PG 7 · cols. 1223–1226

R. Massuet, O.S.B., De sequentibus fragmentis admonitio

Editors' preface

DE SEQUENTIBUS FRAGMENTIS ADMONITIO.

NOTICE ON THE FRAGMENTS THAT FOLLOW.

De iis quae hic in lucem emittimus, Irenaei fragmentis, cum jam in Dissertatione secunda, operi praevia, art. 3, egerimus, pauca supersunt dicenda. Id tantum observare juvat, duplicis generis fragmenta hic exhiberi: alia sunt quae Eusebius, aliive ejusdem auctoritatis antiqui scriptores ex Irenaei operibus tunc exstantibus, et ab ipsis nominatim citatis eruerunt, suisque inseruerunt: alia vero vel a scriptoribus quibusdam recentioribus referuntur, vel in Catenis, aliisve mss. codicibus, sub Irenaei episcopi Lugdunensis nomine leguntur. Priora indubitatos esse Irenaei fetus, negari non potest. Posteriorum non adeo tuta fides. Sic enim plerumque referuntur, ut ipsa Irenaei opera, ex quibus excerpta sunt, aut nominatim non designentur; aut si quae designentur, ea sint quorum mentionem nullam fecerint Eusebius, Hieronymus, aliique quibus genuina S. doctoris opera notiora esse debuerunt. Tale est illud fragmentum, quod ex Irenaei episcopi Lugdunensis Sermone de fide,, ad Demetrium Viennensem diaconum, descripsisse se dicit Maximus abbas et confessor: ut et illud quod velut ex eodem sermone Latine edidit Feuardentius. Ii quippe sermones de fide Eusebio et Hieronymo prorsus ignoti fuisse videntur.

Concerning the fragments of Irenaeus which we bring to light here, since we have already treated of them in the second Dissertation, which precedes the work, art. 3, little remains to be said. It is worth observing only this, that fragments of two kinds are presented here: some are those which Eusebius, or other ancient writers of the same authority, drew out of the works of Irenaeus then extant, and cited by them by name, and inserted into their own writings; others, however, are either reported by certain more recent writers, or are read in the Catenae or other manuscript codices under the name of Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons. That the former are undoubted offspring of Irenaeus cannot be denied. The latter are not so securely to be trusted. For they are for the most part so reported that either the very works of Irenaeus from which they were excerpted are not designated by name; or, if any are designated, they are works of which Eusebius, Jerome, and the others to whom the genuine works of the holy doctor must have been better known made no mention. Such is that fragment which Maximus, abbot and confessor, says he copied out from the Sermon of Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, On Faith, to Demetrius, deacon of Vienne; as also that which Feuardent published in Latin as if from the same sermon. For those sermons On Faith seem to have been wholly unknown to Eusebius and Jerome.

Editors' notes and page, col. 1223

Footnotes

(ref. 49) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1223 Matth. XIII, 8.

Matt. 13:8.

(ref. 50) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1223 Joan. XIV, 2.

John 14:2.

(ref. 51) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1223 Matth. XXII, 2 seqq.

Matt. 22:2 ff.

(ref. 52) ‹anchor: destruetur mors› · call in col 1223 I Cor. XV, 25, 26.

1 Cor. 15:25–26.

(ref. 53) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1224 Ibid., 26 seqq.

Ibid., 26 ff.

(ref. 54) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1224 Matth. XXVI, 29.

Matt. 26:29.

(ref. 55) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1224 Rom. VIII, 21.

Rom. 8:21.

(ref. 56) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1224 I Cor. II, 9.

1 Cor. 2:9.

(ref. 57) ‹anchor: concupiscunt angeli videre› · call in col 1224 I Pet. I, 12.

1 Pet. 1:12.

(printed under page 620)

(98) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1223

Ταύτην. In Gretseri edit. et mss. citatis, ταύτης.

Ταύτην ("this", accusative). In Gretser's edition and the manuscripts cited, ταύτης (genitive).

(printed under page 620)

(99) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1223

Sexaginta. Sic cod. Voss. juxta Evangelii textum, et Graecum Anastasii. In Feuard. vitiose, quadraginta.

Sexaginta ("sixty"). So the Voss codex, following the text of the Gospel and the Greek of Anastasius. In Feuardent, faultily, "quadraginta" ("forty").

(printed under page 620)

(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1223

Verbum ejus ait, omnibus divisum esse, etc. Ni fallor, respicere videtur Irenaeus ab parabolas vel quinque talentorum, vel decem mnarum; sin minus, ad aliquod Christi dictum, quod ex presbyterorum, quos mox citat, traditione acceperit.

Verbum ejus ait, omnibus divisum esse ("he says his word was divided among all"), etc. Unless I am mistaken, Irenaeus seems to be looking to the parables either of the five talents or of the ten minas; if not, to some saying of Christ which he received from the tradition of the presbyters, whom he cites shortly after.

(printed under page 620)

(2) ‹anchor: [ad] Filium› · call in col 1223

Ad Filium. Cum palam exigat sermonis series legi ad Filium, particulam ad addidi, quanquam hamulis inclusam.

Ad Filium ("to the Son"). Since the run of the sentence plainly requires that "ad Filium" be read, I have added the particle "ad", though enclosed in brackets.

(printed under page 620)

(3) ‹anchor: ponat omnes› · call in col 1223

Omnes. Hanc vocem addidit Grab. auctoritate cod. Voss. et ipsius sacri textus.

Omnes ("all"). Grabe added this word on the authority of the Voss codex and of the sacred text itself.

(printed under page 620)

Page

running head: 1223 S. IRENAEI EPISCOPI LUGDUNENS
marginal letters: A 2. Εἶναι; B τὴν ἁρμόζουσαν; C regni justus; D (98) Ταύτην.
old-edition numerals: 338 in full-width block at foot (not set)
other: facing Latin at top (2. Esse autem distantiam... praestat :) not set; Latin only from quemadmodum Verbum; oblivi- split at column break; full-width title (DE SEQUENTIBUS FRAGME-) and editors' admonition (338 De iis quae...) at foot cut off at right edge, not set
other: page shared with PG007/contra_haereses_v; this file is a copy of its notes (QA keeps this unit's own)
running head: 1223 S. IRENAEI EPISCOPI LUGDUNENSIS ET MARTYRIS 1224
marginal letters: A, B, C beside the Book V text above (not in this unit); D beside the footnotes; none beside the admonition
old-edition numerals: 338 before De iis (bold, at the opening of the admonition)
full-width: title and the whole admonition paragraph (De iis quae … ignoti fuisse videntur.) printed across 1223/1224 at the page foot, set under 1223 (Q2 completed the paragraph from Posteriorum to videntur, which neither 1223 nor 1225 had set)
misprints: "Sermone de fide,, ad" double comma as printed; "de ıfide" (second instance) has a stray stroke before f, a type defect, set as "fide" (UNSURE)

PG 7:1224

Posteriorum non adeo tuta fides. Sic enim plerumque referuntur, ut ipsa Irenaei opera, ex quibus excerpta sunt, aut nominatim non designentur; aut si quae designentur, ea sint quorum mentionem nullam fecerint Eusebius, Hieronymus, aliique quibus genuina S. doctoris opera notiora esse debuerunt. Tale est illud fragmentum, quod ex Irenaei episcopi Lugdunensis Sermone de fide, ad Demetrium Viennensem diaconum, descripsisse se dicit Maximus abbas et confessor: ut et illud quod velut ex eodem sermone Latine edidit Feuardentius. Ii quippe sermones de fide Eusebio et Hieronymo prorsus ignoti fuisse videntur.

The trustworthiness of the latter is not so secure. For they are generally reported in such a way that either the very works of Irenaeus from which they were excerpted are not designated by name, or, if any are designated, they are works of which Eusebius, Jerome, and others, to whom the genuine works of the holy doctor must have been better known, made no mention. Such is that fragment which Maximus, abbot and confessor, says he copied out from the Sermon on Faith of Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, to Demetrius, deacon of Vienne; as also that which Feuardent published in Latin as if from the same sermon. For these sermons on faith seem to have been wholly unknown to Eusebius and Jerome.

Editors' notes and page, col. 1224

Footnotes

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1224

Obliviscetur. Voss., obliviscitur.

Obliviscetur ("will forget"). Voss manuscript: "obliviscitur" ("forgets").

(printed under page 620)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1224

Eduxit illam. Scil. creaturam a servitute.

Eduxit illam ("brought it out"). That is, the creation, from bondage.

(printed under page 620)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1224

Regnum. Libentius legerem, regno.

Regnum ("the kingdom", accusative). I should more willingly read "regno" (ablative, "in the kingdom").

(printed under page 620)

(7) ‹anchor: per quam› · call in col 1224

Per quam. Sic Voss. et Grab. melius quam Feuard., per quem.

Per quam ("through which", feminine). So the Voss manuscript and Grabe, better than Feuardent's "per quem" (masculine).

(printed under page 620)

(8) ‹anchor: et fiet› · call in col 1224

Et fiet. Vel lege et fiat; vel intellige, et tunc fiet.

Et fiet ("and he will become"). Either read "et fiat" ("and may become"), or understand "et tunc fiet" ("and then will become").

(printed under page 620)

Page

running head: PI LUGDUNENSIS ET MARTYRIS 1224
marginal letters: A scetur (4); B reditatem terræ; C angelos, et; D ries legi
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: begins with -scetur from 1223; Latin only, no Greek printed; full-width title (-FRAGMENTIS ADMONITIO.) and editors' admonition at foot cut off at left edge, not set
other: page shared with PG007/contra_haereses_v; this file is a copy of its notes (QA keeps this unit's own)
running head: 1223 S. IRENAEI EPISCOPI LUGDUNENSIS ET MARTYRIS 1224
marginal letters: (none) beside the admonition
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: UNSURE: after "Sermone de fide" the page appears to show a doubled comma (",,"), and in "de fide" before "Eusebio" a stray mark stands before the f; read as specks, set "fide," and "fide". The admonition continues in col. 1225.

PG 7:1225

Anastasius Sinaita, vel alius quisquis auctor est Anagogicarum contemplationum in Hexaemeron lib. X, seu, ut scripsit auctor, λόγῳ τῷ δεκάτῳ, haud spernendum refert fragmentum, quod a nullo hactenus observatum, Graece primum cum nova interpretatione Latina proferimus. Graeca, nondum edita, nobiscum communicavit amicus, excepta e ms. cod. bibliothecae Colbertinae 2253, quem ipsi contulimus. Quae ibi referuntur, ab Irenaeo adversus haeresim impurorum Ophitarum decertante dicta fuisse scribit Anastasius: φάσκει γὰρ κατὰ τῆς τῶν μιαρῶν Ὀφιτῶν αἱρεσιαρχίας ὁπλιζόμενος. Ubi vero adversus haeresim Ophitarum speciatim decertaverit Irenaeus, non novimus. Eorum quidem deliria narrat lib. I Detectionis et eversionis, cap. 30. Sed in decursu operis speciatim non confutat, nec aliter adversus ea decertat, quam fundamenta Gnosticorum omnium communia, quibus illorum etiam innitebatur haeresis, diruendo; nec demum in iis libris occurrunt ea quae velut ex Irenaeo allegat Anastasius.

Anastasius of Sinai, or whoever else is the author of the Anagogical Contemplations on the Hexaemeron, Book X, or, as the author wrote, λόγῳ τῷ δεκάτῳ, in the tenth discourse, reports a fragment by no means to be despised, which, hitherto noticed by no one, we bring forward for the first time in Greek with a new Latin translation. The Greek words, not yet published, a friend communicated to us, copied out from manuscript codex 2253 of the Colbertine Library, which we ourselves collated. What is reported there Anastasius writes was spoken by Irenaeus contending against the heresy of the impure Ophites: φάσκει γὰρ κατὰ τῆς τῶν μιαρῶν Ὀφιτῶν αἱρεσιαρχίας ὁπλιζόμενος, for he says it arming himself against the heresiarchy of the abominable Ophites. Where Irenaeus specially contended against the heresy of the Ophites, however, we do not know. He relates their ravings indeed in Book I of the Detection and Overthrow, Chapter 30. Yet in the course of the work he does not specially refute them, nor contend against them otherwise than by demolishing the common foundations of all the Gnostics, upon which their heresy also rested; nor finally do the things which Anastasius alleges as if from Irenaeus occur in those books.

Incertius adhuc an ex genuinis Irenaei operibus excerpta sint, quae ex variis tum Catenis, tum ms. codicibus exscripta sunt fragmenta. Ita enim sub Irenaei nomine citantur, ut nullus plerumque designetur ejusdem liber aut tractatus. Imo Regiae bibliothecae Catenas evolvendo deprehendimus, in quibusdam descripto interdum aliquo, velut Irenaei, testimonio, cum hac epigraphe, Εἰρηναίου ἐπισκόπου Λουγδούνων, aliis quae proxime subnectuntur, hanc tantum praefigi, τοῦ αὐτοῦ: in aliis vero similibus Catenis, inter ea testimonia, quae Irenaeo nominatim ascribuntur, et ea quae epigraphen τοῦ αὐτοῦ praefixam habent, alia interseri, sub alterius auctoris nomine, quae prohibent ne τοῦ αὐτοῦ ad Irenaeum referri possit; probareque videntur, id quod ab unius Catenae descriptore Irenaei fragmento proxime subjunctum fuerat alterius auctoris testimonium, ab alio imprudenter omissum, occasionem dedisse perperam ascribendi Irenaeo ea quibus praefigitur inscriptio τοῦ αὐτοῦ. Quinetiam aliquando, in iis saltem quas inspeximus Catenis, post ea quae Irenaeo nominatim tribuuntur fragmenta, alia immediate sequuntur ἀνεπίγραφα, quorum proinde cum incertus sit auctor, haud recte fecerit, qui Irenaeo ascripserit. Id tamen a Combefisio factum pag. 545, observavimus. Ex quibus omnibus id, quod volumus, conficitur, non usque adeo certa esse omnia quae ex Catenis proferuntur, ut fidem statim impetrare debeant. Utut est, ea omnia fragmenta quae tum a Feuardentio, Halloixio, Sirmondo, Combefisio, Grabio, et aliis, tum a nobis ipsis collecta sunt, hic exhibemus: ita tamen ut illis plus fidei non attribuamus quam mereantur.

It is still more uncertain whether the fragments copied out from various Catenae as well as manuscript codices were excerpted from the genuine works of Irenaeus. For they are so cited under the name of Irenaeus that for the most part no book or treatise of his is designated. Nay more, in turning over the Catenae of the Royal Library we discovered that in some, after some testimony has at times been copied out as Irenaeus's with this heading, Εἰρηναίου ἐπισκόπου Λουγδούνων, Of Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, to others that are immediately subjoined this only is prefixed, τοῦ αὐτοῦ, Of the same; whereas in other similar Catenae, between those testimonies which are ascribed to Irenaeus by name and those which have the heading τοῦ αὐτοῦ prefixed, others are inserted under the name of another author, which forbid τοῦ αὐτοῦ to be referred to Irenaeus, and seem to prove that the testimony of another author which had been immediately subjoined to the fragment of Irenaeus by the copyist of one Catena, having been imprudently omitted by another, gave occasion for wrongly ascribing to Irenaeus those to which the inscription τοῦ αὐτοῦ is prefixed. Moreover, sometimes, at least in those Catenae which we have inspected, after those fragments which are attributed to Irenaeus by name, others immediately follow ἀνεπίγραφα, uninscribed, whose author consequently being uncertain, he would not do rightly who should ascribe them to Irenaeus. Yet we have observed that this was done by Combefis at page 545. From all of which what we mean is established, that not all the things brought forward from the Catenae are so certain that they ought immediately to obtain credit. However that may be, all those fragments which have been collected both by Feuardent, Halloix, Sirmond, Combefis, Grabe, and others, and by ourselves, we present here; yet in such a way that we do not attribute more credit to them than they deserve.

Editors' notes and page, col. 1225

Footnotes

(9) Clausula. Σημείωσιν vocat Eusebius, vertitque Valesius, adnotationem; Hieronymus vero, Rufinus, et Christophorsonus, subscriptionem. At, inquit Valesius, quamvis σημείωσις interdum pro subscriptione sumatur, hic tamen ita sumi non potest. Nam subscriptio nomen subscribentis debet exprimere. Quod cum hoc loco minime factum sit, nequaquam haec subscriptio dici debet, sed potius adnotatio. Sic σημειώσεις dicebantur notae illae, quae ad marginem scriptorum codicum appingebantur, ut lector rem notatu dignam ibi contineri intelligeret. Utut sit, cum ea σημείωσις, Eusebio et Hieronymo testibus, in fine libri scripta fuerit, non male clausula ejusdem libri dicitur. Eamdem ex Eusebio, ut videtur, descripserunt Hieronymus in Catalogo, et Nicephorus lib. IV Hist. eccles., cap. 30.

(9) Concluding clause. Eusebius calls it σημείωσις, and Valesius translates it adnotatio, a note; but Jerome, Rufinus and Christopherson, subscriptio, a subscription. But, says Valesius, although σημείωσις is sometimes taken for a subscription, here it cannot be so taken. For a subscription ought to express the name of the one subscribing. Since this has by no means been done in this place, this ought in no way to be called a subscription, but rather a note. Thus those marks which were added in the margin of manuscript codices, so that the reader might understand that something worth noting was contained there, were called σημειώσεις. However that may be, since this σημείωσις, on the testimony of Eusebius and Jerome, was written at the end of the book, it is not wrongly called the concluding clause of that book. Jerome in the Catalogue, and Nicephorus in Book IV of the Ecclesiastical History, Chapter 30, copied it out, as it seems, from Eusebius.

(10) Libri de Ogdoade. Vide quae de hoc libro diximus Dissert. 2, art. 3, § 58.

(10) Of the Book on the Ogdoad. See what we have said of this book in Dissertation 2, Article 3, § 58.

(11) Μεταγραψόμενον. In Niceph., μεταγραψάμενον.

(11) Μεταγραψόμενον, who shall transcribe. In Nicephorus, μεταγραψάμενον, who has transcribed.

(12) Epistolae ad Florinum. De hac epistola, et Florini erroribus disseruimus citatae Dissert. § 58, 59.

(12) Of the Epistle to Florinus. We have discussed this epistle and the errors of Florinus in § 58, 59 of the Dissertation cited.

(13) Εἰς τὴν μεγίστην ... αὐτοῖς. Niceph. omittit τὴν et αὐτοῖς.

(13) Εἰς τὴν μεγίστην ... αὐτοῖς. Nicephorus omits τὴν and αὐτοῖς.

Page

running head: 1225 FRAGMENTA. 1226
marginal letters: A Adjuro te; B Eusebio, ut videtur
old-edition numerals: 339 before Clausula
other: editors' matter: Anastasius Sinaita and FRAGMENTA DEPERDITORUM OPERUM (end of Dom Massuet's introductory note to the Fragments and headings of Fragments I and II across cols 1225-1226); facing Latin versions of Fragments I and II not set; footnotes (9)-(13) belong to Fragments I-II and move with them to fragmenta_deperdita; (13) continues the lemma onto the next page (αὐτοῖς). Below the admonition this page carries the fragments' title, Fragment I and the opening of Fragment II, set in fragmenta_deperdita (pointer, Ray NR-529 A)

PG 7:1226

Editors' notes and page, col. 1226

Footnotes

(9) ‹anchor: Clausula› · call in col 1226 (call printed once, in the full-width heading of Fragment I)

Clausula. Σημείωσιν vocat Eusebius, vertitque Valesius, adnotationem; Hieronymus vero, Rufinus, et Christophorsonus, subscriptionem. At, inquit Valesius, quamvis σημείωσις interdum pro subscriptione sumatur, hic tamen ita sumi non potest. Nam subscriptio nomen subscribentis debet exprimere. Quod cum hoc loco minime factum sit, nequaquam haec subscriptio dici debet, sed potius adnotatio. Sic σημειώσεις dicebantur notae illae, quae ad marginem scriptorum codicum appingebantur, ut lector rem notatu dignam ibi contineri intelligeret. Utut sit, cum ea σημείωσις, Eusebio et Hieronymo testibus, in fine libri scripta fuerit, non male clausula ejusdem libri dicitur. Eamdem ex Eusebio, ut videtur, descripserunt Hieronymus in Catalogo, et Nicephorus lib. IV Hist. eccles., cap. 30.

Closing note. Eusebius calls it a σημείωσις, and Valesius translates it "annotation"; but Jerome, Rufinus and Christopherson translate it "subscription". Yet, says Valesius, although σημείωσις is sometimes taken for a subscription, it cannot be taken so here. For a subscription ought to state the name of the one subscribing. Since that is not done at all in this place, this ought by no means to be called a subscription, but rather an annotation. Thus σημειώσεις was the name for those marks that were added in the margin of manuscript codices, so that the reader would understand that something worth noting was contained there. Be that as it may, since this σημείωσις, on the testimony of Eusebius and Jerome, was written at the end of the book, it is not wrongly called the closing note of that book. Jerome in the Catalogue and Nicephorus in book IV of the Ecclesiastical History, chapter 30, copied it, as it seems, from Eusebius.

(printed under page 621)

(10) ‹anchor: Libri de Ogdoade› · call in col 1226 (call printed once, in the full-width heading of Fragment I)

Libri de Ogdoade. Vide quae de hoc libro diximus Dissert. 2, art. 3, § 58.

Of the book On the Ogdoad. See what we have said about this book in Dissertation 2, article 3, § 58.

(printed under page 621)

(11) ‹anchor: τὸν μεταγραψόμενον› · call in col 1226

Μεταγραψόμενον. In Niceph., μεταγραφάμενον.

μεταγραψόμενον ("who will transcribe"). In Nicephorus, μεταγραφάμενον ("who transcribed").

(printed under page 621)

(12) ‹anchor: Fragmentum› · call in col 1226 (call printed once, in the full-width heading of Fragment II)

Epistolae ad Florinum. De hac epistola, et Florini erroribus disseruimus citatae Dissert. § 58, 59.

Of the letter to Florinus. We have discussed this letter, and the errors of Florinus, in the Dissertation cited, §§ 58, 59.

(printed under page 621)

(13) ‹anchor: εἰς τὴν μεγίστην› · call in col 1226

Εἰς τὴν μεγίστην … αὐτοῖς. Niceph. omittit τὴν et αὐτοῖς.

εἰς τὴν μεγίστην … αὐτοῖς. Nicephorus omits τὴν and αὐτοῖς.

(printed under page 621)