Imatges de pÓgina
[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

and Thamar, children of David ? In the next chapter, • Have P you not read of the family of Solomon ?' They 9 did not remember that saying.' - Behold,' we find what is written of Moses and Aaron.' • For sos the boly scriptures speak in these very words.' • Ast the apostle said.' See

2 Cor. xi. 12. “Whom" the divine apostle rejects.' •Widows wbom the divine apostle refuseth. · Let us be mindful w of the word, which says.' Sec Eccles. vii, 26. • As * we have learned from the law, the prophets, and the Lord Jesus Cbrist.' • Let y us inquire and search from the law to the New Testament.'

8. Farther, he seems in several places to refer to a practice then in use of reading the scriptures in private houses, and at visits.

For? he blames some, whom he calls idle, 'who went about to the houses of brethren, and sisters, virgins, under a pretence of visiting them, or reading the scriptures to them, or exorcising them, or teaching them.' Representing his own and other good people's way of travelling, whose conduct is set forth to be an example, he says : When we come to a place where there is no man, but all are faithful women and virgins, when we have gathered them all together, and find they live in peace, we speak to them in all purity, and read to them the scriptures. Afterwards in the next chapter : * Ifb we come to a place, and there be one faithful woman only alone, and nobody else; we do not stay there, nor pray there, nor read the scriptures there, but we flee away as from the face of a serpent, and P Nonne legisti de familià Salomonis, &c. ii. 12.

q Non enim recordati sunt dicti illius, &c. ii. 13. " Ecce reperimus quod scriptum est de Mose et Aarone. ii. 14.

* Sic enim scripturæ sacræ testantur ad verbum. ii. 14. + Sicut dixit apostolus. i. 12.

u Quos aversatur apostolus divinus. i. 10.

aut cum viduis, quas fugit divinus apostolus. ii. 14.

-sed simus memores verbi dicentis de muliere. ii. 10.

* Sicut didicimus de Lege, et Prophetis, et Domino Jesu Christo. i. 12.

y Inquiramus et scrutemur a Lege ad Novum Testamentum. ii. 7.

? Alii autem circumeuntes per domos virginum, fratrum, et sororum, prætextu visitandi eos, aut legendi scripturas, aut exorcizandi eos, aut docendi eos, quia sunt otiosi. i. 10.

a Si autem contingat, ut nos recipiamus in locum, ubi vir non est, sed omnes sunt mulieres et virgines, cogantque nos pernoctare in illo loco; vocamus omnes illos in unum locum, ad latus dextrum--et quando congregatæ veniunt omnes, et videmus quomodo in pace sunt, loquimur cum illis verba castitatis in timore Dei, et legimus illis scripturas in verecundiâ, &c. ii. 4.

• Si autem recipiamus nos in locum, et inveniamus ibi unicam mulierem fidelem solam, nec quisquam alius ibi sit nisi illa sola, non stamus ibi, neque oramus ibi, neque legimus ibi scripturas, sed fugimus, sicut coram facie serpentis, et tamquam coram laqueo peccati. ii. 5.

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

. We

c с

from a dangerous snare.' And in another place.
do not sing psalms, nor read the scriptures to Gentiles."

EXTERNAL EVIDENCE. II. Having made these extracts, it will be proper to consider the age and authority of the epistles from whence they are taken. When was first reported among us, that Mr. Wetstein of Amsterdam bad received out of the East a Syriac translation of two new epistles of Clement, bishop of Rome, I said, it was a mistake. It was more probable, that he had received a Syriac translation of the epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, and of the other epistle often ascribed to him. And if that was the case, the translation might be very valuable, and of great use, because we have not the epistle to the Corinthians entire, and of the other epistle a fragment only. And undoubtedly those two epistles, if entire, though in a translation only, would have been an acceptable present to the learned world. But I was mistaken in my conjecture. The report first made has been confirmed by the event. The two epistles received by Mr. Wetstein, and published by him, have been hithertod 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 bis books against heresies : · Whene

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 • therefore of this Clement, when there was no small dissen• sion 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


[ocr errors]


Propterea non psallimus gentibus, neque legimus illis scripturas. ii. 7. d 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. l. 3. c. 3. p. 176. ed. Massuet. Et. conf. Euseb. H. E. 1. 3. c. 15. et 16. et 1. 5. c. 6.

• 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, Inf which letter, says the ecclesias

tical 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 holy Lord's-day, in which we • read your epistle. 'Which we shall also read frequently * for our instruction, as s well as the former, written to us • by Clement,'

Íbis, 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, madeb 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, ork of the Romans, to the Corinthians.

5. Origen, about 230, bas 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 Cesarea, 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

[ocr errors]



Euseb. H. E. 1. 4. c. 3. p. 145. B. C.

ως και την προτεραν ήμιν δια Κλημεντος γραφεισαν. Ιbid.

Ακεσαι γε τοι παρει μετα τινα περι της Κλημεντος προς Κορινθιες επιστολης αυτω ειρημενα. . H. E. I. 4. c. 22. in. Vid. et. I. 3. c. 16.

Aυτικα ο Κλημης εν τη προς Κορινθιες επιστολη κατα λεξιν φησι. Str. 1. i. p. 289. A. Paris 1629. Vid. et Str. 4. p. 516. A. Str. 6. p. 647. A. B. προς Κορινθιας Ρωμαιων επισολη. Str. 1. 5. p. 586. Β.

I De Princip 1. 2. p. 82. et 83. Edit. Bened. T. i.

in Comm. in Jo. c. i. v. 29. T. 2. p. 143. Huet.

Philoc. cap. 23. p. 81. Cant. • H. E. I. 3. c. 15. et 16.


Αλλα καν το

[ocr errors]

: one epistle acknowledged by all, a great and admirable • epistle, which as from ihe 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 P 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 6 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 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 bis 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 : • Her wrote in the name of the church of Rome to the

church of Corinth a very useful epistle, which also is pub. • licly 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 Ecclesiastical 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 P L. 3. c. 3.

9 Catech. 18. n, viii. p. 288. edit. Bened. Clemens, de quo apostolus ad Philippenses, -scripsit ex persona 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.

p. 110.

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 bad 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 u 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' 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, “ Tow such [eunuchs] Clement also, successor of • the apostle Peter, of whom the apostle Paul makes men

tion, 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 • De quo et Clemens, vir apostolicus, qui post Petrum Romanam rexit ecclesiam, mittit ad Corinthios. In Is. cap. 52. T. III. p. 382.

• 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. In Eph. 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. I. 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. 1. 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: ei deinceps multi apostolici, et martyres, et illustres tam sanctitate quam eloquentiâ viri, quos ex propriis scriptis nôsse perfacile est. Id. ibid. p. 156. m.

-quarum yvnalotnta et utilitatem nunc indicare atque demonstrare

« AnteriorContinua »