ἀρ[κ]ούμενοι· καὶ προσέχοντες τοὺς λόγους αὐτοῦ ἐπι5 μελῶς ἐνεστερνισμένοι ἦτε τοῖς σπλάγχνοις, καὶ τὰ παθήματα αὐτοῦ ἦν πρὸ ὀφθαλμῶν ὑμῶν. Οὕτως εἰσ 5 ἐνεστερνισμένοι] Bois. εστερνισμενοι Α. νιστο, Apost. Const. procem. ἐνεστερα νισμένοι τὸν φόβον αὐτοῦ, ib. v. 14 ἐνστερνισάμενος αὐτόν. There seems to be no such word as στερνίζεσθαι, and therefore ἐνεστερνισμένοι must be read. If ἐστερνισμένοι could stand, Cotelier's explanation would probably be correct, • Clementi ἐστερνισμένοι sunt, qui Latinis pectorosi, homines lati capacisque pectoris (2 Cor. vi. 11), as the analogy of σπλαγχνίζεσθαι suggests; and later critics seem to be wrong in making it equivalent to ἐνεστερνισμένοι, which owes its transitive sense to the preposition. τὰ παθήματα αὐτοῦ] i.e. τοῦ Θεοῦ, for there is no other word to which αὐτοῦ can be referred. Compare Gal. iii. 1 οἷς κατ ̓ ὀφθαλμοὺς Ἰησοῦς Χριστ τὸς προεγράφη ἐσταυρωμένος, of which Clement's expression is perhaps a reminiscence. The early Christian writers occasionally used language so strong in expressing their belief of our Lord's divinity, as almost to verge on patripassianism; so Ign. Ephes. 1 ἀναζωπυρήσαντες ἐν αἵματι Θεοῦ, Ign. Rom. 6 ἐπιτρέψατέ μοι μιμητὴν εἶναι τοῦ πάθους τοῦ Θεοῦ μου, Melito (Routh Rel. Sacr. 1. p. 122) ὁ Θεὸς πέπονθεν ὑπὸ δεξιᾶς Ισραηλίτιδος. The nearest parallel in the New Testament is Acts xx. 28, τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἣν περιεποιήσατο διὰ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ ἰδίου; but even if τοῦ Θεοῦ be the correct reading (as possibly it is), the form of expression is far less strong than in these patristic references. In this passage of Clement it has been proposed to read μαθήματα for παθήματα ; and the confusion of μαθητής, παθητής, in Ign. Polyc. 7, and μαθήματα, παθήματα, in Ign. Smyrn. 5, shows that the interchange would be easy. But (1) The parallels above quoted prove that no alteration is needed, since τὰ παθήματα αὐτοῦ would be a natural expression to a writer of this age; (2) The reading μαθήματα would destroy the propriety of the expressions in the parallel clauses as read in the MS, ἐνεστερνισμένοι referring to τοὺς λόγους and πρὸ ὀφθαλμῶν to τὰ παθήματα, ‘the words in your hearts, the sufferings before your eyes'; (3) While τὰ παθήματα is a common expression in the New Testament, being used especially to denote the sufferings of Christ, the word μábnua does not once occur either there or in the Apostolic fathers; and in the only passage in the Lxx where it is found (Jer. xiii. 21), there is a v. l. μαθητὰς (for μαθή ματα) which approaches more nearly to the original Hebrew ; (4) Though τὰ μαθήματα τοῦ Θεοῦ might stand, still αἱ διδαχαὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ (or some similar expression) would be more natural. It is urged indeed that, as Photius (Bibl. 126) complains of Clement's language in this epistle ὅτι ἀρχιερέα καὶ προστάτην τὸν Κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐξονομάζων οὐδὲ τὰς θεοπρεπεῖς καὶ ὑψηλοτέρας ἀφῆκε περὶ αὐτοῦ φωνάς, he cannot have had τὰ παθήματα αὐτοῦ in his text. But, as the declaration of Christ's divinity lurks under the reference of the preposition avrov, it might very easily have escaped the notice of Photius who in the course of this single embassy read as large a number of books as would have sufficed many a ρήνη βαθεῖα καὶ λιπαρὰ ἐδέδοτο πᾶσιν καὶ ἀκόρεστος πόθος εἰς ἀγαθοποιΐαν, καὶ πλήρης πνεύματος ἁγίου ἔκχυσις ἐπὶ πάντας ἐγίνετο· μεστοί τε ὁσίας βουλῆς ἐν ἀγαθῇ προθυμίᾳ μετ ̓ εὐσεβοῦς πεποιθήσεως ἐξετείνατε τὰς χεῖρας ὑμῶν πρὸς τὸν παντοκράτορα Θεόν, 5 ἱκετεύοντες αὐτὸν †ἵλεως† γενέσθαι, εἴτι ἄκοντες ἡμάρτετε. ἀγὼν ἦν ὑμῖν ἡμέρας τε καὶ νυκτὸς ὑπὲρ πάσης 4 πεποιθήσεως] πεποιηθησεωσ Α. το ακέραιοι] ακερεοι Α. points to the Alexandrian Clement; but this is not conclusive, since in the very next sentence the chronological order of Melito and Irenæus, is inverted, τὰ γὰρ Εἰρηναίου τε καὶ Μελίτωνος καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν τίς ἀγνοεῖ βιβλία; The question therefore must remain undecided; though the reasons in favour of the Roman Clement seem to preponderate. As it is very 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. · λιπαρὰ ἐδέδοτο] λειπαραεδεδετο Α. 8 ἐλέους] ελαιουσ Α. 9 εἰλικρινείς] ειλικρινεισ Α. man not ill-informed for a life-time. It must be remembered too that our MS is some centuries older than Photius, and therefore carries more authority. On the other hand Caius (or rather Hippolytus) early in the third century in the Little Labyrinth (Euseb. H.E. v. 28; see Routh Rel. Sacr. II. p. 129) mentions Clement with Justin, Miltiades, and Tatian, besides 'several others', among those ἐν οἷς θεολογεῖται ὁ Χριστός. Routh (p. 145) supposes Clement of Rome, to be meant (as 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. 185 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 resembling the language of the Roman Clement here, ὁ εὔσπλαγχνος Θεὸς καὶ Κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς οὐκ ἐβούλετο ἀπόλεσθαι μάρτυρα τῶν ἰδίων παθῶν, and that Clement of Alexandria (who is the alternative) can only have died a very few years (ten or at most twenty) before the passage was written. On the other side it may be urged that the order of the names, Ἰουστίνου καὶ Μιλτιάδου καὶ Τατιανοῦ καὶ Κλήμεντος καὶ ἑτέρων πλειόνων, 2. ἀγαθοποιΐαν] beneficence; again just below and §§ 33, 34: comp. I Pet. iv. 19, Test. xii. Patr. Jos. 18. The allied words occur several times in S. Peter : ἀγαθοποιεῖν η Pet. ii. 15, 20, iii. 6, 17; ἀγαθοποιός, 1 Pet. ii. 14. While καλοποιΐα regards the abstract character of the action, ἀγαθοποιΐα looks to its results and more especi ally to its effect on others. 6. †ἵλεως γενέσθαι] The adverb ἱλέως is recognised by Hesychius, but no instances are given in the lexicons. As it appears only to occur in the expression ἱλέως γίνεσθαι (as a v.l. in 2 Macc. ii. 22, vii. 37, x. 26), it is probably a grammatical mistake of the later language, the true construction being forgotten and the word τῆς ἀδελφότητος, εἰς τὸ σώζεσθαι μετ ̓ ἐλέους καὶ †συνειδήσεως† τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν αὐτοῦ· εἰλιτο κρινεῖς καὶ ἀκέραιοι ἦτε καὶ ἀμνησίκακοι εἰς ἀλλήλους· πᾶσα στάσις καὶ πᾶν σχίσμα βδελυκτὸν ὑμῖν· ἐπὶ τοῖς παραπτώμασιν τοῖς πλησίον ἐπενθεῖτε τὰ ὑστερήματα αὐτῶν ἴδια ἐκρίνετε· ἀμεταμέλητοι ἦτε ἐπὶ πάσῃ ἀγαθοποιΐα, ἕτοιμοι εἰς πᾶν ἔΡΓΟΝ ἀγαθόν· τῇ παναρέτῳ τὸ ἀμνησίκακοι] αμαμνησικακοι A. So I read the Ms with Tisch., but previous editors give it αναμνησικακοι. 14 ἕτοιμοι] αιτοιμοι Α. being erroneously treated as an adverb (λέως instead of ἵλεως). In this passage it be due to the tranmay scriber and not to Clement himself. At all events our MS (A) in the three passages of 2 Maccabees has ἱλέως, where B has a proper grammatical construction ἵλεω γενομένου, ἵλεω γενέσθαι, ἵλεω γενόμενον. 7. ἀγὼν ἦν κ.τ.λ.] Comp. Col. ii. I. ἡμέρας τε καὶ νυκτὸς] Hilgenfeld calls attention to the fact that the writer elsewhere has the same order 'day and night' §§ 20, 24, and argues thence 'scriptorem non e Judæis, qui noctem anteponunt, sed e gentilibus, Romanis quidem, ortum esse.' This argument is more specious than sound. Thus in the Apocalypse the order is always 'day and night,' iv. 8, vii. 15, xii. 10, xiv. 11, xx. 10 ; in S. Paul always 'night 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 order is used indifferently in both the Gospel (ii. 37, xviii. 7) and the Acts (ix. 24, xx. 31, xxvi. 7). 8. ἀδελφότητος] a word peculiar to S. Peter in the New Testament; I Pet. ii. 17, v. 9. 9. †συνειδήσεως†] If the reading be correct, it must mean 'with the consent of God,' but this is hardly possible. I hazard the conjecture εὐδοκήσεως (ΕΥΔΟΚΗΣἑως for ΣΥΝΕΙΔΗ cewc), which is less violent than συναινέσεως and other emendations. This conjecture struck me before I was aware that Davis had suggested συνευδοκήσεως, of which word I cannot find any instance. The clause would then mean 'Of His mercy and good pleasure: comp. § 9 ἱκέται γενομένοι τοῦ ἐλέους καὶ τῆς χρηστότητος αὐτοῦ. The Lexicons supply a few instances of the form εὐδόκησις (e.g. Diod. xv. 6, Dion. Hal. iii. 13), which also occurs below § 40 (see the note). In the N. Τ. the allied word εὐδοκία is generally said of God; Matt. xi. 26 (Luke x. 21), Eph. i. 5, 9, Phil. ii. 13. τὸν ἀριθμὸν κ.τ.λ.] Comp. Apost. Const. viii. 22 τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν σου διαφυλάττων. So too in our Burial Service, 'Shortly to accomplish the number of thine elect.' εἰλικρινεῖς καὶ ἀκέραιοι] For εἰλικρινεῖς, see Philippians i. 1o; for ἀκέραιοι Philippians ii. 15. 10. ἀμνησίκακοι] Test. xii Patr. Zab. 8 ἀμνησίκακοι γίνεσθε, Clem. Alex. Strom. vii. 14 (p. 883) ἀμνησίκακον εἶναι διδάσκει, Hermas Mand. ix. αὐτὸς ἀμνησίκακός ἐστι: comp. Strom. ii. 18 (p. 398) δι' ἀμνησικακίας. 12. τοῖς πλησίον] a brachylogy for τοῖς τῶν πλησίον. Jacobson quotes Eur. Hec. 996 μηδ ̓ ἔρα τῶν πλησίον. 13. ἀμεταμέλητοι κ.τ.λ.] i. e. When you had done good, you did not wish καὶ σεβασμίῳ πολιτείᾳ κεκοσμημένοι πάντα ἐν τῷ φόβῳ αὐτοῦ ἐπετελεῖτε τὰ προστάγματα καὶ τὰ δικαιώματα τοῦ Κυρίου ἐπὶ τὰ πλάτη τῆς καρδίας ἡμῶν ἐΓέγραπτο. ΙΙΙ. Πᾶσα δόξα καὶ πλατυσμὸς ἐδόθη ὑμῖν, καὶ ἐπετελέσθη τὸ γεγραμμένον· ἔφασαν καὶ ἔπιεν και 5 ἐπλατΥΝΘΗ καί ἐΠΑΧΥΝΘΗ καί ἀπελάκτισεN ὁ ΗΓΑΠΗΜΕΝΟΣ. Ἐκ τούτου ζῆλος καὶ φθόνος καὶ ἔρις καὶ στάσις, διωγμὸς καὶ ἀκαταστασία, πόλεμος καὶ αἰχμαλωσία. 2 ἐπετελείτε] επετελείται Α. 4 ἐδόθη] δοθη Α. 6 ἀπελάκτισεν] Deut. xxxii. 15. απογαλακτισεν Α. it undone: when there was an opportunity of doing good, you seized it.' The latter clause ἕτοιμοι κ.τ.λ. is from Titus iii. I πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἑτοίμους εἶναι: comp. 2 Cor. ix. 8, and see below § 34 with the note. 1. πολιτεία] the graces of your heavenly citizenship:' see Phil. i. 27, Ephes. ii. 12, 19. For πολιτεία, που λιτεύεσθαι, see §§ 3, 6, 21, 44, 51, 54. 2. αὐτοῦ] i. e. τοῦ Θεοῦ, understood from τῇ παναρέτῳ καὶ σεβασμίῳ που λιτείᾳ; comp. § 54 τὴν ἀμεταμέλητον πολιτείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ. τὰ προστάγματα] The two words occur together frequently in the LXX: see esp. Mal. iv. 4, and comp. 1 Sam. xxx. 25, Ezek. xi. 20, xviii. 9, xx. II, etc. 3. ἐπὶ τὰ πλάτη κ.τ.λ.] taken from the Lxx of Prov. vii. 3, ἐπίγραψον δὲ ἐπὶ τὸ πλάτος τῆς καρδίας σου, where Tλáros corresponds to the Hebrew 'a tablet.' The phrase is repeated in the LXX Prov. xxii. 20, and in some copies also in Prov. iii. 3; but as there is nothing corresponding in the Hebrew of either passage, these are probably interpolations from Prov. vii. 3. Wotton's statement that πλάτος occurs in this sense passim in the LXX is erroneous. From this LXX reading the expression το πλάτος τῆς καρδίας is not uncommon in the Christian fathers (e.g. Iren. I. præf. 3, and other passages quoted by Wotton), and τὰ πλάτη was doubtless written by Clement here. But it seems not improbable that the expression arose from a very early corruption of the Lxx text (a confusion of πλάτος and πλακός), since πλάξ is the natural equivalent of and is frequently used elsewhere in the LXX to translate it. S. Paul's metaphor in 2 Cor. iii. 3 is derived from the original of Prov. vii. 3. οὕτως ἐπηγέρθησαν οἱ ἄτιμοι ἐπὶ τοὺς ἐντίμους, οἱ ἄδοξοι 1ο ἐπὶ τοὺς ἐνδόξους, οἱ ἄφρονες ἐπὶ τοὺς φρονίμους, οἱ Νέοι ἐπὶ τοὺς πρεςβγτέρογς. διὰ τοῦτο πόρρω ἄπεστιν Η ΔΙΚΑΙΟΣΥΝΗ καὶ εἰρήνη, ἐν τῷ ἀπολείπειν ἕκαστον τὸν φόβον τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ ἐν τῇ πίστει αὐτοῦ ἀμβλυωπῆσαι μηδὲ ἐν τοῖς νομίμοις τῶν προσταγμάτων αὐτοῦ πορεύ15 εσθαι μηδὲ πολιτεύεσθαι κατὰ τὸ καθῆκον τῷ Χριστῷ, ἀλλὰ ἕκαστον βαδίζειν κατὰ τὰς ἐπιθυμίας αὐτοῦ τὰς 12 ἀπολείπειν] απολειπί Α. 13 πίστει] πιστι Α. 16 τὰς πονηράς] τησ πονηρασ Α. Κύριον καὶ ἐπήκουσέ μου εἰς πλατυσ μόν: comp. Ps. xvii. 2o, cxviii. 45, Ecclus. xlvii. 12. See also the opposition of ἐν εὐρυχώρῳ and στενοχω ρεῖσθαι, Hermas Mand. v. I. 5. ἔφαγεν κ.τ.λ.] A very free quotation from the Lxx of Deut. xxxii. 14, 15, καὶ αἷμα σταφυλῆς ἔπιεν (v.1. ἔπιον) οἶνον· καὶ ἔφαγεν Ἰακὼβ καὶ ἐνεπλήσθη καὶ ἀπελάκτισεν ὁ ἠγαπημένος, ἐλιπάνθη, ἐπαχύνθη, ἐπλατύνθη. It diverges still more from the original Hebrew. Justin Dial. 20 (p. 237 B) quotes the same passage, but his quotation has no special resemblances to that of Clement. 7. ζῆλος κ.τ.λ.] The words occur in an ascending scale: first the inward sentiment of division (ζῆλος developing into φθόνος); next, the outward demonstration of this (epis developing into στάσις); lastly, the direct confict and its results (διωγμός, ἀκαταστασία, πόλεμος, αἰχμαλωσία). ζῆλος καὶ φθόνος] These words occur together also below, §§ 4, 5: comp. Gal. v. 20, 21, Test. xii. Patr. Sym. 4 ἀπὸ παντος ζήλου καὶ φθόνου. For the distinction between them see Trench N. T. Syn. ser. I § xxvi, and Galatians 1. c. Ζῆλος is ‘rivalry, ambition,' the desire of equalling or excelling another. It does not ne cessarily involve the wish to deprive him of his advantages, which is implied in φθόνος ; but, if unduly cherished, it will lead to this; § 4 διὰ ζῆλος Δαυεὶδ φθόνον ἔσχεν, Plat. Menex. p. 242 Α πρῶτον μὲν ζῆλος ἀπὸ ζήλου δὲ φθόνος, Æsch. Αgam. 939 ὁ δ ̓ ἀφθόνητός γ ̓ οὐκ ἐπίζηλος πέλει, Arist. Rhet. ii. 4 ὑφ ̓ ὧν ζηλοῦσθαι βούλονται καὶ μὴ φθονεῖσθαι. 8. ἀκαταστασία] * tumult'; Comp. Luke xxi. 9 πολέμους καὶ ἀκαταστασίας, 2 Cor. xii. 20 ἔρις, ζῆλος...ἀκαταστασίαι, James iii. 16 ὅπου γὰρ ζῆλος καὶ ἐρίθεια, ἐκεῖ ἀκαταστασία κ.τ.λ. 9. οἱ ἄτιμοι κ.τ.λ.] Is. iii. 5 προσκόψει τὸ παιδίον πρὸς τὸν πρεσβύτην, ὁ ἄτιμος πρὸς τὸν ἔντιμον. ΙΙ. πόρρω ἄπεστιν κ.τ.λ.] Is. lix. 14 καὶ ἡ δικαιοσύνη μακρὰν ἀφέστηκεν. 13. ἀμβλυωπῆσαι] grown dimsighted. The Atticists condemned ἀμβλυωπεῖν and preferred ἀμβλυώτ τειν ; Thom. Μag. p. 39. The word and the form ἀμβλυωπεῖν are as old as Hippocrates, Progn. I. p. 38 (ed. Foes.). In the LXX it occurs I Kings xiv. 4 (displaced and found between xii. 24 and xii. 25 in B). But in most places where it occurs there is a v. 1. ἀμβλυώττειν. Comp. a Gnostic writer in Hippol. Ref. v. 16 (p. 133 ad fin.). 15. τὸ καθῆκον τῷ Χριστῷ] The ex |