« ElőzőTovább »
• one epistle acknowledged by all, a great and admirable epistle, which as from ibe 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 bave 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 lvimself 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. p. 110.
4 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 Ėusebius in tertio Historiæ Ecclesiasticæ volumine coarguit. De V. I. cap. 15.
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 inentioned 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 Isaiab; where he expressly quotes the epistle of Clement bishop of Rome to the Corinthians. And much after the same manner twicet 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.
, 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 epistolà sua 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.
u 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. I. 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.
--quarum yunolotnta et utilitatem nunc indicare atque demonstrare
here Jerom refers to the two 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 bis 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 thein. And in his other works, as we bave 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 cpistle, 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 deprecinted 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 inore, than that there are in his epistles 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: Lety our for your children ' partake of the discipline of Christ Let them know how • much a chaste love avails with God, how great and excel• lent his fear is, saving all who serve him in holiness with a pure mind. Wer being the portion of the holy one, let • us do all things that pertain unto boliness, shunning im
conabor. Proferam primo duo externa testimonia Hieronymi atque Epiphanii, quorum ille c. Jovinianum I. i. • Hi,' inquit, “sunt eunuchi, quos castravit non necessitas, sed voluntas propter regnum cælorum. Ad hos et Clemens, successor apostoli Petri, cujus Paulus apostolus meminit, Philip. iv. 3, 'scribit epistolas, omnemque pene sermonem suum de virginitatis puritate contexuit: et deinceps multi apostolici et martyres, et illustres tam sanctitate quam eloquentià viri, quos ex propriis scriptis nosse perfacile est.' Hic vero Hær. xxx. Ebionitarum n. 15. Avroç Kanunc--Hæc tamen testimonia de nostris epistolis, quæ nemo non videt esse clarissima, et a Petavio et Martinæo, Epiphanii et Hieronymi editoribus, et ab omnibus, quotquot illa epistolis Clementis ad Corinthios præfixa legerunt, et scriptoribus ecclesiasticæ historia, 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 αγνη παρα τω θεώ δυναται κ. λ. Εp. ad Corinth
pure and unchaste embraces. Among the blessed and wonderful.gifts of God, Clement reckonsa « continence [or • chastity] in holiness. Again : « Letb therefore our whole ·body be saved in Jesus Christ. Afterwards, in the same chapter : · Leto not him that is chaste (or pure] in the • flesh, grow proud, knowing that it is from another he re• ceived the gift of continence.' 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 Jerome 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 : keep. ing the flesh chaste. • Wes ought therefore to keep our • flesh as the temple of God.' Servingh 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 inmediately precedes the passage which we are considering. Iti 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. xii, 1. And, ac
cording to the same apostle, to be “ holy both in body and * spirit," 1 Cor. vii. 34. These are eunuchs, who in İsaiah • 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 • Ibid. cap. 30.
εγκρατεια εν αγιασμό. c. 35. Σωζεσθω το ήμων όλον σωμα εν Χρισώ Ιησο. C. 38. εν τη σαρκι μη αλαζονευεσθω, γινωσκων, ότι έτερος εσιν ο επιχορηγων αυτη την
- μακροθυμιαν, εγκρατειαν, αγνειαν, και owopoouvnv. cap. 58.
e Et posteriora quidem loca de continentiâ virginali aperte loquuntur, priora vero licet castitatem in genere, ipsamque conjugalem, concernant, ab Hieronymo tamen in disputationis fervore aliorsum trahi potuerunt. Grabe Spic. T. I. p.
-και την σαρκα αγνην τηρησαντες. Εp. 2. cap. 8.
8 Δει 8ν ήμας, ως ναον θες, φυλασσειν την σαρκα. cap. 9.
h Hμεις αν εν καθαρα καρδια δελευσωμεν τω θεφ. Ιb. c. xi.
i Grandis fidei est, grandisque virtutis, Dei templum esse purissimum, totum se holocaustum offerre Domino, et juxta eundem apostolum, esse sanctum et corpore et spiritu. Hi sunt eunuchi, qui se lignum aridum ob sterilitatem putantes, audiunt per Isaiam, &c.
of purity in soul and body. But who are they, of whom it can be said, without an hyperbole, that they bad written books, discoursing almost throughout of the purity of virginity ? And where are their writings to be found ? Dr. Cavek 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 might 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 bis argument, he speaks of two epistles of Clement; though in bis 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 um 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
k 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, eandem conjugii ac virginitatis dignitatem coram Deo statuentis, hyberbolice ait, • Clementem omnem pene sermonen suum de virginitatis puritate contexuisse.' Quales hyberbolicæ locutiones in ipsius scriptis, inque ipso illo contra Jo ni. anum, haud infrequentes occurrunt. Spic. T. i. p. 264.
m Verisimile sit ex Epiphanio H. 30. cap. 15. et Hieronymo i. adversus Jovinianum 7. Apostolicum nostrum in iis quæ desiderantur istius epistolæ, de virginitate disseruis:e non paucis. Cot. ap. Patr. Ap. p. 188.