTajv
kcu irdo-qs a-apKos

(comp.

xvi. 22)

:

see

also
tcov,

Heb.
Rev.

xii.

9

rco TrciTpl tg>v nvevpid-

below,
of the

§

65.

For the

light

which
in-

xxii.

6 Kvpios

6

Qebs twv

this notice

throws on the early history
see the
;

TTVCVpClTOdV
16.

TWV

TjpoCprjTWV.

Roman Church
I.

troduction,

27 sq bearing on the date, see

p

and
I.

for its

6 vlos

pov

o e/cXe^a/xews] See Luke ix. 35 6 e/cXeXfy/xeVos (the correct

p. 349.

reading,

though

there

are

vv.

11.

i86
juevov
ets

THE EPISTLE OF

S.

CLEMENT
r)fjLas

[lxiv
Si

top Kvpiov 'Irjcrouv XpidTov kcll \aov 7repLOua'LOu Swrj 7ra(rri yjsvx*1
y

auTOv

€7raceic\riiuevti

to

fJieyaXoTrpeTres kcli
eiprjvrjv,

ayiov ouo/ua avTOv
fxaKpodufiiav,
eis
m

7tl(ttlv,

(pofiov,

v7ro/uiOur]u,

eyKpctTeiav,

kclI
1

(rco(j)pocruvriv,
r///.as]

€vap€GTt]a
3 peyaXoirpeires

iv
/cat

tw
ay iov]

dyveiav ovo/liccti avrov
sanctum
et deceits
1/71-0-

5

AS;

i^ets C.

AC;
S.

magnitudine et gloriosum S; see above, 1. p. 137. povf)v\ AC; et timorem et concordiam et amorem et patient iam
(in)

cpbfiov, eiprjvrjv,

4 paxpodv-

piav]

A;

/cat

paKpodvplav CS.
ayvelav S.

eyupdreiav, ayveiav]
5 /cat crw^poffi;^??^]

AC

(but ayvt.au

A);
/cat)

/cat

iyKpdreiav
dj'o/Aart]

/cat

AS

;

acocppoavvTjv

(om.

C.

AC;
o

add. sancto S.

6 dpxtepews]

AC;

add. magni S.

7

Soija]

inXeKTos
xxiii.

and

dyanrjTos).

So too Luke
rov

English
(ed. 2).

New

Testament
'

p.

195

sq
in-

35
:

Xpiarbs
1

6
ii.

Qeov

e/c-

XeKTos

comp.

Pet.

4

sq.

Harnack
2 e/<\e|d-

€7nKeK\r]fxeurj]

which

hath

refers to

pevos

Hermes Sim. v. SovXov TLva marbv /cat

voked his name 3
ix. 14, 21, xxii. 16,

\

cvdpearov

comp. Acts ii. 21, etc. So it is trans-

evTipov,

where the servant entrusted
from Enoch
xl. 5, xlv. 3, 4,

with the vineyard represents Christ.
It is clear
li.

lated actively in the Syriac. Or is it rather, as the perfect tense suggests, ''which is called by his name*"* This
latter

3, liii. 6, lxii. 1,

that 6 enXeKTos

was
the
/cam-

makes

better sense, especially
nepiovo-ios
;

a recognized Messiah.
1.

designation
avrov] Ephes.
rjpds
ev

of

in

connexion with Xabs

rjpas 81

i.

4

but with this meaning the common constructions in biblical Greek would

eos

e^eXe^aro
2.
els'

avrco

(i.e.

iv

X/jtcrrc5).

be e'c/V tjv (or e'ep' r}) e7TiK€KXr]Tai to ovofia avrov (e.g. Acts xv. 17, James
ii.

Xabv Trepiovaiov] Deut. xiv. e£eAe'£aro Kvpios 6 Geo? crov yeveaOai ere Xaov avraj nepiovcriov ; comp. ib. vii. 6, xxvi. 18, Exod. xix. 5,

7,

and

freq. in the

lxx), or

rrj

em-

4

/cat

ere

K€Kkrjfxevr] rco
4.

ovbpari avrov (Is.

xliii. j).

ayvelav Ka\ o~co(ppoo-vvr]v]
Efthes.

So too
ii.

Ign.
5.

10;

comp.

Tit.

5

Ps.

exxxiv.

4,

Tit.

ii.

14

KaOapiarj

acoeppovas, dyvds.
evapeo-Trjo-iv]

eavTco Xabv

nepiovcriov.

In the

LXX

The word occurs
See

Xabs nepiovaios is a translation of !"l;OD Dy, the expression doubtless

Test, xii Pair. Is. 4. 6. dpxiepecos kcu TTpoaTarov]
is

present to S. Peter's mind when he spoke of Xabs els nepnrolr]o~iv (i Pet. In Mai. iii. 17 n?3D is transii. 9).
lated
els tv

the note on § 36 above, where the

expression
7-

expanded.

nepiovo-ios

epm 011)0- iv in the LXX, and by Aquila. As f"l?JD is
'

'peculium', 'opes',
7Tepioi;crios'

("jJD

acquisivit'),
'

would seem to mean acquired over and above', and hence
'specially acquired' with a meaning It similar to the classical e^alperos.

peyaXa>o-vvrf\ See the note on § 20, where also these two words occur together in a doxology comp. also § 59, where nearly the same combination of words as here is repeated. In Rev. v. 13 we have
t>6£a <a\
:

7)

ri/x77

<al

rj

bo^a

/cat

to Kpdros els tovs

alwvas tu>v

alcovcov.
'

was rendered
effectively
'

at

once

literally

and
by

LXV.

We

have sent Claudius

in

the

Latin

Bible

peculiars'.

See

my

Revision of the

Ephebus and Valerius Bito to you. Let them return to us quickly accom-

LXV]

TO THE CORINTHIANS.
tjjULcov

187
'lrj(rou

Bid tov dpxiepecos Kal TrpocrraTOV
Sl

Xpi&TOV'
Tiptri,

ov avTto So^a kcli /ueyaXtocrvvri, KpaTOS, vvv Kal eis TTctVTas tovs aitovas toov aitovcov.

Kal

djurjv.

f

io'

Tovs Se ctireo'TaXiuieuov^ Kal OvaXepiov BiTtova avv €,<pnfiov
AC;
om.
is

LXV.

d<p'
kcli

tjfULtov

KAavSiov
iv

0opTOwarcp

Traaa 56£a S,
/cat.

Kal vvv

S.

which omits the following words /cat peyaXioo-vvrj, Kparos, rifxrj, /cat tl/atj C. 8 iravTas] AC ; tl/xt)] A /cat] om. C. 10 /cat OvaXepiov] AC; Valerium (om. /cat) or et Alerhim S; but this
;

doubtless owing to the accidental omission of a

1

before

DnSOXI

by a Syrian
is

scribe.

BtVawa]

AC

;

om.

S.

The punctuation
to the
;

of both

C and S

faulty

here, in separating

names which belong
QopTovvarix)]

same person.

avv Kal]

AC

;

avv (om. Kal) S.

A

QovpTovvdru
this

C

;

Frutunato S.

panied by Fortunatus, and bear glad tidings of harmony and peace restored among you. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you and with all. Through Him be glory
to

allied names see above, I. In Muratori, 1367 no. 12, it occurs as a woman's name,LONGlNVS.

and

p. 28.

BITONI. VXORI. AMENTO. 10. avv kcu &opTovva.T(p]
position of
/cat

For
iv.

the

God

for ever.'

/cat

comp.

Phil.

3 pera

KXavdiov k.t.X.] These two 9. names, Claudius and Valerius, suggest some connexion with the imas the fifth Caesar perial household with his two predecessors belonged to the Claudian gens and his empress Messalina to the Valerian. Hence it happens that during and after the
;

KXrjfievTos

p. 425).

(quoted by Laurent Hilgenfeld adds from the
'

Assumption
Strom,
XaAe/3.
vi.

of Moses'' Clem. Alex.
15
(p. 806) avv kcu tco clever emendation of

The

fore unnecessary

Davies avv Tata ^oprowaTco is thereand moreover the
;

reign

of

Claudius
find

quently

the

we not unfrenames Claudius

(Claudia) and Valerius (Valeria) in conjunction, referring to slaves or
retainers of the Caesars.
It is not impossible therefore that these two delegates of the Roman Church were among the members of Caesar's
'

testimony of A is now reinforced by one other Greek MS. The form of expression seems to separate Fortunatus from Ephebus and Bito and, if so, he was perhaps not a Roman who accompanied the letter, but a Corinthian from whom Clement was expecting a visit. In this case there
:

household

'

mentioned

and fairly probable some way connected with the palace

in Phil. iv. 22, that they are in
;

no improbability in identifying him with the Fortunatus of 1 Cor.
is

xvi. 17

see the dissertation in Philippiaus p. 169 sq. On this subject see also the

for Fortunatus seems to be mentioned by S. Paul (a.d. 57) as a younger member of the household of Stephanas, and might well be alive
;

introduction,

1.

p.

27 sq.
is

cognomina Ephebus

Of the two not so unhand Bito

less

than

forty

years
It

after,

when

Clement wrote.
very

must be remem-

common.
is

On

the other

rare in Latin, though

commoner

in

Greek
d.

(comp.

Pape-Benseler

bered however, that Fortunatus is a common name. See above, I. p. 29, note 3, p. 62, note 1.
iv dprjvr] k.t.X.]
1

Wbrterb.
Bltojv).

Gricch. Eigeniiainen s.v. For instances in Latin of

Cor. xvi. 11 npoelprjvrj.

wepyj/aTe di avrov iv

1

88
jUL€Ta

THE EPISTLE OF
daTTOv
evKTalav

S.

CLEMENT.
Trpos
rifJiiv

[lxv
t)p.ds,

elprivf)

%apas ev Tayei dvaTrepL^aTe
Tt)v
Keel e7ri7ro6r]Tt]v

07TW9
teal

eiprivr}V

dfJiovoiav

dirayyeWwo'iv

eU to tw^lov
'

kcli

tjp.ds

^apfjuai irepl Ttjs evcrTaQeias v/uiwv.

H

x^P

1^

T °v Kvpiov
avTOV'
$i

rifjiitiv

lt](Tod

XpiGTOu

pied' vjjlwvS

Kal fxerd

iravToav
St

7ravTa%rj

tcov

KeKXtj/ueuoov

vtto

tou

Qeov Kai
aitovas
I

jueyaXooo'uvri,

avrw So^a, Tijuri, KpctTOS Kai tovs dpovos aidSvios, airo twv aicovcov ets
ov
dfj.r]v.
2 iTrnrodr)Tr)v]

twv

altbvcov.

avairefixpare]

were fixate A.
b/xovoiav
/cat

A

;

e-KiirbB^rov C.

elpfyrjv

Kal 6/xovoiav]

AC;

dpr\vr\v S.
;

3 faeayyi'Kkwrw]

A

supplied above the line but
4 evcTTaOdas] evaradiaa- A.
...airo tCov

prima manu)
S.

7 kolI 8l avrov]

alwvwv]

AC; om.

As

d-wayy eiXwaiu C. AS ; di avrov (om. Kal) C. rifirj the general tendency of S is rather to add than
in the

X being t&xiov] ra%cto A.
(the first

to omit, the omissions in this

neighbourhood (more especially

proper names)

suggest that the translator's copy of the Greek was blurred or mutilated in this part. It must 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. AS ; Kal els C.

8

els]

For the subscriptions
2.

in our authorities see above,

I.

pp. 117, 122, 131.
p.
'

This form is doubly strange here, as it does not occur in the New Testament, and Clement uses the usual raxiov two lines below. QaTTov however is found in Mart. Ign. 3, 5, Mart. Polyc. 13, in which latter passage Oarrov and rd%iov occur in consecutive sentences Both our MSS agree in as here.
Buttov]

Lobeck Paral.
p.

455 sq, especially

473
4.

sq.

Wisd.

evaradeias] tranquillity* \ comp. On evvi. 26, 2 Mace. xiv. 6.

aradelv see the notes to Ign. Polyc. 4. 6. kol perd navrcop k.t.A.] For a

benediction similarly extended see 1 Cor. i. 2 avu nao-i rols iniKaXovfxevois
rb ovopa
8. is

k.t.X.

reading below.

Oclttov here,

and

raxiov just

dpnvos amvios] This doxology imitated in Mart. Polyc. 21 'It/ct-oO
u>
rj

evKTaiap] cur in the

The word does not OCLXX or New Testament,
in classical Greek.

Xpiarrov

do£a,

tl/xt],

peyaXcoavvrj,
els

Opovos alavios, ano yeveds

yeveav.

though

common

eTn7ro6t]TT]v]

As an

adjective

of

dpovos aloovios seems to be thrown in as an after thought, the

Here

comp. Barnab. eirtTrodrJTrj o\jns vpav, where § I Hilgenfeld unnecessarily reads emnothree terminations;
77

ascription having
p.eyak(ocrvpr)
is
;

ended with Kal and the idea of alaiPios

prolonged by the thrice repeated

Otjtos.

in the

The feminine does not occur LXX or New Testament. For
instances
of

ala>v<ov, alcovas, ala>v<ov.

For the obligations of the beginning and end of this same document
to the Epistle of

adjectives of three terminations in the New Tessimilar

Clement see Ignat.
610
sq, ed.
1

tament see A. Buttmann p. 22 sq and on the whole subject refer to
;

and

Polyc.

1.

p.

(p.

626

sq, ed. 2).

THE SO-CALLED

SECOND EPISTLE OF
TO

S.

CLEMENT

THE CORINTHIANS.

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
I.

ms (A) ascribes to Clement the Second Epistle equally with On the other hand it ought to be noticed that there is no the First. heading npoc KopiNGioyc 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 letter of Clement, but also (as we may perhaps infer)
a letter to
the Corinthians;
yet the

WE

have seen that the table of contents prefixed

to our leading

absence of such a

title

might

have been transmitted from an

anonymous

copy, where the work was and not intended to be ascribed to this father. But the
earlier

alternative supposition that the title has disappeared by mutilation is In the later Greek ms (C) at least not improbable (see below, p. 199).

the second Epistle
first

is

entitled

'

Of Clement

to the Corinthians', like the

(see above, 1. p. 122). On the other hand the Syriac Version makes a distinction between The First Epistle is described as 'The the two (see 1. p. 131 sq).

Catholic 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 Of the same designation of the two, the title is given more simply (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
its

S

CLEMENT.

as the author of the Second.

throws serious doubts on
'

the First he adds, I Second Epistle of Clement
KXrjfjLevTos ItrujToXri)
:

It is first mentioned by Eusebius, who genuineness (H.E. iii. 37). After describing should mention also that there is said to be a
(to-reov 8' cos kcu Sevripa Tts eTvai

Xeyerat rov

but

we do not know that

this is

recognised like the

former (ov fxrjv W o/xotw? ty} Trporkpa kcu Tavrrjv yvwpi/xov €7ricrTa/x€0a) \ for we do not find the older writers making any use of it (on fxrjSk kcu tov?

Then after summarily rejecting other tcr/xev). pretended Clementine writings, because they are never once mentioned by the ancients' and 'do not preserve the stamp of Apostolic orthodoxy
dpxaiov<s avrfj Ke^p^ei/ov?
'

intact',

he concludes by referring again to the First Epistle, which he

calls 'the
p.ivt)

acknowledged writing of Clement (y tov KXyj/AevTos opioXoyovAnd in other passages, where he has occasion to ypa^').'
'

he uses similar expressions, the Epistle of Clement', 'the The acknowledged Epistle of Clement' (ff. E. iii. 16, iv. 22, 23, vi. 13).
speak of
it,

is more than borne out by facts. Not only 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 Irenaeus and Clement of

statement of Eusebius

;

1

Alexandria (as read in their extant writings), that they cannot have known 2 or at least accepted any such epistle Rufinus and Jerome use still
.

more
1

professedly translates Eusebius, Dicitur esse et alia Clementis epistola cujus nos notitiam non accepimus' ; the latter tacitly paraphrases him, Fertur et secunda ejus nomine
'

decisive language.

The former

epistola quae a veteribus reprobatur' (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
1
;

for they
iii.

could not have so written,
16,
iv.

if

any Second Epistle
Thus he seems

Hegesippus, H. E.

22:

was written by Clement.
to

Dionysius, H. E. iv. 23. The words of the latter are rr\v arj/uLepov ovv Kvpiaicrjv

of only one letter of Clement to the Corinthians. The passage however

know

ayiav
vfjL&p

-fj/xipav
T7]i>

dirjydyo/uLev, iv
-qv

ji

&viyv<a/i€V
del
/cat

has

been strangely misinterpreted,

as

eirKnokrjV,

e^ofxev
cos

ttotc
rr\v

av ay Lv<J)<TKOi>Tes vovdereicrdai,
i)pui>

though tt]v 7r pore pap meant the former a meaning of Clements tivo epistles

KX^/xevros ypacpeicxav. irportpav He is writing in the name of the Corinthians to the Romans, acknowledging a
letter

5ia

which the context does not at all favour and which the grammar excludes, for then

we
2

should require

ttjv

irporipav r<2v did

which they had received from the

KXrj/mevTos ypa<peiau)i>.

brethren in

Rome

their bishop Soter

;

written apparently by and he declares that

The

fathers,

to

passages from these, and later whom I shall have occasion
are given in full above,
I.

his

Church will preserve and read from time to time this second letter from the

to refer,

p.

153

s q-

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 genuine letter to the Corinthians' (Chronog. a.d. 78, 1. 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 voOos a7roSo/a/xa£eTai).'

Meanwhile however this epistle had been gradually gaining recogwork of Clement. The first distinct mention of it as such is in the ms A, which belongs probably to the fifth century but
nition as a genuine
;

the

notice

of Eusebius

implies
it.

that

even in

his

day some persons

were disposed to accept

At a

later period its

made

it

especially

welcome

to the

language and teaching 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 (1. p. 183 sq), which may date from this latter period or

The doubtful reference in the Pseudo-Justin has been subsequently. discussed above (1. p. 178 sq). To the 6th century also may perhaps be ascribed the Apostolical Canons, where (can. 85) 'Two Epistles
of Clement
'

are included
187).

above,
is

1.

p.

among the books of the New Testament (see About the opening of the 7th century again it
1.

quoted by Dorotheus the Archimandrite (see
1

p.

190);
if

in

the

8th century by Joannes Damascenus (see 1. p. 193), passage has not been interpolated ; and in the nth

indeed the

by Nicon of

Rh^ethus

If in the Sticho?netria attached to the (see the notes, § 3). of Nicephorus (ta.d. 828) it is placed with the First Chronography Epistle among the apocrypha, this classification does not question its
its

genuineness but merely denies

canonicity.

But what
Corinthians
?

is

We

the external authority for considering it an Epistle to the have seen that it is called an Epistle from the first ;
to

but

the designation
It

the

Corinthians

is

neither

so

universal.

Timotheus.

was not so designated by But in Severus of Antioch
is

Eusebius
(c.

early nor or Jerome

so
or
first

a.d.

520) for the

time a quotation the Corinthians
'.

distinctly given as

The

Syriac

ms

itself

from the Second Epistle to which contains the extract from
'
'

Severus

'

can hardly,' in Cureton's opinion,

than the commencement of the
1

have been transcribed later 8th century and might have been
1.

See the investigation above,

p.

373

sq.

CLEM.

II.

13

194

THE EPISTLES OF
end of the
6th.'

S.

CLEMENT.

written about the

perhaps belong to the 6th century,

In other Syriac extracts also which In the it is quoted in this way.
eve<£epovTO,

copy used by Photius again
126
/3i/3Aioapioi> ev
a>

it

appears to have been so entitled (Bid/.
j3'

KXyjfxevTOS iiri(TToXai 7rpos KopivOtovs
Xeyofxevrj

compared with Bibl. 113 rj and John Damascene twice
Corinthians
'.

SevTepa

7rpos

tous

avTovs)

;

cites

it

as

'the Second Epistle to the

to seek Passing from the external to the internal evidence, we have an answer to these several questions; (1) Is it truly designated an

Epistle?

(2)

Was

it

addressed to the Corinthians?
it

(3)

What

indi-

cations of date does

give?

(4)

Who

was the author, Clement or

another

?

2.

Having considered the external testimony, we are now
to interrogate the internal evidence.

in a position

The Second questions suggested by the common attribute, Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians,' are threefold; (1) Was it an If not, what is the nature of the document? (2) Was it epistle? The
'

addressed to the Corinthians or to some other Church
written by
last

?

(3)

Was

it

Clement or by some one else question we have to enquire what indications we
?

In order to answer
find of date

this

and

authorship
(i)

?

The answer
Clement

to our
is

Epistle of

If the First first question is ready to hand. the earliest foreshadowing of a Christian liturgy,
is

the so-called Second Epistle

the

first

example of a Christian homily.
set
1 .

The newly recovered ending has The work is plainly not a letter, but a
addresses his hearers more

this point at rest for ever. The speaker homily, a sermon than once towards the close as 'brothers

and

sisters'
is

(§§

19,

20).

Elsewhere he appeals to them

in

language

which

'Let us not think,' he quite explicit on the point at issue. now only, while we are being admonished says, 'to give heed and believe
1

Grabe

{Spic. Patr.

1.

p.

268,

300)

in

Clement's

name.

The

event

has

supposed it to be a homily forged in He referred to AnasClement's name. tasius (Quaest. 96), who quotes from the
his
'

shown
the

his conjecture to be right as to

character of the document.

In

all

sacred and apostolic doctor Clement in discourse {\6y(j}) concerning first

The Cleother respects he is in error. ment of Anastasius is not the Roman,
but the

Alexandrian; and our homily

providence and righteous judgment,' as showing that such homilies were forged

bears no traces of a forgery or of pretending 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 later he speaks still more definitely; 'After 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
they come together in one place, and the memoirs of the the Gospels, as he explains himself elsewhere] or the Apostles [i. of the Prophets are read, as long as time admits. Then, when writings

and

districts,

e.

the reader has ceased, the president

(o irpoeo-Tui)

in a discourse

(Sid

\6yov) 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' (ApoL i. 67, quoted 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, this being so, the preacher was doubtless,
' ' 1

as Justin describes him, d 7rpo£crTws, the leading minister of the Church, i. e. the bishop or one of the presbyters, as the case might be.

A

view indeed has been taken by Harnack. He supposes that 2 the homily was delivered by a layman drawing his inference from the
different
,

mention of the presbyters preacher and his hearers

(in § 17 just

quoted) as persons
listen
to.

whom
But

the
this

alike

were bound to

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
brilliant reputation, like
1

made
3
.

to persons

who had an

exceptionally

Origen

As a

rule, this function

belonged to

Exception has

been taken to this
ttjs

expression /xera tov Qebv

aXrjdeias.

troduces an evangelical quotation with X^yei 6 Geo's, § 13; see the note on the

Zahn

Gel. Anz. p. [G'dtt. 141 8) and Donaldson {Theol. Rev. January, 1877,

do not even know whether passage. the lesson to which he here refers was
taken from the Old or the ment.
2

We

p.

46)

propose \6yov

for

Qebv,

while

New

Testa-

Gebhardt suggests tovuv or tovov (tonon But it is difficult or TONOYfor ton©n).
to see

our preacher should not have used this phrase, when he elsewhere in-

why

So
3

See p. lxxii, note n, p. 138 (ed. 2). also Hilgenfeld, p. 106 (ed. 2).

The

objections

raised

in

his

case

13—2

196

THE EPISTLES OF

S.

CLEMENT.

A presbyter did the chief ecclesiastical officer in the congregation. 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
.

1

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 2 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
still

(July 9, 1870) Lipsius espoused this theory as probable. And later, on the very eve of the discovery of Bryennios, Harnack in
is

the excellent edition of the Patres Apostolici of which he

coeditor

had confidently adopted Hilgenfeld's opinion

'

;

Nullus dubito quin

verum
show

Hilgenfeldius verum invenerit,' 'mireris...neminem ante Hilgenfeldium This view was highly invenisse' (prol. pp. xci, xcii, ed. 1).
that the practice

was

rare.

Alex-

ander of Jerusalem and Theoctistus of Csesarea (Euseb. H. E. vi. 19), writing to

strongly with Hilgenfeld that the document is really a letter, not a homily.'

So
I

Demetrius of Alexandria, defend themselves
for

far from holding this view strongly, have stated that we find in the docu'

according
:

this

privilege
8e

to
rots

ment

nothing which would lead to this

Origen,

as follows
otl

TrpoaedrjKe

inference,'

and again that
been a

'

it

bears

no
it

tovto ovde irore rjKovadr} ypa/uLfxacrLv, ov8e vvv yeyivrjTai, to irapovTWV eTriVKOiritiv
\aiKovs opuXeiv, ovk old'
dXrjdr)
07rcos rrpocp'avCo's

traces of the epistolary form,

though
'

may
I

possibly have

letter

;

but

ovk
01

did not consider that in the existing

Xiyiov.

ottov

yovv evpiaKovTai

condition of the
point

work

certainty

on

this

eTTiTrjdeiOL Trpbs

to uxpeXew tovs d8eX(povs,

was

attainable,

and

I

therefore

Kal

irapa.K<x\ovvTai

ru

Xa<£

TrpoaofiiXetv

suspended judgment.

When my

able

virb t<2v dyioov emaKOTriov, uxjirep ev

Aapdv'IkovLu)

dois Eue\7rts

virb

NeWos
Kal

Kal
ev

ev

reviewer goes on to say of me ' He also agrees with Hilgenfeld in the opinion,
that the epistle

HavXivos

vtto

KeXaov

^vwddois
tovto

was composed during the

GeoScopos virb 'Attikov tQv fxaKapiwv &5eX(p<2v

eUbs 5e Kal ev dXXois
rjfxas

tottois

persecution under Marcus Aurelius,' he imputes to me a view directly opposed to
that

ylveadai,
1

de

fir]

eldivai.

which

See Bingham Antiq.

xiv.

4.

2,

4,

I

I have expressed (p. 177, ed. 1). think also that the reader would

Augusti Christl. Archaol. VI. p. 315 Probst Lehre u. Gebet pp. 18 sq, 222.
2

sq,

gather from the manner in which I am mentioned by Harnack (p. lxvi, note 2,
refuting Grabe, that I had p. lxxv) as maintained the document to be an epistle and not a homily; though probably this
'
'

See esp. pp.

177,

178.

I call

at-

tention to this, because

my

view has been
'

misrepresented.

Thus Lipsius (Academy,

July

9,

1870) wrote of me,

He

holds

was not intended.

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
plausible
;

197

and attractive but it was open to one objection which I out as fatal to it. It did not satisfy the primary conditions of pointed the letter mentioned by Dionysius of Corinth, which was written in the name of the whole Roman Church, whereas our author speaks in the
1

singular throughout

.

As regards the audience addressed by the preacher Corinth (ii) 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.

and presumably to the which is quite natural if festival, language addressed to Corinthians, but not so if spoken elsewhere. When the preacher refers to the crowds that 'land' to take part in the games
First.

The

allusion to the athletic games,
is

Isthmian

couched

in

rovs cf>6apTov<; aycovas KaraTrXiovcriv, §7) without any mention of the port, we are naturally led to suppose that the homily was delivered in
(eis

the neighbourhood of the place where these combatants landed. Otherwe should expect eh tov 'laOfxov, or eis KoptvOov, or some explana2 addition of the kind tory

wise

.

This hypothesis alone satisfactorily explains the dissemiSecondly. nation and reputed authorship of the document. It was early attached

mss and came ultimately to be attridid this happen ? The First Epistle was read from time to time in the Church of Corinth, as we know.
to the Epistle of

Clement

in the

buted to the same author.
This homily was
Corinthians;
it
3
;

How

a manuscript
1

first preached, if my view be correct, to these same was not an extempore address, but was delivered from it was considered of sufficient value to be carefully pre-

Wocher

(der

Brief

des

Clemens

etc.

p.

204) suggested that the author was This theory had the Dionysius himself.
it

possible however, that the homily was originally delivered extempore and taken

down by
notarii),

short-hand writers (raxvypdcpoi,

advantage of connecting
genuine

with Clement's

and
it

it

letter (though not very directly) ; explained the local colouring. But

and that the references to the reader were introduced afterwards when it was read in the Church as a homily.

has nothing else to
2

commend

it.

The employment
was
frequent.

of short-hand writers

Thus

in Plat.

pot doKeiv,
is

Enthyd. 297 c pecoart, KaTcnreTrXevKOTL, where the word

We
:

read of discourses of

used absolutely, we naturally understand the place in which ihe speaker is at the time.
3

Origen taken down in this way (Euseb. H.E. vi. 36) and Origen himself on one
occasion
p.

(Comm.

in Ioann.

vi. praef., IV.

§ 19 fiera tov

Qebv

ttjs dXrjdeias
els

dva-

101) excuses himself for not having gone on with his work by the fact that

yivwaKU)
kclI

vpuv cvtcv^cv

to

it

poo ex eLV

the

'

customary short-hand writers
/cat

'

were

tois yeypafi/uLevoLS, iva /ecu eavrovs crojarjTe

not there,
p.7]

01

awr/Bets 8£ T<xxvypd<poi

tov

dvayivwcTKOVTa

iv vyuv.

It

is

wapovTes tov

e'x eo~Q aL

T ^ v virayopefaewp

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

of this church in reference to uncanonical documents.

bishop Soter, shows the practice 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 KopiN0ioyc
with or without the addition 6ttictoAh
;

while the homily which stood

next in the volume might have had the heading
B

npoc KopiNGioyc
with or without the addition Aoroc or omiAia, just as Orations of Dion Chrysostom bear the titles npoc &AeI&NApeic, npoc &TT<\Meic; the author
of the sermon however not being named.

In the course of transcription
1

the enumeration

would seem
matter of

to

would easily be displaced, so that the two works <\ As a be of the same kind and by the same author
B,
.

fact, indications are not wanting in our existing authorities,

that after this homily

had been attached
is

to S. Clement's Epistle

it

re-

mained anonymous
works.
called

in the

common document which
no heading
1.

contained both
at all to the so-

In the Alexandrian ms there

Second Epistle

(see above,

p. 117).

This fact however cannot
Harnack

At ckuXvov; comp. Photius Bibl. 121. a later date this became a common mode
of preserving pulpit oratory
:

alternative

is

suggested
I.

by

Zeitschr.f. Kirchengesch.

p. 268.

The

see Bing-

ham Ant. xiv. 4. 11. It was not uncommon for sermons and lectures to be
taken

hypothesis would at all events have the merit of explaining the incoherence and
looseness of expression which we find in this work; but in the absence of evi-

down

surreptitiously

:

see Gaudent.

Praef. p. 220 {Patrol. Lat. xx. p. 831 Migne) 'notariis, ut comperi, latenter ap-

dence

it

is

safer to

assume that the
to writing

ser-

mon was committed

by the

poses' (with the

note).

On

stenography
Glos-

among
sarium

the ancients

see

Ducange

IV. p. 642 sq (ed. Henschel) s. v. Nota, together with the references collected in Mayor's Bibl. Clue to Lat. Lit.

preacher himself. 1 This opinion was arrived at independently of the remarks of Zahn (Gott. Gel.

Anz. Nov.
the the

8,

more glad

1876, p. 1430 sq), and I am to find that he accounts for

p.

175 sq.

view October 1875,

See also Contemporary ReThis p. 841 note.

common

similar way.

heading of this sermon in a See also 1. p. 371, note 1.

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.

1

99
1
.

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 In both only known letter written by this father (see above, p. 191). 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
the other
origin

I

adhere to Corinth as the place of writing.

On

hand Harnack has with much ability maintained the Roman 2 of this document and it is due to his arguments to consider
;

them.

The
known
only

external evideiice seems to

him

to point in this direction.

He

remarks on the

fact that this writing

appears to

in the East during the earliest ages. It Eusebius, and Eusebius himself, as Harnack argues from his language,

have been very little is first mentioned by

knew

it

from hearsay 3

.

this is the correct inference

It is very far from certain however, that from the historian's words, mriov 8' cos kcu

oevTepa tis etvat Xiyerau rov J^kyj/mevTOs iincrToXy]'
irpoTtpa
Kai
ravTrjv yvwpL/xov
ta-fxev

ov

fxrjv

iff

d/Wtos

rfj

e7ri<TTa/xe#a,

ort

/xvySe

tovs ap^atovs avrrj

Kexp^eVovs

(H.

E.

iii.

38).

The

may
1

refer

equally well to the authorship as to the

hearsay implied in Aeyerat contents of the

This possibility was overlooked by
in

me
of

my

first

attention

was Harnack (Z. f. K. 1. p. 275, note 1), who however incorrectly states that in A

edition pp. 22, 174. directed to it by a remark

My

that the space left between the top of the leaf and the text varies from |- to f of

an inch.

Thus the space

is

quite con-

sistent with the supposition that the title

has been cut away.
a single spot at the

Moreover there

is

the First Epistle has 'page-headings over the columns.' There is only one such

which may

top of the page, have been the end of an
title,

page-heading, which stands over the first column as the title to the work. Having

ornamental flourish under the
this is doubtful.

though

omitted to inspect the MS myself with this
view,
I

requested

Mr

E.

M. Thompson
it

of the British
to give

Museum

to look at

and
is

The photograph for the most part represents these facts fairly well, 2 In two careful and valuable articles
in the Zeitschrift f. Kirchengeschichte
1.

me

his opinion.

His report

to

p.

this effect:

The

title to

the First Epistle has small

329 sq, as well as in the prolegomena to the 2nd ed. of the Patres 264
sq, p.

ornamental flourishes beneath.

Between

Apostolici Pt.
this

i,

p.

lxiv sq.

He

stated

the bottom of these and the text there
is

view

first

in a review of the edition

first

a space of f- of an inch. Over the column of the Second Epistle (where
title

of Bryennios in the Theologische Literatzir-

the
the

should be,

if
is

top of the leaf

there were any) cut obliquely so

zeitimgYeh. 3 Z. f. K.
note
2.

19, 1876.
1.

p.

269 sq

;

Prol. p. lxiv,

200
book.

THE EPISTLES OF

S.

CLEMENT.

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
ascribed
is

found
Justin

in the

Quaest.
1
.

et

Resp.

ad Orthodoxos
is

§

74, falsely

to

Martyr
all

This work

supposed to have been
fifth

written at the
as

end of the fourth or beginning of the
.

century, and,

appearances are deceptive, to have emanated 2 Our next direct witness in point from the Syro-Antiochene Church of date is probably the Alexandrian ms, about the middle of the fifth

Harnack

says, unless

century.
indistinct
3

From
.

that time forward the testimonies are neither few nor

This evidence is somewhat slight ; but it cannot be alleged against Such as it is, it all emanates from the the Eastern origin of the work. East. Neither early nor late do we hear a single voice from the West
testifying to the existence of this

Clementine

mere echoes of some Greek
though
theorv.
it

witness.
is

may

not be worth much,

writing, except such as are External testimony therefore, directly opposed to Harnack's

From
same
'

the internal character of the

work again Harnack draws the
the
close

inference.

He

remarks

on

resemblances

to

the

Shepherd of Hernias, and thence infers that it must have emanated ex eadem communione ac societateV Thus he makes it a product
of the Church of

Rome.
had referred
to

If these resemblances

any peculiarities of the

Roman

Church

generally, or of the Shepherd

argument would have been strong. 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

of Hernias in particular, the But this is not the case. The

and the

terrestrial

Church, so
the

far

from being peculiar,
Christian writers.

was a

common

characteristic

of
is

earliest

And

the statement of Anastasius

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
1

and of the

See

I.

p.

178 sq, and the notes on
article

3

The

references in
it

my

notes seem to

§ 16.
2

show
by Gass
in

that

was known

to a very early

See the

Illgen's

writer, the author of
4

Apost.

Const,

i

vi.
1.

Zeitschr.f.d.
sq,

hist. Theol.

1842, iv. p. 143
I.

Trol. p. lxx sq:

comp. Z. f. K.

quoted by Harnack Z.f. K.

p. 274.

pp. 340, 344 sq, 363.

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
earlier part of the third constantly use
it
'

201

without misgiving (see the

note on § 9). Again both writings speak of baptism as the seal,' and the exhortation to purity of life takes the form of an injunction to 'guard
in Christian writers of the

we have an image which is common second century (see the note on § 7). Nor are other coincidences wanting, though less striking than these.
the seal'

But in

this case likewise

the other hand the two writings present marked contrasts on There is a wide divergence for instance of special prominence. points between the rigid, almost Encratite, view of the relations between the
1 sexes which our Clementine author enunciates
,

On

and the reasonable

position of Hermas, which led the fierce Tertullian to denounce him as 2 And again the difference of language regarding 'pastor moechorum
.'

I cannot indeed is equally great. the author of the Shepherd as a Judaizer, any more than I regard could regard our Clementine writer as a Marcionite but the tendency

the relations of the two covenants

:

of the one

is

to see in the

whereas the other delights gether it may be said that the points of difference in the two documents are more fundamental than the points of coincidence.
(iii)

Church a development of the Synagogue, to set them in sharp contrast. And alto-

The

third question, relating to the date

and authorship, receives

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
illustration

some

belongs to the first half of the second century, nor do they contain Harnack, as the result of a anything that is adverse to this view.
it
1

§

12

tovto Aeyei

'iva

ddeXcpos k.t.X.
iv. 1)

Trj

fieWovarj aov ddeXcprj,

as

showing
life

On
tt]v

the other

hand Hermas (Mand.
aoi,
(prjai,
/ecu
/jltj

that

Hermas looked upon

the single

writes 'EvrcAXoyiuu

cpvKdaaeiv

as the ideal state,

and he concludes

that

dyvelav Kapblav

avafiaiveru) aov ewi

tt)v
Trepl

irtpl

yvvcLLKOs
rj
'

dWorpias
yap

rj

neither writer 'thought of stopping marriage among Christians for the present.'
It is

Tropvdas tlvos

irepl

tolovtwv tlvQiv
iroL&v

not clear what the words in Vis.

ii.

2

bp.0Lup.6.T<j)v

irovTjpwv

tovto

ap.apTiav

ipyd^y ttjs 5e arjs yvvaiKos ovdeIn this same seciroTe ap-apTrjaeis. tion the husband is enjoined to take back
p.eyd\f]v

nor again is it certain that our Clementine preacher intended to en-

may mean;
force

fivTjp.ovevcjv TrdvTOTe

an absolute rule or to do more than

But the fact give counsels of perfection. remains that the direct language of the
one
2

into his society the wife
unfaithful,

who

has been
4)

is

in favour of latitude, of the other

and

just

below

second

in favour of restraint.

marriages are permitted to

Christians,

Tertull. de Pudic. 10 'scriptura Pas-

though the greater honour is assigned to those who remain in widowhood. On
the other hand
p. 348)

toris quae sola

moechos amat...adulteraet
ib.

ipsa et inde patrona sociorum,'

20

'illo

Harnack
Vis.
ii.

(Z. f.

K.

I.

apocrypho Pastore moechorum.'

quotes

2

7-77

avp.^iu)

aov

202

THE EPISTLES OF

S.

CLEMENT.
of date as

thorough examination of the whole

a.d. and, if it emanated from Rome (as he supposes to have been the case), he thinks that it must have been written within

— 160; 130

epistle, sets the limits

the

first

two decades of

this period,

i.e.

within a.d. 130

— 150

1
.

were necessary to mention any limits This view is reasonable. of date, where so much uncertainty exists, I should name a.d. 120 140; still but, as there is nothing in the work which militates against a
If
it

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
earlier

date, so

for

determining the age of the document are these. We are furnished with additional information respecting First. He the relations of the author to the Canon of the New Testament.
distinguishes
'

between the Old and
'

New

Testament

:

the former he

styles

the Books,'

the Bible

'

(to pipXCa), while the latter (or a part

of

This distinction separates designated 'the Apostles' (§ 14). a broad line from the age of the Muratorian writer, of Irenaeus, him by and of Clement of Alexandria, i.e. from the last quarter of the second
it) is

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
all explicit in

the acceptance of our four Canonical Gospels alone,

as the traditional inheritance of the Church.

very strong in favour of an early date,

if

we could be

This argument would 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.
to

The

Clement certainly point
it is

general acceptance of this homily and its attribution to a Catholic origin ; and in its Christology
its

also

tendencies

Catholic as opposed to Gnostic or Ebionite, but (not to mention other phenomena) might
'
'

Encratite
the

suggest

opposite conclusion. On the other hand our preacher quotes as

scripture

(§ 6)

a saying

But this same passage is Canonical Gospels. 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
which appears
in our

have been written much
text
1

earlier;

and even Polycarp
26 as 'scripture.'
to

if (§ 12),

the Latin

may be trusted,
K.
I.

cites

Ephes.
comp.

iv.

Stronger in the

same
it

Z. f.

p.

363;

Prol.
it

be of

p. Ixxiii sq (ed. 7),

where, supposing

later

than a.d.

Roman origin, he places 135— 140 (145).

not

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
1
'

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

know whether the scriptural lessons which had preceded the delivery of this homily were taken from the Old or from the New Testament. The relations of the preacher to Gnosticism furnish an Secondly.
not
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 kcikoSiThey inculcated an 8a<TKa\ovvTe<s) were led to antinomian inferences.
indifference (aSia<£opta) with regard to fleshly lusts,
their disciples to

and they permitted

This antideny denounced by the preacher. But his polemic against Gnosticism does not go beyond this. There is no attack, direct or indirect, on the peculiar tenets of Valentinus and the Valentinians, of

their faith in times of persecution.

nomian teaching

is

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 aeon Ecclesia (see the note on § 14), and which he would almost certainly have avoided, if he had
written after this heresiarch

manner the language in 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
2 epoch seeing that the writer is a determined opponent of Gnosticism, and would not have compromised himself by such language after it had
,

In like began to promulgate his doctrine which he sets the Church against the Synagogue
.

1

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: a very primitive, though homily suggest 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

and altogether the topics

in this

1

This argument drawn from the relais

Z.f. K.
2

I.

pp. 359, 360.
1.

tion of the writer to Gnosticism
insisted

justly

See Ignat. and Polyc.

p. 374, ed.

1

;

upon by Harnack Pro/,

p. lxxii,

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

Thus it is said not bear the stress that has been laid upon them. that the preacher betrays no knowledge of the writings of S. John, or poswill

sibly

even of

S.

Paul

1
.

As regards

S.

John,

I

have called attention to an

indication that our author was not unacquainted with the Fourth Gospel

As regards not certain. of his appeal to 'the ApoS. Paul, I cannot see any probable explanation stles' as supporting his doctrine respecting the heavenly Church, except
(see the note

on

§ 17),

though the inference

is

that

which supposes him to be referring
the Ephesians — not
.

to S. Paul,

and more

especially

to the Epistle to

to

mention echoes of

this Apostle's

2 But even if it be granted that he language elsewhere in this homily of the writings of either Apostle, does it follow shows no knowledge

What numbers of sermons and tracts, published in authors living in this nineteenth century, must on these the name of And again, if he says grounds be relegated to the first or second
that

he had none ?

!

3 nothing about episcopacy does it follow that he knew nothing about and therefore must have written before this institution existed? it, 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.
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
But,

while

criticism

discussed this question since the recent disAll covery of the lost ending, must, I venture to think, be discarded. in the retention of Clement as the author, but underthree alike agree
three editors

who have

stand different persons bearing this name.
place Bryennios (p. pvO') maintains that the homily the work of none other than the famous Clement whose name it
(1)

In the

first

is

bears, the bishop of

Rome

4
.

This view however has nothing to recom-

1

Harnack Prol.

p. lxxiii, Z. /.
it

K.

I.

p. 361 sq.

He

regards

as uncertain,

taken from the Old Testament) are anonymous, this fact can hardly surprise us.
2 3

though probable, that our author had
read S.
Paul's
Epistles.
it

See the notes on §

14.

At the same
that S.

Harnack

Prol. p. lxxii, Z. f.

K.

I.

p.

time
Paul's

he

considers
is

strange

359.
4

name

not mentioned.
quotations

of our author's

(even

As most when

Bull, Galland,

This had been the view of Cotelier, Lumper, and others; who

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
mend
it,

205

and has found no favour with others. Indeed all the arguments even when we possessed it only in a mutilated form, were sufwhich, ficient to deter us from ascribing it to the author of the genuine epistle
or indeed to

any contemporary, are considerably strengthened, now that
writer delights to

we have
(i)

it

complete.
identify himself

The

and

his

hearers with

Gentile Christianity. He speaks of a time when he and they worshipped stocks and stones, gold and silver and bronze (§ 1). 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
his

and with the traditional legends and interpretations. In short language and tone of thought proclaim him a Jew, though a Hellenist, in style I do not lay great stress; (ii) On the difference where there is much play for fancy, there is much room because, 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 is more Hellenic and less Judaic, though at the same time more awkward and less natural, than the First, (iii) The argument from the
theology
strong.
is

There

stronger than the argument from the style, but not very 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 (§§ 1, 9) which is wanting in the

First,

and

in a

form which perhaps the writer of the First would have
(iv)

hesitated to adopt,
Scriptures
is

The

position of the writer with respect to the

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 This seems to indicate a somewhat later date, when preponderate.
gospel narratives were more generally circulated and

when appeal could
still

wrote without the light which the discovery of the lost ending has thrown on

the question, and
epistle.

regarded

it

as

an

206
safely

THE EPISTLES OF
be made to a written Christian

S.

CLEMENT.
This
last

literature.

more

especially has received a large accession of strength
itself.

argument by the re-

covery of the lost ending, and would be conclusive in

The

gulf

which separates our preacher from the genuine Clement relations to the New Testament Scriptures (see above,

in their respective
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
that our preacher

Roman Clement

but the Alexandrian.
1
.

He

argues

the passage
*

philosophy' is he imagines that he sees resemblances in this sermon to the style and He therefore suggests that this thought of the Alexandrian Clement.
.

He points to was not a presbyter, but a catechist in which (as he reads it) the duty of studying 19) 3 2 inculcated And, as Dodwell had done before him
,

was an early production of the Alexandrian father. The inference however with regard to the preacher's office highly precarious, as we have seen already (p. 195); nor does
materially affect
disappears,

is
it

when

the question. the passage

The mention
is

of

'

'

philosophy

again

shows clearly that
as a

<f>i\o7rovtLv is

much commoner

The Syriac Version correctly read. the true reading, and that cf>i\o<rocf>eZv, word, was written down first from mere inadvert-

Nor again afterwards corrected by him is it possible to see any closer resemblance to the Alexandrian Clement in the diction and thoughts, than will often appear between one early
ence by the scribe of

C and

4

.

Christian writer
is

and another; while on the other hand the

difference

vocabulary, the speculative power, the vigorous and epigrammatic expression, of the Alexandrian Clement are all wanting to this sermon, which is conlearning, the

most marked.

The wide

extensive

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
due

there

is

Alexandrian Clement,
1

it is

to his wealth of learning

want of arrangement in the and of thought.
In both cases the scribe has cor-

See
7 el

pp.

xlix,

106.

He

§

1

yap ivroXas

e'x o lJL€V ---& 7r °

explains T ^ v et5c6-

§ 14.

rected the

word which he
in

first

wrote
is

Xo)v airocnrav Kai

Karr/xecv as referring
;

down, and

both the correction

sup-

to the official position of the preacher

but compare e.g.
vi. 6.
2

1

Cor. xiv.

19,

Gal.

Hilgenported by the Syriac Version. feld has consistently adopted the scribe's

See pp.

xlix, 84, 106.
i.

3 4

Dissert, in Iren.

§ xxix p. 53.

On p. 84 he first writing in both cases. has incorrectly given (pihoiroi.&v as the It should be (piXoirocorrection in C.
word
veiv.

Compare

the

note

on

this

(piXoirouelv § 19

with that on

fjt.eTa\r]\f/eTai

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
In our author on the other hand the confusion
tellectual poverty.
less
is

207
the result of in-

Nor again

is

the difference between the two writers

It is true that
it

wide as regards their relation to the Canon of the New Testament. both alike quote the Gospel of the Egyptians, and (as But this very fact so happens) the same passage from this Gospel.

Our author enables us to realize the gulf which separates the two. 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
1
.

hand

refutes this interpretation,

and explains

it

in a mystical sense

(3)

Lastly;

the

Roman

is disposed to assign this homily neither to nor to the Alexandrian father, but to a third person bishop

Harnack

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
it is

in a vision to

send a copy of
it

his

book
e£co

to

'

Clement,' and

added, 'Clement
'

shall

send
ovv
is

to the cities abroad, for
€ig
-rets

he

with this business
€7rtTeTpa7rTat).

(7re/Ai//€i

K\-rjfjLr)<;

7r6Xet<s'

is charged eKeiW yap

As Hermas

stated to have written this

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 illustrious bishop of

work during

Rome

(see above,

1.

p.

359

sq).

Shepherd gives us another

Roman

Clement,

Thus the notice in who flourished about

the

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 known to have emanated from the early Church of Rome and homily bearing the name of Clement was carried to the East, it would not

unnaturally be attributed to the famous bishop, and thus, being attached
1

Strom,

iii.

13, p.

553 (quoted below,

Julius Cassianus, like our p. preacher, had interpreted the passage as

236

sq).

The discovery of the conclusion of the passage however decides in favour of the
former.
It is in reference to this

discountenancing marriage ; and Clement of Alexandria controverts him, substitut-

very passage

While the ing another interpretation. passage was still mutilated, the opinion was tenable that it was doubtful whether
our author's explanation was more closelyallied to the interpretation of Cassianus
or to
that
I

from the Gospel of the Egyptians, that Clement of Alexandria urges in answer
to Cassianus, ev tols Trapaoedofievois r/fuv

TeTTapaiv evayyeXiots ovk
dXX' ev

exo/u-ev

to

(jtjtqv,

ry

kclt

Atyvirrlovs.

Thus he

is

of Clement of Alexandria,

diametrically opposed to our preacher on the one point where we are able to com-

though

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 century be furnished with the incorrect title KX^/xevros 7rpos KopwOiovs
€7ricrToAr;
/3'.

This view has

much more
existence
I

to

recommend
second
(i.
1 .

it,

than the two which
it

have been considered already.
inadequate.

But the foundation on which
of this

rests is
is

The
and as

Roman Clement
359
sq),

un-

supported

;

have shown above
in

p.

the reference in

Hermas must be explained
As
all

another way

these hypotheses
;

fail us,

we must be content
it

to

remain

still

in ignorance of the author

nor

is

likely

now

that the veil will ever
is

be withdrawn.
less.

The homily
earliest

itself,

as a literary work,

almost worth-

example of its kind however, and as the product of an important age of which we possess only the scantiest remains,

As the

it

has
its

the highest value.
true grandeur, as

Nor

will

its

intellectual poverty blind

us

to

the triumphant faith trate at the foot of the Cross.

an example of the lofty moral earnestness and which subdued a reluctant world and laid it pros-

3-

The
1

following
brethren,

is

an analysis of the fragment

:

My

we must look on

Christ as God.

We

must not think

mean
life

things of
all

Him who
(§ 1).

and

things

has been so merciful to us, who has given us In us is fulfilled the saying that the barren

woman
but

hath

many

children.

The
2).

now has a numerous came especially to save
Him.

offspring.

Gentile Church was once unfruitful, We are those sinners whom Christ

Therefore
asks
is

we owe

all

recompense
confess

to
in

And

the return which

He

that

we should

Him

our deeds.
yielded to

The

Him

worship, not of the lips only, but of the heart, must be He has denounced those who, while they obey (§ 3).

Him

not, yet call

Him

Lord.

He

gathered into His bosom,

He

will reject

has declared that, though they be them (§ 4). Let us therefore

remember
world.
kill

are sojourners here, and let us not fear to quit this us call to mind His warning, and fear not those who the body, but Him who can destroy body and soul together. All
that

we

Rather

let

1

Hagemann
etc.

{Ueber den zweiten Brief
in the Theolog.

the fiction, being

the letter of recomin

des Clemens,
schr.

Quartal-

mendation written
great

the

name

of the
antici-

xliii. p.
is

509

sq,

186 1) supposed

that this
(

the letter mentioned by

Hermas

So far he pated the theory of Harnack.
Clement.

Roman

Vis.

ii.

4).

He

regarded

it

as part of

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
things earthly

209
this there

we must hold

foreign to us

(§ 5).

On

must be

no wavering.
other are

We

cannot serve two masters.

This world and the

deadly
Job,

Even Noah,

It must be our choice to do Christ's will. foes. and Daniel, could not have rescued their own children

from destruction.

seal intact, present ourselves in

open
part.

;

we keep not the baptismal God's kingdom? (§ 6). The lists are Let us crowd thither to take our the struggle approaches. Let us fight to win the immortal chaplet. But, so doing, we
shall

How

we

then,

if

we would escape chastisement. who break the seal (§ 7). Now is the time for repentance. Now we can be moulded like clay in the hands of the potter. If we keep not small After death it will be too late. how shall we be trusted with great? If we guard not the seal things, 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 brief pleasure at the price of eternal joy. purchase They who lead others astray herein are doubly guilty (§ 10). We must not falter. The prophetic word denounces the double-minded; it foretells how the
must observe the laws of the
contest, if

A

horrible fate awaits those

'

course of things

is

maturing to
faithful
;

its

consummation, as the vine grows

and

ripens.

God

is

and, as

He

has promised, so will

He

give

joys unspeakable (§ 11). signs, the approach of His kingdom, Christ has foretold. The two shall be one in universal peace. The outside shall be as the inside in strict sincerity.

to the righteous

The

which

shall herald

The male shall
(§ 12).'

be as the female in the cessation of all sexual

longings
1

may

Let us repent forthwith, that we may be forgiven, and God's name not be blasphemed by our inconsistency. When God's oracles

and we do another, they regard them as an idle tale when God's precepts tell us to love our enemies and we hate one another (§ 13). Fulfilling God's command, we shall be members of the
say one thing
eternal, spiritual

Church, which

is

Christ's body.

This

is

the

meaning

Male and female created He them. The Church, like Christ, was spiritual, and became flesh. This flesh we must keep pure, that we
of the words

may

attain to the spiritual, the
this

immortal

(§ 14).'

'Whosoever obeys
the preacher.

This

is

precept of chastity saves both himself and the only return which speaker and hearer alike

can make to their Creator.

God promises

an immediate answer.

We

CLEM.

II.

14

2IO
must close with

THE EPISTLES OF
it

S.

CLEMENT.

and escape condemnation (§ 15). Therefore let us The Day repent, while there is time, and obtain the mercy of Jesus. shall melt away. a heated furnace. cometh as Heaven and earth 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.
all

The Lord

and gather

nations,

rewarding them

after their works.

will come 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
It is the price

;

(§ present suffering. only the arena the crown shall be awarded hereafter.
;

of future glory

nor deterred by This life is 19).
Else,
it

were a
to us

matter of mere

traffic'

'To

the one invisible God,

who manifested
(§ 20).'

truth

and

life

through the Saviour, be glory for ever

CnPOC KOPIN0IOYC
I.

B]
irepl 'hi&ov

'ASe\(poi,
ft!s

OVT009

Se?

tj/uias

(j)poveTv

XpKTTod,
veKpwv.

Trepl

Oeov,
r\{JL<xs

w?

7repi

KpiTOv

(^wvtwv kcu
ty\<±

kcli

ov del
B.]

/uucpa (ppoveTv mepi

crcoTrion
I.

[npoc KOpiNGioyc
117, 122, 131 sq.
1

The
C.

authorities for this title will be found

pp.

rjfxas]

S

;

v/uas

3 ^uas]
it

S

;

jfyuts

C.

I. brethren, we must think of Christ as God, as judge of all men. It is no light crime to have mean
'

My

with

the
r\

First

as

respects

its

Christology,
(3iov

be bcvrepa kcu avrrj vov-

Secriav kcu napaivzcriv Kpeirrovos elcrayei

views of
called

Him by whom we
suffered for us.

were

kcu
:

iv

apxf}

Qeov top

Xpicrrov

and who

What

Krjpvcrcrei

worthy recompense can we pay to Him, who has given us light and life, who has rescued us from the worship of stocks and stones, has scattered the dark cloud that hung over us, has brought back our straying footsteps, and thus has called us
into being?
1.
3

see the notes on §§ 2, 36, 58, of the First Epistle, and the rein
I.

marks
2.

p.

398

sq.

The expression KpiTov k.t.X.] occurs in Acts x. 42 (in a speech of S. Peter) comp. 2 Tim. iv. 1, 1 Pet.
:

iv.

5.

See also Barnab.
2.
'

§ 7, Polyc.

Phil.
3.

p,iKpa

cppoveiv]

to

have mean

'AdtX^oi K.r.A.] the epistle, as far as nadelv
y/iaiv,

The opening

of

views.''

The

Ebionites,

whom

the

eveica

is quoted by Timotheus of Alexandria (a.d. 457) as 'from the

writer of this epistle attacks, were said to have earned the title of 'poor'

by

their

mean and beggarly concep;

beginning of the Third Epistle/ ' immediately after a quotation from the First Epistle on Virginity' (see above, 1. p. 181); and by Severus of Antioch (c. A.D. 513 518) as 'from

tion of the Person of Christ
esp.
ol

see

Origen de Princ.
777

iv.

22

(1.

p. 183)
rfjs

tit co^oi

biavoia

ESjStwatoi

7rTa)^eia9 rfjs biavolas e7roivvp.oi, e(3ia>v

the Second Epistle to the Corinthians' It is also found in (see I. p. 183).

[]V2&] yap 6 nTcoxos napa 'Efipalois ovopdfcrcu, c. Cels. ii. i (1. p. 385), in

Matth.
'irjcrovv

t.

more than one anonymous Syriac
collection of excerpts (see
1.

'E/3tO)I/ai6>

xvi. § 12 (ill. p. 734) to KCU 7TT(i)X€VOVTL 7T€p\ TTJV €LS

p.

185).

Photius {Bibl. 126) remarks on the

Horn. §
iii.

opening of

this

epistle, contrasting

nicmv, and again in Gen. Hi Euseb. H.E. 5 (11. p. 68) 27 'JLfticdvaiovs tovtov? oikWgk eVe;

14

—2

212

THE EPISTLES OF
tw yap

S.

CLEMENT.

[i

plas rifjLwv ev
jjiiKpa
kcli

(ppoveiv fj/xas /miKpa irepl avrov,
Xafielv.

eXiri^ofJiev

Kai

ol

aKOvovres

a)s

Kai ^/xe??] dfjLapTavofJLev, ovk wept iiiKpwv [d/uapTavovcrLV, etSores 7r66ev €K\r\dt]jJL€v Kai viro rivos Kai eU bv tottov,
Kai

oca

'

virefjieivev
nfJieis

Itjcrovs

XpKrrds iraQeiv eveKa
dvTifiicrdiav
; ;

rifiiov. 5

TLva ovv
Kapirov

aura)
rifjuv

hcoco^xev

rj

riva
aiiTw

dpiov ov
;

airros

eSwKev

irocra

Se

The reading of S is uncertain, for 7l\> (the word i \ape?v] A diroKa^elv C. used here) occurs elsewhere indifferently as a rendering of both Xafx^dveiv and dirows irepl] CS Sever Timoth 11. oxnrep A. \a[x(3dveii>, e.g. below §§ 8, 9,
;

3 a/j-aprdvovaLP, Kai

rjfieis]

add. offeremus

Mi

S.

7 Kapirov] AC ; S; om. AC see the lower note. This however does not perhaps imply any additional words
:

(pijpu^ov ol 7rpa>Toi 7TT(ox^>s kcu raneLvcos

Ta

irepi

tov Xpio~Tov 8o£d£ovTas, Eccl.
i.

ward and misplaced. Young suggested KaiToi which others have
required.

Theol.

14

ol 7rpoiToKripvKes 'Efiicovaiovs

(ov6pa£ov 'E/Spaiieg cpoovfj 7rrco^ofs ttjv biavoiav ci7roKa\ovvT€s tov? eva p,ev Qeov

Xeyovras
crap.a pr/

elftevat

Kai

tov

crcoTrjpos

to

dpvovp,evovs ttjv 8e tov vlov
p,rj

deoTrjTa

eldoTas, sages collected in

with other pas-

Schliemann

Cle-

adopted, but this is not the particle The Syriac quotations of Timotheus and Severus have a?id whe?i we hear] as though the article were absent from their text but, allowance being made for the license of translation, no stress can be laid
' ;

ment, p. 471 sq. Origen's language perhaps does not necessarily imply that he gives this as a serious account
of the term, but only that they were Eusebius howfitly called 'poor.'
ever, mistaking his drift, supposes this name to have been a term of

on this fact. Photius (Bibl. 126) remarks on the looseness and inconsequence of expression in
this

Second Epistle (or rather in the two epistles, but he must be referring
especially to the Second), to. ev avTais vor)\x.ara eppip,p,iva ncos Kai ov
crvvexrj
ttjv

tics

reproach imposed upon these hereinstead of by the orthodox
;

a.Ko\ov6iav vnfjpxe cpvXctT-

Tovra.

Several instances of this will

being, as doubtless

it it

was and as

perhaps Origen knew

sumed

to be, self-asin allusion to their voluntary

be noted below, and this passage, if the Greek text be correct, furnishes
another illustration but the Syriac comes to the rescue by inserting the words which I have placed in brackets
;

poverty.

The

idea of a heresiarch
is

named Ebion, which

found

first

in

Tertullian (de Praescr. 33,

and

else-

and removes the
6.

difficulty.

where), is now generally allowed to be a mistake.
ol ciKovovres] 2. we who hear] according to the text of the Greek For the article compare Clem. MSS.
l

dpTifjucrdiav]
i.

The word
vi. 13,

occurs

Rom.

27, 2 Cor.
9.
it

Theoph. ad

Auiol.

ii.

Though apparently not
is
;

common,

Rom.
see

§ 6 at dcrdevels tg> §

o-co/xciti,

and
ol

a favourite word with our author see just below and §§ 9, 11. The sentiment is taken from Ps.

below

19

fxrj

dyavaKToUpcv
is

cxvi. 12 ti dvra7To8(oaa>
8.
'

ru Kvpico

k.t.A.;
it

cio-ocpoi;

but the expression

awk-

ocrm]

mercies, kindnesses] as

I]

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
to
(f>ws

213
7rarrip

ocpeiXo/uev oaia',

yap

r\\xiv

i^apiaaro, ws

vious

ti/uias

Trpocrtiyopevcrev, aTroXAvfjievovs fj^as 'e&warev.
r\

10 ttolov ovv alvov avTco dcocrcojuev

/uicrdov

apTi/uuo'dicts iav

i\a/3ojuev
kcli

;

7Tt]poi

ovtss

Trj Siavoia,
Keel

irpovKWOvvTes Xidovs

^v\a Kal xpvaov
dfjiavptocriv
text.

dvdptoTrcov Kal 6 (3io$

apyvpov kcci ^oKkov, epya aWo ovSev r\v el juri ti/ucov bAos
ovv
; ;

davaros.
in the

irepiKeifJievoi

Kai

TOiavrtis

Greek

5e]
ttolovv

A

10

ttolov ovv']
ddoao/j-ev

C;
»

A;

ttolov

yap S om. C. S: see above,

8 ocpeiXopev] ocpCKopev A.
I.

p. 144.

avrtp dwcrcapev]

A;

avrcp C.

11

Trr]pol]A; caeci

S

;

irovrjpol

C.

12 Kal xpucroj']

A; XP V<J0V ( om Kal) CS. ^P7a] AC; ovdev d\\o C and so apparently S.
;

^701/ S.

14 dp.a6piocnv]

AC

13 aXXo ovdev] A; tantam obscu;

ritatem S.
is used in the lxx Acts xiii. 34 Scoo-co

Is. lv.
u/xli/
:

Wi

3 (quoted in ocria AavelS

i

10.

b<6o-(opev]

can

we give?' The

ra mora) for

DHDn

see

Wolf Cur.

reading of C disposes of the grammatical difficulty presented by a
future

Philol. p. 1 197. In a parallel passage 2 Chron. vi. 42 the LXX has ra ikerj.

conjunctive,

da>o-copev

;

see

Winer Gramm.
perhaps correct.

§ xiii. p.

In this case 6<pel\opev will have a pregnant sense, we have received and should repay? Perhaps how'

Of

all

89 and is such future
is

conjunctives however dcccrco the best supported ; see
p. 95.

perhaps
§ xiv.

id.

ever
'

simpler to take oaia as duties'' (e.g. Eur. Sufipl. religious 368 oaia ircpl deovs). The distinction
it

is

II.

TTrjpol

OVTeS K.T.X.] AHst. EtJl.
pr)

between 6'o-ia what is due to God and dUaia what is due to men is as old as Plato (Gorg. p. 507 b) and runs through Greek literature comp. Trench N. T. Syn. 2nd ser. § xxxviii, and Steph. Thes. s. vv. biKtuos and See also below, §§ 5, 6. oo-los.
'
'

Ttjv,

'

'

neTTrjpcopevois npos dpePtolemaeus ad Flor. (in Epiphan. Haer. xxxiii. 3, p. 217) pr) povov to rrjs
i.

Nic.

IO rols

tyvxys oppa
neirripoipevcov.

dWa

Kal to tov atopaTOs

:

In the

New Testament

nrjpovv,

Co?

Tjarrjp

k.t.A.]

The
ii.

reference
1

occur occasionally as various readings for noopovv, Trcopcosee o-ls, but are not well supported Fritzsche Rom. II. p. 451 sq.
TTijpoio-is,
:

is

perhaps to Hosea
eVcei

Kal eorai

iv t<5 to7T(o ov eppedrj avTols

Ov Xaos
viol

pov vpets,
£g>vtos,

K\rj6rjaovTai

Qeov

TTpocrKwovvTes K.T.A.] The writer of this epistle therefore is plainly a Gentile Christian comp. § 2 r)
:

more

especially as
ix.

applied

eKKk-qala rjpwv,
p. 205.

and the introduction

by

S.

Paul Rom.

26.

See also
vi.

the quotation in 2 Cor.

18

ko.1

eo~opai vpiv els narepa Kal vpels eo~eo~6e poi els viovs Kal Ovyaripas (a combination of 2 Sam. vii. 14 and Is. xliii. 6),

6 fiios] Their (3ios was not far) 13. but BdvaTos: see the note on Ign. Rom.
7.

and

I J oh. iii. 1 'Idere iroTaTrr)v dydmjv dedcoKev Tfp.lv 6 Trarrjp iva reKva Qeov

Comp. I Tim. v. 6 faaa Tedvr)Kev. See also the passage of S. Augustine quoted by Harnack, Con/, i. 6 'in istam dico vitam mortalem an mortem
vitalem nescio.'

K\r)0u>pev.

214

THE EPISTLES OF

S.

CLEMENT.

[i

d^Xvos ye/uovres
eiceivo

ev ty\ 6pd(rei, dve^Xe^ra/uiev diroQeixevoi

yap
r\fjuv

6 7repiKel/ue6a vecpos ty\ clvtov deXtjaei. Y\Xer\(Tev rinds Kal o'TrXay-fcvio'deh eaaxrev, deacrajuevos ev

7roXXr]v irXdvY)v Kal a7rcoXeiav, Kal jutj^e/uiav i\7ri$a
(rtoTripias,
el
jjiyi

e^ovras

Tt)v

nap' avTOv.
e/c
fmrj

eKaXecrev

5

yap
tjiuas.

r\fjLas

ovk

bvTas Kal ^6eXt](rev

ovtos elvai

II.

EycJ)pANeHTI,

BOHCON, H

pASON KAI OYK OOAlNOyCA, OTI TTOAAA TA T6KNA THC epHMOY
CTG?pA
H

of

TIKTOyCA"

MAAAON
2 rrj

H

THC l)(OYCHC
deXrjcrei]

TON

ANApA.

6

eiWeV

6y4>pAN6HTI IO
if

avrov

A;

r% dekqaet avrov C; voluntate nostra S, as

avrQv.
S.

4 iro\\7]v
lates

ir\dvr)v\

AC;
;

hitnc

omnem

(

= tantum = ToaavT7]v)

errorem

multum
it

i\7rl8a 'ixovras]

C

eXTridavexovTea A.

S evidently read as C, though
spes salutis sit nobis.
p.7]

trans-

by a

finite verb, et
iic

quod ne una quidem
p,T}]

AC;
I.

5e S.

A;

£k tov

C.

8 eicppavd-qri]

AC;

6 yap] add.

dvefiXeyj/apev]

anoOeiitvoi

k.t.A.]

Comp. § 9. The language

tov

prj

ovros

eis

to

eiuat,
to. p.r)

Clem. Horn.
II.

iii.

32 ra
is

Ta navTa, ovTa els to

here,

coloured
€X 0VT€S
k.t.A.

though not the thought, is by Heb. xii. 1 too-ovtov
TrepiKeifievov
77/xti/

eivai o~vo-TT]o-ap,€V(o.

'For what

the

meaning of

vecfros

fxaprvpoiv,

oynov dnodepevoi navra For the construction nepLKeladaL
1

the scripture, Rejoice thou barren that bearest not? It has been fulfilled

in
is

us

—the

Gentile

Church,
also

ti

Ho

be enveloped in or surroicnded
xxviii. 20,

which
it is

even

now more numerous
In like

by a thing, see Acts
v. 2.
5.

Heb.

than the Jewish.

manner

exovras] SC. -qpas.
it

If this read-

written elsewhere, / caine not to call just men but sinners. Such

ing be correct

is

perhaps
rather

go-

sinners were we.'
8.

verned

by

6eao-dp.€vos

than

EvcppdvOrjTi
Is.
liv.
1,

k.t.A. ]

From
iv.

the

by

ecraxre,

''and
1

this

though
:

we

LXX
same

word
is

for word. 27.

See

had no hope

But exovres may be

the notes on Galatians

the right reading after all in which case a word or words may have fallen
out from the text ; or this may be one of the awkward expressions to which
allusion has
01 aKovovres).

application
i.

also

The made in

Justin Apol.
lib. 2, II. p.

53, p. 88 c.

Philo also

allegorizes this text

(quod Omn. Prob. 449), but in a wholly difthe Gen-

been already made (on

ferent way.
11.
tile
77

eKKXrjcTLa ijpaiv] i.e.

eKaXeaev yap k.t.A.] Rom. iv. 17 Kakovvros to. prj ovra cos ovra, Philo de Creat. P?'inc. 7 (11. p. 367) to. yap pr) ovra enaXecrev els to ehai
:

Church, called

6

Xaos

rjpa>v

below.

comp.

Hermas
ovtos
to.

Vis.

I.

1

KTtcras
I

e*s

tov

prj

ovra,

Mand.

7roLt]cras

ck

seems so far to differ from S. Paul's, that he makes the contrast between Gentile and Judaic Christendom, whereas in the Apostle it is between the new and
author's application

Our

"]

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
h

215

cTeipA

oy

tiktoyca,

nfAas

e'nrev

crTeipa

yap

rjv

r\

6 Se e'nrev iKKXrjcria tj/uLcov nrpo tov Sodrjvai cwtyj t6kvcl. Bohcon h oy'k ooAi'noyca, tovto Xeyer ras irpoaev^a^ aVAws dvacpepeiv irpos tov Qeov \*yi, ok al rifjiijov
15 wSivoucrai,

eyKaKoofJiev.

b Se

eiirev

on

ttoAAa ta tgkna
€7T€i
eprjfixos

thc epHMOY maAAon h thc exoYCHc ton ANApA,
eSoKEL eivai diro

tov Qeov 6 \ao\
eyevofieda
ypacpr)

tjfJitov,

vvvl Be 7no"-

TEvcravTes

irXeioves

toov

Sokovvtwv

eyeiv

Qeov,
Yd/?,

Kal €Tepa Se
S.

Xeyet, otl

Oyk hAGon KA12 r/yuwv]

\4yei,

PV&v]

AC;

Kal pi)£ov S.

AC;
as
7/

om.

S.

13

tcls

Trpocrevxte]

AC;

rd

7rpos ras

irpoaevx^ (or ra
17 tov]

irpbs

ei)xds,

by Bensly) S.
15
iyi<a.Ku>fj.ev]

See above, L

p. 141.

14 at tidbovaai]

AC;

suggested udivovaa S.

A

;

e/c/ca/cw^tev

C.

A; om. C.

19 5e]

AS;

om. C.
the old dispensation. Justin uses the text in the same way as our Pseudotovs e£
TCOV

edvcov

rav oVd

'lovdalcov Kal

"2,ap.apeoov

Clement.
as k.tX] If the order of the words be correct they can only mean 'let us notgrow weary, as women in travail grow weary' ; but it is strange that the writer should have
14.
firjy

Xpio~Tiavovs eldoTes. doKOVVTfOV €%eiV 0601/]

Hil"

genfeld quotes from the Praedicatio Petri in Clem. Alex. Strom, vi. 5
(p.

760)

p.r]de

/card 'lovdaiovs
p.6voi

'

ae^eade

Kal

yap

eKelvoi,

olop.evoi tov

confused his application of the text by this fanciful account of 77 ovk <o8lof which the natural explanaFor iyKaKcop.ev tion is so obvious.
vova-a,

ovk eVi'crrai/rat yivoio-K€iv} (comp. Orig. in Joann. xiii. § 17, iv.
p. 226).

Qeov

would subis a misas authority is against e«atake, see the note on Kelv and for iynaKiiv
Cotelier

and other

editors

stitute €KKa<(op.ev;

but this

Thus the 19. erepa 8e ypa<pr)] Gospel, treated as a written document, is regarded as Scripture like the Old Testament. Comp. Barnab.
§ 4,

:

and possibly 1 Tim. v. 18. above, the introduction p. 202.
ovk
rjXdov
K.r.X.]

See

Galatia?is
17.

vi. 9.

The

quota-

dnb tov Qeov]
ep-qp.os

position after IO (oVd (xl).

For the precomp. Jer. xxxiii
kttjvwv),

tion agrees exactly with S. 17, but might also be taken

Mark
from

ii.

S.

avdpatiroiv Kai

Matthew

ix.

13

oi)

yap rjXdov k.t.X.
in S.

xxxiv
xliv

(xli).

22 (dno

tcov kcltoucovvtoov),

On

the other

hand

(li).

2 (a7ro

evoLiccov).

The word

the form

is different,

Luke (v. 32) ovk eXrfXvda Kadp.apTo)Xovs
5

involves a secondary idea of severance,

Xeaai diKaiovs
p.eTavoiav.

aXXa

els

and so takes
18.

and.

Comp.

also Barnab. §

ovk

irXe loves]

Writing about

this

rjXdev KaXeaai SiKatovs

dXXd

d/xaprcu-

time, Justin Martyr gives a similar account of the greater numbers of the Gentile Christians: Apol.'x. 53

same

Xovs (where the words els p.eTavoiav, added in the late MSS, are wanting in
5<),

and Justin Apol.
k. d. a. dp., els

i.

p.

62 C ovk

rp\-

(p.

88 B) nXeiovds T€ koi dXrjOeaTepovs

Oov

p-erdvoiav.

2l6
Aec<M

THE

EPISTLES OF

S.

CLEMENT.
tovto Xeyei, otl

[n

Aikaioyc, aAAa

amaptooAoyc.

Sel

tovs diroWvfjLevovs trwteiv* eiceivo yap ecTiv /ueya kcli tcl ttlttOavfjiaa'Tov, ov Ta icToora CTrjpl^eLv

dWa

TOVTCL.

OVTCOS
kcci

KCLI

6

XpLCTTO^

tldeXtlOSV

(TUHTCLl
kclI

TCL
5

aTroWvfJLeva,
rnjids rjSr]

ecrcocrep

7ro\\ovs, iXdtvv

/caAeVas

aTroWvfJLevovs.

III.
YlfJici^'

Tocovtov ovv eAeos
/UL6V,

iroir\G avTO^
,

avTOv

els

TTpLOTOV

OTL
ov

tj/xels

ol

^COVTSS

TOTs

V€Kpo7s

6eois

ov

dvo/uev
$i

kcll

irpoo'KVvoviJLev

clvtoTs,

dWa
10

tov irwrkpa Ttjs dXrjdelas* Tts r\ eyvtofjiev yvtocris tj 7rpos clvtov, rj to /ulvj apveicdai Sl ov eyvoo/uev clvtov; AeyeL Se kcli clvtos* Ton omoAoth'canta Me [Incoclvtov
4 ovtcos] ovtio C.
£Xeos] eXaioa

Xpiarbs]

AS

;

Ktf/uos C.

7 ovv]

AC

;

om.

S.

A.
it

9
11
I.

ical

ov trpoaKWov/xev aureus]
'iireira 5e otl
;

AS
I.

;

om. C.
p. 142.

AC

;

S

translates as if

had read

see above,
r\

dXXa] 10 tI$]
T77S £1X77-

AC;
ddas

rt's

de S.

yvQas]

yvtoaeio'
7)]

A.

irpbs

avrov]

AS;

C

:

see above,

p. 127.

AC

;

om.

S.

apveladai] add. avrbv C.
12 avrov]

The testimony
evunriov

of S cannot be alleged in such a case.

ruv

avdp&iruv]

AC

;

om.

S.

13

avrbv]

AC.
ko.1

AS; om. C. S adds etiam

4. owcu k.t.X.] Luke xix. 10 tf\0ev o vlos tov avdpconov £r)Trjo~ai icai o~a>o-ai to diro\a>\6s (compare the interpolation in Matt, xviii. 11), 1 Tim. i.

Second Epistle;
tlvl

Tov 6poXoyrjo-avTa...Tov rrarpos
8e...T(ov

6 Kvpios Xeyet p.ov' ev

evToX&v.

Cotelier (on

15

I.

X. rjXOev els rbv k6o~[mov ap,apT(oXovs
III.

Clem. Rom. § 14) mentions the fact, but does not give the quotation in
full.

crcocrai.

'Seeing then that He has been so merciful and has brought us to know God, wherein does this knowledge consist but in not denying Him

Tov opoXoyrjaavTa k.t.X.] free quotation of Matt. x. 32 (comp. Luke
xii. 8).

A

eVwVtoj/ k.t.X.]
is

The omission

in

S

by

whom we

were brought

?

If

we

confess

Him, He

will confess us be-

probably correct, the words having been inserted by scribes from a well-

fore the Father.

This we must do,
lives.'

known
xii. 9.

evangelical

passage,

Luke

not with lips only but in our
8.

For a similar instance, where

rots veKpois deols]
a>v

Wisd. xv. 17

ve<pbv epyd£erai xepo~\v dvopois' KpeiTTow yap eort tcov aeftao-pdrav avrov, a>v avros p.ev eijjo-ev eKelva
de ovdenoTe.
12.

Bvtjtos de

S preserves the true reading, see Clem. Rom. 46. Our preacher is in the habit of dropping out words in
his quotations, in skeleton.
14.

and presenting them
'

(see
15)

Xeyei de <al avros k.t.X.] Nicon above on the First Epistle §§ 14, quotes this passage from the

eav ovv]

if after all, if only.'

For similar instances of the use of ovv see Hartung Partikel. 11. 11.

IV]

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
outos ovv ecrlv 6
§1

217

TTION TOON

ANGpOOnOON], 6moAO["HCCO AyTON GNCOniON TOY HATpOC
/uuordos
ij/uicov,

moy.
15

eav

ovv

6[xo-

Xoyrjcco/uev

ov

iccodrj/uLev.

ev tlvl Se
/urj

avrov

o/uloXo-

yov\xev\
tcov
el

ev

tw

iroielv
/urj

a Xeyei Kal

irapaKOve.iv

avrov

evToXuv, Kal
kai
e

julovov )(ei'AeciN

ayton timan

dWa

oAhc KApAiAc

ev tco

na aia*
m

\eyei oe Kat Aaoc oytoc toTc x e| ^ ec|N Me tima, h Ae
el
a'tt'

oAhc thc aianoiac.

20 KApAlA AYTOON TTOppGO ATTeCTIN

6MOy.

IV.

Mrj

julovov

ovv

avrov

KaXw/uev

Kvpiov,

ov

yap rovro
moi,

aroucei

tj/ULas.

Kfpie, Kfpie, coo6i-iceTAi,

Aeyei yap* Oy hac d AercoN AAA' 6 hoioon thn Aikaiocynhn.

wcrre ovv, d$eA(poi, ev roTs epyois avrov SjULoXoycojuev,
ego (/cayw) as in Matt. x. 32.

14
ovv\

p.ov\

AC; om.

S.

6 fuo~0bs tj/xQv]
Ttfj.dv'}

AC;
mus

merces

magna

S.

A; om. CS.
S.
5e]

17 avrov

AC;
18

deberrji]

invocare {vocare)

eum

S, as if o^eiXo/xev avrov eiriKakeladai (icaXeTv).

A; om.
S;

C.

diavoias]

AC

;

8vvdfj,eojs
;

yap AS; om. C.
dVecrTiJ']

19

6]

(i.e. ov)

A.
C.

20 aurow']
21

direo-TTjv

ow]

AS avrov C. AS (?) om. C.
;

A;

aireariv (or ecrnv)

22

crwcret]

AC;

<rw£ei S.

24 aurov] avroov A.
18.

6/u.o\oyw/Ae»>]

A

;

6/j.oXoyrjaojfJ.ev

C.

ultimately to Deut.

reference but as both words diavoias and Kapdias do not seem to occur in that passage in any

0X7;?
k.t.A.]
vi. 5
;

A

lessness.

must not fear men For Christ Himself has but God. warned us that, though we be His
most familiar
not His
friends, yet if

We

we do
will re-

one text of the lxx, we must suppose
that the writer

commandments, He
ttcls

had in his mind the saying rather as it is quoted in the Gospels, esp. Mark xii. 30 e£ oXrjs
Kapdias crov Kal e£
0X77 y rfjs

ject us.'
22.

Ov
vii.

6 Xeycov k.t.X.]

From

Matt.
pie,

rfjs

^vxi s

21 ov nas 6 Xeycov pot, KvKvpie, elaeXevaerai els rrjv ftaaiovpavcov,

aov Kal e£
bXrjs rfjs

aov Kal i£ laxvos aov (comp. Matt. xxii.
bXrjs rrjs diavoias
x. 27).
k.t.X.]

Xeiav rS>v
6eXt]p,a

aXX'
p,ov
vi.

6

ttoicov

rb
rols

rov

irarpos

rov

ev

yj,

Luke
13,
it

ovpavols

(comp. Luke

46 quoted

19.

'O Xabs ovros
is

From

Is.

xxix.

modified by the form in quoted in the Gospels; see the note on the genuine Epistle of Clement § 15, where again it is quoted in almost exactly the same

below). Justin {Apol. i. 16, p. 64 a) gives the exact words of S. Matthew

which

(except ovxi for
7

ov).

Clem. Horn.

viii.

has

ri

pe Xeyeis Kvpie, Kvpie, ko! ov
;

7roiels

a Xeyco
vi.

which closely resembles
ri

form as here.
IV.
'It is

Lord.

We must confess Him by our

not enough to call

Him

8e p.e KaXelre, Kvpie, Kvpie, Kal ov rvoielre a Xeyco ; comp. Clem. Horn. viii. 5 ovde ev r<u mar eve iv

Luke

46

didaaKaXois Kal Kvpiovs avrovs Xeyetv
77

works, by love and purity and guile-

aoyrrjpia yiverai.

218
ev

THE EPISTLES OF
tw dyairdv
eAerj/uovas,
teal
fjit]

S.

CLEMENT.
/urj

[IV

eavTOvs,

ev

rw
kcli
m

ixoiyacrQai

/urjhe

KctTaXaAelv
eivat,

dAAqAwv

jurjhe

dyadovs*

eyKparels fyAovv, a v/UL7rdo'^eiv dAArjAois
ev tovtois toIs epyois

aAA'

6<pei\ofJLev,

dfJLoAoycoiuiev

(piAapyvpeTv. clvtov ko.1 jur] ev

toTs

evavTiois*

k<xi

ov

5

Set

ij/uids

(j)o@e'i<r6ai

tovs dvdpco7rovs /mdAAov, dXAa tov

tovto, tclvtol vjulcov Trpacrcrovrcov, elnev 6 KvpLOS* 'EaN HT6 MET 6M0Y CYNHTMeNOl 6N TO) KOAntp MOY ka'i mh ttoiht€ tac 6ntoAac moy, attoBaAoo ymac kai epoc)
i

Qeov.

$ia

ayairav

AC

;

add. tovs irX^ulov
7
v/j.<joi>]

tj/awv

ws S

:

see above.

4

6(pei\ofjLev]

ocpiKofMev

A.

A;

ijfi&v

CS.
9 7rot^re]

8 Ki/ptos]

iv r<£ Kokirip fxov]
I.

AC;

m zm<? «'«# S.
K.r.A.]

AC;
C.

irjaovs

S.

A;

TroiricrrjTe

12 7rap-

/x^Se
/ut?7

KaraAaAeiv

James

Aeyw

i5/ui>,

ovk olda [yfxas] TvoBev ears'

iv.

1 1

also

KaraAaAeire dAA^Aa)!/. See Hermas Maud. 2 nparov p,ev
KaraXaXei,
'

an6o-rr)re

p.r)devbs

with

the

whole

section.
dyatfous] kindly, as Tit. ii. 5, 1 Pet. ii. 18 ;
3.

an e/xoO ndvres ipydrai adiThis is much closer than Matt, icias. vii. 23. The denunciation is taken from Ps. vi. 9 dnoo-rrjre air ep.ov irav-

beneficent]

and so pro-

bably
5.

1

Thess.

iii.

6.

Comres oi epya£6p,evoi rr\v dvoplav. pare the quotations in Justin Afiol. i. 16 (p. 64 B) Kai rore epat avrols'
'Anoxcopelre an
p.ias,
e'/uoO,

ov del -qpas K.r.A.]
'Eav ^re K.r.A.]

Comp. Acts
in

epyarai
ko.1

rfjs

avo'

iv. 19, v. 29.
8.

Dial. 76
p.
'

(p.

301 D)
ep,ov.

ipa> avrols

Not found

'Avaxoipelre

an

See WestCOtt

the canonical Gospels, and perhaps taken from the Gospel of the Egyptians,

Canon
V.

We

125 sq (2nd ed.). must break loose from

which
1 2.

is

quoted below

;

see

§§ 5, 8,

5

The image and expressions

are derived from Is. xl. iitw fipaxiovi avrov avva^ei apvas <al ev too KoXna)

The Lord has warned us, that here we shall be as lambs among wolves; that we have
the ties of this world.

avrov

(3a.o-Ta.o-e 1.

though absent in several mss (see sons), in other Greek Versions, and in the original and must be supposed to have been known to the writer of the Gospel in question. For
;

The latter clause, BSA, is found in Holmes and Par-

cause to fear the perdition of our souls rather than the murder of our bodies.

Our

life

here

is

brief

and

transitory ; our life in heaven is eternal rest. Therefore should we look

upon
world.'
12.

ourselves

as

aliens
'

to

the

rrjv
i.e.

TrapoiKiav]

the expression o-wayeiv iv koKitco, to gather in the lap] see lxx Prov.
xxx. 4 (xxiv. 27). The image is carried out in the language of the next

'

ing in]

our sojourn'our dalliance with': see

the note on napoiKovvres in the opening of the First Epistle. "EaeaOe K.r.A.] This is a close 15.
parallel to
cos

chapter, eaeade
IO.

cos

dpvia K.r.A.

vndyere
S.

K.r.A.]
xiii.

The

parallel

Luke x. 3 d7roo-re'AAa) vpas apvas ev p.eaco Xvkcov (comp. Matt.

passage in

Luke

27 runs Kai ipel.

x. 16).

As however Peter

is

not men-

v]

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
att'

219

10

YmiV YnAreTe
anomi'ac.
'

gmoy, oyK oiAa ymac tto0€n ecTe, eprATAi

V.

Odei/,

dSe\(f)oi 9

KCLTaXei^lsai/Tes
TTOiY\(TO)[xe.v

ttjv
deAti/uia

Trap-

oiKiav tov

KCKTfJLOV
rifjias,

tovtov
kcll
/uri

to

TOV

i^eXdeTu e/c tov Aeyei yap 6 Kvpios "EcecOe 00c apnia cn i$KOcrfj.ov tovtov, mccco Aykcon* aTTOKpideh $e 6 fleTpos avTto Aeyer 'Ean OYN AlACHApAlOOCIN 01 AYKOI TA A'pNIAj ellTeV 6 IfJOTOVS TCO
(pofiridco/uiev
'

KaXeffavTOS

lleTpcp'

Mh

(J)oBeicOoacAN
KAI

ta apnia toyc

AyKoyc mgta to

ATTO0AN6IN AYTA.
oadav]

\Me1c Mh (J)OBe?C06 TOYC ATTOKT€NNON19 (poplelade] (popleiadcu A.
airoKTevvovTas]

AC

;

wapoLfiiav S.

A;

a7ro/creVras C.
tl 7roir)o~ai' v7ro8ei^co de
6fjTe.

tioned in the context, and as the continuation of the quotation is not found in the canonical Gospels, the

(po(3r]dr]Te

vpuv Tiva (j)o(3r]tov p,eTa to aTVOKTelvai

e'xovTa e^ovaiav ep.(Ha\elv els ttjv yeev-

whole passage was probably taken from some apocryphal source, per-

vav

vai,

\eyco vpuv, tovtov
is

(pofitjOrjTe.

The saying
Horn.
xvii.

quoted also in Clem.
p.rj

haps the Gospel of the Egyptians see the note on §§ 4, 8, 12. As the same metaphor of the lambs occurs in the apocryphal quotation just above (§ 4), they were probably taken from
:

4

(pofirjOrJTe

diro

tov

be yjsvxj} /*>) bvvap.evov tl Troifjo-ai' (po[3i]6r)Te be tov 8vvdp,evov Kal o~dop.a Kal tyvxyv els ttjv
o~<op.a ttj

cnvoKTevvovTos to

yeevvav tov nvpos fiakelv,

and

in Justin

the
126)

same

context.

Photius (Bibl.

ApoL

i.

19

(p.

66 B)

/a?)

<po(3elo-0€

tovs
pLrj

remarks on the number of apocryphal quotations in this Second
Epistle, nXrjv otl prjTa riva
<os drrb rrjs

dvaipovvTas

vp.as

Kal

p,eTa

TavTa

dvvap,evovs ti irovfjo-ai,, ciVe, (pofirjdrjT* de tov p.€Ta to cmoBavtiv dvvap-evov Kal
y\rvx^v Kal au>p.a els yeevvav
ep,(3a\eiv.

deias ypa(prjs £evi£ovTa Trapeiardyei, cov ovft 77 iTpcorr) cnvrpXkciKTO navTeXoiS.

The
lies

(For apocryphal quotations in the First, which however are chiefly from
the

points of coincidence in the quotations of the Clementine Homi-

Old Testament and therefore not
8, 13,

so prominent, see the notes §§
17, 23, 29, 46.)
19.
leal

and Justin with our pseudo-Clement are worthy of notice, but they seem to be accidental. The expression
els ttjv

vp,els

k.t.\.]

The apocry-

quotation

yeevvav tov nvpos (in the of the Homilies) might

phal citation again runs parallel to the canonical Gospels, Matt. x. 28
Kal
p.rj

have come from Matt,

(pofielo-de cltvo tg>v
tt)v de
'

anoKTevvovTcov
p.rj

xviii. 9 (interpolated in the parallel passage Mark ix. 47). For the amount of variation

to

o-6Jp.a,

y\rvx*]v

8vvap,eva)v

which may

anoKTeivai

(pofirjdrjTe

8e

pioWov tov

8vvap,evov [kcu] yjsvxyv Kal o-(op,a airoXecrcu ev yeevvr], Luke xii. 4> 5 4) °^ r]'

arise accidentally, see a parallel instance given by Westcott Canon p. 116; and it is instructive
to observe the variations in

M

two quo-

6f)T€

OIVO

TG>V aiVOKTeVVOVTOiV to
p.rj

(rco/xa

Kal /zero

TavTa

e'xovTcov nepia-croTepov

tations of this very saying in Clem. Alex. Exc. Theod. p. 972 (po^r)6r]Te

220

THE

EPISTLES OF

S.

CLEMENT.

[v

tac ymac kai MHAeN ymin AyNAMeiMoyc ttoigTn, aAAa cboBeicGe

TON

M6TA TO ATTOGANeiN YMAC I^ONTA ISoyCIAN

YY\HC
tovtco

K

A<l

coc>matoc, toy BaAg?n eic tggnnan nypoc.

Kai yivu)(TKeTe 9
Ttjs
5

dSeAcboi, otl
(TCtpKOS

y\

eV^/i/a
/ULlKpd

r\

ev

tw

koc/ulw

oKiyO^pOVLO^* Y\ 06 €7rayye\ia tov XpiCTTOv /ueyd\r] Kal QavfiacrTr] eariv, Kal dvairavcris rfjs jmeWovcrj^ (JafftKeias Kal farjs
TClVTtlS

i(TTlV

Kal

aicovlov.
el
fjiri

tl

ovv

i&Tiv
Kal

7roirio avTa$
m

eiriTvyeiv avTtov,

to

oaiios
cos

SiKaicos

dvao'Tpecpeo'dai,
fxr]

Kai

tcl
10

KO&fJLUcd
I

TavTa

dXKoTpia
A.

tjyelcrdai Kal

67ri6vfJLeiv
6 e7ra7Ye\ia]

(pofielo-de]

(pofiaadai

3 irvpos]

AC; om.
8

S.

eirayyekeia A.
S.

XpiaTov]

C

7 avairavcns]

A;

i]

Kvpiov S. avairavcns C.
;

iaTiv]

AC

;

om. (apparently)

t'i... eTn.TVX&v']

AC;

quid

igitur est
for
it.

id quod facit ut attingatis S.

The

translator seems to

have had

iroLrjaav

woLrjaaPTas in his text,
11

and

to

yap r£] A; t£ yap C.
13 Xiyei 5e]

have wrested the grammar to make sense of ravra] AS; eiridvixeZv] eiridvueL A.
X^yei yap Kal S.

aurd C.

AC;

14 iav] C; add. ovv

yoi/v, \eyei,

ml ^rvxw
and
delv

tov fiera Bavarov hvvdp.evov Kai aafia els yeevvav fiakelv, p. 981 6 o~a>TT)p \eyei (po^eladai

possible for us to do that we 7>iay obtain them, but to walk holiiy and

tov dvvafjLevov tclvttjv ttjv tyvxqv Kal tovto to o~a>p,a to ^rvx^ov ev yeevvr)
anoXeo-ai:
'

comp. also Iren.

iii.

18. 5

Nolite timere eos qui occidunt cor-

Thus ra, which some righteously? would substitute for to, interferes with the construction. For oo-iWkcu dtKaias, implying duties to God and to man respectively, see the note on oo-ia
§
I
:

pus,

occidere

animam autem non possunt timete autem magis eum
;

comp.

§

VI.

'Our Lord has

6 e\ovTes oaia Kal dUaia. told us that

qui habet potestatem et corpus et animam mittere in gehennam.'

ed

dnoKTewovTas] The passages quotin the last note show that the substitution of arroKTeivovTas is quite

no man can serve two masters. There is a direct antagonism between the world present and the world to come.
cannot keep the friendship of Let us then, if we would deliver ourselves from eternal misery,
both.

We

unnecessary. For the form dnoKTevvew see Winer § xv. p. 95 (note), A.

obey the

command

of Christ and
life.

Buttmann
4.
r\

p. 54.
'
'

follow after the heavenly

Even

eTridr}fxia]

sojourn

:

comp.

7rapeni8rjixoi.
ii.

Heb. xi. 1 3, I Pet. i. I, See the note on napoiKiav above, which contains the same idea. Kai dvanavais] 7. namely, rest.' For this use of Kai see the notes on
11.
'

Noah, Job, and Daniel, it is written, could not by their righteous deeds
rescue their
shall
if

own

children.

How then
of God,

we

enter the

kingdom

we keep not our baptismal vows ?' Ov8e\s k.t.X.] Luke xvi. 13 13.
oIk4tt]s

Galatians
8.

vi. 16.
i

ouSeis-

bvvarai

bvcr\

Kvpiois

ti

ovv k.t.X.]

What

then

is it

8ovXeveiv...ov

dvvaade Qe<n

dovXeveiv

VI]

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
ev

221

a\)Twv\

yap tw
Se

iiridvfJLeiv

fi/xas

Krrjo'ao'dai

Tavra

dTTOTTLTTTOfJieV Tjjs

6$OV
6

Ttjs SlKCtiaS.

VI.
Kypi'oic

Aeyei

AoyAeyeiN.
Kcti

Kvpios* OyAeic oiKeTHc Aynatai Ayci edv *j/xe?s deXw/mev kcli Qeco $ou\daviucjyopov
r\\xiv

15 eveiv

/uajULcova,

Iottlv.

ti

r^p

to

OCpeAOC,

6AN TIC TON

zhmiooGh;
e-)(jdpoi*

KOCMON OAON KepAHCH THN Ae YYXHN €<ttiv Se ovtos 6 alcov kcci 6 fixeWcov $vo
noiyeiav
eiceZvos

ovtos Aeye*
kcli

yvpiav

diraTr\v,

(pQopav Kai <pi\apSe tovtois drroTao'creTai.
kcli

20 ov Svud/ueda ovv tcov dvo (piXoi

eivar Se? Se
oitoimeda
oKov)
;

r\fJLas

toutco

diroTa^afJievovs eKeivco ^pdadai.
S.

otl fieXnov
S,

16 tov kog\xov

o\ov~\

tov

KocfJLov (oiti.

C omnem hunc mundum
17 ty/Juudfj]

but the insertion of hunc probably does not imply any different reading from
see above,
I.

A

:

p.

141,

and comp. below

§ 19.

AC;

perdat

(perhaps

cbroXecrfl)

S.

18 koX (pdopav]

AC; om.

S.

rots tolovtols S.
XpTjcflai

C.

See conversely below on p. 222 1. 8. S also adds de d8e\(poi. oiiopeda] olbpeda ACS.
are the

19 tovtols] AC; 21 xP^ <J ^ aL l A;

Kal

papava.

The words

same

in Matt. vi. 24, excepting the omis-

sion of
15.

oIkcttjs.

noixela here points to this latter sense; comp. Barnab. 10 ov prj yevy polx°s ovde tpOopevs, Philo de Spec. Leg. 11
(II.

yap to o(pe\os k.t.A.] See Matt. xvi. 26, Mark viii. 36, Luke ix. The quotation here may have 25.
tl

p.

310 M) adeXcpov pev

Ka\ avyyeves

abiK-qpa poixeias (p9opa, Epictet. Diss. ii. 22. 28 aKparels Ka\ poixovs K.a\
(pOopels,

been derived from either

S.

Matthew

Iren.

Haer.

i.

28.

1,

Clem.

or S. Mark, though it differs slightly from both. The divergence from S.

Horn.
20.

iv. 16, 24.

Luke is greater. The saying is quoted also by Justin Apol. i. 15; but Justin's

farewell
5 01

rovTto aTTora^apivovs] ''bidding to this.'' Act. Paul, et Thecl.

aTTOTa^apevoi r<a Koo~p(p tovt(o, Ign.
1 1

quotation, while combining different features of the three canonical

Philad.

d.7roTa£dpevos rco

/3t<a.

The

Gospels,

does

not
(tl

reproduce

the

word is fairly common in the Testament see Lobeck Phryn.
;

New
p. 23.

special peculiarity
17.
€<ttiv

to ocpeXos;) of
6
aloov
i.

our pseudo- Clement.
de
oxitos
K.T.A.]

Xpaa6aC\ ''consort with as a friend/ according to a common sense of the

word.

The

editors

have substituted

See the notes on Galatians pare also Clem. Horn. viii.
18.

4.

Com-

21, xx. 2.

Xpw6aL for the reading of the older MS but there is sufficient authority
;

cpdopav]

Either

(1)

corrupt-

for xpacr&u in later writers

:

see Lo-

ness, profligacy generally, as in 2 Pet. i. 4, ii. 12, 19; or (2) in a morespecial

beck Phryn.

p. 61,
(1.

Buttmann Ausf.
Veitch Ir-

sense, as Plut. Crass.
<p6opas
a7ro\vo-dpevos,

1

t^
Mor.

aWiau
p.

Trjs

Sprachl. § 105 regular Verbs

p. 487),

s. v.

xpdopai.

For the
vi.

89 B

form
3,

in a

comp. crvyxpao-dai Ign.Magn.
10.

KpiOf/vai (pOopas.

The connexion with

napaxpaadai Apost. Const,

222

THE EPISTLES OF
jULio'fjo'ai,

S.

CLEMENT.
kcli

[VI

eorTLV tcc ivOaSe

oXiyo-^povia Kai (pOapTcc eKeiva he ctya7rrj(rcu, to. dyada Kat a<pdapTct. iroiovvTes yap to BeXy/ma tov XpiCTOv evprjcro/uev dvdel

otl /uwcpd

Travcriv

de

wye,
r\

ovSev

ij/uLas

pvcreTai

eic

Trjs

alooviov

Ko\ao"ews,

edv

7rapaKOvo-(o/uiev

twv

evToXvov

avTOv.

5

Xeyei he Kai
No>e kai
ty\
'looB

ypa(pr)

ev

tw
Kai
S.

'le^eKirjX,

on

'Ean anacth

kai Aanih'A, oy py'contai ta tekna aytoon ev
el

al^/maXcoo'la.
2

he

ol

tolovtol

hiKaioi
is

ov
to be

dyada

Kat]

dyada rd
is

AC; om.

Here probably the reading of C

preferred: for (i) It
3 yap]
iKe?,

more

forcible in itself: (2) It explains the omission in S.

AS

;

om. C.

dvaTravcnv]

AC

;

add. quae

illic

S, as

if it

but this

may

be only a translator's gloss.
ev ry]

4

77/xas]

AC

had read 7-771/ om. S.
;

6 de]

AC;

A.

AC;
4.

8 cu'x/xaXaxria] C; atX/uaXwcria oStol S ol tolovtol] see conversely above on p. 221 1. 19. 5i/catot] om. S. ov StivavTai] here, A; after Si/ccuoo-tWts in C; but S has appa-

yap S.

AC;
:

tov S.

AC

;

alooviov

KoXdaecos]

The

ex-

pression occurs Matt. xxv. 46.
6.

as in Test, xii Pair. Jud. 17, 22, 23, Orac. Sib. iii. 159, Gaius (Hippolytus?) in Euseb.
pol.

Ezek.

iv tu> 'le^eKn/A] Abridged from xiv. 14 20, being taken es-

H. E.
103,

iii.

28,

Hip-

Fragm.

59,

105 (pp. 162,

pecially from ver. 14 eav oZaiv ol Tpels avbpes ovtol ev (xecrco avTrjs Ncoe Kai
AavLrjX Kai 'Ig^/3, and ver. 18 ov The crovTaL vlovs Ka\ OvyaTepas.
/*?)

181, 182, Lagarde),
17,

Euseb. H. E. viii. Epiphan. Haer. Ii. 9 (p. 432).

pv-

words

iv

Tjj alxpakwcTLq are the writer's own addition and should not be treated

there is ample authority for sense of (3aa!\eiov. Galland, desirous of retaining the more usual meaning 'a palace,' supposes the
this

Thus

as part of the quotation. It is worth noticing also that the order of the

writer to refer to the parable of the marriage feast given by the king,

three names, which has given rise to so much speculation among modern
is changed by the pseudoClement, and a chronological sequence is produced. The same order of the names appears in Aftost. Const.

critics,

Matt. xxii. 11, 12. If so, we might suppose that he explained the wedding garment of baptism, which is mentioned just before. But the reference seems improbable. This more
usual

meaning of
parallel
ii.

fiao-!\eiov

would

ii.

Chrysostom also makes the same change in two passages quoted
14.

have a

in

S.

Anselm Cur

Dens homo
12.

16 'ut nullus palatium
'advocate,* as
it

by
p.

Cotelier, Horn, xliii in Gen. (iv.

ejus ingrediatur.'
7rapdic\r)Tos]

436)
9.

and Exp. in Ps.

xlviii (v. p.

210).
BiKaioo-vvais]
ix.

The
1

in Deut.
23, Ezek.
xliv. 10.
11.

4

(v. 1.), 6,

Sam.
13,

plural, as xxvi.

iii.

20, xxxiii.
'

Ecclus.

should always be translated in the New Testament. This is one coincidence of language in our pseudoClement with S. John see esp. 1
:

J oh.
ftao-lXeiov]

ii.

I

7-0

the

kingdom}

naTepa.

napaKKrjTov exopev 7rp6s tov So above § 3 tov naTepa Trjs

VIl]

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
tclTs

223

hwavTcti
10

avTwv
Kcti

rjjJLeis,

iavTcov htKcttocrvvats pv&acrQai ra T€Kva iap jmr] Triptjorco/ULev to (idirTtafJia dyvov
Troia
;

dfjLiavTOv,

TreiroLdricreL
fj

elaeXevcrofJieda

eU to
€o~Tat>
;

fiatfiXeiov

tov Qeov

tls

tj/ucou

7rapctK\riTOs

eav

jut]

evpeOco/uev

epya

e-^ovTes octet Kat

StKata

15

ovv, dde\<pot julov, eidoTes oti ev %epo"tv 6 dydv, Kat oTt

VII.

''Were

dytoptewfuieda,

as tovs
ov

cj)6ap-

tovs

dytovas

KaTairXeovortv

ttoWoi,
riwa]

a'W
A
;

irdvTes

rently the 10 avrQv]

add. quod accepimus S. 14 ovv] As S always adds the possessive pronoun A; om. CS. pov] A; om. C. where the vocative d5eX0oi stands alone in the Greek, its testimony is of no value
pdirTia/xa]
§ 6.

same order as A. A; om. CS.

g pixraadai ra

tcl

reKva pijaaadat C.

AC;

here: see above
{

16 KaTairXiovcLv]

AC;

certant

{

= ay uvlfrvTai)

S, but

probably does not represent a different reading in the Greek. S translates KarairXevaoipev descendamus in certamen.
t

Lower down

oXrjdeias,

and see on
p.

this

subject

22 ovk eXdrrova
Vit.

rrjs ev

"

X^P
:

1

ftvffTvxiciv,

Westcott Canon
13.

157 sq.

Brut. 36

ev

x c P<tIv
etc.

ex<*>v

ras virep

oo-ia koL 67/ccua]
1, 5.

See the notes

twv oXcov npd^eis,
Xelpa,

compare vnb
10 (with the

on

§§

Hermas
els
1

Vis.

iii.

VII. 'Therefore let us prepare for the struggle. In the Isthmian games

note).
otl

rovs

(pBaprovs
ix.

K.r.X.]

An

but not many are crowned. In this our immortal race we should all strive to win. In the earthly contests he who breaks the rules is scourged. What then shall befall those who in their heavenly course swerve from the right path? Their worm, it is written, dieth not, and their fire is not quenched.'

many

enter the

lists,

echo of

Cor.

24, 25 irdvres pev

rpexpwriv, els 8e \apfidvei to /3pa/3eiov and eKetvoi pev ovv iva (pdaprbv
are(pavov
\d(3(oo~iv,

ijpets 8e acpOoprov.

Comp. Lucian Anachars.
navres avra \ap(3dvovo~iv
2.

13

elite poi,
;

01 dycoviarat

15.
is

' ev \epo\v 6 dya>v\ The contest at hand} as Xen. Cyr. ii. 3. 2 "Av-

dpes

(ptXoi,

o

pev ayeev
7
6

comp. Clem. Rom.

eyyvs rjplv avrbs rjptv
'.

ovdapSs a\\a els e£ dnavrcov 6 KpaTrjaas avrcdv (a passage of which the context presents several coincidences with S. Paul see Clark's Peloponnesus p. 50), Seneca Ep. lxxviii. § 16 Athletae quantum plagarum ore,
; '

The reading AfcoN dya>v eiriKarai. for aicon is doubtless correct, and
this is not the only instance of the

ferunt

quantum toto corpore excipiunt ? tamen omne tormentum glori;

ae cupiditate nee tantum, quia pugnant, ista patiuntur, sed ut pugnent...

see Hase and Dindorf Steph. Thes. p. 593 s.v. dya>v, and to the references there given add ^sch. Again. 495, and For iv see 4 Mace. ix. 23, xi. 19.

confusion of the two words

:

nos quoque evincamus omnia, quorum praemium non corona nee palma est
etc'
16.
(

K.a.Tcm\eovo~Lv]

resort'

;

comp.
e(pr)

Plut.

Mor.

p. 8l

E

KctTcmXeiv yap
0-^0X171/

Xepcriv, ''at

hand} see

Plut. Vit. Cleom.

rovs

noXXovs

eVt

'AOrfvafe,

224

THE EPISTLES OF
el
\ir\

S.

CLEMENT.
KOiriacravTe^
'Iva

[vn

(TTecpavouvTca,

ol

woWa
deco/uep

kol

/ca-

\ws

dycovicra/jievoi,

rifiels

ovv dycovio'co/meda,
ty\v

iravTes

GT€(f)av(jod(iofJL€v.

oocrT6

ohov t^v evdeiav,

dycova tov acpdapTOv, Kai 7ro\\oi ek avTOV KarairXevauifiev
1

Kal

dycovicrwjJLeda,
;

\va

Kal cTTecpavcodto/mev Kal
3
dtufjiev] conj. (so

5

el firi]
;

AC
5

{Bifxr]

curramus)
S.

dQpev
Kal

AC.

A) add. solum S. See the lower note.

4 els auTov]
ayajvicribpeOa]

AC
;

too S distinctly in certamen ;

pri.]

AC;

om.

S.

AS

ayviaibpeda

C.

Compounds
rod,
iii.

of 7rXe7v

are sometimes

see the notes on Ign. Polyc. 6

and

used metaphorically, as eKnXelv (He155 e£e7r\cocras tcov (ppevSv),
II.

Philippians ii. 16. For the connexion here comp. 1 Tim. iv. 10 kol Konicopev
<a\ dycovi£6pe6a (the correct reading).
3.

a7ro7rXeii/(Aristoph. Fr.

p.

907 MeidLanXev-

neke

a7T07rA€ucrre' ovv iir\ tov vvp(piov),

Beoofxev]

8icnr\elv (Plato

Phaed. 85

D
;

after this
p.

verb see
'

For the accusative Lobeck Paral.

But KaTanXelv can o~ai tov ftiov). hardly be so explained here and we must therefore suppose that the allusion is to the akiepKTjs *lo~6p,ov deipds (Pind. Isthm. i. 10), which would naturally
(xxxiii.

511: comp. also Cic. Off. iii. 10 'stadium currit (from Chrysippus).
of

The reading
Scopev,

the

Greek

mss,
It
is

can

hardly

stand.

be approached by

sea.

Livy

games
loci,

32) describes the Isthmian as 'propter opportunitatem

explained as referring to the dycovoOeaia but in this case the dycovo6eTT]s should be God Himself
;

per duo diversa maria omnium rerum usus ministrantis, humano In these later generi concilium.'

ad Mart. 3) and (see Tertull. moreover Qcopev ttjv 6d6v is in itself an awkward expression. Gebhardt,
;

days of Greece they seem to have surpassed even the Olympian in importance, or at least in popularity comp. Aristid. Isthm. p. 45 ev 777 koK\io~Tr) tcov
:

having read has returned

Becopev in first edition, to 6cop,ev in his second,

being apparently persuaded byBryennios. But the argument of Bryennios appears to me to be based on a mis-

Travqyvpecov Tr/be kol ovopaa-

TOTaTt] k.t.X. (see Krause Hellen. II. 2. If this homily was adp. 205 sq).

He urges that we canconception. not read Becopev on account of the
words
immediately
following,
Kal

dressed

to

the

Corinthians

(see

above, p. 197), there would be singular propriety in this image, as in S. Paul's contrast of the perishable and imperishable crown likewise addressed to them, or again in the lessons which Diogenes the Cynic is reported to

iroXXot els avTov KaraTrXevcrcopev., and he argues 6 de apri dycovi£6p,evos XP ciav

ovk e^ei els tov dycova Kare\6elv, as if the reading Becopev involved a hysBut in fact this teron-proteron. clause introduces an entirely new proposition, of which the stress lies

have taught in this city during the Isthmian games, maintaining the superiority of a moral over an athletic
victory
ix).
1.

on noXKoi

;

'let

this race (Becopev ttjv 6d6v),

us not only take part in but let us
Kal dycovi-

go there in great numbers and contend (noXKoi KaTairkevcrcopev
1

(Dion Chrysost. Orat.

viii,

K07TLaaavT€s]

A

word

used
:

especially of training for the contest

it has not been shown that Belvai ttjv 686v or t6v dycova can be said of the com-

acopeBa).'

On

the other

hand

vn]
€i
fxr}

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
Svvd^xeda
iravres
(rrecpavcodijvai,
kclv

225
€771)5

tov

<TT€(j)ctvov

yevto/meda.

eilevcu >//xas del, otl

6 tov

(pdaprov

dycova

dycovify/uievos,

edv

evpedfj

<p6eipcov,

fxao-TiywOels aiperai ical e£a) 10 tl COKelre ; 6 tov ty\<z
7 elUvai]

fidWeTai tov o-Tahiov.

dcpdapaias dy covet (pOeipas, tl
A; before ayuvi&fievos, C. C, so apparently S.
10 doKeire]

A; add.

5e

CS.

6]

here

doKeirai A.

(pdeipas]

A;

(pdeipcov

batants themselves.

Bryennios

in-

explains it SoZpev eavTols 77 7rpoQu>ne6a, but this explanation stands

deed

self-condemned by the necessity of using either the reflexive pronoun (eavToh) or the middle voice {npodoopeOa) to bring out the sense. construction which we have occurs from time to time with

start or cutting off a corner or tripping up an adversary or taking any underhand advantage comp. Epiphan. Haer. lxi. 7 Trapa(p6eLpas dycova
:

o adXrjTrjs pao~Tix@d?

£K/3aXXerac

tov

dywvos

The
here
0eeiv,

word

The Cotelier). is specially chosen here for the
(quoted

by

but

is

because the verb

more common with rpe'xeii/, itself is more comHeb.
r\p\v
xii. I Tpe X oopev top dycova (see Bleek's

mon

sake of the neighbouring (pOapTov See Chrysippus in Cic. Off. iii. 10 Qui stadium currit, eniti et contendere debet, quam maxime
dcpdapalas.
'

;

e.g.

possit,

Trpoiceipevov

quicum
nullo

ut vincat; supplantare eum certet aut manu depellere

note).
6)

Polybius (i. 87. 1, xviii. 35. has the proverb Tpex €lv rr\v evxar-qv. kcu el prj 8vvdpe$a This 5. k.t.X.]
to point to

modo

debet

:

Lucian Cal.
ayaBbs

7ion tern. cred.

sic in vita etc.', 12 6 pev

dpopevs...Tco

nXr^aiov

ovdev

some public recognition of those who came next after the victor. In the Olympian chariot races
there were second, third, and fourth prizes; but in the foot races the notices of any inferior prize or honourable

seems

KCLKOvpyei. ..ode kokos e<e7.vos kcu avadXos a.VTay(0VLO~Trjs. .eVt ttjv KaKOTexylav eTpd.

neTo

k.t.X.

The

turn given to

the

image
gested
edv
p.r)

in cpdelpoov was perhaps sugby 2 Tim. ii. 5 ov o~TecpavovTai
vop.1p.00s d8Xrjo-rj

(comp. Epictet.
anode l^lv
el

mention are vague and uncertain see Krause Hellen. II. 1. p. 170 sq. This passage is quoted loosely by Do:

Diss.

iii.

IO.

8

dos pot
i.e.

voplpcos rjdXrjcras).
9.

rotheus Doctr.

xxiii cos Xeyei

kci\

6 ayios

Xoi or, as they are
(e. g.

KXrjprjs, Kai> prj

aTe(pava>Tai riy,

dXXd

by the pa(3dovsometimes called Lucian Hermot. 40), paaTiyopao~Tiya>6eis]

(T7rov8ao-eL prj paicpdv evpeOfjvat toov crre-

(pavovpevcov.
6.

B.J.
ois

See Joseph. k.t.X.] dOXa piyicrra irpodels ev ov povov ol vlkoovtcs dXXd kciI ol per
kclv

iyyvs

Pollux (iii. 153) furnishes also a third name, pao-Tiyovopoi. Compare Herod, viii. 59 fJ/ toicti dyoocn ol npoet-cpopoi.

1.

21. 8

avio-Tapevoi pani^ovTai, Thucyd. v. 50 ev too dyoovi vnb toov pafidovxoov 7rXi]yas
eXafiev,

avrovs
Const,
8.

kqI

ol

Tplroi

tov

j3ao~iXiKov

nXovrov pereXdpfiavov.
ii.

Comp.
1

Aftost.

33.
len.

On
II.

Lucian adv. Indoct. 9, Fiscal. these police see Krause Helpp. 112 sq, 139, 142, 144,
sq.
'

14.
'

1.

II.

cpdelpoov]

vitiati?ig.'

The word

2.

p.

46

See Schweighaeuser
iii.

is used of violating the conditions of the contest, e.g. by making a false

on Epictet. Diss.
dipeTai\
is

15. 5 (p. 689).
1

removed.

CLEM.

II.

15

226
TradeiTai
;

THE EPISTLES OF
tcov

S.

CLEMENT.

[vn

yap

/mrj

TrjprjcravToov, (prjcriv, ty\v trtypakai

ylda

6

ckcoAh! aytoon oy TeAeyri-'cei
kai gcontai
eic

to

ttyp

aytoon

oy cBecGh'ceTAi,

6'pAciN
eirl

hach CApKi.
/meTavoricroojuev'

VIII.
7rr]\6s

f

&)s

ovv

ea/mev
rrjv

yfjs,

yap TpoTrov yap

e&fjiev

eU

X
rj

e

a ^P

T0 ^

t^X VIT0V
Kai
iraXiv

'

ov

5

6 Kepafievs, eav
StacrTpaCpri

woirj

cr/cei/os

iv tols

"Xeparlv

avTOv

crvvTpiPrj,
eis

avTO
tov

dua7r\d(rcrer
7rvpos
V/meTs,
I

eav

$6

7rpo<p6d<rri

Tt)v

kccjulvov

avTO
<5tos

(SaXeiV)
i&iuiev

ovkstl

/3orj6rjo'6i

avrto*
iv

ovtcos Kai
Trj

iv

tovtco

tw

Kocr/xtt,

aapKi

io

TradeLTaC]

A;

ireiaeTai

C
;

1 to irvp avrCov]

AS
;

;

rd irvp (om. avrCov) C.
see below.
ev]

6

iroirj]

A

here,

A;

C, but the present tense is wanted here before diao-rpcuprj, CS thus altering the sense.
;

iroiT)<xri

Kai]
;

A; om. C
;
;

S

is

doubtful.

7

i)]

AS

om. C.
It is

8 dvairXdao-eC]
9

tov Trvpbs]

AC

;

om.

S, but see the next note.

A /3a\e2V] AC

dvairXdaei C.

add. et com-

burat id
I.

et

pereat {perdatur) S.

not probable however that any corresponding

ttjv o-cppaylda]

By a comparito
/3a7T-

son with
Tio-pa, it

§

6 iav

pr) Trjpijcroipev

meant by the

appears that baptism is here seal. So again § 8 rrj-

John (Rev. ix. 4 ttjv acppaylBa tov Qeov eVi t&v pcTconoiv) used the image with any direct reference to baptism.
2.

6 o-k(6Xtj^ k.t.X.]

An accurate quoof the last verse
o~K(oXrjg
is

prjo-are ttjv crcppaylda acnriXov.

Comp.
ttjv

tation from the

LXX

Hermas Sim.
TT]prjo-avT€<i vyir)
al/

viii.

6 dXrjcpoTts

of Isaiah (lxvi. 24) 6 yap
k.t.X.

avTav

acppaylda kol T€0XaKOT€S
k.t.X.,

clvttjv kol prj
ix.
1

The denunciation

uttered

Sim.

6 or-

Se Xd^rj ttjv crcppayiSa... 77
k.t.X. ,

o~(ppay\s

against tcov dvBpaurcov tg>v irapafiefirjkotcov, and the context does not contain

ovv to v8a>p ecrTLV
viii. 2, ix.

also

Sim.

any reference

to the

broken
clay in

seal.

17, 31,

Clem. Horn. xvi. 19

VIII.

'We

are as

the

to acopa o~(ppaylbi peyicrTrj diaT€Tvncopivov (with the context), Act. Paid,
et Thecl. 25 povov 80s poi ttjv iv Xptcrr<0

hands of the

o-tppaylda,

Hippol.
p. 44.

Antichr.

42

At present, if we are crushed or broken, He can mould us again; but when we have been once thrown into the furnace, nothing will
potter.

(p.

119, Lagarde), Cureton's A?icient

avail us.

Syriac Docume?its
cius
it is

So of Aber1.

time.
late.

said {Ign. a7id Polyc.

p.

496)

Therefore let us repent in After death repentance is too Let us keep the flesh pure now,
inherit eternal
is
life

Suicer Xapnpav acppayeldav e^ovTa. s. v. quotes Clem. Alex. Quis div. salv. 39 (P- 957), Strom, ii. 3 (p. 434), and
later writers.

that

we may
This

here-

after.

when He

our Lord's meaning, says, If ye kept not that

Barnabas

§ 9

speaks

of circumcision as a acppayh after S. Paul, Rom. iv. 11. But it may be questioned whether S. Paul (o-cppayiadpevos
2 Cor.
i.

which is smalt, who shall give yoti that which is great?* While then.' For this 'Sis ovv] 4.
'

22,

comp. Ephes.

iv.

30) or S.

sense of cos see § 9 with the note.

cos

exopev Kaipov,

VIIl]

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.
jUL6Tavorj(rooiui€v

227

a eirpa^ajjiev Trovr\pa
Slas,

iva

g"(jo6cojul€v

1)77-0

tov

e£ bXt]s Trjs KapKvpiov, ews e^ofJiev kcli^/xa?
e'/c

pov lueTavolas'
koct/ulov,

/uerd

yap to e^eXdeiv
e/ce?

tov
/ue-

ovKSTi

Svvdjueda

e^o/uoXoyrja'acrdai
7roit]cravT6s

rj

15

Tavoeiv €Ti.

tov

wcrT6, ddeXcpoi, Kal ty\v capita dyvr\v Tripr]cravT6s TTctTpos

to

BeXrjjua
KCLl

Tas
alcu-

evToXas tov Kvplov (pvXa^avTes Xtj^o/ueda
vlov.

^corji/

Xiyei
oyK

MiKpoN

Kvptos ev eTHphicATe, to Mer^

yap

6

tw
tic

evayyeXico*
ymin
Acocei;

Ei

to

Aerco
outws]

words stood ovtw C.
;

in the
11

Greek
<t]

text.

(3or)6r}crei]

dum S ws eri C. tov k6<t/jlov] AC; AS; om. C. AC; add. super nostris peccatis S. 16 crdpKa] C aapicav A; add. 7//awj' S.
;

C; si quid S. ix°^ v Kaipbv] A;

tt}s]

A; fiorjOei CS. A; om. C.

Kaipbv tx

^C

12

£'ws]

A; A;

13 fJ-eravolas]

r^s crapKos S.
15 iroLTjcravTes]

14

e^o/ioAc^Tjcrcto-tfcu]

AC;
it

add.

ow

(?)

S.

5.

7Ti]\6s

yap

eo-fxev

k.t.X.]

image of Jeremiah xviii. 4 ed by S. Paul Rom. ix. 21.
sent passage
is

The
adopt-

He

has once cast

into

the fiery
to its

6,

furnace,

He

will

?zo

?nore

come

presuggested rather by

The

rescue? npocpddveiv occurs Matt. xvii. 25 and several times in the LXX.
16.

the prophet than by the Apostle. The imag-e is drawn out in Test, xii Pair. Nepht. 2, and in Athenag.

Paul,
adpica

Tr/v adpKa dyvrjv k.t.X.] Act. et Thecl. 5 fiaKapioi ol dyvrjv tt}v

TTjprjcravTes,

12

ttjv

adp<a

fir)

Suppl.
6.

15.

fioXvvqTe
(tk€vos

dXXd

T7)pr](TT]Te dyvrjv.

ttoltj

Kol

k.t.X.]

can be no

doubt

that

the

There more

graphic reading of A is correct. The very point of the comparison is that the breakage happens in the

18. Ei to piKpbv k.t.X.] Probably a quotation fused from Luke xvi. 10 6 maTos ev eAa^/crTO) Ka\ ev noXXco ttlct-

tos

eo~Tiv, kol 6 ev

ev ttoXKco
L

cidiKos

eo~Tiv'

eXaxiCTcp adiKos Kal el ovv ev tco t

making (71-0177), happens under the hands of the potter (ev rais xeP a>lv avroii Biao-Tpcicpfi), and not afterwards,
as
7TOt.T](Tr]...Ta1s

ddUcp

fiapLCovq ttio~to\

ovk eyevecrSe, to
;

d\-q6ivbv tls vfuv 7riaTev(reL

and Matt.

rpacprj
7.

x € P (TLV would imply.
Rev.

clvtov Koi diacr-

XXV. 21, 23, eVl oXlya t]s ttlo~t6s, en\ tvoWcov ere KaTacrTrjcrco. Irenasus (ii. 34.
3) cites it

crvvTpifif)]

ii.

27

cos

to.

modico

fideles

CTKeVT) TCI K€pap,LKCl CTVVTpifieTai.

num

est

somewhat similarly, Si in non fuistis, quod magquis dabit vobis?' The quo-

'

Hilgenfeld refers to Theoph. ad Autol. ii. 26 KaOcmep crKevos ti, Itvclv uXaadev
dva7rXdcraei]
alriav

ndXiv

avrb

tation of our Clementine writer

may

Tiva

o~xfj)

dvaxcoveveTai

77

dva-

TrXdacreTai

els
;

okoKhrjpov
8.

to yeveadai kclivov kcu see the references there
'

perhaps be taken from an apocryphal gospel (see the notes on §§ 4, 5, 12) ; but the passage of Irenasus, who can hardly have borrowed from an apocryphal source, shows how great divergences are possible in quotations

given by Otto.
idv
fie

7rpo<p6d<TT] k.t.X.]

Whe?l

from memory, and lessens the pro-

15—2

228
TAp

THE EPISTLES OF
ymin

S.

CLEMENT.
kai

[vni

on

o

ttictoc

6N

eAAYj'cTCO

6N

ttoAAco

tti-

ctoc
(rdpKct

€ctin.
a<yvY\v

apa
kcu

ovv
ty\v

tovto

\eyer

TtjpricraTe

ty\v

crcppaylZa

a<nriAov,

\va

Tt\v

\a\wvLOv\ farjv
i

diToXafitjdfjiev,
4 a7ro\&(3w/iev]

7roX\y]

AC

;

ttoWois S.

A

;

airo\a(3r)Te

CS

:

see the

lower note.
bability of this solution.

inference
epistula

'

(p.

xxxix),

Hilgenfeld's Irenaeus hac

quamvis nondum Clementi
adscripta usus esse videtur,'

Romano
seems
to

The licence in the change of persons (r?7pj7o-are, a7ro\a/3a>/i€i>) has offended the transcribers here, though occasionally indulged in even by
the best
e.g.
'

me quite unwarranted by have in fact a the coincidence.

writers

in

all

languages,
vi. p.

We

Jeremy Taylor Works
If

similar coincidence in Hippol. Haer.

X 33
'

(P*

33^) «"> fWt TW

fJilKpCp

TTKTTOS

evpeOiisKai to /xiya TTiarevdrjvai
2.

dvvrjOjjs.

they were all zealous for the doctrines of righteousness, and impatient of sin, in yourselves and

364

apa ovv]

A

favourite colloca:

tion of particles in S. Paul

see Fritz-

sche on

Rom.
is

v. 18.

The

accentuathis'*',

it is not to be imagined what a happy nation we should be.' See also e.g. Rom. vii.

in the people,

tion apa ovv

erroneous.
'

4
as

€0avaT<68r)Te,

KapnocpoprjO'Oip.ev , viii.

tovto Aeyei]

He means
12.

in § 2 (twice), §

See the note on Galatians iii. 1 7. The words therefore which follow ought not to be treated as an apocryphal quotation, as they
are
3.

15 eXafieTe, icpafypev, in S. Paul.

and frequently

IX.

'

Do

not deny the resurrection

of the body. As we were called in the flesh, so also shall we be judged
in the flesh.

by several
ao~TTikov\
1

editors

and

others.
ao~7rihov
i.

As

Christ being spirit

For
vi. 14,

Trjpelv

became
the

comp.
4.

Tim.

James

27.

flesh for us, so shall we in flesh receive our recompense.

alwviov]

The omission

in the

Syriac is probably correct ; comp. § 14 TocravTrjv dvvaTai 77 cra.pt; avTt]
p,€TaXa^elv £(orjv k.t.A., § 1 7 crvvrjypevoi apev eVl ttjv farjv. The epithet may

Let us love one another; let us make a return to God for His goodness. What must this return be? Sincere
repentance and unceasing praise the praise not of our lips only, but of our hearts and of our actions.' Kat p,rj Xeye'ra) tis k.t.A.] This 5.
passage, as far as
p,Lo-66v, is

have been inserted from the expression
just

above, \rf^f6pc6a £0)7)1/ alaviov. Similarly in John xx. 31 alaviov is
after farjv

aivo\rj^r6p,cda

tov

added
in
1

by

NCD

etc.,

and

Tim.

vi.

(from ver. 12) less usual ttjs
authorities.

is

19 ttjs alcovlov £<dr}s substituted for the

ovtcos {oofjs

In

Luke

x.

by several 25 Marcion

quoted in several collections of Syriac fragments, immediately after the opening sentence of this epistle see the note on the beginning of § 1, and comp. I. p. 185. The sentence
:

read
c.

£0)771/

without
i

aleoviov (see Tertull.

eis

Xpio-Tos...r]fJias

eicaXeo-ev

is

also
;

Marc.

iv. 25),

and so one Latin copy.
secure?

quoted by Timotheus of Alexandria
see
I.

aiTo\a$<£>psv\

The

pre-

p. 180.
rj

position implies that it is already potentially our own, so that we are only recovering 3. right: see Galatia?is iv. 5

avTr)

o-ap£

k.t. A.]

Difficulties

on this point were very early felt and met by S. Paul, 1 Cor. xv. 12 sq. A
little

with the note.

later the precursors of Gnosti-

IX]

AN ANCIENT HOMILY
IX.

229
avTt]
y\

5

Kal

/urj

Xeyerto tis

v/ukjov,

otl

crapp

ov Kpiverai ovde dviorTaTcu,
6V TLVL CtU€f3\6^raT€,
5 ris]

yi/coTe'

ev tlvl e(rwdr}Te,
;

€L
it

fJLY\

€V Trj (TCCpKL TaVTf] OVT€$
pyjdeis.

AC

;

S

translates, as if

had read

6 ovde]

A;

oiire

C.

cism boldly maintained that the onlyresurrection was a spiritual resurrection (2 Tim. ii. 18). It afterwards became a settled tenet of the Gnostic
sects to

ttjv Kapbiav crov tt)v era pica crov

rau-

(pOapTr/v elvai Kal napa^prja-rj So too avTjj ev p,iao~p.(p tiv'i k.t.X.
rrjv

deny the resurrection of the

otl

Ps.-Ign. Tars. 2 erepoi de [Xeyovcriv] r} o~dp£ avTrj ovk eyeiperai, Kal del
fiiov
£r)v

body

:

bevrj to.

see Polyc. Phil. 7 os av p.e6o\6yia tov Kvpiov npos ras IBias

d7roXavo-TLK6v

Kal

peTievai.

ini.6vp.ias /cat

Xeyg

prjTe avacrraaiv p-r^re

Kpiaiv elvai, Justin Dial. 80 (p. 306 D)

See also Orig. c. Cels. v. 22. This practical consequence our writer seems to have distinctly in view §§ 8>
(2) That it is legitimate to decline martyrdom and to avoid persecution by a denial of Christ with a mental
9.

yap Kal crvvefidXeTe vpels Ticrl Xeyopevois Xpio~Tiavo'is...oi Ka\ Xeyovcri prj
el

elvai

veKpatv

dvdcrTacriv

aXX'

ap,a

tco

dnoBvr\crKeiv ras yfrvxas

avrav dvaXap.Iren.
ii.

reservation.

Rightly or wrongly this
antagonists.

fiavecrOai els tov ovpavov, prj V7roXd(3r)Te

charge

is

constantly brought against
their

avrovs Xpicrriavovs
2

k.t.X.,

31.

them by

Thus

toctovtov

be

anoheovcri

iycipai... ut

ne quidem totum posse fieri esse autem resurrectionem a mortuis agnitionem ejus, quae ab eis dicitur, veritatis' (comp.
;

veKpov credant hoc in

tov

Agrippa Castor, writing against Basilides (Euseb.
tcdv

H.E. iv. 7), represented him as teaching ddiacpopelv elSvXodvdnoyevop.evovs
ttjv
'.

Kal

dnapacpvXaKTcos
iii.

ttlcttlv

e£op.vvpevovs Kara tovs

v.

31.

1,

2),

Act. Paul, et Thecl. 14
r)v

fjpels (re

8i8d£opev,

Xeyei ovtos dvd-

on rjdr) yeyovev id) ols e%opev renvois, Kal dvicrTapeOa Qeov eneyvooKores d\r]dfj, Tertull. de Res. Cam.
o~Tao~iv yevecrdai,

19

'Nacti quidam sollemnissimam

and Iren. Haer. temeritatem progressi sunt quidam ut etiam martyres spernant et vituperent eos qui propter Domini confessionem occiduntur etc' (comp. i. 24. 6). This is a contcov dicoypcov Kaipovs 18. 5 'Ad tantam

formam, allegorici non tamen semper, resurrectionem quoque mortuorum manifeste annuntiatam in imaginariam
eloquii prophetici
et figurati,

See on Kirche This view again seems to p. 495 sq. be combated by our writer, §§4, 5,
stant charge in Tertullian.
this subject Ritschl Altkath.
7, 10.

significationem distorquent etc.,' with the following chapters. From this doctrine the antinomian

(1)

Gnostics deduced two consequences; That the defilement of the flesh is a matter of indifference, provided that the spirit has grasped the truth.

Schwegler Nachap. Zeitalt. I. p. 453 sq maintained that the expression in our text is directed against docetic Ebionism. He is well refuted
p.

by
ev

Hilgenfeld
'

Afiost,

Vat.
'

115 sq.
7.

Against

this

error

is

directed the
v.

tlvl]

in

what,''
et

not
p.r)

in
tt}

warning Hermas Sim.
crov ravTfjv (pvXaacre

7

ttjv

adp<a

whom,' as the following
crapKi

ev

KaOapdv Kal dpiavKarevoiKovv ev

shows.
l

tov,
avTji

Iva to TTVevp.a to
p,apTvprjo-T]
r]

dvej3Xe\f/aTe]

ye
I

?'ecovered
ToiavTrjs

your
dxXvos

avTrj

Kal diKaicodrj

sight';

comp.
Trj

§

crov

o-dpi-- {Skene pijnoTe dvafirj eVi

yepovres ev

opdaei dvej3Xe\j/'apev k.t.X.

230
Se?

THE EPISTLES OF
ovv
rinas

S.

CLEMENT.
ty)v
kcli

[IX

ws

vaov
ev
ty\
el

Qeov
crapKi

(pvXaoro'eiv

crdpKa'
ev
Trj

bv

Tpoirov

yap
/uev

eKXt]6r]Te 9

crapKi
tjjULas,

eXevcrecrde.

wv

Xpi&TOs Kvpios, 6 craicras to 7rpcoTOv 7rvevfJLa y eyeveTO crdpp Kal
kcli
rj/uLels

6

ovtcos

rjjULas

eKaXecrev, ovtcos

ev

TavTrj

Trj 5

crapKi diToXri^ofJieda tov

/uucrdov.

dyairio^Lev ovv dX-

XrjXovs, 07rws eXdcojuev

iravTes eU ty\v flaariXelav tov

Oeov.
2
kolI

ok e^ofxev

Kaipov
AC;

tov
et

ladrjvai,

eTrihwfjLev
dominus

eav(noster),

ev ttj (rapid... b crwcras]

in

came

venit christus

unus

existens, is

letters,

qui salvavit S. This may be explained by the obliteration of some so that eXeicecde was read eX...de, and translated as if r/\de. 3 eXeveXevaeadai A.
et]

ceffde]

Fragm Syr
:

;

eh

ACS

Timoth

:

see the lower

note.

4

irvev/xa]

AS

;

change.

eyivero]

AC

;

\6yos C see above, I. p. 125, for the motive of this add. 8e S Timoth Fragm-Syr. in <?"<*/)£]

AC
5

;

came S Timoth Fragm-Syr.
I.

na\ 01/rws]

A;

/cat

ovtus Kal C.
is

e/cct-

co?

vaov Qeov
ttjv

k.t.\.~\

See Ign.
vaov Qeov
16, 17, vi.

the ever

Logos,

here presented in a
;

Philad. 7
TTjpelre:

aapKa vpiov
1

(os

somewhat unusual form comp. how-

comp.

Cor.

iii.

Hermas Sim.

v.

6 to

7rvevp.a

to

19, 2 Cor. vi. 16,
9.

and see
Not,

Ign. Ephes.
I

15 (with the notes).
3.

ayiov, to npoov, to KTiaav nao~av ttjv ktio~iv, KaTCOKiaev 6 Qebs els aapKa r)v

eXevaeade]
it,

think, els

tt)v

ftaaiXeiav tov Qeov, as

Harnack
el

efiovXero, ix. I enelvo yap to 6 vlbs tov Qeov iariv, Theoph.
tol.
ii.

Tvvevpa

ad Au-

takes
el

but

els tt)v Kpiaiv.

IO ovtos ovv
Kal
o~o(pia

coi/

nvevpa Qeov ko\
bvvapis vyj/iaTov
Kal
81

Xpio-rbs k.t.A.]
els,

The reading

apxh

kcu

for

now supported by ample
evidently required by Mill and others would

KarijpxeTo
iii.

els

tovs

irpo(j)rJTas

authority, is the context.

avTav eXaXei
16

k.t.X.,

Tertull. adv.

Marc.

'spiritus

Creatoris
c.

have read
sense.

coy,

which gives the same

Christus,' Hippol.

qui est Noet. 4 (p. 47
r)v,

Editors quote as a parallel
iariv 'Irjaovs Xpiaros, is quite out of place here,

Lagarde) Xoyos
dvvap.es
rjv k.t.X.

crapf-

irvevp-a

r\v,

Ign.

Magn.
els

7

els

but

See especially Dorner Lehre von der Person Christi I.
p.

though appropriate there where the writer is dwelling on unity. It is
that the reading of possible 6IC arose out of eilC i.e. et 'Irjaovs,

205 sq.
8.
l

cos

A

e\op,ev

Kaipov]
:

while

we

have opportunity''
(with the note),

or € IOIC

i.e. el

6 'Irjcrovs.

The

confu-

m

Kaipov
10.

e'xop.ev.

comp. Gal. vi. 10 Ign. Smyrn. 9 cos Another instance
8.
i.

sion would be easier, as the preceding word ends in €
.

of as, 'while,' occurs above, §
Trpoyvaa-T-qs] Justin
b),
(p.

Apol.
19,

44

4.

coj/

pev\

As though

the sentence
in a

82
11.

Tatian adGraec.
ii.

Theoph.

were intended to be continued participial form yevopevos 8e.
to irpQ>Tov irvevpai]

ad Ajitol.
eldevai
viii.
to.

ic.

Ta ev Kapdia] 2 Chron. xxxii. 31
ev
ttj

The

doctrine

Kapdia ovtov, Deut.
to.

of the pre-existence of the Son, as

2 8iayv(oo~6rj

ev

ttj

Kapdia

o~ov,

ix]

AN ANCIENT HOMILY.

23

1

tovs Ttp depairevovTL Qew, avTifdurdiav avTw Sidovres*
10 iroiav
;

to

/ueTavofjcrai

eiAucpivovs

yvcoo'Ttis yap ectlu twv 7rdvTcov Kal

Kapdias* irpoeiSws tjjULtov to.
diro
r\fj.as

hv

KapSia.

Sw/uiev
fJiovov

o~TO[xctTOS

dWa

7rpocrSe^t]Tai
I

ws
oytoi

avTcp aivov alcoviov > pxrj Kal diro KapSlas, iva viovs. Kal yap etirev 6
eiciN
01

ovv

Kvpw
toy

5 'AAeAdpoi

moy

noioyNTec

to

GeAHMA

TTATpOC MOYadd. existens in came (wv Xecrev] AC rfj vapid) S, but this may be only a gloss of ovrus and probably does not represent any additional words in the Greek text, ourws sec] ovtco C. 6 dwoX^opeda] airoXrjxf/opatda A. ovv] AS ; on*. C. 10 eiXiKpivovs] 9 t£ depairetioitTi] AC; add. nos S.
;

h

A

;

i\iKpi.vov<T

A.

11

rd

iv Kapdia] raevKapSia

A

;

ret,

eyKapdia

C

;

ea quae in

corde nostrum S.

12 alvov aiioviov] auaviov (om. cuvov)
/cat 17/ias

A;

atvov (om. aiioviov)

CS.

13 r]fxds]AC;

S.

15 iroiovvTes] Trovpreo- A.

i

Sam.

ix. 19, etc.

Hilgenfeld reads

prjrrjp

ivKap8ia (s. iyKapbia) C. cod., Jun., iv Kapdia ceteri edd.' But, inasmuch as an iota subscript or adscript never appears in

ra ivKapdia, saying of

A

l

ol

tov Xoyov
j

pov ko\ ddeXcpoi pov ovroi elaiv, roil OeoC aKovovTes Kal

noiovvTes.
(P-

39)j gives

Epiphanius, Haer. xxx. 14 the saying Ovtol elatv
77

ol ddeXcpoi
to.

pov Kal

prjrrjp, 01 7roiovvT€S
it

MSS of this date, the transcriber could not have written iv Kapdia otherwise than he has done. Moreover, since iv Kapbiq and iv rfj Kapb'iq occur numberless times in the lxx, whereas the adjective iyKapdios is not once found there, this reading seems to me imIn Clem. Alex. Paed. i. 3 (p. 103) I should be disposed conversely to read diopav ra iv Kapdia (for iympprobable.
bia) Xdyos.

BeXrjpaTa tov iraTpos pov, as

is

The word

iyKap8ios

how-

ever

is

legitimate in

itself.

assumed, from an Ebionite gospel (Westcott Canon p. 160, Hilgenfeld Apost. Vat. p. 122