« EdellinenJatka »
epistles received by Mr. Wetstein, and published by him, have been hitherto unknown. It must therefore be very fit that we examine their title to this high original, before we receive them as genuine. In the first place I will consider the external, then the internal evidence.
In examining these epistles by external evidence we are led to recollect what ancient writers have said of Clement and his works.
1. Says Irenæus, bishop of Lyons in Gaul, who flourished about the year 178, in his books against heresies: When the blessed apostles Peter and Paul had founded and established the church, (at Rome) they delivered the office of the bishopric in it to Linus-to him succeeded
Anencletus. Next to whom in the third place after the apostles, Clement obtained the
bishopric, who had seen the blessed apostles, and conversed with them-In the time there
"fore of this Clement, when there was no small dissention among the brethren at Corinth, the
Church of Rome sent a most excellent letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace
among themselves, and reminding them of the doctrine lately received from the apostles, which declares, that there is one God Almighty, maker of the heavens and the earth, who brought in the flood, and called Abraham: who brought the people out of Egypt, who spake with Moses, who ordained the law, and sent the prophets.'
This is the only writing of Clement, which is taken notice of by Irenæus. If he had known of any other, why should he not have quoted it, the more effectually to confute and silence the unreasonable men against whom he was arguing?
2. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, flourished about the year 170. Eusebius mentions an epistle of his to Soter, then bishop of Rome, In which letter, says the ecclesiastical historian, he makes mention also of the epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, testifying that it had been 'wont to be read in the church from ancient time, saying, To day we have kept the Lord's day, in which we read your epistle. Which we shall also read frequently for our instruction, as well as the former, written to us by Clement.'
This, as it seems to me, affords an irrefragable argument, that there was but one epistle of the Church of Rome, written by Clement to the Corinthians.
3. We are also assured by Eusebius, that Hegesippus, who flourished about the year 173, made mention of the epistle of Clement to the Corinthians.
4. Clement of Rome is several times quoted by his namesake of Alexandria, about the year 194. But he quotes only the epistle of Clement, or of the Romans, to the Corinthians.
5. Origen, about 230, has some passages out of Clement's epistle to the Corinthians in his books of Principles, and in his Commentary upon St. John's Gospel. He elsewhere * quotes a work called Circuits, ascribed to Clement.
6. We come now to Eusebius of Cæsarea, about the year 315, who having mentioned the order of the succession of the first bishops of Rome to Clement, whom he reckons the third after the apostles, adds: Of this Clement there is one epistle acknowledged by all, a great and admirable epistle, which as from the church of Rome, he wrote to the church of the Corinthians, upon occasion of a dissension, which there was then at Corinth. And we know, that this epistle has been formerly, and is still publicly read in many churches.'
In another place he speaks of the epistle of Clement acknowledged by all, which he wrote 'to the Corinthians, in the name of the church of Rome. Afterwards, in the same chapter: It ought to be observed, that there is another epistle said to be Clement's. But this is not so generally received as the former. Nor do we know the ancients to have quoted it. There
have been published also not long since other large and prolix writings in his name, containing
Præcipuum vero, ut tandem ad rem ipsam veniam, manuscripti hujus ornamentum sunt duæ Clementis Romani Epistolæ, hactenus non ineditæ solum, verum nostri temporis eruditis plane incognitæ. Wetst. Proleg. p. v.
Iren. contr. Hær. 1. 3. c. 3. p. 176. ed. Massuet. Et Conf. Euseb. H. E. 1. 3. c. 15. et 16. et 1.. 5. c. 6.
Euseb. H. E. 1. 4. c. 3. p. 145. B. C. δώς και την προτεραν ήμιν δια Κλημεν
• Ακεσαι γε τοι παρεσι μετα τινα περι της Κλημενης προς Κορινθίας επίτολης αυτῷ είρημενα. H. E. 1. 4. c. 22. in. Vid.
et 1. 3. c. 16.
4 Αντικα ὁ Κλήμης εν τη προς Κορινθίας επισολη κατα λεξιν Cro. Str. 1. i. p. 289. A. Paris. 1629. Vid. et Str. 4. p. 516. A. Str. 6. p. 647. A. B.
6 Αλλα καν τη προς Κορινθιες Ῥωμαίων επισολη. Str. 1. 5.
De Princip. 1. 2. p. 82. et 83. Edit. Bened. T. i.. i Comm. in Jo. c. i. v. 29. T. 2. p. 143. Huet. Philoc. cap. 23. p. 81. Cant.
1 H. E. 1. 3. c. 15. et 16.
m L. 3. c. 3. p. 110.
Dialogues of Peter and Appion, of which there is not the least mention made by the ancients. 'Nor have they the pure apostolical doctrine.'
So writes Eusebius, who had so good opportunities for acquainting himself with the writings of Christians before his time: and, so far as we are able to judge, diligently improved those opportunities.
7. Cyril of Jerusalem, about the year 348, quotes, or refers to a passage of Clement, which is in his epistle to the Corinthians.
8. Jerom in his Catalogue, written in 392, in the article of Clement of Rome expresseth himself in this manner: He wrote in the name of the church of Rome to the church of • Corinth a very useful epistle, which also is publicly read in some places-There is likewise a 'second epistle, which goes under his name, but it is rejected by the ancients. And a prolix disputation of Peter and Appion, which is censured by Eusebius in the third book of his Eccle'siastical History.'
Upon this chapter we are led to make some remarks. 1. There was but one epistle of Clement universally acknowledged: which also was publicly read in some churches. 2. There was another epistle received as Clement's by some in Jerom's time. But he says, it was rejected by the ancients, that is, was not quoted by them as Clement's. 3. Jerom does not expressly say, that this second epistle was supposed by any to have been written to the Corinthians. But, possibly, some of those who received it, reckoned it to have been sent to the same church, to which the former epistle was sent. 4. Jerom was quite ignorant of any other epistles ascribed to Clement. Having mentioned those two epistles, he proceeds to the long disputation, which Eusebius had censured: and doubtless ought to be understood to confirm that censure with his own approbation.
Clement is mentioned in some other works of Jerom: particularly in his Commentary upon the prophecy of Isaiah: where he expressly quotes the epistle of Clement bishop of Rome to the Corinthians. And much after the same manner twice in his Commentary upon the epistle to the Ephesians. Clement is also mentioned by Jerom in the fifth chapter of the book of Illustrious Men, where is the article of St. Paul, in speaking of the epistle to the Hebrews. He is also mentioned elsewhere.
There is yet one passage more of Jerom, of which particular notice must be taken. It is in his first book against Jovinian: who, as Jerom assures us, beside other things, said, that • f virgins have no more merit than widows and married women, unless their works distinguish them in other respects: and likewise, that there is no difference of merit between abstaining from some meats and using them with thanksgiving.' Our author having quoted Matt. xix. 12, says, To such [eunuchs] Clement also successor of the apostle Peter, of whom the apostle • Paul makes mention, Philip. iv. 3, writes epistles, and almost throughout discourseth of the purity of virginity. And in like manner, [or and afterwards] many apostolical men, and martyrs, and others, illustrious for their piety and eloquence, as may be easily seen in their own writings.'
Mr. Wetstein, whose words I transcribe below, says that here Jerom refers to the two
• Catech. 18. n. viii. p. 288. edit. Bened.
b Clemens, de quo Apostolus ad Philippenses, -scripsit ex personâ Romanæ ecclesiæ ad ecclesiam Corinthiorum valde utilem epistolam, quæ et in nonnullis locis publice legitur― Fertur et secunda ejus nomine epistola, quæ a veteribus reprobatur. Et disputatio Petri et Appionis longo sermone conscripta, quam Eusebius in tertio Historiæ Ecclesiasticæ volumine coarguit. De V. I. cap. 15.
De quo et Clemens, vir apostolicus, qui post Petrum Romanam rexit ecclesiam, mittit ad Corinthios. In Is. cap. 52. T. III. p. 382.
d De quibus et Clemens in epistolâ suâ scribit. In ep. ad Eph. cap. ii. v. 2. T. IV. P. I. p. 338.
Cujus rei et Clemens ad Corinthios testis est. cap. iv. v. 1. ib. p. 359.
Et si Clemens, aut ille Apostolorum discipulus, aut ille Alexandrinæ ecclesiæ, et ipsius magister Origenis, tale aliquid dixerunt. Adv. Rufin. 1. 2. p. 406. T. IV. P. 2.
Dicit, virgines, viduas, et maritatas, quæ semel in Christo
lotæ sunt, si non discrepent cæteris operibus, ejusdem esse meriti-Tertium proponit, inter abstinentiam ciborum, et cum gratiarum actione perceptionem eorum, nullam esse distantiam. Adv. Jovin. l. 2. T. IV. p. 146.
Ad hos [eunuchos] et Clemens, successor Apostoli Petri, cujus Paulus Apostolus meminit, scribit epistolas, omnemque pene sermonem suum de virginitatis puritate contexuit: et deinceps multi Apostolici, et Martyres, et illustres tam sanctitate quam eloquentiâ viri, quos ex propriis scriptis nôsse perfacile est. Id. ibid. p. 156. m.
h quarum yvyoiola et utilitatem nunc indicare atque demonstrare conabor. Proferam primo duo externa testimonia Hieronymi atque Epiphanii, quorum ille c. Jovinianum l. 1.
Hi,' inquit, sunt eunuchi, quos castravit non necessitas, sed voluntas propter regnum cœlorum.--Ad hos et Clemens, successor Apostoli Petri, cujus Paulus Apostolus meminit,' Philip. iv. 3, scribit epistolas, omnemque pene sermonein suum de virginitatis puritate contexuit: et deinceps multi apostolici et martyres, et illustres tam sanctitate quam eloquen
epistles published by him. But 1. Jerom must be understood to mean the two well known epistles of Clement, of which he had spoken in his Catalogue: which are plainly the same, and no other than those spoken of by Eusebius of Cæsarea in his Ecclesiastical History, to which he refers, and indeed transcribes. It is the more reasonable, and even expedient, so to understand him, because the books against Jovinian were written about the same time with the catalogue: from which it appears, that he had then no knowledge of any other epistles of Clement. If he had, he would not have omitted there to take notice of them. And in his other works, as we have seen, he quotes no epistle of Clement, but his well known and universally received epistle to the Corinthians. Here he speaks of two, it having been then not uncommon to ascribe to Clement another epistle, beside that which was universally received by the ancients, as we saw him acknowledge in the Catalogue. 2. Jerom here speaks hyperbolically, a style very frequent with him, as all know, and especially in his books against Jovinian: where he so exalted virginity, and depreciated marriage, as to give general offence, though at that time virginity was in great esteem. In those epistles, says Jerom, Clement discourseth almost throughout of the purity of virginity. The meaning of which really is no more, than that there are in his episcles some things favourable to virginity. Jerom may be supposed to refer to some things in ch. 21, 29, 30, 35, 38, 48, and 58, of the epistle to the Corinthians: particularly to such places as these, where Clement says: Let our [or your] children partake of the discipline of Christ-Let them know how much a chaste love avails with God, how great and excellent his fear is, saving all who serve him in holiness with a pure mind. We being the portion of the holy one, let us do all things that pertain unto holiness, shunning impure and unchaste embraces.' Among the blessed and wonderful gifts of God Clement reckons continence, [or chastity] in holiness.' Again: Let therefore our whole body be saved in Jesus Christ.'. Afterwards, in the same chapter: Let not him that is chaste [or pure] in the flesh, grow proud, knowing that it is from another he received the gift of continence.' And near the end he And near the end he prays, That God may give them patience, long-suffering, continence, chastity, and sobriety. To these and other things in the epistles to the Corinthians Jerom may be supposed to refer. And he may intend a large part of that which is called Clement's second epistle: in which are recommended chastity, self-denial, and mortification to the delights of this world. Jerom might have a regard to that epistle from chap. 4, to chap. 12, that is, the end, so far as we have it. Where are such expressions as these: "keeping the flesh chaste.' 'We ought therefore to keep our flesh as 'the temple of God.' Serving God with a pure heart.' And the like. That such expressions as these may be the foundation of what he says is manifest from what immediately precedes the passage which we are considering. It is, says he, an act of eminent faith, and eminent virtue, to be a holy temple of God, to " offer ourselves a whole burnt-offering to the 'Lord," Rom. vii. 1. And, according to the same apostle, to be " holy both in body and spirit, • 1 Cor. xii. 34. These are eunuchs, who in Isaiah call themselves a dry tree-To these ⚫ eunuchs Clement writes.'The hyperbolical style appears likewise in what follows: In like manner many apostolical men, and martyrs, and others illustrious for their piety and eloquence,
as may be easily seen in their own writings.' It is true, that many, beside Clement, have discoursed of chastity, and of purity in soul and body. But who are they, of whom it can be said, without an hyperbole, that they had written books, discoursing almost throughout of the purity
tiâ viri, quos ex propriis scriptis nôsse perfacile est.' Hic vero Hær. xxx. Ebionitarum n. 15. AUTOS Kλyμys—Hæc tamen testimonia de nostris epistolis, quæ nemo non videt esse clarissima, et a Petavio et Martianæo, Epiphanii et Hieronymi editoribus, et ab omnibus, quotquot illa epistolis Clementis ad Corinthios præfixa legerunt, et a scriptoribus ecclesiasticæ historiæ, qui de Clemente egerunt, neglecta, id est, non intellecta, aut perperam de duabus istis ad Corinthios epistolis, in quibus tamen nec Sampsonis, nec prolixus de virginitate sermo reperitur, intellecta fuere. Wetst. Prolegom. p. v.
τι αγαπη άγνη παρα τῷ θεῷ δυνατα.κ. λ. Ep.
ad Corinth. cap 21.
Ibid. cap. 30.
-εγκράτεια εν άγιασμῳ. c. 35.
Ο Σωζέσθω το ήμων όλον σώμα εν Χρισῳ Ιησ8. c. 38.
* Ο άγιος εν τη σαρκι μή αλαζονευέσθω, γινωσκων, ότι
ἑτέρος εσιν ὁ επιχορηγων αυτῷ την εγκρατειαν. Ibid.
of virginity? And where are their writings to be found? Dr. Cave understood Jerom exactly after this manner. As did' Grabe likewise: whose remarks upon this passage of Jerom are so clear and full, and, as seems to me, satisfactory, that I think it great pity Mr. Wetstein did not observe and well consider them. If he had so done, it inight have prevented those scornful reflections upon Dr. Cave, and Bishop Beveridge, and the two learned editors of Epiphanius and Jerom, which are at p. v. of the Prolegomena. Godfrey Wendelin, as cited by Mr. Wetstein, Prolegom. p. vi. supposed that Jerom had an eye to the latter part of the second epistle, which is now wanting. And to the like purpose Cotelerius in his note at the end of that fragment. And indeed it has seemed to me not improbable, that Jerom reckoned he had an advantage to his cause from the second epistle ascribed to Clement. And therefore here writing against Jovinian, when his mind was heated with his argument, he speaks of two epistles of Clement: though in his catalogue, where he writes as a critic and an historian, he speaks as if he thought one only to be genuine: nor has he quoted any other in his Commentaries. Nevertheless I am of opinion, that we have enough remaining of these two epistles, and particularly of that last mentioned, to justify our interpretation of Jerom: especially with that qualifying expression almost: which no man can think to be a mere expletive. 3. I observe farther. If Jerom had intended the two epistles published by Mr. Wetstein, he would have said: To these eunuchs Clement wrote two whole epistles in praise of virginity, and teaching how it may be kept pure and incorrupt. And the remaining part of the sentence, relating to other apostolical men, and other eminent writers, would likewise have been different. 4. If Jerom had had these two epistles before him, and had supposed them to be written by Clement of Rome, he would not have failed to make great use of them in his books against Jovinian, and in his apology for them. Moreover they would also have been often quoted in his other writings, where he recommends virginity, and gives directions about preserving it.
9. Epiphanius, who flourished about A. D. 368, and afterwards, in his article of the heresy of the Carpocratians, speaking of the first bishops of Rome, quotes Clement thus: For he says in one of his epistles.' The passage there quoted, is in the 54th chapter of the epistle to the Corinthians, which we have. Hereby we perceive that Epiphanius acknowledged more than one epistle of Clement. And we have learned from Jerom, that about that time it was not uncommon to speak of two epistles, as written by Clement.
In another place, the heresy of the Ebionites, says Epiphanius: There are other books: used by them, as the Circuits of Peter, written by Clement: [probably meaning the recog⚫nitions] in which they have made many interpolations. But Clement himself confutes them in the circular letters written by him, which are read in the holy churches-He teaches • virginity, which they reject. He commends Elias, and David, and Samson, and all the prophets, whom they abuse.'
Mr. Wetstein thinks, that Epiphanius here intends the epistles published by him. But to me it appears plain, that Epiphanius intends the two epistles spoken of by Eusebius, in his Ecclesiastical History, and by Jerom in his Catalogue, and which we have had published now above a century by Patrick Young, from whence several other editions have been since made. For the epistles here spoken of by Epiphanius were circular, and read in the churches. So were Indeed Eusebius and Jerom speak of but one only publicly read in christian assemblies. But the other might be so read likewise. There is reason to think, that both were read in some
a Cæterum haud satis constat, quid sibi velit Hieronymus, cum de epistolis a Clemente ad Corinthios scriptis verba faciens, ' omnem pene sermonem suum de virginitatis puritate Clementem contexuisse,' scribat. Neque enim alias ab hisce quæ nunc extant epistolas ad Corinthios dedisse Clementem credi potest, nec in his utramque faciunt paginam virginitatis laudes. Id potius dicendum videtur, Hieronymum nimio virginitatis studio abreptum, hyperbolicâ dictione usum esse, cumque Clemens pauculas periodos animi corporisque puritati docendæ impendat, totum sermonem virginitatis encomio dicatum esse voluisse. H. L. T. i. p. 20. De Clemente. Hieronymus vero acriter disputans contra errorem Joviniani, eamdem conjugii ac virginitatis dignitatem coram Deo statuentis, hyperbolice ait, Clementem omnem pene sermonem suum de virginitatis puritate contexuisse. Quales
churches. For the eighty-fifth apostolical canon, as it is called, reckons two epistles of Clement among the books of the New Testament. And our two epistles were at the end of the Alexandrian manuscript, after the books of scripture generally received: which affords an argument, that both these epistles were publicly read in the place where it was written: and it should be taken notice of by us, that here we have two new witnesses to the number of Clement's epistles, as two only. If Jerom could say of our epistles, (as we have seen he might). that Clement almost throughout discourseth of the purity of virginity, Epiphanius might say, he teacheth it. He also says, that Clement commends Elias, David, Samson, and all the prophets, which is the proper character of Clement's epistle to the Corinthians, though not the whole of it, and particularly insisted on by that early writer Irenæus: in which, says he, • Clement 'exhorts the Corinthians to peace among themselves, and reminds them of the doctrine lately received from the apostles which declares, that there is one God Almighty, maker of the heavens and the earth, who called Abraham, who spake to Moses, and sent the prophets.' All which perfectly suits the epistle to the Corinthians, which we still have in our hands, and in the name of Clement, as may appear to any upon consulting ch. 17, 18, 19, 20, 43, and other places. Mr. Wetstein objects, that Samson is not named in the epistle just mentioned, whereas he is in his. But though we do not now find Samson's name in what remains of that epistle, he may have been there. And as we have it not entire, I think it would be presumption to say he was not there named.
10. Photius, patriarch of Constantinople in the ninth century, has two articles for Clement bishop of Rome. In the first he says, That Clement wrote a valuable epistle to the Corinthians, which is so esteemed by many, as to be read publicly. But that which is called the * second to the same is rejected as spurious.'
In the other article he speaks of two epistles of Clement to the Corinthians, bound together in one book or volume: and he distinctly gives the character of each, with regard to their style and doctrine; but says nothing particularly about the genuineness of either.
11. Nicephorus Callisti, in the fourteenth century, so agrees with Eusebius of Cæsarea, that I need not take any particular notice of him.
12. Mr. Wetstein seems to suppose, that Dionysius Barsalibi, bishop of Amida near the end of the twelfth century, of whom there is an account in Dr. Asseman's Bibliotheca Orientalis, speaks of another letter of Clement, written against those who rejected marriage. Barsalibi,' says Asseman, beside Ephrem, Chrysostom, and other authors, cites an epistle of • Clement against those who rejected marriage.' Upon which I observe, 1. It does not certainly appear what Clement is here spoken of. 2. If Clement of Rome be intended, Barsalibi must mean one of the two epistles spoken of by Eusebius, Jerom, Epiphanius, and Photius, provided he deserves any regard; for there never were any other epistles ascribed to him by learned Christians in former times. And it may be reckoned very likely, that Barsalibi cited the first epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, particularly ch. 1, or 21. So, on account of some things in that epistle Epiphanius might say, that Clement teaches virginity, and Jerom, that almost throughout he discourseth of the purity of virginity. And with regard to some other passages Barsalibi might say, that he wrote against those who rejected marriage. In like manner a learned writer might say, that St. Paul in his epistles recommends virginity; and another, suitably to the argument, of which he is treating, may say, he vindicates marriage. And both those authors would be understood to mean the same epistles. Yea they might both cite, or refer to one and the same epistle, for their several ends and purposes, particularly the first epistle to the Corinthians. Not now to instance in any other.
* Κλημεντα επιςολαίδιο.
13. Mr. Wetstein says farther, That' probably these two epistles were suppressed, or laid aside, because of the strictness of the rules of piety contained therein.' Which to me appears
Αυτός και επιβολην αξιόλογον προς Κορινθιας γραφει, ήτις πάρα πολλοις αποδοχής ηξιώθη, ώς και δημοσίᾳ αναγινώσκεσθαι. Η δε λεγόμενη δευτερα προς αυτες, ὡς νομού, αποδοκιμάζεται. Cod. 113. p. 289.
• Αναγνωστη βιβλιδάριον, εν ᾧ Κλημενίω επίτολαι προς Κορινθίας δυο ανέφεροντο. Cod. 126. p. 305.
Prolegom. p. vii. m.
Præter Ephræmum vero, Chrysostomum,quibus Bar