Migne Reading Room
PG 2 · cols. 685–706
A. Gallandius, Dissertatio de epistola S. Barnabae
Editors' preface
VI.
(GALLANDIUS, Vet. Patr. Bibliotheca, t. I, Venetiis, 1765, in-fol., Proleg., p. xxix.)
VI.
(GALLANDI, Library of the Ancient Fathers, vol. I, Venice, 1765, folio, Prolegomena, p. xxix.)
CAPUT PRIMUM.
CHAPTER THE FIRST.
Num S. Barnabas auctor sit Epistolae quae sub ejus nomine circumfertur. Clemens Alexandrinus et Origenes eam Barnabae asserunt. Hieronymus item, cujus testimonium edisseritur atque astruitur. Eusebii Caesariensis locus expensus.
Whether St Barnabas be the author of the Epistle which is circulated under his name. Clement of Alexandria and Origen assert it to be Barnabas's. Jerome likewise, whose testimony is expounded and established. A passage of Eusebius of Caesarea weighed.
Inter vetustissima saeculi I ecclesiastica monumenta, tertium locum occupat Epistola quae sub S. Barnabae nomine circumfertur. De auctore haud una est scriptorum tum veterum tum recentiorum sententia.
Among the most ancient ecclesiastical monuments of the 1st century, the third place is occupied by the Epistle which is circulated under the name of St Barnabas. Concerning its author the opinion of writers, both ancient and modern, is by no means one.
Ut autem hinc exordiamur, saeculo II desinente Clemens Alexandrinus plerisque in locis, supra inter veterum testimonia relatis, hanc Epistolam constanter Barnabae attribuit, et quidem apostolo, testi apostolico, uni ex LXX Domini discipulis et Pauli adjutori, ut ipsemet eum appellat. Quin et in libris Ὑποτυπώσεων, Eusebio teste, compendiosam Novi Testamenti Scripturarum enarrationem instituens idem Clemens, Barnabae item Epistolam eas inter recensuit. Alicubi tamen presbyter Alexandrinus consilium mutasse videtur: dum enim ex eadem Epistola nonnulla delibat, Barnabae sententiam interdum respuit; quamvis tanti viri reverentia tactus, ejus nomini parcat, ut post Cotelerium Potterus admonuit.
Now to begin from this point, at the close of the 2nd century Clement of Alexandria in very many places, recounted above among the testimonies of the ancients, constantly attributes this Epistle to Barnabas, and indeed to the apostle, an apostolic witness, one of the 70 disciples of the Lord and helper of Paul, as he himself calls him. Nay more, in the books of the Hypotyposes, as Eusebius testifies, the same Clement, drawing up a compendious exposition of the Scriptures of the New Testament, reckoned the Epistle of Barnabas likewise among them. Somewhere, however, the Alexandrian presbyter seems to have changed his mind: for while he culls some things from the same Epistle, he sometimes rejects the opinion of Barnabas; although, touched with reverence for so great a man, he spares his name, as Potter after Cotelier pointed out.
Clementem Alexandrinum praeceptorem suum secutus Origenes, circa medium saeculi III, non solum a Barnaba scriptam putavit Epistolam, verum etiam catholicam vocitavit, et Scripturae nomine insignivit. Sunt, inquit, praeterea (sicut in multis Scripturae locis invenimus) etiam utriusque partis vel utriusque viae fautores quidam et adjutores angeli, etc. Quibus nimirum verbis ad Epistolae nostrae caput 18 digitum intendisse Origenem liquet.
Following his teacher Clement of Alexandria, Origen, about the middle of the 3rd century, not only thought the Epistle written by Barnabas, but also called it catholic, and honoured it with the name of Scripture. There are, he says, besides (as we find in many passages of Scripture) also certain angels who are favourers and helpers of either party or of either way, etc. By which words it is clear that Origen pointed his finger at chapter 18 of our Epistle.
In eamdem porro sententiam de Barnaba Epistolae auctore ivisse quoque S. Hieronymum jure quis dixerit, Clementis fortasse Alexandrini vel potius Origenis sive auctoritate sive exemplo permotum. Siquidem in opere De interpretatione nominum Hebraicorum, inter Novi Testamenti libros Epistolae quoque Barnabae locum ipse dedisse comperitur. Opus illud scribebat doctor maximus anno 388. Deinceps vero, anno scilicet 392, quo librum De
Furthermore, one might rightly say that St Jerome also went over to the same opinion concerning Barnabas as author of the Epistle, moved perhaps either by the authority or by the example of Clement of Alexandria or rather of Origen. Since in his work On the Interpretation of Hebrew Names, he himself is found to have given a place among the books of the New Testament to the Epistle of Barnabas also. That work the greatest doctor was writing in the year 388. Thereafter, however, namely in the year 392, in which he published his book On
Editors' notes and page, col. 685
Footnotes
(31-32) ‹anchor: Ὑποτυπώσεων, Eusebio teste› · call in col 685 Euseb., Hist. eccles., lib. VI, cap. 14.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book 6, chapter 14.
(printed under page 340)
(33) ‹anchor: nonnulla delibat› · call in col 685
Clement. Alex., Paedag., lib. II, cap. 10, p. 221, edit. Oxon. 1715.
Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus (The Instructor), book 2, chapter 10, p. 221, Oxford edition of 1715.
(printed under page 340)
(34) ‹anchor: Scripturae nomine insignivit› · call in col 685
Origen., Explanat. in Epist. ad Rom. I, 24.
Origen, Exposition of the Epistle to the Romans, 1, 24.
(printed under page 340)
(35) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 685 or 686
Hieron., De vir. illustr., cap. 6.
Jerome, On Illustrious Men, chapter 6.
(printed under page 340)
(36) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 685 or 686
Pearson., Vindic. Ignat., part. I, cap. 4, pag. 289.
Pearson, Vindiciae Ignatianae (Vindication of the Ignatian Epistles), part 1, chapter 4, page 289.
(printed under page 340)
Page
- running head: 685 PROLEGOMENA.
- marginal letters: A secunda pars; B sebii Caesariensis; C tuens idem Clemens,; D strae caput 18
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; full-width title across cols 685-686 after quae in not set: VI. (GALLANDIUS, Vet. Patr. Bibliotheca, t. I, Venetiis, 1765, in-fol., Proleg., p. XXIX.); editors' matter: secunda pars, CAPUT PRIMUM (Gallandi's prolegomena)
- other: a full-width band stands across cols 685/686 in mid-page: the 1 paragraph(s) above it in col 686 are set here, after the 1 above it in col 685 (reading order, moved on receipt); the band itself (its title lines) is not set by the volunteer page: set it here, at the move, with full_width
- other: the column opens with the end of the previous work (another unit); not set here: the unit begins at CAPUT PRIMUM.
- other: title band printed across the full width of cols 685-686 (page 340) above CAPUT PRIMUM; editors' matter, the title of this unit.
viris illustribus edidit, de ejus Epistolae auctoritate, non autem de auctore, aliter censuisse existimatur. Sic enim ibi: Barnabas Cyprius, qui et Joseph Levites, cum Paulo gentium apostolus ordinatus, unam ad aedificationem Ecclesiae pertinentem Epistolam composuit, quae inter apocryphas scripturas legitur. Quem in locum scite Pearsonius: « Barnabae Epistolam fuisse tradit (S. Hieronymus) non ipsi supposititiam, aut spuriam; ad aedificationem Ecclesiae pertinuisse asserit; non itaque haereticam putavit: lectam tamen inter apocryphas scripturas docet, nec ab Ecclesia repudiatam innuit. »
Illustrious Men, he is thought to have judged otherwise concerning the authority of that Epistle, though not concerning its author. For thus he writes there: Barnabas the Cypriot, who is also Joseph the Levite, ordained apostle of the Gentiles with Paul, composed one Epistle pertaining to the edification of the Church, which is read among the apocryphal scriptures. Upon which passage Pearson skilfully remarks: « He (St Jerome) hands down that the Epistle was Barnabas's, not supposititious to him, or spurious; he asserts that it pertained to the edification of the Church; therefore he did not think it heretical: yet he teaches that it was read among the apocryphal scriptures, and hints that it was not rejected by the Church. »
Quod autem Hieronymus Epistolam Barnabae ad apocryphas scripturas amandet, non usque adeo negotium facessere debet, ut statim adulterina censenda sit, ipsique apostolo abjudicanda; quam contra fuisse ab eo compositam perspicue tradit sanctus doctor. Idque ut clarius adhuc pateat, exemplo illustrabo. Legitur in Decreto Gelasiano: Historia Eusebii Pamphili apocrypha. Cedo, statuitne his verbis sanctus pontifex Historiam Eusebii ecclesiasticam episcopo illi Caesariensi fuisse suppositam? Minime omnium: at id solummodo edicere voluit Gelasius, Eusebii Historiam non esse publice in Ecclesia legendam, dum apocrypham declaravit. Nimirum hujus vocis ἀπόκρυφα vis et notio probe tenenda, ut res ejuscemodi rite expediantur. Constat enim inter eruditos, vocem istam non uno sensu accipiendam. Rem fuse pertractat inter alios Svicerus; sed brevius exactiusque cl. Fontaninus: « Apud veteres Patres, inquit, apocrypha ea vere sunt, quae canonicis opponuntur. Hinc Annalium parens Baronius, apocrypha esse ait, quasi non hagiographa; non tamen, ut ea (Gelasius) ab Ecclesia omnino proscribat. Augustinus tradit ea denotari nomine apocryphorum, quae ab auctoritate canonica diligenti examinatione remota sunt. Duplex enim erat scriptura: canonica, cujus auctor Spiritus sanctus; et apocrypha, cujus auctor homo solus. Illa publice in Ecclesia; haec non ita, legi poterat. Quare librum apocryphum esse, idem eensetur atque auctoritate carere, qua publice in Ecclesia, ut canonica leguntur, legi possit. Duplicis enim generis apocrypha Gelasius enumerat, orthodoxorum
Now the fact that Jerome relegates the Epistle of Barnabas to the apocryphal scriptures ought not to cause so much trouble that it should straightway be deemed spurious and adjudged away from the apostle himself; whereas on the contrary the holy doctor clearly hands down that it was composed by him. And that this may be clearer still, I will illustrate it by an example. It is read in the Gelasian Decree: The History of Eusebius Pamphili is apocryphal. Pray tell, did the holy pontiff by these words determine that the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius was falsely attributed to that bishop of Caesarea? Least of all: rather, Gelasius wished only to proclaim that the History of Eusebius was not to be read publicly in the Church, when he declared it apocryphal. Assuredly the force and notion of this word ἀπόκρυφα must be well grasped, in order that matters of this sort may be properly cleared up. For it is agreed among the learned that this word is not to be taken in one sense. Suicer among others treats the matter at length; but more briefly and accurately the illustrious Fontanini: « Among the ancient Fathers, he says, those writings are truly apocryphal which are opposed to the canonical. Hence Baronius, the father of the Annals, says that apocrypha are, as it were, non-hagiographa; yet not so that (Gelasius) altogether proscribes them from the Church. Augustine hands down that those writings are denoted by the name of apocrypha which have been removed from canonical authority by diligent examination. For scripture was twofold: canonical, whose author is the Holy Spirit; and apocryphal, whose author is man alone. The former could be read publicly in the Church; the latter not so. Wherefore for a book to be apocryphal is deemed the same thing as to lack the authority whereby it may be read publicly in the Church as the canonical writings are read. For Gelasius enumerates apocrypha of a twofold kind, of the orthodox
Editors' notes and page, col. 686
Footnotes
(37) ‹anchor: in Decreto Gelasiano› · call in col 686
Gelas., Decr., cap. 4.
Gelasius, Decree, chapter 4.
(printed under page 340)
(38) ‹anchor: Svicerus› · call in col 686
Svicer. Thes. eccl., v. Ἀπόκρυφος.
Suicer, Thesaurus ecclesiasticus, under the word Ἀπόκρυφος ("apocryphal").
(printed under page 340)
(39) ‹anchor: cl. Fontaninus› · call in col 686
Fontanin., Hist. Aquil., lib. V, cap. 11, § 8, pag. 354.
Fontanini, History of Aquileia, book 5, chapter 11, § 8, page 354.
(printed under page 340)
(40) ‹anchor: Annalium parens Baronius› · call in col 686
Baron., ad an. 31, § 9.
Baronius [Annals], at the year 31, § 9.
(printed under page 340)
(41) ‹anchor: Augustinus tradit› · call in col 686
Aug., De Civit. Dei, lib. XV, cap. 23.
Augustine, The City of God, book 15, chapter 23.
(printed under page 340)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA. 636
- marginal letters: A Graeco habentur,; B unam ad aedificationem; C Historia Eusebii; D ab Ecclesia omnino
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; full-width title across cols 685-686 after assecutus est. not set: VI. (GALLANDIUS, Vet. Patr. Bibliotheca, t. I, Venetiis, 1765, in-fol., Proleg., p. XXIX.); editors' matter: Graeco habentur, viris illustribus edidit (Gallandi continued); word split at end: ortho-[doxorum]
- misprints kept as printed: eensetur (for censetur)
- other: the 1 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 685 (reading order, moved on receipt)
et haereticorum. Haec omnino rejiciuntur: illa canonicis opponuntur, et publica tantum, ob naevos quosdam, in Ecclesia lectione privantur. » Hactenus vir eruditus. Itaque dum Hieronymus Epistolam fuisse a Barnaba compositam scribit, quae inter apocryphas scripturas legitur, ejus verba sic sunt accipienda, ut vere a Barnaba compositam Epistolam asseveret, quae tamen inter canonicas scripturas minime adnumeretur. Frustra enim est Basnagius, dum nobis suadere conatur Hieronymum populariter fuisse locutum et tituli habita ratione, non pro rei veritate, dum Barnabam composuisse hanc Epistolam litteris tradidit.
and of heretics. The latter are altogether rejected: the former are opposed to the canonical, and are deprived only of public reading in the Church on account of certain blemishes. » Thus far the learned man. Therefore, when Jerome writes that the Epistle was composed by Barnabas, which is read among the apocryphal scriptures, his words are so to be taken that he asserts the Epistle to have been truly composed by Barnabas, yet by no means numbered among the canonical scriptures. For Basnage is in vain when he endeavours to persuade us that Jerome spoke popularly and with regard to the title, not according to the truth of the matter, when he committed to writing that Barnabas composed this Epistle.
Veterum testimoniis huc usque allatis contraire videtur Eusebius, qui Barnabae Epistolam νόθοις accenset. Verum « improprie, inquit Valesius, hoc nomen usurpat Eusebius, pro libris scilicet qui ambiguae sunt auctoritatis; cum νόθοι dici debeant libri adulterini, et ab haereticis conficti. Quod ut manifestius appareat, intelligendum est tres species esse librorum sacrorum. Alii sunt extra controversiam veri: alii extra controversiam falsi: tertii sunt de quibus inter antiquos ambigitur. Hi postremi νόθοι dici non possunt, cum a multis habiti sint pro veris. Restat igitur, ut secundi dicantur νόθοι sive adulterini. » Haec vir ille doctissimus. Enimvero postquam ἐν τοῖς νόθοις Actus Pauli, Barnabae Epistolam aliaque nonnulla retulisset Eusebius, statim subdit: His adjunge, si lubet, Joannis Revelationem, quam nonnulli ex albo Scripturarum expungunt; alii vero inter libros omnium consensu probatos adnumerant. Verumtamen certum est, eodem Eusebio teste, Apocalypsim nunquam inter libros νόθους sive adulterinos fuisse relatam, sed tantum inter eos qui ἀντιλεγόμενοι sive dubii habebantur. Cum igitur ἀκυρολογίᾳ hic utatur episcopus Caesariensis, aliunde sententia ejusdem est repetenda. Quid plura? Eusebius deinceps seipsum emendat: eamdem enim Barnabae Epistolam, quam modo vidimus ab eo νόθοις attributam, mox ἀντιλεγομένοις adjungit in haec verba: Κέχρηται δ' ἐν αὐτοῖς καὶ ταῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἀντιλεγομένων γραφῶν μαρτυρίαις· τῆς τε λεγομένης Σολομῶντος Σοφίας, καὶ τῆς Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Σιράχ· καὶ τῆς πρὸς Ἑβραίους ἐπιστολῆς· τῆς τε Βαρνάβα, καὶ Κλήμεντος, καὶ Ἰούδα : In iisdem libris (Στρωματέων) affert (Clemens) testimonia scripturarum, quae a nonnullis repudiantur: nempe ex Sapientia Salomonis, et ex ea quae dicitur Sapientia Jesu filii Sirach: item ex Epistola ad Hebraeos, et ex Clementis ac Barnabae Epistolis. Et paulo post his gemina profert. Ubi cl. Valesius ad rem nostram haec adnotat: « Inter ἀντιλεγομένας scripturas Eusebius, tum hoc loco, tum
Eusebius seems to go against the testimonies of the ancients adduced thus far, when he reckons the Epistle of Barnabas among the νόθοι (spurious). But « Eusebius uses this name improperly, says Valois, namely for books which are of doubtful authority; whereas adulterated books, fabricated by heretics, ought to be called νόθοι. That this may appear more manifestly, it must be understood that there are three kinds of sacred books. Some are beyond controversy true: others beyond controversy false: the third are those concerning which there is doubt among the ancients. These last cannot be called νόθοι, since by many they were held as true. It remains, therefore, that the second be called νόθοι or adulterated. » Thus that most learned man. For indeed, after Eusebius had recounted ἐν τοῖς νόθοις the Acts of Paul, the Epistle of Barnabas, and some other writings, he immediately subjoins: To these add, if you please, the Revelation of John, which some expunge from the roll of the Scriptures; while others reckon it among the books approved by the consent of all. Nevertheless it is certain, as the same Eusebius testifies, that the Apocalypse was never reckoned among the νόθοι or adulterated books, but only among those which were held as ἀντιλεγόμενοι or doubtful. Since, therefore, the bishop of Caesarea here uses an improper expression (ἀκυρολογίᾳ), his opinion must be sought from elsewhere. Why say more? Eusebius thereafter corrects himself: for the same Epistle of Barnabas, which we have just seen attributed by him to the νόθοι, he presently joins to the ἀντιλεγόμενοι in these words: And in them he also uses testimonies from the disputed scriptures: both that which is called the Wisdom of Solomon, and that of Jesus the son of Sirach; and the Epistle to the Hebrews; and that of Barnabas, and of Clement, and of Jude: In the same books (of the Stromata) he (Clement) adduces testimonies of scriptures which are rejected by some: namely from the Wisdom of Solomon, and from that which is called the Wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach: likewise from the Epistle to the Hebrews, and from the Epistles of Clement and of Barnabas. And a little after he brings forward things twin to these. Where the illustrious Valois notes to our purpose as follows: « Among the ἀντιλεγόμεναι (disputed) scriptures Eusebius, both in this place and
Editors' notes and page, col. 687
Footnotes
(42) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 687 or 688
Basnag., Annal. polit. eccles., ad an. 50, § 54.
Basnage, Annales politico-ecclesiastici, at the year 50, § 54.
(printed under page 341)
(43) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 687 or 688
Euseb., Hist. eccl., lib. III, cap. 25.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book 3, chapter 25.
(printed under page 341)
(44) ‹anchor: in haec verba› · call in col 687
Id., ibid., lib. VI, cap. 13 et 14.
The same, same work, book 6, chapters 13 and 14.
(printed under page 341)
(45) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 687 or 688
Id., ibid. lib. III, cap. 24, 25, et alibi.
The same, same work, book 3, chapters 24, 25, and elsewhere.
(printed under page 341)
(46) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 687 or 688
Tillem., Memoir. eccl., tom. I, not. 6, in S. Barnab., p. 658.
Tillemont, Mémoires ecclésiastiques, vol. 1, note 6 on St Barnabas, p. 658.
(printed under page 341)
Page
- running head: 687 S. BARNABAS APOST
- marginal letters: A doxorum et haereticorum.; B accenset. Verum; C pturarum expungunt;; D τος, καὶ Ἰούδα :
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: doxorum et haereticorum (Gallandi continued); word split at start: [ortho]doxorum
in praecedenti capite recenset Epistolam Judae et reliquas alias catholicas, item Epistolam Barnabae; quas tamen nemo inter apocryphas scripturas merito recensuerit. »
in the preceding chapter, reckons the Epistle of Jude and the remaining Catholic epistles, likewise the Epistle of Barnabas; which nevertheless no one would deservedly reckon among the apocryphal scriptures. »
Non est itaque cur Eusebii auctoritatem tantopere urgeant nonnulli recentiores critici, quo Epistolam nostram Barnabae abjudicent. Tantum enim abest ut illam Eusebius spuriam, adulterinam, supposititiam esse existimarit, ut maxime etiam integram sinceramque agnovisse dicendus sit; quippe qui eam recenseat inter libros ἀντιλεγομένους, in quorum albo refert etiam Epistolam quae dicitur Jacobi, et quae Judae, et secundam Petri; Joannis item alteram et tertiam, nec non Epistolam ad Hebraeos et Apocalypsim. Uno verbo, de Epistolae tantum auctoritate, num scilicet in sacrarum Scripturarum canone reponenda esset, cum nonnullis veterum ambigebat Eusebius, ut pluribus evincit Tillemontius. Quibus addas velim, ab auctore quoque Stichometriae quae Nicephoro CP. tribuitur, inter eas scripturas quae ἀντιλέγονται, Barnabae Epistolam recenseri. Quin et in antiqua Stichometria Latina, in praefatione ad Barnabam a Cotelerio edita, eadem Epistola post Epistolam Judae atque ante Joannis Revelationem et Actus apostolorum relata conspicitur.
There is therefore no reason why some more recent critics should urge the authority of Eusebius so strongly in order to adjudge our Epistle away from Barnabas. For so far is Eusebius from having thought it spurious, adulterated, or supposititious, that he must be said most of all to have recognized it as entire and genuine; inasmuch as he reckons it among the ἀντιλεγόμενοι (disputed) books, in the roll of which he also places the Epistle which is called that of James, and that of Jude, and the second of Peter; likewise the second and third of John, as well as the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalypse. In one word, Eusebius doubted along with some of the ancients only concerning the authority of the Epistle, namely whether it ought to be placed in the canon of the sacred Scriptures, as Tillemont proves at length. To which I should wish you to add that by the author also of the Stichometria which is attributed to Nicephorus of Constantinople, the Epistle of Barnabas is reckoned among those scriptures which ἀντιλέγονται (are disputed). Nay more, in the ancient Latin Stichometria published by Cotelier in his preface to Barnabas, the same Epistle is seen recorded after the Epistle of Jude and before the Revelation of John and the Acts of the Apostles.
Cum igitur ex vetustissimorum Patrum testimoniis constet, Epistolae nostrae auctorem fuisse Barnabam Cyprium, apostolum, testem apostolicum, unum ex LXX Domini discipulis et Pauli adjutorem; in nihilum abit Christiani Schotani figmentum, qui duos Barnabas distinguit; quorum « alter fuerit ex evangelistis et comitibus apostolorum, alter vero e sublimioribus apostolis, id est proprie ita appellatis. » Cui quidem erudito viro haec Isaaci Vossii verba regerimus: « Unde habes, inquit, quod duo fuerint Barnabae inter apostolos aut apostolorum discipulos? Unde item habes quod unus ex sublimioribus, hoc est e duodecim fuerit apostolis, non autem e LXX discipulis, uti habet Clemens Alexandrinus? Ego vero quod scripsi, id ipsum confirmat inscriptio hujus Epistolae, in qua Pauli συνέκδημος appellatur: confirmat Hieronymus in Catalogo scriptorum ecclesiasticorum, etc., ut mirer quid te moverit, quamobrem duos finxeris Barnabas. » Neque magis proficit Tentzelius; qui nonnullis levibus conjecturis adductus, in eam sententiam devenit, Epistolam nostram Alexandriae in Aegypto extremis Adriani temporibus, ab aliquo scholae catecheticae Alexandrinae doctore sub Barnabae nomine fuisse confictam. Moynium praetereo, qui ejusdem Epistolae auctorem facit S. Polycarpum Smyrnensem antistitem, eo tantum nomine quod in manuscriptis
Since therefore it is established from the testimonies of the most ancient Fathers that the author of our Epistle was Barnabas the Cypriot, an apostle, an apostolic witness, one of the 70 disciples of the Lord and helper of Paul; the figment of Christianus Schotanus comes to nothing, who distinguishes two Barnabases; of whom « the one was from among the evangelists and companions of the apostles, the other however from among the higher apostles, that is, those properly so called. » To which learned man indeed we retort these words of Isaac Vossius: « Whence have you it, he says, that there were two Barnabases among the apostles or the disciples of the apostles? Whence likewise have you it that one was from among the higher, that is, from the twelve apostles, and not from the 70 disciples, as Clement of Alexandria has it? As for what I wrote, the inscription of this Epistle confirms that very thing, in which he is called the fellow-traveller (συνέκδημος) of Paul: Jerome confirms it in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers, etc., so that I wonder what moved you to invent two Barnabases. » Nor does Tentzel make any more progress; who, led by some slight conjectures, arrived at the opinion that our Epistle was fabricated at Alexandria in Egypt in the last times of Hadrian, by some teacher of the catechetical school of Alexandria under the name of Barnabas. I pass over Le Moyne, who makes St Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, the author of the same Epistle, solely on the ground that in the manuscript
Editors' notes and page, col. 688
Footnotes
(47) ‹anchor: duos Barnabas distinguit› · call in col 688
Schotan., Diatr. de auctor. Vers. LXX Intt., cap. 4, p. 118.
Schotanus, Diatribe on the Authority of the Version of the Seventy Interpreters, chapter 4, p. 118.
(printed under page 341)
(48) ‹anchor: verba regerimus› · call in col 688
Is. Voss., Append. ad lib. de LXX Intt., p. 143.
Isaac Vossius, Appendix to the book on the Seventy Interpreters, p. 143.
(printed under page 341)
(49) ‹anchor: proficit Tentzelius› · call in col 688
Tentzel, apud Fabr. Bibl. Eccles. p. 42, § 10.
Tentzel, in Fabricius, Bibliotheca ecclesiastica, p. 42, § 10.
(printed under page 341)
(50) ‹anchor: fuisse confictam› · call in col 688
Videsis Fabric., Bibl. Gr., tom. III, p. 173, 174.
See Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graeca, vol. 3, pp. 173, 174.
(printed under page 341)
Page
- running head: ARNABAS APOSTOLUS. 688
- marginal letters: A in praecedenti; B auctoritate, num; C in nihilum abit; D moverit, quamobrem
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: in praecedenti capite (Gallandi continued); word split at end: ma-[nuscriptis]
codicibus illa cum Polycarpiana jungatur, neque hujus finem aut ejus initium exemplaria quae supersunt exhibeant. Quod quidem argumentum quam infirmum sit quamque inane, jamdudum demonstrarunt Caveus, Tentzelius, Basnagius aliique. Ipseque profecto Moynius ab eo urgendo abstinuisset, si Usserii verba in praemonitione de Barnabae Epistola, a Joanne Fello edita eo ipso anno quo sua Varia sacra evulgavit, legere sibi licuisset: « Nempe, inquit ille, in primo exemplari ex quo Columnaeus ille codex (qui omnium putatur antiquissimus) et reliqui qui supersunt hodie sunt descripti, librariorum vitio quaternio vel omissus vel transpositus est: cujus defectu factum est, ut in Graecis superstitibus et finem Epistolae Polycarpi desideremus et principium Barnabae. » Quod si necdum sententia decedere statuisset vir eruditus, ipsi saltem animadvertendum erat, apud utrumque veterem interpretem etiamnum exstare cum Epistolae Polycarpianae finem, tum quae est Barnabae initium.
codices it is joined with that of Polycarp, and the copies which survive exhibit neither the end of the latter nor the beginning of the former. How weak and how empty this argument is, Cave, Tentzel, Basnage, and others have long ago demonstrated. And Le Moyne himself would assuredly have abstained from urging it, if he had been permitted to read the words of Ussher in his forewarning concerning the Epistle of Barnabas, published by John Fell in that very year in which he published his Varia sacra: « Namely, says he, in the first exemplar from which that Colonna codex (which is thought the most ancient of all) and the rest which survive today were copied, through the fault of the copyists a gathering was either omitted or transposed: by which defect it came to pass that in the surviving Greek copies we lack both the end of the Epistle of Polycarp and the beginning of Barnabas. » And if the learned man had resolved not yet to depart from his opinion, he ought at least to have noticed that in both ancient translators there is still extant both the end of the Epistle of Polycarp and the beginning of that which is Barnabas's.
CAPUT II.
CHAPTER II.
Potiores objectiones diluuntur, eaque potissimum, qua hujus Epistolae integritas impetitur.
The weightier objections are refuted, and that one especially whereby the integrity of this Epistle is assailed.
Verum, his missis, quid insuper adversae sententiae patroni praecipue objiciant, inspiciamus. Et primum quidem Barnabae abjudicant Epistolam, quod auctor quaedam Veteris Testamenti loca minus apte allegata et mystice nimis exposita, in medium producat. Huic autem objectioni verbis Hammondi occurrere placet, quae sic se habent: « Apostoli Barnabae quae non ita pridem prodiit Epistola, ex hoc uno Gnosticorum charactere commode explicari poterit; alias, ut complicatum et prolixum aenigma, certissimam lectoribus crucem factura. Isti quippe Simonis asseclae, γνῶσιν, id est, Scripturae sacrae mystice interpretandae facultatem sibi arrogantes, multa Veteris Testamenti mysteria ad impuros usus suos accommodabant..... Hinc Barnabas hac fere universa Epistola sua, Veteris Instrumenti loca quamplurima, mystice etiam et cabalistice exposita, Gnosticorum doctrinis opponit. » Hammondi vestigiis insistens Joannes Fellus: « Constat, inquit, Epistolam hanc, quae fere tota est in Synagogae ritibus et sacrarum Scripturarum mysticis sensibus evolvendis, ad rudis vulgi captum minus esse accommodatam; et proinde verisimile est, a lectione ejus publica Ecclesiam post tempus aliquod abstinuisse... Hoc vero fidenter dixerim, Epistolam hanc quo penitius intelligatur, eo acceptiorem futuram, et ad sacrarum litterarum nec non antiquissimorum Patrum cognitionem plurimum facturam. Quanquam enim perpetuus Veteris Instrumenti ad Messiam respectus nobis quasi per transennam ex Chaldaei Paraphrastis stricturis, scriptorum Talmudicorum
But passing over these things, let us examine what besides the patrons of the opposite opinion chiefly object. And first indeed they adjudge the Epistle away from Barnabas because the author brings forward certain passages of the Old Testament less aptly adduced and too mystically expounded. Now this objection it pleases us to meet with the words of Hammond, which run thus: « The Epistle of the apostle Barnabas which appeared not so long ago will be able to be conveniently explained from this one characteristic of the Gnostics; otherwise, as a complicated and prolix riddle, it is sure to cause a most certain cross to readers. For those followers of Simon, arrogating to themselves γνῶσις (knowledge), that is, the faculty of mystically interpreting sacred Scripture, accommodated many mysteries of the Old Testament to their own impure uses..... Hence Barnabas throughout almost this whole Epistle of his opposes to the doctrines of the Gnostics very many passages of the Old Testament, expounded mystically too and cabalistically. » Treading in the footsteps of Hammond, John Fell says: « It is established that this Epistle, which is almost wholly occupied in unfolding the rites of the Synagogue and the mystical senses of the sacred Scriptures, is less suited to the capacity of the unlearned multitude; and accordingly it is likely that after some time the Church abstained from the public reading of it... Yet this I would confidently say, that the more deeply this Epistle is understood, the more acceptable it will be, and will contribute very much to the knowledge of the sacred letters as well as of the most ancient Fathers. For although the perpetual reference of the Old Testament to the Messiah appears to us as if through a lattice from the touches of the Chaldee Paraphrast, and the malicious interpretations of the Talmudic writers
Editors' notes and page, col. 689
Footnotes
(51) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 689 or 690
Tentzel., Exercit. select., part. I, p. 152.
Tentzel, Exercitationes selectae, part 1, p. 152.
(printed under page 342)
(52) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 689 or 690
Basnag., Annal. polit. eccl., ad an. 50, § 57.
Basnage, Annales politico-ecclesiastici, at the year 50, § 57.
(printed under page 342)
(53) ‹anchor: sic se habent› · call in col 689
Hammond., Dissert. I, cap. 7, §§ 4, 5, pag. 22, 23.
Hammond, Dissertation 1, chapter 7, §§ 4, 5, pages 22, 23.
(printed under page 342)
(54) ‹anchor: Joannes Fellus› · call in col 689
Fell., praefat. ad Epist. Barn.
Fell, preface to the Epistle of Barnabas.
(printed under page 342)
Page
- running head: 689 PROLEGOMENA
- marginal letters: A nuscriptis codicibus; B sideremus et; C ducat. Huic autem; D Epistolam hanc,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: nuscriptis codicibus, CAPUT II (Gallandi continued); word split at start: [ma]nuscriptis
Rabbinorumque malignis interpretamentis compareat, olim tamen quando in omni synagoga hebdomadatim non lectae tantum, sed et enarratae erant scripturae, Midrasch iste mysticus sive evangelicus Veteris Instrumenti sensus, non minus omnibus innotuit quam ipse sacer textus; et proinde non minus idonea suppeditabat argumenta ad convincendos Judaeos, quam ea quae ex disertissimis sacrarum litterarum vocibus fuissent deducta... Et si forte aliqua apud auctorem nostrum occurrunt quae longius petita videntur, illa ipsa aut eorum saltem vestigia in Epistolis Paulinis quis poterit reperire. » Hactenus ille. Hinc factum ut cum viris doctis concludam, vetustissimos Patrum, Clementem Alexandrinum, Origenem, caeteros qui Epistolam nostram tanquam sincerum Barnabae fetum agnoscunt, nihil absonum in ejus enarrationibus, nihil detortum, coactum nihil in ejus allegoriis, nihil denique viro apostolico indignum in ea detexisse; adeoque nihil quod ejus aetatem non ferat: ut proinde minime audiendi videantur nonnulli recentiores, qui de stylo scriptorum apostolicorum melius quam eorumdem discipuli, aliique aut synchroni aut suppares homines, se judicare posse confidunt. Qua de re plura satis apposite aliis observata apud Zornium reperias.
and of the Rabbis, yet formerly, when in every synagogue weekly the scriptures were not only read, but also expounded, that mystical Midrash, or evangelical sense of the Old Testament, became no less known to all than the sacred text itself; and accordingly supplied arguments no less suitable for convincing the Jews than those which had been deduced from the most express words of the sacred letters... And if perhaps some things occur in our author which seem fetched from too far, those very things, or at least traces of them, anyone will be able to find in the Pauline Epistles. » Thus far he. Hence it has come to pass that I conclude with learned men that the most ancient of the Fathers, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and the rest who recognize our Epistle as the genuine offspring of Barnabas, detected nothing incongruous in its expositions, nothing twisted, nothing forced in its allegories, nothing finally unworthy of an apostolic man in it; and therefore nothing which does not suit his age: so that accordingly some more recent writers seem by no means to be listened to, who are confident that they can judge concerning the style of apostolic writers better than their disciples and other either contemporary or nearly contemporary men. On which matter you may find more things observed appositely enough for others in Zorn.
Pergunt adversarii, eaque regerunt quae de apostolis Epistolae auctor his verbis pronuntiat: Quando autem, ait, apostolos suos qui praedicaturi erant illius Evangelium elegit, homines omni peccato iniquiores, ὄντας ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν ἁμαρτίαν ἀνομωτέρους, ut ostenderet quod non venit vocare justos sed peccatores ad poenitentiam; tunc palam fecit se esse Filium Dei. Quis autem credat, inquiunt, apostolos, hominum iniquissimos et super omne peccatum peccatores, a Barnaba fuisse vocatos? Simplices quidem, rudes, imperitos atque homines interdum malos fuisse illos in sacris litteris legimus; at peccatores omnium maximos eos exstitisse non legimus.
The adversaries proceed, and retort what the author of the Epistle pronounces concerning the apostles in these words: Moreover when, says he, He chose His own apostles who were to preach His Gospel, men more iniquitous than all sin, being more lawless than all sin, that He might show that He came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance; then He made it plain that He was the Son of God. Now who would believe, they say, that the apostles were called by Barnabas the most iniquitous of men and sinners beyond all sin? That they were indeed simple, unlearned, unskilled, and sometimes bad men, we read in the sacred letters; but that they were the greatest sinners of all we do not read.
Quibus primum ex virorum doctissimorum sententia reponimus, nihil in Scripturis occurrere quod huic Barnabae dicto repugnet. Deinde vero quid obstat quin ejus verba sic accipiantur, ut nihil aliud sonent, quam apostolos antequam vocarentur, plura et gravia quidem peccasse? Id sane de Matthaeo publicano constat; id quoque de apostolo Paulo, qui, ut ipsemet de se scribit, prius blasphemus fuit et persecutor et contumeliosus; quique seipsum appellat peccatorum primum, sic inquiens: Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς ἦλθεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἁμαρτωλοὺς σῶσαι, ὧν πρῶτός εἰμι ἐγώ · quo forte in primis respexit Barnabas, ejusdem Pauli συνέκδημος, dum apostolos priusquam eligerentur, homines vocat ὄντας ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν ἁμαρτίαν ἀνομωτέρους· neque enim quidquam nos cogit, ut de omnibus et singulis apostolis id ab eo dictum intelligamus. Quid quaeris? Duos luculentissimos
To whom we reply first, from the opinion of the most learned men, that nothing occurs in the Scriptures which is repugnant to this saying of Barnabas. And next, what prevents his words from being so taken that they mean nothing else than that the apostles, before they were called, committed many and indeed grave sins? That certainly is established concerning Matthew the publican; that also concerning the apostle Paul, who, as he himself writes concerning himself, was formerly a blasphemer and a persecutor and contumelious; and who calls himself the chief of sinners, speaking thus: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief; to which perhaps Barnabas, the fellow-traveller (συνέκδημος) of the same Paul, chiefly looked when he calls the apostles before they were chosen men being more lawless than all sin: for nothing compels us to understand that this was said by him concerning all and each of the apostles. What more do you ask? Two most
Editors' notes and page, col. 690
Footnotes
(55) ‹anchor: apud Zornium› · call in col 690
Zorn., Opusc. sacr., tom. I, p. 648 seq.
Zorn, Opuscula sacra, vol. 1, p. 648 and following.
(printed under page 342)
(56) ‹anchor: verbis pronuntiat› · call in col 690
Barn. Epist., cap. 5.
Epistle of Barnabas, chapter 5.
(printed under page 342)
(57) ‹anchor: de se scribit› · call in col 690
I Tim. I, 13, 15.
1 Timothy 1:13, 15.
(printed under page 342)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA. 690
- marginal letters: A Rabbinorumque malignis; B tanquam sincerum; C erant illius Evangelium; D et gravia quidem
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Rabbinorumque malignis (Gallandi continued); word split at end: lucu-[lentissimos]
- other: the word luculentissimos was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 691
hujus a Barnaba prolatae sententiae patronos, Origenem et Hieronymum, in promptu habemus. Ille scilicet contra Celsum disputans, Barnabae dictum fortasse arripientem, quo infames homines fuisse apostolos, publicanos et nautas nequissimos diceret, haec habet: Τί οὖν ἄτοπον, βουλόμενον παραστῆσαι τῷ γένει τῶν ἀνθρώπων τὸν Ἰησοῦν, ὁπηλίκην ἔχει ψυχῶν ἰατρικὴν, τοὺς ἐπιῤῥήτους καὶ πονηροτάτους ἐπιλέξασθαι, καὶ τούτους προαγαγεῖν ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον, ὥστ' αὐτοὺς παράδειγμα εἶναι ἤθους καθαρωτάτου τοῖς δι' αὐτῶν προσαγομένοις τῷ Χριστοῦ Εὐαγγελίῳ· Quid ergo absurdi est, si Jesus ostendere volens humano generi, quam efficacia sint quae morbis animarum adhibet remedia, infames et nequissimos elegerit, illosque eo provexerit, ut purissimae vitae exemplum essent iis, qui eorum ministerio ad Evangelium Christi adducerentur? Viden Origenem, virum illum longe doctissimum, in quo tanta vis ingenii, tam profundi, tam acris, tam elegantis, ut omnes pene multum longeque superaret; Origenem, inquam, nihil absoni huic sententiae inesse, nihil Barnaba indigni censuisse?
brilliant patrons of this sentiment uttered by Barnabas, Origen and Jerome, we have at hand. The former, namely, disputing against Celsus, who had perhaps seized upon the saying of Barnabas in order to say that the apostles were infamous men, most wicked publicans and sailors, has these words: What absurdity, then, is there if Jesus, wishing to set before the race of men how great a medicine of souls He possesses, chose the infamous and most wicked men, and advanced them to such a degree that they were an example of the purest character to those brought through them to the Gospel of Christ? What absurdity, then, is there if Jesus, wishing to show to the human race how efficacious are the remedies which He applies to the diseases of souls, chose the infamous and most wicked, and advanced them to such a point that they were an example of the purest life to those who by their ministry were brought to the Gospel of Christ? Do you see that Origen, that man by far the most learned, in whom there was so great a force of genius, so profound, so acute, so elegant, that he much and far surpassed almost all; that Origen, I say, judged that there was nothing incongruous in this sentiment, nothing unworthy of Barnabas?
Neque aliter S. Hieronymus, qui Pelagianis objicit eamdem Barnabae sententiam, licet memoriae lapsu illam Ignatio martyri tribuat; tantumque abest ut eam vel leviter notet, ut maxime etiam ipsam ex Psalmista confirmans, sic tandem graviter statim concludat: Quibus testimoniis si non uteris ad auctoritatem, utere saltem ad antiquitatem, quid omnes ecclesiastici viri senserint. Porro utriusque testimonio vim addere videtur S. Joannes Chrysostomus; cujus verba licet de solo apostolo Paulo efferantur, mire tamen ad mentem Barnabae quadrare, nemo, ut opinor, ierit inficias. Sic igitur ille: Ἂν τοίνυν λέγῃ τις, ὅτι πᾶσιν ἀφεῖναι βούλεται ὁ βασιλεὺς, οὐχ οὕτω πιστεύσουσι τῷ λόγῳ, ἕως ἂν ἴδωσι τὸν πάντων φαυλότερον αὐτῶν τούτου τυχόντα · οὐκ ἔστι γὰρ λοιπὸν ἀμφισβήτησις. Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλός φησιν, ὅτι βουλόμενος ὁ Θεὸς πληροφορῆσαι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους, ὅτι πάντα αὐτοῖς ἀφίησι, τὸν πάντων ἁμαρτωλότερον εἵλετο. Si quis ergo dixerit velle regem omnibus veniam dare, non tam facile credent, donec viderint omnium improbissimum veniam consecutum: nulla enim postea dubitatio supererit. Hoc et Paulus dicit: quod nempe volens Deus homines certiores facere, quod omnia illis condonet, eum qui plus quam omnes peccato obnoxius erat, delegit.
Nor does St Jerome judge otherwise, who objects the same sentiment of Barnabas to the Pelagians, aunque by a slip of memory he attributes it to Ignatius the martyr; and so far is he from censuring it even slightly, that confirming it most of all from the Psalmist also, he thus at length gravely and immediately concludes: Which testimonies if you do not use for authority, use at least for antiquity, to see what all ecclesiastical men have thought. Furthermore, St John Chrysostom seems to add force to the testimony of both; whose words, although they are uttered concerning the apostle Paul alone, yet no one, as I think, will deny wonderfully square with the mind of Barnabas. Thus therefore he speaks: If therefore someone says that the king wishes to pardon all, they will not so believe the word until they see the basest of them all obtaining this; for thereafter there is no doubt. This Paul also says, that God, wishing to assure men that He forgives them all things, chose the most sinful of all. If anyone therefore should say that the king wishes to grant pardon to all, they will not so easily believe, until they see the most wicked of all having obtained pardon: for no doubt will remain afterwards. This Paul also says: namely that God, wishing to make men more certain that He pardons them all things, chose him who more than all was obnoxious to sin.
Verum ad alia properantes, unam adhuc objectionem breviter solvere nostra interest, qua nimirum impetitur hujus Epistolae integritas. Nonnullis itaque viris eruditis monumentum istud vetustissimum vel plerisque insitionibus infectum, vel otiosis laciniis aliunde ascitis adauctum videtur. Si autem ab iisdem quaeras cur demum istiusmodi judicium ferant,
But hastening on to other matters, it concerns us to resolve briefly one more objection, whereby namely the integrity of this Epistle is assailed. To some learned men, accordingly, this most ancient monument seems either infected with very many interpolations, or enlarged with idle patches fetched from elsewhere. Now if you ask of the same why after all they pass a judgement of this sort,
Editors' notes and page, col. 691
Footnotes
(58) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 691 or 692
Origen., cont. Cels., lib. I, § 63.
Origen, Against Celsus, book 1, § 63.
(printed under page 343)
(59) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 691 or 692
Vinc. Lirin., Common., cap. 17.
Vincent of Lérins, Commonitorium, chapter 17.
(printed under page 343)
(60) ‹anchor: eamdem Barnabae sententiam› · call in col 691
Hieron., lib. III contr. Pelag., § 2.
Jerome, Against the Pelagians, book 3, § 2.
(printed under page 343)
(61) ‹anchor: ex Psalmista› · call in col 691
Psal. XV, 4.
Psalm 15 (Vulgate numbering), verse 4.
(printed under page 343)
(62) ‹anchor: Sic igitur ille› · call in col 691
Chrysost., hom. 4 in Epist. I ad Tim., § 2, Opp. tom. IX, pag. 569.
Chrysostom, Homily 4 on the First Epistle to Timothy, § 2, Works, vol. 9, page 569.
(printed under page 343)
(63) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 691 or 692
Clem. Alex., Strom. lib. II, cap. 18, p. 472.
Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, book 2, chapter 18, p. 472.
(printed under page 343)
(64) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 691 or 692
Origen., Περὶ ἀρχῶν, lib. III, cap. 2, § 4, Opp. tom. I, p. 140, et lib. I Explan., in Epist. ad Rom., I, 24.
Origen, On First Principles, book 3, chapter 2, § 4, Works, vol. 1, p. 140; and book 1 of the Exposition of the Epistle to the Romans, 1, 24.
(printed under page 343)
Page
- running head: 691 S. BARNABAS APOS
- marginal letters: A lentissimos hujus; B ut purissimae vitae; C que testimonio; D Hoc et Paulus
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: lentissimos hujus (Gallandi continued); words split at start and end: [lucu]lentissimos, fe-[rant]
- other: the word ferant, was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 692
suas tantum conjectationes nullis rationum momentis innixas tibi obtrudunt. In primis vero posteriorem Epistolae partem paraeneticam, quatuor postremis capitibus 18-21 constantem, plane subdititiam esse contendunt. Jamque interpolamenti suspicionem, a coactis allegoriis aliisque capitibus petitam, modo satis diluimus: nunc vero ad illud praecipuum de additamento quod objicitur, stylum convertimus. Nec multis quidem opus, quo evanida evincatur interpellatio. Clemens namque Alexandrinus locum recitat ex Epistolae nostrae capite ultimo, descriptum hisce verbis: Ἀμέλει μυστικῶς ὁ Βαρνάβας· Ὁ δὲ Θεὸς ὁ τοῦ παντὸς κόσμου κυριεύων, φησὶ, δῴη ὑμῖν σοφίαν, κ. τ. λ. Mystice profecto Barnabas: « Deus qui universo mundo dominatur, inquit, det vobis sapientiam, » etc. Origenes item verbis disertissimis, et quidem duobus in locis, Barnabae sententiam laudat de duabus viis, quae in ejus Epistolae capite 18 occurrit: Eadem quoque, inquit, Barnabas in Epistola sua declarat, cum duas vias esse dicit, unam lucis, alteram tenebrarum, quibus et praeesse certos quosque angelos dicit. Sic et S. Hieronymus in libro quem, Philonem et Origenem imitatus, De nominum Hebraicorum interpretatione composuit, inter Hebraica nomina quae in Barnabae Epistola exstant, vocem Satan recenset, quae sane non alibi quam in capite 18 ejusdem Epistolae occurrit. Cum itaque jam inde a saeculis II, III et IV Patrum vetustissimi, Clemens Alexandrinus, Origenes atque Hieronymus, eadem ac nos etiamnum in Barnabae Epistola perlegerint; immerito enimvero posteriorem ejusdem partem subsecutis temporibus fuisse superadditam, nonnulli recentiores suspicantur. Hinc vero ipsemet Dodwellus veterum auctoritate permotus, quatuor laudata postrema capita Barnabae abjudicare non audet, licet ea pro ejusdem Barnabae διδαχῇ haberi posse conjiciat. Sed esto: διδαχῆς titulum aliquando prae se tulerint ista; num ideo sequioris manus assumentum esse jure quis dixerit? « Nimirum, ut verbis utar cl. Felli, in primis saeculis nonnulli, ut adversus haereses praescriberent aut placita sua commendarent, dogmata apostolicorum virorum scriptis mandarunt, et illorum διδαχάς appellavere. Hujus generis videtur fuisse liber quem memorant Eusebius et Athanasius, cujus epigraphe erat: τῶν ἀποστόλων διδαχαί. Sed praeterquam quod numerus versuum, in Stichometriis antiquissimis huic Epistolae assignatus, suadet hanc accessionem ad ejus molem omnino desiderari; pariter a Clemente Alexandrino et Origene, nec non auctore Constitutionum laudatur, ac aliae partes hujus Epistolae. Et si in Latinis exemplaribus desiderari, idoneum sit argumentum unde confici possit, quidquid sic
they obtrude upon you only their own conjectures resting upon no weight of reasons. And in the first place they contend that the latter, paraenetic part of the Epistle, consisting of the four last chapters 18-21, is plainly supposititious. Now the suspicion of interpolation drawn from forced allegories and other chapters we have just sufficiently refuted: now, however, we turn our pen to that principal point which is objected concerning the addition. Nor indeed is there need of many words to prove the objection empty. For Clement of Alexandria recites a passage from the last chapter of our Epistle, copied in these words: Assuredly Barnabas mystically says: « And may God, Who rules over the whole world, grant you wisdom, » etc. Mystically indeed Barnabas: « May God Who rules over the whole world, he says, grant you wisdom, » etc. Origen likewise in the most express words, and indeed in two places, quotes the sentiment of Barnabas concerning the two ways, which occurs in chapter 18 of his Epistle: The same things also, he says, Barnabas declares in his Epistle, when he says that there are two ways, one of light, the other of darkness, over which also he says that certain angels preside. So also St Jerome, in the book which in imitation of Philo and Origen he composed On the Interpretation of Hebrew Names, among the Hebrew names which are extant in the Epistle of Barnabas reckons the word Satan, which certainly occurs nowhere else than in chapter 18 of the same Epistle. Since therefore already from the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th centuries the most ancient of the Fathers, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Jerome, read the same things as we still read today in the Epistle of Barnabas, undeservedly indeed do some more recent writers suspect that the latter part of the same was superadded in subsequent times. Hence indeed Dodwell himself, moved by the authority of the ancients, does not dare to adjudge the four aforesaid last chapters away from Barnabas, although he conjectures that they may be held as the διδαχή (Teaching) of the same Barnabas. But grant that those chapters at some time bore the title of διδαχή; could anyone therefore rightly say that they are the addition of a later hand? « Assuredly, to use the words of the illustrious Fell, in the first centuries some, in order to prescribe against heresies or to commend their own tenets, committed to writing the doctrines of apostolic men, and called them their διδαχαί (Teachings). Of this kind seems to have been the book which Eusebius and Athanasius mention, whose title was: τῶν ἀποστόλων διδαχαί (The Teachings of the Apostles). But besides the fact that the number of lines assigned to this Epistle in the most ancient Stichometriae persuades us that this addition is altogether required for its bulk, it is praised equally by Clement of Alexandria and Origen, as well as by the author of the Constitutions, with the other parts of this Epistle. And if its being lacking in the Latin copies be a suitable argument from which it may be inferred that whatever is thus
Editors' notes and page, col. 692
Footnotes
(65) ‹anchor: ipsemet Dodwellus› · call in col 692
Dodw., Dissert. I in Iren., § 31, p. 56.
Dodwell, Dissertation 1 on Irenaeus, § 31, p. 56.
(printed under page 343)
(66) ‹anchor: verbis utar cl. Felli› · call in col 692
Fell. not. ad Barnab. Epist., cap. 18.
Fell, note on the Epistle of Barnabas, chapter 18.
(printed under page 343)
(67) ‹anchor: quem memorant Eusebius› · call in col 692
Euseb., Hist. eccl., lib. III, cap. 25.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book 3, chapter 25.
(printed under page 343)
(68) ‹anchor: et Athanasius› · call in col 692
Athan. epist. 39.
Athanasius, Letter 39 [the Festal Letter].
(printed under page 343)
Page
- running head: ARNABAS APOSTOLUS. 692
- marginal letters: A rant, suas tantum; B natur, inquit,; C etiamnum in Barnabae; D Eusebius et Athanasius
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: rant, suas tantum (Gallandi continued); word split at start: [fe]rant
μειοῦρον est, genuinum non esse scriptum; periclitabitur prioris Epistolae partis fides, quandoquidem Graece non compareat. Conclusionem quae in Latinis exemplaribus hodiernis comparet, librariis deberi libenter concesserim; siquidem ii istiusmodi epilogis libros a se conscriptos alibi passim ornarunt. Sed et iteratae scriptionis post solemnem valedictionem non desunt exempla. Sic Epist. II ad Timotheum, post doxologiam, quaedam resumpto calamo subnectuntur, ut alia ejus generis praeteream. » Haec ille.
curtailed (μειοῦρον) is not a genuine writing, the credit of the former part of the Epistle will be imperilled, since it does not appear in Greek. That the conclusion which appears in the present-day Latin copies is owed to the copyists, I would gladly grant; since they elsewhere everywhere adorned books copied by themselves with epilogues of that sort. Moreover, examples of resumed writing after a solemn farewell are not lacking. Thus in Epistle 2 to Timothy, after the doxology, certain things are subjoined with the pen taken up again, to pass over other examples of that kind. » Thus he.
Ad reliquas levioris momenti difficultates quod attinet, illas mira sane dexteritate dissolvit Papebrochius vir doctissimus, quem proinde consulere praestat. Eas item, ut tempori parcam, praetermitto quae a Moynio primum excitatae, deinde a Tentzelio, Basnagio aliisque instauratae fuerunt; eo vel maxime quod Moynianas perstringens potissimum cl. Nourrius, alias quoque diluisse videatur. Caeterum, quod laudatus Papebrochius ex hujus Epistolae capite 15 conjecerit, illam forte ab aliquo Chiliastarum post annum 97 fuisse perscriptam; ex ea quidem suspicione ipsum exemissent Menardus in primis et Cotelerius, quorum editiones videre sibi haud contigisse testatur.
As regards the remaining difficulties of lighter moment, the most learned man Papebroch resolves them with wonderful dexterity indeed, whom accordingly it is better to consult. Those likewise, to spare time, I pass over which were first raised by Le Moyne, and afterwards renewed by Tentzel, Basnage, and others; all the more so because the illustrious Le Nourry, in criticizing chiefly those of Le Moyne, seems to have refuted the others also. For the rest, as to the fact that the aforesaid Papebroch conjectured from chapter 15 of this Epistle that it was perhaps written out by someone of the Chiliasts after the year 97; Ménard especially and Cotelier would have freed him from that suspicion, whose editions he testifies it had not fallen to his lot to see.
CAPUT III.
CHAPTER III.
Quo tempore scripta fuerit, inquiritur.
At what time it was written is inquired.
Sed tandem ad tempus inquirendum accedamus, quo Epistola ipsa exarata fuisse existimatur. Nimirum, ut optime Millius, paulo post annum aerae vulgaris 70, sive cum jam recens fuisset eversum templum, deletaque urbs Hierosolymitana. Et id quidem ex eadem Epistola satis liquet. Sic enim ibi: Πέρας γοῦν πάλιν λέγει· « Ἰδοὺ οἱ καθελόντες τὸν ναὸν τοῦτον, αὐτοὶ αὐτὸν οἰκοδομήσουσι. ΓΙΝΕΤΑΙ. Διὰ γὰρ τὸ πολεμεῖν αὐτοὺς, καθῃρέθη ὑπὸ τῶν ἐχθρῶν ΝΥΝ. » Et tandem rursus ait: « Ecce qui destruxerunt templum hoc, ipsi illud aedificabunt. Idque EVENIT. Nam quia bellum gerunt, NUNC ab hostibus destructum est. » Ita enim cum Fello et Cotelerio in edito distinguendus hic locus, reclamante licet Menardo, qui τὸ νῦν male jungi nomini ἐχθρῶν autumabat.
But at length let us proceed to inquire into the time at which the Epistle itself is thought to have been penned. Namely, as Mill excellently says, a little after the year 70 of the common era, or when the temple had just recently been overthrown and the city of Jerusalem destroyed. And this indeed is sufficiently clear from the same Epistle. For thus it is written there: Finally then he says again: « Behold, those who pulled down this temple shall themselves build it up. IT IS HAPPENING. For because they wage war, it was pulled down by the enemies NOW. » And finally he says again: « Behold, those who destroyed this temple shall themselves build it up. And that HAPPENS. For because they wage war, NOW it has been destroyed by the enemies. » For thus with Fell and Cotelier must this passage be punctuated in the printed text, albeit Ménard protests, who judged that τὸ νῦν was wrongly joined to the noun ἐχθρῶν.
Haud equidem ignoro, Moynium et Tentzelium hinc potius Barnabae abjudicandi Epistolam ansam arripere, eo scilicet nomine quod tempora minime quadrent. Barnabas enim, inquiunt, ex communi sententia Nerone imperante martyrium subiit, adeoque ante quam templum Hierosolymitanum solo aequaretur: quam quidem objectionem tanti ducunt ii viri critici, ut invictum argumentum appellare non dubitent. Attamen tantum abest ut istiusmodi difficultati vim aliquam inesse alii censeant ut
I am not indeed unaware that Le Moyne and Tentzel seize from this rather a handle for adjudging the Epistle away from Barnabas, on the ground namely that the times by no means square. For Barnabas, they say, according to the common opinion suffered martyrdom in the reign of Nero, and therefore before the temple of Jerusalem was levelled with the ground: which objection indeed those critical men esteem so highly that they do not hesitate to call it an invincible argument. Nevertheless, so far are others from judging that there is any force in a difficulty of this sort, that
Editors' notes and page, col. 693
Footnotes
(69) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 693 or 694
Papebr., Act. SS., Jun. tom. II, pag. 459, § 5.
Papebroch, Acta Sanctorum, June, vol. 2, page 459, § 5.
(printed under page 344)
(70) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 693 or 694
Nourr. App. ad Bibl. PP., tom. I, pag. 38 seq.
Le Nourry, Apparatus ad Bibliothecam maximam Patrum, vol. 1, page 38 and following.
(printed under page 344)
(71) ‹anchor: ut optime Millius› · call in col 693
Mill., Prolegom. ad N. T., § 144.
Mill, Prolegomena to the New Testament, § 144.
(printed under page 344)
(72) ‹anchor: Sic enim ibi› · call in col 693
Barnab. Epist. cap. 16.
Epistle of Barnabas, chapter 16.
(printed under page 344)
(73) ‹anchor: tandem rursus ait› · call in col 693
Isa. XLIX, 17.
Isaiah 49:17.
(printed under page 344)
(74) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 693 or 694
Euseb., Chron., ad an. MMLXXX.
Eusebius, Chronicle, at the year 2080.
(printed under page 344)
(75) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 693 or 694
Hieron., De vir. illustr., cap. 1 et 5.
Jerome, On Illustrious Men, chapters 1 and 5.
(printed under page 344)
(76) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 693 or 694
Alex. Mon., apud Bolland., Act. SS., Junii, tom. II, pag. 445.
Alexander the Monk, in the Bollandists, Acta Sanctorum, June, vol. 2, page 445.
(printed under page 344)
Page
- running head: 693 PROLEGOMENA
- marginal letters: A μειοῦρον est,; B mitto quae a Moynio; C vulgaris 70,; D hinc potius Barnabae
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: μειοῦρον est, CAPUT III (Gallandi continued)
maxime etiam eamdem insuper habeant. Et jure quidem. Nam quae communis fertur sententia de Barnabae sub Nerone martyrio, nullo idoneo teste, nulla veterum auctoritate firmatur; nullumque apud antiquos scriptores vestigium occurrit, unde quo tempore supremum diem obierit Barnabas, certo statuatur. Contra vero, cum constet ex Eusebio et Hieronymo, apostolos Petrum et Paulum ultimo Neronis anno, id est anno 68, martyrii palmam fuisse adeptos: quidni ergo Barnabas post captam a Tito Hierosolymam anno 70, aliquot adhuc annos ab eorum apostolorum martyrio vixisse potuerit, et quidem in primis cum jam e medio sublato Nerone, persecutio desierit; ut proinde circa annum 72 aut 73 Epistolam scripserit?
they most of all even disregard the same. And rightly indeed. For the opinion which is commonly current concerning the martyrdom of Barnabas under Nero is confirmed by no suitable witness, by no authority of the ancients; and no trace occurs in ancient writers from which it may be established with certainty at what time Barnabas met his last day. On the contrary, since it is established from Eusebius and Jerome that the apostles Peter and Paul obtained the palm of martyrdom in the last year of Nero, that is, in the year 68: why then could not Barnabas have lived for some years still after those apostles' martyrdom, after Jerusalem had been taken by Titus in the year 70, and especially since, Nero having now been removed from the midst, the persecution had ceased; so that accordingly he wrote the Epistle about the year 72 or 73?
At enim ex Alexandri monachi elogio in S. Barnabam perspicuum est ipsum vivente adhuc Paulo apostolo ex hac vita migrasse: idque patet ex ultimis illius verbis ad Joannem Marcum, consobrinum suum, quae sic se habent: Ἐν τῇδε τῇ ἡμέρᾳ δεῖ με τελειωθῆναι εἰς τὰς χεῖρας τῶν ἀπειθούντων Ἰουδαίων· σὺ δὲ ἐξελθὼν ἔξω τῆς πόλεως κατὰ δυσμὰς, εὑρήσεις τὸ σῶμά μου· καὶ τοῦτο θάψας, ἔξελθε ἀπὸ Κύπρου· καὶ πορεύου εἰς τὸν Παῦλον, καὶ ἴσθι μετ' αὐτοῦ, ἕως οὗ ὁ Κύριος οἰκονομήσει τὰ κατὰ σέ· μέλλει γὰρ τὸ ὄνομά σου μεγαλυνθῆναι ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ. Hodie infidelium Judaeorum manibus me consummari oportet: tu vero extra civitatem, occidentem versus egredere, et corpus meum invenies: quod cum sepelieris, exi e Cypro, et ad Paulum proficiscere; et esto cum illo, quoad Dominus res tuas disposuerit: futurum est enim, ut nomen tuum per totum terrarum orbem divulgetur. Haec ibi. Et Barnabae quidem hortanti morem gessisse Marcum, e Pauli Epistolis patet. Hic enim ad Colossenses scribens, eos salutat nomine Marci consobrini Barnabae; qui nempe primum in causa fuerat cur Paulus a Barnaba secesserit, ut habetur in Actis; quique deinceps ad officium reversus, Paulo fidus comes adhaesit, eique demum post mortem Barnabae utilem operam in ministerio apostolico praestitit, ut ad Philemonem et ex posterioribus vinculis ad Timotheum scribens, idem testatur Apostolus. Atqui quae Colossensibus et Philemoni inscriptae exstant Epistolae, juxta virorum eruditorum sententiam, ab Apostolo exaratae feruntur anno 62; quae autem secunda est ad Timotheum, anno 67, cum nimirum jampridem e vivis excessisset Barnabas, cujus hortatu Joannes Marcus exinde Paulo sese comitem addidit. Ita ferme Tentzelius, qui et hanc objectionem tantum ponderis habere arbitratur, ut eidem nihil obverti posse asseveret quam Epistolam
But indeed from the eulogy of Alexander the monk upon St Barnabas it is clear that he departed from this life while the apostle Paul was still living: and this is evident from his last words to John Mark, his cousin, which run thus: On this day I must be perfected at the hands of the unbelieving Jews; and do you go out outside the city towards the west, and you will find my body; and when you have buried this, go out from Cyprus, and go to Paul, and be with him until the Lord shall dispose your affairs; for your name is to be magnified in all the world. Today by the hands of the unbelieving Jews I must be perfected: do you, however, go out outside the city towards the west, and you will find my body: when you have buried it, go out from Cyprus, and set out to Paul; and be with him, until the Lord has disposed your affairs: for it will come to pass that your name shall be spread abroad through the whole world. Thus there. And that Mark indeed complied with Barnabas's exhortation is evident from the Epistles of Paul. For he, writing to the Colossians, greets them in the name of Mark the cousin of Barnabas; who namely had first been the cause why Paul separated from Barnabas, as is contained in the Acts; and who thereafter, returning to his duty, clung to Paul as a faithful companion, and finally after the death of Barnabas rendered him useful service in the apostolic ministry, as the same Apostle testifies in writing to Philemon and from his later bonds to Timothy. And yet the Epistles which are extant inscribed to the Colossians and to Philemon, according to the opinion of learned men, are said to have been penned by the Apostle in the year 62; and that which is the second to Timothy, in the year 67, when namely Barnabas had long since departed from the living, at whose exhortation John Mark thenceforth joined himself as a companion to Paul. Thus almost Tentzel, who also judges that this objection has so much weight that he asserts nothing can be opposed to it except our Epistle;
Editors' notes and page, col. 694
Footnotes
(77) ‹anchor: ad Colossenses scribens› · call in col 694
Coloss. IV, 10.
Colossians 4:10.
(printed under page 344)
(78) ‹anchor: in Actis› · call in col 694
Act. XV, 37-39.
Acts 15:37–39.
(printed under page 344)
(79) ‹anchor: ad Philemonem› · call in col 694
Philem., vers. 24.
Philemon, verse 24.
(printed under page 344)
(80) ‹anchor: ad Timotheum› · call in col 694
II Tim. IV, 11.
2 Timothy 4:11.
(printed under page 344)
(81) ‹anchor: virorum eruditorum› · call in col 694
Pears., in Annal. Paul., pag. 20, 25; Mill., in Prolegom. ad N. T., §§ 80, 82, 125; Tillem., Mem. eccl., tom. I, p. 292, 595.
Pearson, Annales Paulini, pages 20, 25; Mill, Prolegomena to the New Testament, §§ 80, 82, 125; Tillemont, Mémoires ecclésiastiques, vol. 1, pp. 292, 595.
(printed under page 344)
(82) ‹anchor: Ita ferme Tentzelius› · call in col 694
Tentz. ad Hieron., De vir. illustr., edit. Fabric., cap. 6, § 3, pag. 40.
Tentzel on Jerome, On Illustrious Men, Fabricius's edition, chapter 6, § 3, page 40.
(printed under page 344)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA. 694
- marginal letters: A maxime etiam eamdem; B At enim ex Alexandri; C corpus meum invenies:; D lossensibus et Philemoni
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin with a Greek quotation (Alexander the Monk, Ἐν τῇδε … οἰκουμένῃ); calls 74-76 also stand in this column (listed in n693); editors' matter: maxime etiam eamdem (Gallandi continued)
nostram; quae quidem, subdit, cum sit ipsum κρινόμενον, non est argumenti loco assumenda. Id sane a viro erudito nollem dictum.
which indeed, he subjoins, since it is the very point under judgement (κρινόμενον), must not be assumed in the place of an argument. That certainly I could wish had not been said by a learned man.
Age nunc videamus num adeo firma sit istiusmodi objectio, ut eam nedum everti, sed ne ullo quidem pacto hebetari liceat. Quod ut praestemus, advertendum primum omnium, totam Tentzelii argumentationem unius Alexandri monachi Cyprii testimonio fulciri, scriptoris nimirum obscuri nominis atque aetatis incertae. Antiquiorem enimvero saeculo IX ipsum non fuisse constat apud eruditos: litteris namque consignasse fertur Vitam Nicephori, patriarchae CP., qui eodem saeculo IX ineunte floruisse comperitur. Ecquae porro fides scriptori huic adhibenda, qui et laudatorem potius quam historicum agit, et illa quae multis retro saeculis ante ipsius aevum contigere, nobis enarrat? Neque est quod quis reponat, monachum istum sub Laudationis suae finem tradidisse, pauca illa quae de Barnabae vita et martyrio perhibet, ab auctore Stromatum Clemente aliorumque veterum scriptis, a se collecta fuisse atque exposita. Siquidem in promptu habemus quae de Barnaba profert Clemens Alexandrinus; quorum tamen vix ullum vestigium apud monachum Cyprium reperias. Reliqua vero quae ille sive a Theodoro Lectore, sive a Nilo Doxopatrio, aliisque forte sequioris aevi scriptoribus desumpsit, sublesta nimis fide laborant; perinde ac illa Barnabae monita Joanni Marco tradita, quae unus ipsemet monachus Laudationi suae intexuit: adeo ut nullam omnino vim ad assensum extorquendum habeant, quae a scriptoribus istiusmodi proferuntur. Graviter enim et vere dixit Baronius noster, vir maximus: Quod a recentiore auctore in rebus antiquis sine alicujus vetustioris auctoritate profertur, contemnitur. Illud quoque accedit, absona pleraque ac falsa in ejusdem monachi Laudatione occurrere; quae sane ad ipsius fidem obtundendam elevandamque non minimum valeant: qua de re in primis consulendi laudatus Baronius ac Tillemontius.
Come now, let us see whether an objection of this sort is so firm that it may not only not be overthrown, but not in any way even be blunted. That we may accomplish this, it must be noticed first of all that the whole argumentation of Tentzel is propped up by the testimony of Alexander the Cypriot monk alone, a writer namely of obscure name and of uncertain age. For that he was not more ancient than the 9th century is agreed among the learned: since he is reported to have committed to writing the Life of Nicephorus, patriarch of Constantinople, who is found to have flourished at the beginning of the same 9th century. And what credit, pray, is to be given to this writer, who both plays the panegyrist rather than the historian, and relates to us things which happened many centuries back before his own age? Nor is there reason for anyone to reply that this monk at the end of his Panegyric handed down that those few things which he relates concerning the life and martyrdom of Barnabas were collected and set forth by him from the author of the Stromata, Clement, and the writings of other ancients. Since we have at hand the things which Clement of Alexandria brings forward concerning Barnabas; of which nevertheless you may find scarcely any trace in the Cypriot monk. And the remaining things which he took either from Theodorus Lector, or from Nilus Doxopatrius, and perhaps other writers of a later age, labour under too weak credit; just like those admonitions of Barnabas delivered to John Mark, which the monk himself alone wove into his Panegyric: so that the things which are brought forward by writers of that sort have no force at all to extort assent. For gravely and truly said our Baronius, a very great man: What is brought forward by a more recent author in ancient matters without the authority of some older writer, is despised. There is added this also, that very many incongruous and false things occur in the Panegyric of the same monk; which certainly avail not a little to blunt and diminish his credit: on which matter the aforesaid Baronius and Tillemont are chiefly to be consulted.
His vero vix dum ita enarratis, ad manus nostras pervenit viri doctrina et eruditione praestantis pereruditum sane Commentarium in vetus marmoreum S. Neapolitanae ecclesiae Kalendarium, qui Alexandri monachi causam defendendam suscepit, illumque saeculo VI desinente floruisse contendit. Dolemus enimvero serius nobis detectum opus, quo hactenus dicta utcunque temperandi facultas data esset. At illud saltem concedit V. C. hunc monachum Cyprium, « non multum quidem judicio valuisse, nec raro in paulo antiquioribus rebus a veritate aberrasse; quin et insulanas narrationes
Scarcely, however, had these things been thus set forth when there came into our hands the very learned Commentary on the Ancient Marble Calendar of the Holy Church of Naples by a man excelling in learning and erudition, who undertook to defend the cause of Alexander the monk, and contends that he flourished at the close of the 6th century. We grieve indeed that a work was discovered by us too late, whereby the opportunity of qualifying in some way what has thus far been said would have been given. Yet the illustrious man grants at least this, that this Cypriot monk « did not indeed avail much in judgement, and not seldom strayed from the truth in somewhat more ancient matters; nay, and followed island stories,
Editors' notes and page, col. 695
Footnotes
(83) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 695 or 696
Fabric., Bibl. Gr., tom. X, pag. 475.
Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graeca, vol. 10, page 475.
(printed under page 345)
(84) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 695 or 696
Alex. Mon., apud Bolland. l. c., num. 8, p. 438.
Alexander the Monk, in the Bollandists, at the place cited, no. 8, p. 438.
(printed under page 345)
(85) ‹anchor: vir maximus› · call in col 695
Baron., praelocut. ad Annal. eccl., tom. I, § 12.
Baronius, preface to the Annales ecclesiastici, vol. 1, § 12.
(printed under page 345)
(86) ‹anchor: laudatus Baronius› · call in col 695
Id., ibid., ad an. 51, § 53 et alibi.
The same, same work, at the year 51, § 53, and elsewhere.
(printed under page 345)
(87) ‹anchor: ac Tillemontius› · call in col 695
Tillem., Mem. eccl., tom. I, pag. 412, 655 et seqq.
Tillemont, Mémoires ecclésiastiques, vol. 1, pages 412, 655 and following.
(printed under page 345)
(88) ‹anchor: floruisse contendit› · call in col 695
Mazoch., Comment., vol. II, pag. 555-557.
Mazzocchi, Commentarius, vol. 2, pages 555–557.
(printed under page 345)
(89) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 695 or 696
Act. XV, 30-36.
Acts 15:30–36.
(printed under page 345)
(90) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 695 or 696
Vid. Tillem., Mém. eccl., tom. I, pag. 543.
See Tillemont, Mémoires ecclésiastiques, vol. 1, page 543.
(printed under page 345)
(91) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 695 or 696
I Cor. IX, 5, 6.
1 Corinthians 9:5, 6.
(printed under page 345)
Page
- running head: 695 S. BARNABAS APOS
- marginal letters: A nostram; quae quidem,; B rat? Neque est; C intexuit: adeo; D S. Neapolitanae
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: nostram; quae quidem (Gallandi continued); word split at end: narra-[tiones]
- other: the word narrationes was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 696
majorem partem scriptas, alicubi forsitan per ora traditas, secutum esse: » ut propterea minus fide dignus jure nobis videatur, in iis quae persequimur investigandis.
for the most part written, somewhere perhaps handed down by word of mouth: » so that on that account he rightly seems to us less worthy of credit in investigating those matters which we are pursuing.
Itaque, ut his demum certiora solidioraque objiciamus, quae ad sententiam nostram confirmandam propius accedant: primum quidem ex apostolorum Actis satis liquet, Paulum inter et Barnabam dissensum, post unum alterumve mensem a coacto Hierosolymitano concilio accidisse. Anno autem Dionysiano 51 habitum fuisse concilium illud, rata est celebriorum chronologorum opinio: adeoque hoc ipso anno, sive ut maxime sub initium insequentis 52 Barnabae a Paulo discessio contigisse videtur. Jam vero quatuor aut quinque post annos ab eo divortio, utrumque iterum convenisse, haud obscure, meo quidem animo, e priore ad Corinthios Epistola colligitur. Ibi enim Barnabae velut socii fidissimi meminit Apostolus his verbis: Nunquid non habemus potestatem mulierem sororem circumducendi, sicut et caeteri apostoli, et fratres Domini, et Cephas? Aut ego solus et Barnabas non habemus potestatem hoc operandi? Enimvero, aut ego maxime fallor, aut Barnabas Paulo adhaerebat, dum de eo haec scribebat Apostolus. Prior autem ad Corinthios Epistola anno 56 desinente, vel 57 ineunte, scripta perhibetur. Unde pronum est arguere Barnabam, postquam se a Paulo sejunxerat, anno 51, jam inde post quatuor vel quinque annorum spatium, ut modo innuimus, in ejus demum societatem rediisse: ut proinde nil mirum, si Joannis Marci Barnabae consobrini meminerit Apostolus anno 62, dum ad Colossenses et ad Philemonem scriberet; ipsumque in primis recenseat anno 67, quo secundam ad Timotheum scripsit Epistolam, inter eos socios e quibus sibi assistentibus opportunum in suis vinculis solatium Romae reciperet.
Therefore, that we may finally oppose to these things surer and more solid considerations, which approach nearer to confirming our opinion: first indeed from the Acts of the Apostles it is sufficiently clear that the dissension between Paul and Barnabas happened one or two months after the assembling of the Council of Jerusalem. Now that that council was held in the Dionysian year 51 is the settled opinion of the more celebrated chronologers: and therefore in this very year, or at most towards the beginning of the following year 52, the departure of Barnabas from Paul seems to have happened. Now that four or five years after that separation both came together again is gathered not obscurely, to my mind at least, from the former Epistle to the Corinthians. For there the Apostle makes mention of Barnabas as a most faithful companion in these words: Have we not power to lead about a sister, a woman, as also the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? Or do only I and Barnabas not have power to do this? Assuredly, either I am very much mistaken, or Barnabas was cleaving to Paul when the Apostle wrote these things concerning him. Now the former Epistle to the Corinthians is said to have been written at the close of the year 56, or at the beginning of 57. Whence it is easy to argue that Barnabas, after he had separated himself from Paul in the year 51, thereafter after the space of four or five years, as we just hinted, returned at length into his company: so that accordingly it is no wonder if the Apostle made mention of John Mark, the cousin of Barnabas, in the year 62, when he was writing to the Colossians and to Philemon; and reckoned him especially in the year 67, in which he wrote the second Epistle to Timothy, among those companions from whom, assisting him, he received seasonable solace in his bonds at Rome.
Neque tantum desinente anno 56, sed etiam sub sequentis 57 finem vel fortasse ineunte 58, quo tempore posterior inscripta fuit Corinthiis Epistola, vitam adhuc egisse Barnabam, censuerunt nonnulli ecclesiastici scriptores Joanne Chrysostomo antiquiores. Ad illa enim Apostoli verba: Misimus etiam cum illo fratrem, cujus laus est in Evangelio per omnes Ecclesias, haec adnotat Chrysostomus: Καὶ τίς οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἀδελφός; Τινὲς μὲν τὸν Λουκᾶν· καί φασι διὰ τὴν ἱστορίαν ἥνπερ ἔγραψε. Τινὲς δὲ τὸν Βαρνάβαν· καὶ γὰρ καὶ τὸ ἄγραφον κήρυγμα Εὐαγγέλιον καλεῖ. Et quisnam est hic frater? Nonnulli quidem his verbis Lucam significari putant: atque hoc dicunt propter eam historiam quam litteris mandavit. Alii vero Barnabam: etenim praedicationem quoque non scriptam,
And that not only at the close of the year 56, but also towards the end of the following year 57 or perhaps at the beginning of 58, at which time the latter Epistle was inscribed to the Corinthians, Barnabas was still living, some ecclesiastical writers more ancient than John Chrysostom judged. For upon those words of the Apostle: We have sent also with him the brother, whose praise is in the Gospel through all the Churches, Chrysostom notes these things: And who is this brother? Some indeed say Luke; and they say so on account of the history which he wrote. Others, however, say Barnabas; for he calls the unwritten preaching also Gospel. And who is this brother? Some indeed think that Luke is signified by these words: and they say this on account of that history which he committed to writing. Others, however, Barnabas: for unwritten preaching also he
Editors' notes and page, col. 696
Footnotes
(92) ‹anchor: anno 56 desinente› · call in col 696
Tillem., l. c., p. 563.
Tillemont, at the place cited, p. 563.
(printed under page 345)
(93) ‹anchor: vel 57 ineunte› · call in col 696
Pears. Annal. Paul., p. 15; Mill., Prolegom. ad N. T., § 9.
Pearson, Annales Paulini, p. 15; Mill, Prolegomena to the New Testament, § 9.
(printed under page 345)
(94) ‹anchor: Corinthiis Epistola› · call in col 696
Tillem., Pears. et Mill. locis cit.
Tillemont, Pearson and Mill, at the places cited.
(printed under page 345)
(95) ‹anchor: Apostoli verba› · call in col 696
II Cor. VIII, 18.
2 Corinthians 8:18.
(printed under page 345)
(96) ‹anchor: adnotat Chrysostomus› · call in col 696
Chrys., hom. 8 in Epist. II ad Cor., § 1, Opp. tom. X, pag. 564.
Chrysostom, Homily 8 on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, § 1, Works, vol. 10, page 564.
(printed under page 345)
Page
- running head: ARNABAS APOSTOLUS. 696
- marginal letters: A tiones majorem; B post annos ab eo; C in ejus demum; D Evangelio per omnes
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: tiones majorem (Gallandi continued); word split at start: [narra]tiones
Evangelium nuncupat. Unde videas Chrysostomo item probari eorum veterum scriptorum sententiam, qui Apostoli verba de Barnaba fuerunt interpretati. Verum apertissime Theodoritus in eumdem locum: Τὸν τρισμακάριον Βαρνάβαν τὰ εἰρημένα χαρακτηρίζει. Αὐτὸς γὰρ καὶ ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ σὺν τῷ μακαρίῳ Παύλῳ, τῆς χειροτονίας τετύχηκε, τοῦ θείου Πνεύματος εἰρηκότος· Ἀφορίσατε δή μοι τὸν Βαρνάβαν καὶ τὸν Σαῦλον, εἰς τὸ ἔργον ὃ προσκέκλημαι αὐτούς. Haec verba designant beatissimum Barnabam. Ipse namque Antiochiae cum beato Paulo ordinatus est, dicente divino Spiritu: « Segregate mihi Barnabam et Saulum, ad opus ad quod vocavi eos. » Neque aliud sane suadere videtur contextus Paulinus. Siquidem verbis modo recitatis de fratre, cujus laus est in Evangelio per omnes Ecclesias, subdit statim Apostolus: Non solum autem, sed et ordinatus est comes peregrinationis nostrae. Quis porro comes iste? Non Lucas, non Silas, non Apollo, non Joannes Marcus, ut nonnulli veteres et recentiores censuerunt; sed solus Barnabas. Hic enim unus legitur χειροτονηθεὶς συνέκδημος ἡμῶν, ut Paulus ibidem loquitur; ad illa procul dubio respiciens, quae de se ipso et Barnaba traduntur in Actis: Καὶ ἐπιθέντες τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῖς, ἀπέλυσαν, quod nuspiam de aliis expresse legimus.
calls Gospel. Whence you may see that the opinion of those ancient writers who interpreted the words of the Apostle concerning Barnabas is approved by Chrysostom likewise. But most openly Theodoret upon the same passage: What is said characterizes the thrice-blessed Barnabas. For he himself also at Antioch with the blessed Paul obtained ordination, the divine Spirit having said: Separate now for Me Barnabas and Saul, unto the work to which I have called them. These words designate the most blessed Barnabas. For he himself was ordained at Antioch with the blessed Paul, the divine Spirit saying: « Separate for Me Barnabas and Saul, unto the work to which I have called them. » Nor indeed does the Pauline context seem to persuade anything else. Since to the words just recited concerning the brother, whose praise is in the Gospel through all the Churches, the Apostle immediately subjoins: And not only so, but he was also ordained the companion of our pilgrimage. Now who is that companion? Not Luke, not Silas, not Apollos, not John Mark, as some ancients and moderns have judged; but Barnabas alone. For he alone is read of as ordained the fellow-traveller of us (χειροτονηθεὶς συνέκδημος ἡμῶν), as Paul speaks in the same place; looking without doubt to those things which are handed down concerning himself and Barnabas in the Acts: And having laid their hands upon them, they sent them away, which we nowhere read expressly concerning others.
Quid quod idem S. Joannes Chrysostomus censuisse quoque videtur, ut viro erudito notatum, Barnabam superstitem adhuc fuisse, dum ad Colossenses Apostolus scriberet. In illa enim verba: Salutat vos... Marcus consobrinus Barnabae, haec habet S. doctor: Καὶ τοῦτον ἐνεκωμίασε τέως ἀπὸ τῆς συγγενείας· μέγας γὰρ ἦν ἀνὴρ ὁ Βαρνάβας. Περὶ οὗ ἐλάβετε ἐντολὰς, ἐὰν ἔλθῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς, δέξασθε αὐτόν. Τί γάρ; οὐκ ἐδέχοντο καὶ χωρὶς τούτου; ναί· ἀλλὰ μετὰ πολλῆς τῆς σπουδῆς βούλομαι, φησί· καὶ τοῦτο τὸν ἄνδρα δείκνυσι μέγαν. Hunc quoque jam laudavit ex cognatione: erat enim Barnabas vir magnus. « De quo accepistis mandata: si venerit ad vos, suscipite illum. » Quid vero? non aliter suscepissent? Maxime. Sed cum magno, inquit, studio: et hoc magnum virum ostendit. Scriptam autem anno 62 fuisse hanc ad Colossenses Epistolam, ex virorum eruditorum sententia superius vidimus. Ex quibus ergo, si prioris Epistolae Corinthiacae verba in medium adducta probe accipiantur; si Theodoritum, Joannem Chrysostomum eosque scriptores ecclesiasticos quos idem sanctus doctor collaudat, prae Alexandro monacho, ut par est, audiamus: concludendum profecto erit, inanem esse Tentzelii objectionem, illius tantum monachi Cyprii testimonio innixam; cum satis constet
What of the fact that the same St John Chrysostom seems also to have judged, as has been noted by a learned man, that Barnabas was still surviving when the Apostle wrote to the Colossians? For upon those words: There salutes you... Mark the cousin of Barnabas, the holy doctor has these words: And him too he praised meanwhile from his kinship; for Barnabas was a great man. Concerning whom you received commands: if he come to you, receive him. What then? Would they not have received him even apart from this? Yes; but with much zeal I wish it, he says; and this shows the man to be great. Him also he has already praised from his kinship: for Barnabas was a great man. « Concerning whom you received commands: if he come to you, receive him. » What then? Would they not otherwise have received him? Most certainly. But with great zeal, he says: and this shows the great man. Now that this Epistle to the Colossians was written in the year 62, we saw above from the opinion of learned men. From which things, therefore, if the words of the former Corinthian Epistle brought forward be rightly taken; if we listen to Theodoret, John Chrysostom, and those ecclesiastical writers whom the same holy doctor praises, in preference to Alexander the monk, as is fitting: we must assuredly conclude that the objection of Tentzel, resting only upon the testimony of that Cypriot monk, is empty; since it is sufficiently
Editors' notes and page, col. 697
Footnotes
(97) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 697 or 698
Theodor. in Epist. II ad Cor. VIII, 18, 19, Opp. tom. III, pag. 243.
Theodoret, on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians 8:18, 19, Works, vol. 3, page 243.
(printed under page 346)
(98) ‹anchor: traduntur in Actis› · call in col 697
Act. XIII, 3.
Acts 13:3.
(printed under page 346)
(99) ‹anchor: viro erudito notatum› · call in col 697
Tillem., l. c., p. 413.
Tillemont, at the place cited, p. 413.
(printed under page 346)
(100) ‹anchor: In illa enim verba› · call in col 697
Coloss. IV, 10.
Colossians 4:10.
(printed under page 346)
(1) ‹anchor: habet S. doctor› · call in col 697
Chrysost., hom. 11 in Epist. ad Coloss., § 2, Opp. tom. XI, pag. 406.
Chrysostom, Homily 11 on the Epistle to the Colossians, § 2, Works, vol. 11, page 406.
(printed under page 346)
(2) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 697 or 698
Mazoch., Comment. in vet. marm. Kalend., vol. II, p. 570-572.
Mazzocchi, Commentary on the Ancient Marble Calendar, vol. 2, pp. 570–572.
(printed under page 346)
Page
- running head: 697 PROLEGOMENA.
- marginal letters: A Evangelium nuncupat.; B cujus laus est; C lossenses Apostolus; D Epistolam, ex virorum
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Evangelium nuncupat (Gallandi continued); word split at end: con-[stet]
- other: the word constet was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 698
Barnabam, adeoque Joannem Marcum consobrinum suum, post discessionem a Paulo quae anno 51 contigisse merito existimatur, Apostolo iterum jam adhaesisse anno 56, quin et in vivis adhuc egisse anno tum 58, tum 62, neque uspiam appareat, ipsum ante Hierosolymitanum excidium supremum diem obiisse: ut proinde nihil obstet quo minus post annum 70, quo πανολεθρία illa Judaica contigit, ejus in Epistola sua meminisse auctor potuerit. Verum hac de re Mazochium V. C. adire praestat, qui ex Actis Joanni Marco tributis copiose satis ac erudite de anno emortuali S. Barnabae agens, ipsum anno 76 Christi fidem suo sanguine consignasse, longe verisimile censet.
established that Barnabas, and therefore John Mark his cousin, after the departure from Paul which is deservedly thought to have happened in the year 51, already clave again to the Apostle in the year 56, nay and was still living both in the year 58 and in 62, and nowhere does it appear that he met his last day before the destruction of Jerusalem: so that accordingly nothing prevents the author from having been able to make mention of it in his Epistle after the year 70, in which that utter destruction (πανολεθρία) of the Jews happened. But on this matter it is better to consult the illustrious Mazzocchi, who, treating copiously enough and learnedly of the year of St Barnabas's death from the Acts attributed to John Mark, judges it far probable that he sealed the faith of Christ with his blood in the year 76.
CAPUT IV.
CHAPTER IV.
Quantae sit auctoritatis, et quanti aestimanda.
Of how great authority it is, and how highly to be esteemed.
Jam vero, ut quantae sit auctoritatis eadem Epistola, demum dispiciamus; illam maximi esse faciendam quisque jure fatebitur, tum pro dignitate atque existimatione quam olim apud vetustissimos ecclesiasticos scriptores obtinuit, tum in primis pro illius pretio ac utilitate quam ex ea in Ecclesiam derivare compertum est. « Et sane, verbis utor Dacherii V. C., quanquam Epistolam hanc pro canonica et extra dubitandam fidem legitima minime proferamus; stylum tamen re vera majestatis apostolicae dignum, materiamque nascentis Ecclesiae rebus accommodatam non modo sapit, sed ingerit etiam clementioribus lectorum judiciis: ita ut, si πορφύρα παρὰ τὴν πορφύραν διακριτέα, profecto de sua cum caeterorum apostolorum scriptis comparatione, suffragium secundum sperare debeat. » Haec ille. Qua de re nos quoque nonnulla paulo ante, cap. 2, attigimus.
Now, to consider at length of how great authority the same Epistle is, everyone will rightly confess that it is to be esteemed most highly, both for the dignity and esteem which it formerly obtained among the most ancient ecclesiastical writers, and especially for its value and the utility which is found to derive from it to the Church. « And certainly, to use the words of the illustrious d'Achery, although we by no means put forward this Epistle as canonical and legitimate beyond doubtful credit; yet it not only savours of a style truly worthy of apostolic majesty and a subject matter suited to the affairs of the nascent Church, but also presses them upon the kinder judgements of readers: so that, if purple must be judged beside purple (πορφύρα παρὰ τὴν πορφύραν διακριτέα), assuredly from its comparison with the writings of the rest of the apostles it ought to hope for a favourable vote. » Thus he. On which matter we also touched upon some points a little before, in chap. 2.
Illud vero potissimum animadvertere juverit, e Barnabae Epistola Ecclesiam catholicam praesidii plurimum petere ad Unitariorum impietatem evertendam, doctrinamque orthodoxam de Jesu Christi Filii Dei τῇ προϋπάρξει, ejusque τῷ ὁμουσίῳ fortiter astruendam stabiliendamque: ut post Bullum et Grabium pluribus ostendit vir doctus Prudentius Maranus. De caeteris porro Christianae doctrinae capitibus, ex eadem Epistola eruendis, prae reliquis nuper satis erudite disseruit cl. Marechalus. His autem hactenus observatis addere libet ex Vossio et Hodio, S. Barnabam quamvis ex Graeca LXXvirali versione Scripturae loca describere consueverit, plerumque tamen Hebraicam veritatem secutum fuisse. Cujus quidem rei ut unum vel alterum exemplum in medium proferatur, ex LXX, Isaiae XXVI, 16, haec recitat auctor: Ἰδοὺ
This, however, it will be chiefly helpful to notice, that from the Epistle of Barnabas the Catholic Church seeks the greatest support for overthrowing the impiety of the Unitarians, and for strongly establishing and confirming the orthodox doctrine concerning the pre-existence (τῇ προϋπάρξει) of Jesus Christ the Son of God, and His consubstantiality (τῷ ὁμουσίῳ): as after Bull and Grabe the learned man Prudentius Maran has shown at length. Furthermore, concerning the remaining heads of Christian doctrine to be drawn out from the same Epistle, the illustrious Maréchal has recently discoursed learnedly enough beyond the rest. Now to these things thus far observed we may add from Vossius and Hody, that St Barnabas, although he was accustomed to copy passages of Scripture from the Greek version of the Septuagint, nevertheless for the most part followed the Hebrew truth. Of which matter, that one or two examples may be brought forward, from the LXX, Isaiah 26:16, the author recites these words: Behold,
Editors' notes and page, col. 698
Footnotes
(3) ‹anchor: verbis utor Dacherii V. C.› · call in col 698
Dacher., Epist. nuncup. ad prim. edit. Menardi, Paris. 1645.
d'Achery, dedicatory letter to the first edition of Ménard, Paris, 1645.
(printed under page 346)
(4) ‹anchor: post Bullum› · call in col 698
Bull. Def. fid. Nic., sect. I, cap. 2, § 2, et sect. 2, cap. 2, § 1.
Bull, Defence of the Nicene Faith, section 1, chapter 2, § 2, and section 2, chapter 2, § 1.
(printed under page 346)
(5) ‹anchor: et Grabium› · call in col 698
Grab., Annot. ibid. pag. 21, 44.
Grabe, annotations in the same work, pages 21, 44.
(printed under page 346)
(6) ‹anchor: Prudentius Maranus› · call in col 698
Maran., Divin. D. N. J. C., lib. IV, cap. 2, p. 371-375.
Maran, On the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, book 4, chapter 2, pp. 371–375.
(printed under page 346)
(7) ‹anchor: cl. Marechalus› · call in col 698
Marech., Concord. des SS. Pères, tom. I, pag. 1 seq.
Maréchal, Concordance des saints Pères, vol. 1, page 1 and following.
(printed under page 346)
(8) ‹anchor: ex Vossio› · call in col 698
Is. Voss., De translat. LXX Intt., cap. 21, pag. 69.
Isaac Vossius, On the Translation of the Seventy Interpreters, chapter 21, page 69.
(printed under page 346)
(9) ‹anchor: et Hodio› · call in col 698
Humfr. Hod. De Bibl. text. orig., lib. III, cap. 3, pag. 277.
Humphrey Hody, On the Original Texts of the Bible, book 3, chapter 3, page 277.
(printed under page 346)
(10) ‹anchor: recitat auctor› · call in col 698
Barn. Epist., cap. 6.
Epistle of Barnabas, chapter 6.
(printed under page 346)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA. 698
- marginal letters: A stet Barnabam,; B set.; C sed ingerit etiam; D ctrinae capitibus,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: stet Barnabam, CAPUT IV (Gallandi continued); word split at start: [con]stet
ἐμβάλλω εἰς τὰ θεμέλια Σιὼν λίθον πολυτελῆ, ἐκλεκτὸν, ἀκρογωνιαῖον, ἔντιμον. Verba tamen proxime subsequentia ex Hebraeo fonte repetit: Καὶ ὃς ἐλπίσει ἐπ' αὐτὸν, ζήσεται εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, Et qui speraverit in illum, vivet in aeternum. Ubi LXX: Καὶ ὁ πιστεύων οὐ μὴ καταισχυνθῇ, Et credens non confundetur. Alibi autem ex Gen. II, 2, haec habet: Καὶ συνετέλεσεν (ὁ Θεὸς) ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ, κ. τ. λ. Et consummavit (Deus) in die septima, etc. At LXX, ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἕκτῃ, in die sexta. Hinc S. Hieronymus in Traditionibus Hebraicis: Pro die sexta, in Hebraeo diem septimam habet. Quem in locum plura observat eruditus Grabius, digna sane quae apud ipsum legantur. Alia vero ejusmodi exempla, ex eadem Epistola repetenda.
I lay for the foundations of Sion a costly, chosen, corner, precious stone. Yet the words immediately following he repeats from the Hebrew fountain: And he who shall hope in Him shall live for ever, And he who shall hope in Him shall live in eternity. Where the LXX have: And he who believes shall by no means be put to shame, And he who believes shall not be confounded. Elsewhere, moreover, from Gen. 2:2, he has these words: And (God) finished on the seventh day, etc. And (God) consummated on the seventh day, etc. But the LXX have, on the sixth day, on the sixth day. Hence St Jerome in his Hebrew Traditions says: For the sixth day, in the Hebrew it has the seventh day. Upon which passage the learned Grabe observes several things, worthy indeed to be read in him. And other examples of this sort may be sought from the same Epistle.
CAPUT V.
CHAPTER V.
Judicium cl. Mazochii: cujus etiam eruditae observationes in aliquot ejusdem Epistolae loca, reliquis editoribus praeterita, in medium adducuntur.
The judgement of the illustrious Mazzocchi: whose learned observations also upon several passages of the same Epistle, passed over by the remaining editors, are brought forward.
Sed ecce tibi vir doctissimus cujus paulo ante meminimus, dum Barnabae gesta fuse persequitur miraque ingenii dexteritate illustrat, aliquot etiam ejus Epistolae loca egregie pro more suo edisserit: ut proinde operae pretium me facturum existimem, si luculentas illius observationes hoc loci describam. Sic autem se habent: « Ex quo primum tempore ab Hugone Menardo publicam lucem aspexit Epistola quae sub Barnabae apostoli nomine a Clemente Alexandrino, Origene et aliis laudata fuit; tot jam virorum eruditissimorum animadversionibus patuit, ut supervacaneum sit quidquam in eam novi aggredi. Tamen obiter illam percurrenti inciderunt mihi quaedam aliis praeterita, quae hic breviter aspergerem.
But behold, the most learned man whom we mentioned a little before, while he pursues at length the deeds of Barnabas and illustrates them with wonderful dexterity of genius, also excellently expounds after his manner several passages of his Epistle: so that accordingly I think I shall do something worth while if I copy his brilliant observations in this place. Now they run thus: « From the time when the Epistle which was praised under the name of the apostle Barnabas by Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and others first saw the public light through Hugues Ménard, it has lain open to the animadversions of so many most learned men already, that it is superfluous to attempt anything new upon it. Yet in running through it in passing there occurred to me certain things passed over by others, which I would briefly sprinkle here.
« Caput 6 sic incipit: Ὅτε οὖν ἐποίησεν ἐντολήν, etc. Cum autem fecit PRAECEPTUM (Christus), quid dicit? Quis est qui judicetur mecum? et quae porro ex Isaiae L, 8, 9, recitat. Hic observatu non indignum est, ἐντολήν, praeceptum, absolute et per excellentiam vocari Patris jussionem de Incarnatione et toto humanae reparationis negotio, quod ἐντολὰς τοῦ Πατρός, praecepta Patris, vocat ipse Christus, Joan. XV, 10. Ac fortassis alluditur a Barnaba ad illud psalmi XXXIX, 8, 9: Tunc dixi: Ecce venio..... ut faciam voluntatem tuam: quam voluntatem mox LEGEM vocat: Deus meus, volui, et legem tuam in medio cordis mei. Omnino hac praeceptione divina plenae sunt utriusque foederis paginae: hoc tantum hic novum, quod ea hic absolute PRAECEPTUM nuncupetur. At vetus interpres Dei praeceptum reddidit, ut insolens loquendi genus clarius efficeret.
« Chapter 6 begins thus: When therefore He made the commandment, etc. Now when He made the COMMANDMENT (Christ), what does He say? Who is he that will contend with Me in judgement? and what he further recites from Isaiah 50:8, 9. Here it is not unworthy of notice that the command of the Father concerning the Incarnation and the whole business of human restoration, which Christ Himself calls the commandments of the Father (ἐντολὰς τοῦ Πατρός), John 15:10, is called ἐντολή, commandment, absolutely and par excellence. And perhaps allusion is made by Barnabas to that saying of Psalm 39:8, 9: Then said I: Behold, I come..... to do Thy will: which will he presently calls LAW: My God, I have willed, and Thy law in the midst of My heart. Altogether the pages of both covenants are full of this divine precept: this only is new here, that here it is called absolutely COMMANDMENT. But the old translator rendered it the commandment of God, in order to make the unusual manner of speaking clearer.
« Paulo post, recitato Mosis testimonio de adipiscenda terra fluente lacte et melle, statim haec
« A little after, having recited the testimony of Moses concerning the obtaining of a land flowing with milk and honey, he immediately
Editors' notes and page, col. 699
Footnotes
(11) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 699 or 700
Barn., Epist. cap. 15.
Barnabas, Epistle, chapter 15.
(printed under page 347)
(12) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 699 or 700
Grab., Epist. ad J. Mill. de lib. Judic. genuin. LXX Intt. vers., pag. 67.
Grabe, Letter to John Mill on the genuine Septuagint version of the Book of Judges, page 67.
(printed under page 347)
(13) ‹anchor: Sic autem se habent› · call in col 699
Mazoch., ubi supra.
Mazzocchi, at the place cited above.
(printed under page 347)
(14) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 699 or 700
Luc. XI, 52.
Luke 11:52.
(printed under page 347)
(15) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 699 or 700
Clement. Alexandr., Strom. lib. V, cap. 10, p. 683 edit. Oxon. 1715.
Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, book 5, chapter 10, p. 683, Oxford edition of 1715.
(printed under page 347)
Page
- running head: 699 S. BARNABAS APOST
- marginal letters: A ἐμβάλλω εἰς; B repetenda.; C mente Alexandrino,; D naba ad illud
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: ἐμβάλλω εἰς, CAPUT V (Gallandi continued)
subdit: Quid dicat ἡ Γνῶσις (Cognitio, sive Scientia) discite: « Sperate in eum, qui in carne manifestandus est vobis, Jesum. Γνώσεως, scientiae, nomine aevo apostolico intellectas fuisse arcanas et allegoricas veteris foederis significationes, nemo ignorat. Ea est Clavis scientiae, in qua sibi legis peritos placuisse Christus notavit. At hoc amplius hic animadvertimus, Γνῶσιν, scientiam, quasi librum citari, et ex eo verba illa proferri: Sperate, etc. Quod quidem ex Clemente Alexandrino multo est evidentius, ubi haec verba ex Barnaba sic recitantur, ut φησίν, quod hic deest, suppleatur: Quid dicat Cognitio, discite: Ἐλπίσατε, φησὶν, ἐπὶ τὸν, etc. Sperate, inquit, in eum, etc., uti supra. Ubi animadvertis, illud φησίν afferri ex ore Barnabae, utique ex Cognitionis sive Scientiae libro citantis. Plures olim fuisse hujusmodi Scientiae libros circumlatos, ab Judaeis allegorica sectantibus conscriptos, non est dubium. Ad eos ergo Barnabas plerumque ablegat lectores, ubi ad allegorias digreditur. Scimus hodienum in Targumim loca complura ad Messiam referri: quod ex eadem Γνώσει manavit. Notandum est autem in ascripto loco, etsi omnia verbis totidem ex Γνώσει recitentur, illud tamen Ἰησοῦν, Jesum, quod ad finem additur, ex Barnabae manu profectum, non ab auctore Γνώσεως. Quem quidem Judaeum fuisse necesse est, alioqui a Barnaba Judaeos convicturo minime citandum. Judaeus autem Messiam norat, Jesum non norat.
subjoins these words: Learn what ἡ Γνῶσις (Knowledge, or Science) says: « Hope in Him Who is to be manifested to you in the flesh, Jesus. That by the name of Γνῶσις, knowledge, in the apostolic age were understood the secret and allegorical significations of the old covenant, no one is ignorant. That is the Key of knowledge, in which Christ noted that the lawyers pleased themselves. But this further we notice here, that Γνῶσις, knowledge, is cited as though a book, and from it are brought forward those words: Hope, etc. Which indeed is much more evident from Clement of Alexandria, where these words from Barnabas are so recited that φησίν (it says), which is lacking here, is supplied: Learn what Knowledge says: Hope, it says, in Him, etc. Hope, it says, in Him, etc., as above. Where you notice that that word φησίν is adduced from the mouth of Barnabas, as quoting at any rate from a book of Knowledge or Science. That several books of Science of this sort were formerly circulated, written by Jews who pursued allegories, there is no doubt. To them, therefore, Barnabas for the most part refers his readers when he digresses into allegories. We know that even today in the Targums very many passages are referred to the Messiah: which flowed from the same Γνῶσις. Now it is to be noted in the passage quoted that, although all things are recited in so many words from Γνῶσις, yet that word Ἰησοῦν, Jesus, which is added at the end, proceeded from the hand of Barnabas, not from the author of Γνῶσις. Who indeed must necessarily have been a Jew, otherwise by no means to be cited by Barnabas when about to convince Jews. Now a Jew knew the Messiah, Jesus he did not know.
« Statim ibidem sequitur: Homo enim, γῆ ἐστι πάσχουσα, terra est patiens. Apparet hic Barnabam, aut quisquis est auctor, philosophis aures admovisse. Nam illud πάσχουσα, patiens, ad philosophorum τεχνικὴν γλῶτταν est referendum, qua materiam pati dicebant. Homo, inquit, est ex terra, non quidem agente, sed patiente. Cujus statim rationem reddit his verbis: Ἀπὸ προσώπου γὰρ τῆς γῆς ἡ πλάσις τοῦ Ἀδὰμ ἐγένετο. A facie enim terrae fictio (seu formatio) Adae exstitit. Ubi pulcherrima Hellenistarum locutio occurrit. Hebraicum enim מפני Mippene (quod Judaei Hellenistae perpetuo, ἀπὸ προσώπου, h. e. a facie reddunt) quamlibet causam, etiam materialem, uti philosophi loquuntur, designat. Ergo tantumdem est, a facie terrae, ac si dixisset, ex terra formatum esse Adam. Et haec etiam ibidem totidem verbis Clemens refert.
« Immediately in the same place there follows: For man is suffering earth (γῆ ἐστι πάσχουσα), is earth suffering. It appears here that Barnabas, or whoever is the author, lent his ears to the philosophers. For that word πάσχουσα, suffering, is to be referred to the technical language (τεχνικὴν γλῶτταν) of the philosophers, whereby they said that matter suffers (is passive). Man, he says, is from earth, not indeed acting, but suffering. Of which he immediately renders the reason in these words: For from the face of the earth the fashioning of Adam came to be. For from the face of the earth the fashioning (or formation) of Adam took place. Where a most beautiful expression of the Hellenists occurs. For the Hebrew מפני Mippene (which the Hellenistic Jews perpetually render ἀπὸ προσώπου, i.e., from the face) designates any cause whatever, even the material cause, as the philosophers speak. Therefore from the face of the earth is tantamount to saying that Adam was formed out of earth. And these things also Clement reports in the same place in so many words.
« Cap. 7, sicuti etiam in sequentibus capitibus, pluries illud Προσέχετε, Attendite, intercalatur: quod peculiare est ἀλληγορούντων, ad attentionem acuendam.
« In chap. 7, just as also in the following chapters, that word Προσέχετε, Attend, is inserted several times: which is peculiar to allegorizers (ἀλληγορούντων), for sharpening attention.
« Cap. 9: Ἀλλὰ καὶ πᾶς Σύρος καὶ Ἄραψ καὶ πάντες οἱ ἱερεῖς τῶν εἰδώλων, etc.: Verum et omnis Syrus et Arabs et omnes idolorum sacerdotes
« Chap. 9: But also every Syrian and Arab and all the priests of the idols, etc.: But also every Syrian and Arab and all the priests of idols
Editors' notes and page, col. 700
Footnotes
(16) ‹anchor: Cap. 7› · call in col 700
Barn. Epist. cap. 7.
Epistle of Barnabas, chapter 7.
(printed under page 347)
(17) ‹anchor: Cap. 9› · call in col 700
Ibid.
In the same place.
(printed under page 347)
Page
- running head: RNABAS APOSTOLUS. 700
- marginal letters: A subdit: Quid dicat; B Barnabae, utique; C « Statim ibidem; D quuntur, designat.
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: subdit: Quid dicat (Gallandi / Mazzocchi continued)
circumciduntur Quae merito difficultatem crearunt. Verum haec non sunt ad severiorem trutinam exigenda, sed παχυτέρως, crassiuscule, accipienda hunc ferme in modum : Quivis Syrus, quivis Arabs, quivis simulacrorum sacerdos circumcisionem admittit ; aut : Ne Syri quidem et Arabes, et profani sacerdotes a circumcisione abhorrent. Nam quia inter Syros et Arabes, interque profanos sacerdotes essent, qui illo se modo mundiores praestarent, licuit Barnabae apostolo dicere, circumcisionem promiscue ab illis usurpari. Quis non in talibus similia loquitur? Caeterum Arabum plurimos fuisse verpos, sicuti et sacerdotes Aegyptios, non est dubium. Ac ne de Syris quidem est dubitandum, si quidem verum sit quod antiqui crediderunt, Phoenices περιτομὴν admisisse. Origenes ad Rom. II, 25, inter caeteros circumcisionis cultores etiam Phoenices numeravit his verbis : Si replicetis historias vestras, invenietis non solum Aegyptiorum sacerdotes, sed et Arabas et Aegyptios et PHOENICES aliosque, quorum studia gratia hujusmodi superstitionis nobilius vigent.
are circumcised. Which things have deservedly created a difficulty. But these words are not to be weighed in too strict a balance, but are to be taken rather broadly, somewhat coarsely, almost in this manner: Every Syrian, every Arab, every priest of idols admits circumcision; or: Not even the Syrians and Arabs and profane priests shrink from circumcision. For since among the Syrians and Arabs, and among the profane priests, there were some who in that manner rendered themselves cleaner, it was permissible for the apostle Barnabas to say that circumcision was promiscuously practised by them. Who does not speak similarly in such matters? Moreover, that very many of the Arabs were circumcised, just as also the Egyptian priests, is not in doubt. And not even concerning the Syrians is it to be doubted, if indeed what the ancients believed is true, that the Phoenicians admitted circumcision. Origen on Rom. 2:25 reckoned even the Phoenicians among the other observers of circumcision in these words: If you unroll your histories, you will find that not only the priests of the Egyptians, but also the Arabs and Egyptians and Phoenicians and others, whose pursuits flourish more nobly by reason of superstition of this kind.
« Cap. 16 : Adhuc et de templo dicam vobis, quomodo errantes miseri, ἐπὶ τὴν ὁδὸν ἤλπισαν, in VIAM speraverunt, et non in Deum ipsum qui fecit eos, quasi domus Dei esset. Hic non est dubium quin ὁδοῦ, viae, nomine templum veniat : nam et in templo totam Judaeorum fiduciam fuisse repositam, notat illa celebris conclamatio, Templum Domini, templum Domini, et quod initio noster de templo proposuit dicere, et quod mox subdit, Quasi (via scilicet illa) domus Dei esset. Vidit hoc et vetus interpres, qui pro ὁδόν, viam, posuit aedem; sic enim reddidit : In AEDEM spem habuerunt. Cotelerius quidem ad quaedam Seniorum loca allusum suspicatur, in quibus ὁδός similiter pro templo sumi posse videtur. Verum et hic Barnabas, et ibi LXX οὐδόν, limen, scripsisse videntur, consueto schemate utentes, quo pars pro toto sumitur, et quo hodieque utimur, ubi Limina apostolorum invisere dicimur. Legendum est igitur ἐπὶ τὸν οὐδὸν... in limine, h. e. templo spem collocantes. Caeterum si Barnabas viam, τὴν ὁδόν, uti nunc legitur, scribere voluisset, ad finem οὖσαν posuisset, non ὄντα, quod non nisi cum οὐδόν convenit : ὡς, inquit, ὄντα οἶκον Θεοῦ. Idem, uti dixi, judicium erit de locis LXXviralibus III Reg. VIII, 44-48, in quibus nunc προσεύξονται... ὁδόν legitur, cum legendum sit οὐδόν. Adorabunt limen, etc. Sicuti etiam II Paral. VI, 34-38. Non inaudita est apud veteres liminis adoratio. Scitum est etiam antiquos ο pro integra diphthongo ου primitus scripsisse (ut in nummis Συρακοσίων pro Συρακουσίων, et sexcenta ejusdem modi), quod postmodum, descriptoribus fraudi fuisse, non est dubitandum. Dixerit aliquis in modo laudatis Seniorum locis ὁδόν esse retinendum, quia ei Hebraice
"Chapter 16: Further, I will also tell you concerning the temple, how the wretched ones, going astray, hoped in the way, in the way they hoped, and not in God Himself Who made them, as though it were the house of God. Here there is no doubt that under the name of way the temple is meant: for that the whole confidence of the Jews was reposed in the temple is marked by that famous cry, The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, both because at the beginning our author proposed to speak of the temple, and because he presently subjoins, As though it (namely that way) were the house of God. The old translator also saw this, who instead of way put sanctuary; for thus he rendered it: In the sanctuary they had hope. Cotelier indeed suspects an allusion to certain passages of the Seventy, in which way similarly seems capable of being taken for temple. Yet both Barnabas here and the Seventy there seem to have written threshold, using the customary figure whereby a part is taken for the whole, and which we use even today when we are said to visit the Thresholds of the Apostles. One must therefore read upon the threshold... placing hope in the threshold, that is, the temple. Besides, if Barnabas had wished to write way, as is now read, at the end he would have put the feminine participle, not the masculine, which agrees only with threshold: as being, he says, the house of God. The same judgement, as I have said, will hold concerning the Septuagintal passages 3 Kings 8:44-48, in which there is now read they shall pray... the way, whereas one should read the threshold: They shall adore the threshold, etc. Just as also 2 Chron. 6:34-38. The adoration of the threshold is not unheard of among the ancients. It is also well known that the ancients originally wrote o for the full diphthong ou (as on coins Syrakosion for Syrakousion, and hundreds of the same kind), which without doubt afterwards misled copyists. Someone might say that in the passages of the Seventy just cited way is to be retained, because to it in Hebrew
Editors' notes and page, col. 701
Footnotes
(18) ‹anchor: Cap. 16› · call in col 701
Barn. Epist., c. 7.
Epistle of Barnabas, chapter 7 [so printed, though the text cites chapter 16].
(printed under page 348)
(19) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 701 or 702
H. Steph., Thes., tom. II, col. 1185.
Henri Estienne (Stephanus), Thesaurus [Graecae linguae], vol. 2, col. 1185.
(printed under page 348)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA.
- marginal letters: A circumciduntur Quae; B nices περιτομὴν; C templum Domini,; D cum οὐδόν
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: circumciduntur Quae merito; ends mid-word He-
respondet DERECH, via; cum contra οὐδός respondeat Hebraico SAPH, quod est limen. Verum sciendum est Hebraicum DERECH, cum a calcando veniat, non tantum viam significare, sed et pavimentum, et in recitatis locis etiam limen, quod statim ab ingredientibus calcatur. Deinde cum Jer. XXXV, 4, φυλάσσοντος τὴν ὁδόν, custodientis viam, pro τὸν οὐδόν, custodientis limen (nam Heb. est SAPH) meo judicio positum inveniatur; non video quin eadem mutatio locis supra depromptis potuerit accidere. Postremo ne tricemur diutius, si grammaticos audimus, ὁδός, via, et οὐδός, limen. unum idemque nomen sunt. Nam et Homero οὐδός pro ὁδός, via, usurpatur : et contra Suidas testatur vocem ὁδός, si tenuetur prima syllaba, significare οὐδόν, i. e. limen, allato Sophoclis loco. Paria in Eustathio reperies, et in Sophoclis scholiaste ad celebrem ejus locum a Suida et Eustathio laudatum. De quibus vide H. Stephanum. Nec te turbet quod haec antiqua et poetarum peculiaria videantur: nam in LXX et Judaeis Hellenistis plurima occurrunt, partim antiquata, partim Alexandrinae aut aliarum ignotarum dialectorum peculiaria. » Hactenus V. C.
corresponds derech, way; whereas on the contrary oudos corresponds to the Hebrew saph, which is threshold. But one must know that the Hebrew derech, since it comes from treading, signifies not only way, but also pavement, and in the cited passages even threshold, which is immediately trodden upon by those entering. Next, since in Jer. 35:4, keeping the way, instead of keeping the threshold (for the Hebrew is saph), in my judgement is found to have been put, I do not see why the same change could not have happened in the passages adduced above. Finally, not to dally any longer, if we listen to the grammarians, hodos, way, and oudos, threshold, are one and the same noun. For in Homer too oudos is used for hodos, way; and on the contrary Suidas testifies that the word hodos, if the first syllable has a smooth breathing, signifies oudon, that is, threshold, citing a passage of Sophocles. You will find the like in Eustathius, and in the scholiast on Sophocles at his famous passage cited by Suidas and Eustathius. Concerning which see H. Stephanus. Nor let it trouble you that these things seem ancient and peculiar to the poets: for in the Seventy and the Hellenistic Jews very many things occur that are partly obsolete, partly peculiar to the Alexandrian or other unknown dialects." Thus far the distinguished man.
CAPUT VI.
Chapter VI.
De variis ejusdem Epistolae editionibus ac versionibus; in primis vero de vetere Latina, ubi et paucula de cura nostra.
Concerning the various editions and versions of the same Epistle; and first indeed concerning the old Latin version, wherein also a few words concerning our own care.
Jam vero ne officio nostro penitus deesse videamur, ad varias et quidem potiores Epistolae hujus editiones ac versiones recensendas accedamus. Illam itaque primus prelo subjecerat Oxonii anno 1643 Jacobus Usserius, « Verum, inquit Fellus, ejus urbis parte magna gravi incendio correpta, typographeum cum tota supellectile, schedis impressis et exemplari ipso, conflagravit. »
Now indeed, lest we seem altogether to fail in our duty, let us proceed to review the various and indeed principal editions and versions of this Epistle. First of all, then, James Ussher had put it to the press at Oxford in the year 1643. "But," says Fell, "when a great part of that city was seized by a grievous fire, the printing-house together with all its equipment, the printed sheets and the copy itself, was burned up."
Quo autem ferme tempore Oxonii suam parabat editionem Usserius, de ipsa Epistola Parisiis evulganda cogitabat Hugo Menardus, monachus Benedictinus e congregatione S. Mauri. Jamque typis praesto erat opus, eruditis adnotationibus illustratum; sed anno 1644 ineunte, morte praerepto viro docto, illius edendi curam in se recepit ejus syncellita Lucas Dacherius, qui et auctum praefatione sua, insequente anno 1645 in lucem emisit. Ut autem primae hujus editionis ratio lectori utcunque comperta sit, ipsius cl. editoris verba hic describere juverit. Sic igitur ille : « In Philastrii episcopi Brixiensis volumen manu scriptum e Corbeiensi monasterio, cum incidisset aliquando R. P. domnus Hugo Menardus, ibidem proxime post Epistolam Tertulliani De cibis Judaicis, Barnabae nomine insignitam Epistolam una cum Jacobi apostoli Epistola deprehendit : moxque in animum induxit, eam ut ex pulvere et squalore excuteret, appositeque notis dilucidaret. At quia ex primoribus Ecclesiae Patribus,
Now at almost the same time as Ussher was preparing his edition at Oxford, Hugues Ménard, a Benedictine monk of the Congregation of St Maur, was contemplating publishing the Epistle itself at Paris. And the work was already ready for the press, illustrated with learned annotations; but at the beginning of the year 1644, the learned man having been snatched away by death, his fellow-monk Luc d'Achery took upon himself the care of publishing it, and having augmented it with his own preface, issued it to the light in the following year 1645. Moreover, in order that the plan of this first edition may in some measure be known to the reader, it will be helpful to transcribe here the words of the distinguished editor himself. Thus, then, he writes: "When the Reverend Father Dom Hugues Ménard had once chanced upon a manuscript volume of Philastrius, bishop of Brescia, from the monastery of Corbie, right next after the Epistle of Tertullian On Jewish Meats he discovered there an Epistle bearing the name of Barnabas together with the Epistle of the Apostle James; and he presently resolved to shake it out of the dust and neglect, and to elucidate it suitably with notes. But because from the foremost Fathers of the Church,
Editors' notes and page, col. 702
Footnotes
(20) ‹anchor: inquit Fellus› · call in col 702
Fell., praefat. ad Epist. Barnab.
Fell, preface to the Epistle of Barnabas.
(printed under page 348)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA.
- marginal letters: A braice respondet; B οὐδόν, i. e. limen,; C mur, ad varias; D sequente anno 1645
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; begins mid-word braice; editors' matter: braice respondet DERECH, CAPUT VI., De variis ejusdem
Clemente Alexandrino, Origene, Tertulliano, Gregorio Nazianzeno, Hieronymo aliisque non paucis, hac in Epistola Barnabam, seu quemvis alium, Graece fuisse locutum haud dubie didicerat, haesit non parum implicatus : nec ejusmodi monumentum, sic imperfectum ac naevis scatens, ut illa qua codex exscriptus est aetas ferebat, in publicum ausus est inferre. Verum suppetias tandem attulit doctissimus Sirmondus, Societatis Jesu presbyter : is quippe de apographo Graeco, quod Romae inter mss. et schedas R. P. Turriani eruditione ac rerum multarum scientia clarissimi repererat, libentissime accommodavit Menardo. Unde autem exscripserit apographum Turrianus, res est nobis prorsus ignota. At vero veluti genuinam nomine Barnabae Epistolam, ab antiquis scriptoribus laudatam atque usurpatam, Versio ipsa Latina, sine dubio ante annum nongentesimum scripta persuadet ; cum ferme continuo textui Graeco respondeat in omnibus..... Mutilum est Graecum, mutila versio Latina. Graecum quidem lacunis et hiatibus initio tantum Epistolae deformatur..... Versio autem caret parte postrema, cui accessionem nova interpretatione ex Graeco Romano attulit Menardus..... Codicem unicum habuit, cum Graecum tum Latinum, neque sanum ubique satis; ut proinde nunc cura, nunc conjectura illi fuerit adhibenda : quod tamen sic parce et prudenter fecit, ut in linea non facile litteram mutaret, sed ad marginem adnotaret. » Huc usque Dacherius.
Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian, Gregory of Nazianzus, Jerome, and not a few others, he had learned beyond doubt that in this Epistle Barnabas, or whoever else it was, had spoken in Greek, he hesitated in no small perplexity; nor did he dare to bring forth to the public a monument of this sort, so imperfect and abounding in blemishes, as the age in which the codex was copied brought with it. But at length the most learned Sirmond, a presbyter of the Society of Jesus, brought aid: for he most gladly obliged Ménard with a Greek transcript which he had found at Rome among the manuscripts and papers of the Reverend Father Turrianus, a man most illustrious for learning and knowledge of many things. Whence Turrianus copied the transcript, however, is a matter altogether unknown to us. Yet the Latin Version itself, written without doubt before the nine-hundredth year, persuades us that the Epistle in the name of Barnabas is as it were genuine, praised and used by ancient writers, since it almost continuously corresponds to the Greek text in all things..... The Greek is mutilated, and the Latin version is mutilated. The Greek indeed is disfigured by lacunae and gaps only at the beginning of the Epistle..... The Version, however, lacks the last part, to which Ménard supplied an addition by a new translation from the Roman Greek..... He had a single codex, both Greek and Latin, and not everywhere sufficiently sound, so that accordingly he had to employ now care, now conjecture; which nevertheless he did so sparingly and prudently that he did not easily change a letter in the line, but noted it in the margin." Thus far d'Achery.
Postero anno 1646 Amstelodami typis denuo excudendam curavit eamdem Epistolam Isaacus Vossius ad calcem Epistolarum S. Ignatii M., notis brevibus sed eruditis illustratam : cujus exemplar a Salmasio primo acceptum contulit cum tribus mss. codicibus, ex bibliothecis Medicea Florentina, Vaticana et Theatinorum Romae degentium repetitis. Quibus subsidiis adjutus vetustissimum hoc monumentum multo castigatius evulgavit : « cum enim Menardi editio, ut ipsemet ait, ex uno promanarit codice, fieri aliter non potuit quin inemendatissima prodiret. »
In the following year 1646, at Amsterdam, Isaac Vossius had the same Epistle printed anew at the end of the Epistles of St Ignatius the Martyr, illustrated with brief but learned notes; the copy of which, first received from Salmasius, he collated with three manuscript codices obtained from the Medicean library at Florence, the Vatican library, and that of the Theatines residing at Rome. Aided by these helps, he published this most ancient monument much more accurately: "for since Ménard's edition, as he himself says, flowed from a single codex, it could not happen otherwise than that it came forth very unemended."
Elapsis vero viginti sex annis a prima Vossii editione, hanc Barnabae Epistolam rursum in vulgus emisit Parisiis 1672 cum vetere Latina versione, nova insuper interpretatione, notisque luculentis adornatam Joannes Baptista Cotelerius, eamque praeclarae suae Patrum apostolicorum editioni inseruit. Quam quidem editionem sub finem ejusdem saeculi, anno 1698, Antuerpiae seu potius Amstelodami typis consignavit cum notis variorum Joannes Clericus, iterumque saeculi currentis anno 1724 nonnullis Joannis Davisii suisque animadversionibus auctam. Denique, ut Felli, Moynii aliorumque praetereamus editiones, eamdem Epistolam prelo commisit Richardus Russel anno 1746, in sua
When twenty-six years had elapsed from the first edition of Vossius, Jean-Baptiste Cotelier again issued this Epistle of Barnabas to the public at Paris in 1672, furnished with the old Latin version, a new translation in addition, and splendid notes, and inserted it into his famous edition of the Apostolic Fathers. Which edition indeed, towards the end of the same century, in the year 1698, Jean Le Clerc committed to the press at Antwerp, or rather Amsterdam, with the notes of various scholars, and again in the year 1724 of the present century, augmented with some observations of John Davies and his own. Finally, to pass over the editions of Fell, Le Moyne, and others, Richard Russell committed the same Epistle to the press in the year 1746, in his
Editors' notes and page, col. 703
Footnotes
(21) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 703 or 704
Cotel. Judic. de Epist. S. Barn., sub fin.
Cotelier, Judgement on the Epistle of St Barnabas, towards the end.
(printed under page 349)
(22) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 703 or 704
Papebr. Act. SS. Jun., tom. II, p. 457-460.
Papebroch, Acta Sanctorum, June, vol. 2, pp. 457–460.
(printed under page 349)
(23) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 703 or 704
Fabric., Bibl. Gr., tom. X, pag. 5, et praefat. ad S. Philastr.
Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graeca, vol. 10, page 5, and his preface to St Philastrius.
(printed under page 349)
Page
- running head: S. BARNABAS APOSTOLUS.
- marginal letters: A Clemente Alexandrino,; B ab antiquis scriptoribus; C Postero anno 1646; D nova insuper interpretatione,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Clemente Alexandrino, Origene
Patrum apostolicorum collectione Londinensi.
London collection of the Apostolic Fathers.
Inter versiones autem hujus Epistolae principem locum sibi vindicat vetus Latina : de qua praeter ea quae sparsim hinc inde attigimus, sic censet cl. Cotelerius : « Vetus interpretatio barbariem ubique, ubique negligentiam ostendit ; estque imperfecta et mutila, tum passim, tum praecipue ad finem, ubi posteriora capita resecantur; forte quia minus docta videbantur interpreti, atque ad mores magis pertinentia : igitur omissis iis, colophonem per doxologiam imponit. Suum tamen illi versioni pretium : cui debemus priora capita, cum non paucis emendationibus Graeci contextus; ut nihil dicam de antiquitate illius ac simplicitate. » Auctorem autem hujus versionis fuisse S. Philastrium Brixiensem episcopum conjecit Papebrochius, eumque secutus Fabricius. At immerito sane. Neque enim Menardus, primus veteris illius interpretationis detector, neque Vossius, neque Cotelerius, neque alii qui deinceps hanc Epistolam vulgarunt, id unquam litteris tradidere. Error autem duumvirum illorum e verbis Dacherii modo relatis fortasse ortus; quibus docemur « Menardum in Philastrii episcopi Brixiensis volumen ms. e Corbeiensi monasterio incidisse » in quo una cum aliis veterum opusculis, vetustam quoque Barnabae Epistolae interpretationem deprehendit, quam ex eodem codice descripsit in lucem emissurus. Pluribus egit hac de re Galeardus V. C. in praefatione ad luculentam veterum Patrum Brixianae Ecclesiae collectionem ; quem, si vacat, lector adeat.
Among the versions of this Epistle, however, the old Latin claims the chief place for itself; concerning which, besides the things that we have touched upon here and there, the distinguished Cotelier judges thus: "The old translation shows barbarism everywhere, negligence everywhere; and it is imperfect and mutilated, both here and there and especially at the end, where the latter chapters are cut off, perhaps because they seemed less learned to the translator, and more pertaining to morals; therefore, omitting them, he places a colophon by way of a doxology. Yet that version has its own value: to which we owe the earlier chapters, together with not a few emendations of the Greek text; to say nothing of its antiquity and simplicity." Now Papebroch conjectured that the author of this version was St Philastrius, bishop of Brescia, and Fabricius followed him. Yet quite undeservedly. For neither Ménard, the first discoverer of that old translation, nor Vossius, nor Cotelier, nor the others who thereafter published this Epistle, ever handed that down in writing. Moreover, the error of those two men perhaps arose from the words of d'Achery just related, whereby we are taught "that Ménard chanced upon a manuscript volume of Philastrius, bishop of Brescia, from the monastery of Corbie," in which together with other minor works of the ancients he also discovered the ancient translation of the Epistle of Barnabas, which he copied from the same codex in order to publish it. The distinguished Gagliardi has treated of this matter at greater length in the preface to his splendid collection of the ancient Fathers of the Church of Brescia, whom the reader may consult if he has leisure.
Recentioribus vero versionibus praestat Anglica Guilielmi Wakii cum Epistolis Clementis, Ignatii et Polycarpi, nec non Hermae Pastore, Londini edita ann. 1693 et 1710. De hac autem versione loquens Joannes Clericus in epistola nuncupatoria posterioris Patrum apostolicorum editionis Cotelerianae, ad eumdem Wakium jam archiepiscopum Cantuariensem, haec habet : « Fuit et alia ratio, eaque majoris ponderis, propter quam existimavi tibi hanc Patrum apostolicorum editionem non displicituram. Nemo nimirum erat, qui minus dedignaretur ejusmodi scriptores; quorum plerosque, et eos quidem genuinos, S. Barnabam, S. Ignatium, S. Clementem et S. Polycarpum, ad quos accessere Pastor Hermae et Ignatii Martyrium, in Anglicum sermonem summa fide atque elegantia, quoad res ferebat, convertisti, et prooemiis pereruditis ac judicio summo conscriptis ornasti. » Ita Clericus. Quae quidem in primis hic describere placuit, ut constet ipsum mutasse sententiam : siquidem antea in sua Historia ecclesiastica sinistrum tulerat de S. Barnabae Epistola judicium, quam hoc loci demum genuinam appellat.
Among more recent versions, however, the English one of William Wake excels, published at London in the years 1693 and 1710 together with the Epistles of Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp, as well as the Shepherd of Hermas. Speaking of this version in the dedicatory epistle of the later Cotelierian edition of the Apostolic Fathers, addressed to the same Wake, then Archbishop of Canterbury, Jean Le Clerc has these words: "There was also another reason, and that of greater weight, on account of which I judged that this edition of the Apostolic Fathers would not displease you. For there was no one who less disdained writers of this sort, most of whom, and those indeed genuine, St Barnabas, St Ignatius, St Clement, and St Polycarp, to whom were added the Shepherd of Hermas and the Martyrdom of Ignatius, you translated into the English tongue with the utmost fidelity and elegance, so far as the subject allowed, and adorned with most learned prefaces written with the highest judgement." Thus Le Clerc. Which things indeed it has pleased us especially to transcribe here, that it may be established that he himself changed his opinion: since previously in his Ecclesiastical History he had passed an unfavourable judgement on the Epistle of St Barnabas, which in this place at last he calls genuine.
Reliquum est ut paucis edisseramus qua ratione
It remains for us to set forth in a few words in what manner
Editors' notes and page, col. 704
Footnotes
(24) ‹anchor: lector adeat› · call in col 704
Galeard., praefat. ad collect. vet. PP. Brix. eccl., p. XXXVI.
Gagliardi (Galeardus), preface to the collection of the ancient Fathers of the Church of Brescia, p. xxxvi.
(printed under page 349)
(25) ‹anchor: Historia ecclesiastica› · call in col 704
Cler., Hist. eccl., ad ann. 71, § 2, pag. 471.
Le Clerc, Ecclesiastical History, at the year 71, § 2, page 471.
(printed under page 349)
Page
- running head: S. BARNABAS APOSTOLUS. 704
- other: calls 21 (Cotelerius), 22 (Papebrochius) and 23 (Fabricius) stand in this column; their notes are listed in n703
- marginal letters: A Patrum apostolicorum; B sem episcopum conjecit; C terum Patrum Brixianae; D S. Polycarpum, ad quos
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Patrum apostolicorum collectione
ad novam parandam editionem accesserimus. Nimirum commemoratis hactenus virorum doctorum lucubrationibus instructi, ad Barnabae textum quod attinet et veterem ejus interpretem exprimendum, editionem Cotelerianam omnium emendatissimam selegimus. Quo autem facilius comparatio institueretur, Graeca inter utramque versionem media stitimus, veterisque hiatus juxta nuperum exemplar Londinense Russelianum distinximus : quo quidem ordine alia insuper nonnulla vetustissimorum Patrum opuscula mox subsecutura digessimus. Cll.
we approached the preparation of a new edition. Furnished, namely, with the labours of learned men commemorated thus far, as regards printing the text of Barnabas and his old translator, we have selected the Cotelierian edition as the most accurate of all. Moreover, that a comparison might more easily be instituted, we have placed the Greek in the middle between the two versions, and have marked the gaps of the old version according to the recent London edition of Russell: in which order indeed we have also arranged several other minor works of the most ancient Fathers that are presently to follow. Of the distinguished
editorum qui nobis praeivere adnotationes prolixiores contraximus, earumque in primis delectum fecimus quae textum Graecum aut veterem interpretem emendarent illustrarentve, pauculis etiam intextis, sive nostris sive aliunde petitis Quae aliorum sunt, nomine cujusque subjecto dignoscuntur : quae autem ANONYM. nota signantur, ea sunt quae ex ora Menardinae editionis manu ignota desumpta, Clericus in suam transtulit editionem : nostris vere nullibi signum ullum appinximus ; quod semel monuisse sufficiat.
editors who preceded us we have abridged the more prolix annotations, and have made a selection especially of those which emended or illustrated the Greek text or the old translator, weaving in also a very few notes, whether our own or sought from elsewhere. Those which belong to others are recognized by the name of each subjoined; whereas those marked with the note ANONYM. are those which, taken from the margin of Ménard's edition in an unknown hand, Le Clerc transferred into his edition; to our own, indeed, we have nowhere affixed any sign, which let it suffice to have mentioned once for all.
Editors' notes and page, col. 705
Footnotes
(2) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 705 or 706
«Quia non venit vocare justos, sed peccatores ad poenitentiam.» Ὅτι οὐκ ἦλθε καλέσαι δικαίους, ἀλλ' ἁμαρτωλοὺς εἰς μετάνοιαν. Barnab. cap. 5, collat. cum Matth. XX, 16. Idem, cap. 6: «Attendamus ergo, ne forte, sicut scriptum est, multi vocati, pauci electi inveniamur.» Collat. cum Matth. c. XXII, v. 14.
"For he came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." [Greek as above.] Barnabas, chapter 5, compared with Matthew 20:16. The same, chapter 6: "Let us take heed, then, lest perhaps, as it is written, we be found many called but few chosen." Compare Matthew chapter 22, verse 14.
(printed under page 350)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA.
- marginal letters: A ad novam parandam; B CAPUT PRIMUM.; C (2) «Quia non venit; D becca; et de quibusnam
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: a full-width band stands across cols 705/706 in mid-page: the 1 paragraph(s) above it in col 706 are set here, after the 1 above it in col 705 (reading order, moved on receipt); the band itself (its title lines) is not set by the volunteer page: set it here, at the move, with full_width
- other: the column continues with CAPUT PRIMUM. (another unit); not set here
Editors' notes and page, col. 706
Footnotes
(3) ‹anchor: not visible in the page-foot image› · call in col 706
«Omni petenti te tribue.» Barnab., cap. 19: Παντὶ αἰτοῦντί σε δίδου. Collat. cum Luc. cap. VI, v. 30, et Matth. cap. V, v. 42.
"Give to everyone who asks you." Barnabas, chapter 19: [Greek as above.] Compare Luke chapter 6, verse 30, and Matthew chapter 5, verse 42.
(printed under page 350)
(4) ‹anchor: ad Romanos› · call in col 706
«Sed videamus utrum hic populus haeres sit, an vero primus; et utrum testamentum ad nos, an ad illos pertineat. Audite nunc quid Scriptura dicat de populo: Orabat Isaacus Rebeccae uxoris suae causa, quod esset sterilis: et illa concepit. Postea vero Rebecca egressa est ad interrogandum Dominum, et dixit Dominus ad illam: Duae gentes in utero tuo sunt, ac duo populi in ventre tuo: atque unus populus alterum superabit; et major serviet minori. Debetis intelligere, quis sit Isaacus, quae Rebecca; et de quibusnam declaraverit, quod hic vel ille populus major futurus sit.» Ἀλλ' ἴδωμεν, εἰ οὗτος ὁ λαὸς κληρονόμος, ἢ ὁ πρῶτος, καὶ εἰ ἡ διαθήκη εἰς ἡμᾶς ἢ εἰς ἐκείνους. Ἀκούσατε νῦν περὶ τοῦ λαοῦ, τί λέγει ἡ Γραφή. Ἐδεῖτο δὲ Ἰσαὰκ περὶ Ῥεβέκκας τῆς γυναικὸς αὐτοῦ, ὅτι στεῖρα ἦν, καὶ συνέλαβεν. Εἶτα καὶ ἐξῆλθε Ῥεβέκκα πυθέσθαι παρὰ Κυρίου, καὶ εἶπε Κύριος πρὸς αὐτήν· Δύο ἔθνη ἐν τῇ γαστρί σου, καὶ δύο λαοὶ ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ σου, καὶ λαὸς λαοῦ ὑπερέξει, καὶ ὁ μείζων δουλεύσει τῷ ἐλάσσονι. Αἰσθάνεσθαι ὀφείλετε, τίς ὁ Ἰσαάκ, τίς ἡ Ῥεβέκκα καὶ ἐπὶ τίνων δέδειχεν, ὅτι μείζων ὁ λαὸς οὗτος, ἢ ἐκεῖνος. Barnab., cap. 13, coll. Rom. IX, 10-12, et Gen. XXV, 23. — Idem, 12: Ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ τὰ πάντα, καὶ εἰς αὐτόν. Coll. Rom. XI, 36.
"But let us see whether this people is the heir, or the former one, and whether the covenant belongs to us or to them. Hear now what the Scripture says about the people: Isaac prayed for Rebecca his wife, because she was barren, and she conceived. Then Rebecca went out to inquire of the Lord, and the Lord said to her: Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples in your belly, and one people shall overcome the other, and the elder shall serve the younger. You ought to understand who Isaac is, who Rebecca is, and of whom he declared that this people or that would be the greater." [Greek as above.] Barnabas, chapter 13; compare Romans 9:10–12 and Genesis 25:23. — The same, [chapter] 12: "For in him are all things, and unto him." Compare Romans 11:36.
(printed under page 350)
(5) ‹anchor: secundaeque ad Timotheum› · call in col 706
Idem c. 5: «Ille autem, ut vacuam faceret mortem, et de mortuis resurrectionem ostenderet, quia in carne oportebat eum apparere, ut promissum parentibus redderet.» Collat. II Tim. I, 10 et Rom. XV, 10.
The same, chapter 5: "But he, that he might make death void and show forth the resurrection from the dead, because he had to appear in the flesh, that he might fulfil the promise made to the fathers." Compare 2 Timothy 1:10 and Romans 15:10.
(printed under page 350)
(6) ‹anchor: primae Petri› · call in col 706
«Quatenus est in nobis, meditemur timorem Dei, et ejus praecepta servare contendamus, ut in illius justificationibus laetemur.» Ἐφ' ὅσον ἐστὶν ἐφ' ἡμῖν, μελετῶμεν τὸν φόβον τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ φυλάσσειν ἀγωνιζώμεθα τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ, ἵνα ἐν τοῖς δικαιώμασιν αὐτοῦ εὐφρανθῶμεν. Barnab. Ep., cap. 4, collatum cum prima D. Petri Epistola cap. I, v. 17.— Idem Barnabas: «Dominus non accepta persona judicat mundum. Unusquisque secundum quae facit, accipiet.» Idem, c. 4, collat. I Petri I, 17, et I Cor. III, 8.
"So far as is in us, let us meditate on the fear of God and strive to keep his commandments, that we may rejoice in his ordinances." [Greek as above.] Epistle of Barnabas, chapter 4, compared with the First Epistle of St Peter, chapter 1, verse 17. — Barnabas again: "The Lord judges the world without respect of persons. Each shall receive according to what he does." The same, chapter 4; compare 1 Peter 1:17 and 1 Corinthians 3:8.
(printed under page 350)
(7) ‹anchor: et merces ejus› · call in col 706
Ἐγγὺς γὰρ ἡμέρα, ἐν ᾗ συναπολεῖται πάντα τῷ πονηρῷ. Ἐγγὺς ὁ Κύριος, καὶ ὁ μισθὸς αὐτοῦ. Barnabas in Epist. c. 21, collatum cum Apocalypsi, cap. XXII, v. 12.
"For the day is near in which all things shall perish together with the evil one. The Lord is near, and his reward." Barnabas in the Epistle, chapter 21, compared with the Apocalypse, chapter 22, verse 12.
(printed under page 350)
(8) ‹anchor: coles castitatem› · call in col 706
Ὅσον δύνασαι, ὑπὲρ τὴν ψυχήν σου ἁγνεύσεις. «Quantum potes, et pro anima tua coles castitatem.» Cujus loco legendum esse censet Cotelerius ὑπὲρ τῆς ψυχῆς σου ἀγωνεύσεις (sic), hoc est, pro tua anima decertabis: quo respiciatur sententia Ecclesiastici cap. IV, v. 33. Pro justitia agoniza pro anima tua, et usque ad mortem certa pro justitia, et Deus expugnabit pro te inimicos tuos.
"As far as you can, you shall keep yourself pure beyond [the measure of] your soul." "As far as you can, you shall also cultivate chastity for your soul." In its place Cotelier thinks one should read ὑπὲρ τῆς ψυχῆς σου ἀγωνεύσεις (sic), that is, "you shall contend for your soul"; this would allude to the saying of Ecclesiasticus, chapter 4, verse 33: Strive for justice for your soul, and even unto death fight for justice, and God will overthrow your enemies for you.
(printed under page 350)
Page
- running head: PROLEGOMENA. 706
- marginal letters: A editorum qui nobis; B institutae ab eo religioni; C ὁ λαὸς οὗτος,; D (7) Ἐγγὺς γὰρ ἡμέρα,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: the 1 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 705 (reading order, moved on receipt)
- other: the text of this column below the full-width band belongs to the next unit; not set here (rail-only part)