S. Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Fragmenta deperditorum operum

(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.

(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)

(14) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1227

Εἶδον γάρ σε, etc. De his legesis quae diximus Dissert. 2, art. 1, § 1 et seqq.

"For I saw you," etc. On these matters read what we have said in Dissertation 2, art. 1, § 1 and following.

(printed under page 622)

(15) ‹anchor: καὶ τὰς προόδους› · call in col 1227

Προόδους. Quidam παρόδους. At priorem lectionem meliorem esse jure merito censet Valesius in notis, eamque in interpretatione sua expressisse se dicit. Hanc tamen ipsam non in interpretatione tantum, sed et in ipso textu Graeco ed. 1659 expressam lego: adeo ut quod reposuisse se monet Grabius, jamdudum repositum esset.

Προόδους ("goings-out"). Some read παρόδους. But Valesius in his notes rightly judges the former reading the better, and says he has rendered it in his translation. Yet I read this very reading expressed not only in the translation but also in the Greek text itself of the 1659 edition: so that what Grabe advises that he has restored had long since been restored.

(printed under page 622)

(16) ‹anchor: Ἰωάννου συναναστροφήν› · call in col 1227

Συναναστροφήν. Niceph., ἀναστροφήν.

Συναναστροφήν ("familiar intercourse with"). Nicephorus reads ἀναστροφήν.

(printed under page 622)

(17) ‹anchor: Πολύκαρπος, ἀπήγγελλε› · call in col 1227

Ἀπήγγελλε. Niceph., ἀπήγγειλε.

Ἀπήγγελλε ("he used to relate"). Nicephorus reads ἀπήγγειλε.

(printed under page 622)

(18) ‹anchor: τὰ ὦτα αὐτοῦ› · call in col 1227

Ἐμφράξας τὰ ὦτα αὐτοῦ. Hic mos erat (Valesii observatio est) veterum Christianorum, ut si forte in familiari colloquio impium aliquem sermonem, et a fidei catholicae regula dissentientem audiissent, protinus obturatis auribus sese in fugam darent. Qua de re locus exstat illustris in libro II Recognitionum Clementis, ubi Simon B. Petro ait: Si dixero quod neque tibi consonum, nec vulgo huic imperito rectum videtur, tu quidem quasi obstupefactus, aures continuo occludens, velut ne blasphemia polluantur, verteris in fugam. Sed et Irenaeus in lib. III Contra haereses, cap. 4, num. 2, eumdem morem declarat his verbis: Quibus si aliquis annuntiaverit ea, quae ab haereticis adinventa sunt, proprio sermone eorum colloquens, statim concludentes aures, longo longius fugient, ne audire quidem sustinentes blasphemum colloquium. Praeterea Athanasius in Epistola ad solitarios: Ὦ τίς ἀκούσας οὐ δακρύσειε, τάχα καὶ τὴν ἀκοὴν κλείσειεν, ἵνα μηδὲ ἑτέρου λέγοντος ἀνέχηται; Hieronymus denique in lib. I Adversus Rufinum: Lectis nuper Theophili papae epistolis, in quibus Origenis exponit errores, dicitur obturasse aures suas, et auctorem tanti mali clara coram omnibus voce damnasse.

"Stopping his ears." This was the custom (the observation is Valesius's) of the early Christians: if in familiar conversation they happened to hear some impious word, dissenting from the rule of the catholic faith, they at once stopped their ears and took to flight. There is a notable passage on this in Book II of the Recognitions of Clement, where Simon says to blessed Peter: "If I say what seems neither agreeable to you nor right to this ignorant crowd, you, as though thunderstruck, at once stop your ears, as if they might be defiled by blasphemy, and turn to flight." Irenaeus too, in Book III Against Heresies, ch. 4, no. 2, declares the same custom in these words: "If anyone should announce to them, speaking in their own tongue, the things invented by the heretics, they would at once stop their ears and flee as far off as they could, not enduring even to hear the blasphemous talk." Further, Athanasius in the Letter to the Solitaries: "O, who on hearing this would not weep, would perhaps even stop his hearing, so as not to endure even another telling it?" Jerome, finally, in Book I Against Rufinus: "When the letters of Pope Theophilus had lately been read, in which he sets out the errors of Origen, he is said to have stopped his ears and to have condemned the author of so great an evil in a loud voice before all."

(printed under page 622)

(19) ‹anchor: κατὰ τὸ σύνηθες› · call in col 1227

Κατὰ τὸ σύνηθες. Αὐτῷ addit Nicephorus.

"According to his custom." Nicephorus adds αὐτῷ ("his").

(printed under page 622)

(20) ‹anchor: ἀκηκόει λόγων› · call in col 1227

Τῶν τοιούτων… λόγων. Niceph., τὸν τοιοῦτον… λόγον.

"Such words." Nicephorus reads "such a word" (singular).

(printed under page 622)

(21) ‹anchor: Fragmentum Epistolae› · call in col 1227

Epistolae ad Victorem. De hac epistola, eaque, quae huic occasionem dedit, controversia quae inter Victorem papam et Asiaticos efferbuit, fuse tractavimus in Dissert. 2, art. 1, § 19 seqq.

"Letter to Victor." On this letter, and on the controversy that gave occasion to it, which boiled up between Pope Victor and the Asians, we have treated at length in Dissertation 2, art. 1, § 19 and following.

(printed under page 622)

(22) ‹anchor: περὶ τῆς ἡμέρας› · call in col 1227

Οὐ γὰρ μόνον περὶ τῆς ἡμέρας, etc. Diffi- (continues)

"For not only about the day," etc. Diffi- (continues)

(printed under page 622)

(22) (continued) · call in col 1230

cultates quae in his ac sequentibus verbis occurrunt, solvere conati sumus cit. Dissert., § 23 et seqq. Consule, si placet.

(continued) ...culties that occur in these and the following words we have tried to resolve in the Dissertation cited, § 23 and following. Consult it, if you please.

(printed under page 623)

(23) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1230

Οἱ δὲ τεσσαράκοντα. Ὥρας ἡμερινάς τε καὶ νυκτερινάς, etc. Sic cum Christophorsono lego atque distinguo; ratus videlicet Valesium, Grabium et alios, qui, deleta distinctionis nota post τεσσαράκοντα, uno et eodem tenore legunt: Οἱ δὲ τεσσαράκοντα ὥρας, ἡμερινάς τε καὶ νυκτερινάς, etc., vim Irenaei menti inferre, et in tot ambages sese conjicere, ut ex iis emergendi nulla pateat via. Unde et Valesii interpretationem emendavi, ac pro horas, scripsi horis. Vide cit. § 23 et seqq.

"And others forty. Hours both of day and of night," etc. So I read and punctuate with Christopherson; for I judge that Valesius, Grabe and others, who delete the punctuation mark after τεσσαράκοντα and read in one continuous run, "And others forty hours, both of day and of night," etc., do violence to Irenaeus's meaning and throw themselves into so many windings that no way lies open to emerge from them. Hence I have also corrected Valesius's translation, and for horas ("hours") have written horis ("by hours"). See the cited § 23 and following.

(printed under page 623)

(24) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1230

Καὶ τοιαύτη μὲν ποικιλία… κρατούντων. Vocem κρατούντων Musculus et Valesius male omnino verterunt, rerum habenis potitos, vel praesidentes: hic verti debuisset, retinentes, vel observantes, scilicet jejunii formam. Quare et hic Valesii interpretationem, alias intricatiorem, emendare necesse fuit. Rationes attulimus cit. Dissert., § 27.

"And such variety… of those holding." The word κρατούντων Musculus and Valesius rendered quite wrongly as "having gained the reins of affairs" or "presiding"; here it ought to have been rendered "retaining" or "observing", namely the form of the fast. So here too it was necessary to correct Valesius's translation, otherwise rather tangled. We have given the reasons in the cited Dissertation, § 27.

(printed under page 623)

(25) ‹anchor: Καὶ οἱ πρὸ Σωτῆρος› · call in col 1230

Καὶ οἱ πρὸ Σωτῆρος. Niceph., ἐν οἷς καὶ οἱ πρὸ Σωτῆρος.

"And those before Soter." Nicephorus reads "among whom also those before Soter".

(printed under page 623)

(26) ‹anchor: ἧς νῦν ἀφηγῇ› · call in col 1230

Ἧς νῦν ἀφηγῇ. Niceph., ἧς σὺ νῦν ἀφηγῇ.

"Over which you now preside." Nicephorus reads "over which you now preside" with σὺ ("you") expressed.

(printed under page 623)

(27) ‹anchor: τοῖς μετ' αὐτούς› · call in col 1230

Τοῖς μετ' αὐτούς. Legit Rufinus, et quidem melius, μετ' αὐτῶν, vertit enim: Neque ipsi ita tenuerunt, neque hi qui cum ipsis erant. Eamque lectionem in interpretatione sua expressit Valesius.

"Those after them." Rufinus reads, and better, μετ' αὐτῶν ("with them"), for he translates: "Neither did they themselves so hold, nor those who were with them." And Valesius rendered that reading in his translation.

(printed under page 623)

(28) ‹anchor: ἀπὸ τῶν παροικιῶν› · call in col 1230

Τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν παροικιῶν. Subintelligit Rhenanus verbum ἐλθοῦσι, sed frustra, inquit Valesius. Nam οἱ ἀπὸ τῶν παροικιῶν, sunt episcopi Ecclesiarum: quemadmodum, ἀπὸ Δεβέλτου, est episcopus Debelti; ἀπὸ Εὐμενείας, episcopus Eumeniae.

"Those from the parishes." Rhenanus understands the word ἐλθοῦσι ("who came"), but in vain, says Valesius. For οἱ ἀπὸ τῶν παροικιῶν are the bishops of the churches: just as ἀπὸ Δεβέλτου is the bishop of Debeltum, ἀπὸ Εὐμενείας the bishop of Eumenia.

(printed under page 623)

(29) ‹anchor: τοῖς μὴ τηροῦσι› · call in col 1230

Τοῖς μὴ τηροῦσι. Legendum putat Valesius, ἐν τοῖς μὴ τηροῦσι· quam emendationem Turnebus ac Moraeus ad marginem librorum suorum apposuerant. Huncque esse loci istius sensum censet. Cum observantia alicujus moris et inobservantia sint inter se contraria, tamen quoties is qui morem observat quempiam, versatur inter eos qui minime observant, tunc ipsa diversitas magis elucet. Hoc est quod vulgo dicitur in scholis philosophorum: Contraria juxta se invicem posita magis elucescunt.

"To those who do not observe." Valesius thinks one should read ἐν τοῖς μὴ τηροῦσι ("among those who do not observe"), an emendation that Turnebus and Morel had set in the margin of their books. And he judges this to be the sense of the passage: although the observance of a custom and its non-observance are contrary to each other, yet whenever one who observes some custom lives among those who do not observe it, then the very difference shows more clearly. This is what is commonly said in the schools of the philosophers: contraries set beside each other shine out the more.

(printed under page 623)

(30) ‹anchor: ἀπεβλήθησάν τινες› · call in col 1230

Ἀπεβλήθησάν τινες. Ἀποβάλλειν, ait Valesius, duo significat, aut ejicere ab Ecclesia, quae frequentior significatio est; aut omnino non admittere venientem. Utraque significatio locum hic habere potest; quare ambas in interpretatione sua expressit Ruffinus. Nunquam tamen, inquit, ob hoc repulsi sunt ab Ecclesiae societate, aut venientes ab illis partibus non sunt suscepti.

"Some were cast out." Ἀποβάλλειν, says Valesius, means two things: either to expel from the Church, which is the more frequent meaning, or not to admit at all one who comes. Either meaning can have place here; so Rufinus rendered both in his translation: "Yet never," he says, "were they for this reason driven from the fellowship of the Church, nor were those coming from those parts not received."

(printed under page 623)

(31) ‹anchor: ἔπεμπον εὐχαριστίαν› · call in col 1230

Ἔπεμπον εὐχαριστίαν. Non iis qui Romam veniebant, ut perperam existimavit Rhenanus, utpote qui cum ipso Romano celebrabant, aut etiam ipso praesente sacra faciebant, si catholica communione gauderent; sed omnibus promiscue τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν παροικιῶν τηροῦσιν, absentibus licet ac longius dissitis. Hunc quippe morem, eucharistiam tempore paschalis festivitatis ad alios episcopos, eulogiarum nomine, transmittendi promiscuum fuisse, et ab omnibus passim episcopis usurpatum, ex concilio Laodiceno discimus.

"They sent the eucharist." Not to those who came to Rome, as Rhenanus wrongly thought, since these celebrated with the Roman bishop himself, or even offered the sacrifice in his presence, if they enjoyed catholic communion; but to all without distinction "of those from the parishes who observe", though absent and far distant. For we learn from the Council of Laodicea that this custom, of sending the eucharist at the time of the paschal feast to other bishops under the name of eulogiae, was general and practised by all bishops everywhere.

(printed under page 623)

(32) ‹anchor: τῇ Ῥώμῃ› · call in col 1230

Μακαρίου Πολυκάρπου ἐπιδημήσαντος ἐν τῇ Ῥώμῃ. Niceph., μακαρίου δὲ Πολυκάρπου ἐπιδημήσαντος ἐν τῇ Ῥώμῃ.

"When the blessed Polycarp was staying in Rome." Nicephorus adds δὲ: "and when the blessed Polycarp was staying in Rome."

(printed under page 623)

(33) ‹anchor: φιλεριστήσαντες ἑαυτούς› · call in col 1230

Περὶ τούτου τοῦ κεφαλαίου μὴ φιλεριστήσαντες ἑαυτούς. Niceph., μὴ φιλεριστήσαντες πρὸς ἑαυτούς. Non igitur ob quaestionem de festo Paschae, de qua vix disceptarunt, sed ob alias quasdam, Romam venerat Polycarpus. Secus quidem sensere Eusebius lib. IV, cap. 14, Hieronymus in libro De scriptoribus eccles., et ex iis Baronius, ad an. Christi 167, sed potior Irenaeo habenda fides.

"Not contending with one another on this head." Nicephorus reads "not contending with each other" (πρὸς ἑαυτούς). It was not, then, for the question of the feast of Easter, on which they hardly argued, but for certain other questions, that Polycarp had come to Rome. Eusebius, Book IV, ch. 14, Jerome in the book On Ecclesiastical Writers, and Baronius after them at the year of Christ 167, thought otherwise; but greater credit is to be given to Irenaeus.

(printed under page 623)

(34) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1231

Τῶν πρὸ αὐτοῦ πρεσβυτέρων. Niceph., τὴν πρὸ ἡμῶν πρεσβυτέρων.

"Of the presbyters before him." Nicephorus reads τὴν πρὸ ἡμῶν πρεσβυτέρων, "(the custom) of the presbyters before us".

(printed under page 624)

(35) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1231

Παρεχώρησεν ὁ Ἀνίκητος τὴν εὐχαριστίαν. Hunc honorem, observat Valesius, Anicetus pontifex Romanus habuit venerabili seni Polycarpo, ut illum in ecclesia sacra facere sineret, et quidem praesente se, quod notandum est. Sic Irenaei verba et Ruffinus, et caeteri interpretes acceperunt. Sed Franciscus Florens, antecessor Aurelianensis, vir doctus, haec Irenaei verba aliter intelligenda esse contendit, in Tractatu ad titulum 7 Decretalium, De translatione episcopi. Vult enim Anicetum porrexisse duntaxat eucharistiam Polycarpo, non autem concessisse illi jus sacra mysteria celebrandi. Verum si hunc Irenaei locum ita intelligimus, quid honoris tributum fuerit Polycarpo ab Aniceto? Hoc enim diserte notat Irenaeus, tum illo verbo παρεχώρησε, quod de suo jure concedere significat; tum illis verbis, quae addit, κατ' ἐντροπὴν δηλονότι, id est, honoris causa et contemplatione, ut vertit Ruffinus. Certe si eucharistiam tantum Polycarpo porrexisset Anicetus, nullum ei praecipuum honorem detulisset, cum omnibus peregrinis episcopis id passim tribui soleret, ut cum episcopo civitatis simul communicarent, quemadmodum scribit ipse Florens ibidem. Sed et in concilio Arelatensi can. 20, decretum est, ut peregrino episcopo locus sacrificandi detur.

"Anicetus yielded the eucharist." This honour, Valesius observes, the Roman pontiff Anicetus paid to the venerable old man Polycarp, that he let him offer the sacrifice in the church, and that in his own presence, which is to be noted. So Rufinus and the other translators took Irenaeus's words. But Franciscus Florens, professor at Orléans, a learned man, contends that these words of Irenaeus must be understood otherwise, in his Treatise on title 7 of the Decretals, On the Translation of a Bishop: for he holds that Anicetus merely gave the eucharist to Polycarp, and did not grant him the right to celebrate the sacred mysteries. But if we understand this passage of Irenaeus so, what honour was paid to Polycarp by Anicetus? For Irenaeus expressly marks this, both by the word παρεχώρησε, which means to yield of one's own right, and by the words he adds, κατ' ἐντροπὴν δηλονότι, that is, "for the sake and in consideration of honour", as Rufinus translates. Certainly, if Anicetus had only given the eucharist to Polycarp, he would have conferred no special honour on him, since it was the usual practice everywhere to grant this to all visiting bishops, that they should communicate together with the bishop of the city, as Florens himself writes in the same place. Moreover, the Council of Arles, canon 20, decreed that a visiting bishop be given a place to offer the sacrifice.

(printed under page 624)

(36) ‹anchor: excerptum e Maximo› · call in col 1231

Excerptum e Maximo. Eamdem Irenaei sententiam ex Claromontano Parallelorum Damasceni cod. lit. E, tit. 43, excerptam edidit Halloixius in Vita Irenaei p. 499. Exstat quoque, Grabio teste, in alia Collectione sententiarum ex Patribus cod. 143, Barocc. fol. 17, p. 1, et cod. 238 in bibliotheca Caesarea Vindobonensi. Sed Maximus solus locum citat unde sumpta est, nempe ἐκ τῆς πρὸς Βίκτωρα ἐπιστολῆς, ex epistola ad Victorem.

"Excerpted from Maximus." Halloix published the same saying of Irenaeus, excerpted from the Clermont codex of Damascene's Parallels, letter E, title 43, in his Life of Irenaeus, p. 499. It also exists, on Grabe's testimony, in another collection of sentences from the Fathers, Baroccian codex 143, fol. 17, p. 1, and in codex 238 in the imperial library at Vienna. But Maximus alone cites the place from which it was taken, namely "from the letter to Victor".

(printed under page 624)

(37) ‹anchor: Irenaei de fide› · call in col 1231

Sermonis Irenaei de fide. Hoc fragmentum ita citat Maximus dicto loco: Τοῦ ἁγίου Εἰρηναίου, ἐπισκόπου Λουγδούνων, μαθητοῦ τοῦ ἁγίου Ἰωάννου, τοῦ ἀποστόλου καὶ εὐαγγελιστοῦ, ἐκ τῶν πρὸς Δημήτριον, διάκονον Βιαίνης, περὶ πίστεως λόγων, οὗ ἡ ἀρχή· Ζητῶν τὸν Θεὸν ἄκουε τοῦ Δαυὶδ λέγοντος. Ubi Irenaeus Joannis apostoli et evangelistae discipulus perperam vocatur. Consule quae de hoc, ac sequenti fragmento diximus Dissert. 2, § 60, et in Admonitione his fragmentis praefixa.

"Of Irenaeus's discourse on faith." Maximus cites this fragment thus in the place mentioned: "Of Saint Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, disciple of Saint John the apostle and evangelist, from the discourses on faith addressed to Demetrius, deacon of Vienne, which begin: 'Seeking God, hear David saying.'" Where Irenaeus is wrongly called a disciple of John the apostle and evangelist. Consult what we have said on this and the following fragment in Dissertation 2, § 60, and in the Admonition prefixed to these fragments.

(printed under page 624)

(58) ‹anchor: est propitiatio› · call in col 1234

Psal. CXXIX, 4.

Psalm 129 (130):4.

(printed under page 625)

(38) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1234

Allegatio de Pascha. Vide cit. § 60.

"The citation on Easter." See the cited § 60.

(printed under page 625)

(39) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1234

Ἐπ' αὐτῶν τεθανατωμένου. Legendum putat R. Stephanus τετραμμένου, pro τεθανατωμένου. Sed αὐτῷ potius, loco αὐτῶν, reponendum censet Grabius. Mallem ego ὑπ' αὐτοῦ, scilicet Χριστοῦ.

"Put to death upon them." R. Stephanus thinks τετραμμένου ("turned") should be read for τεθανατωμένου. But Grabe judges that αὐτῷ should rather be restored in place of αὐτῶν. I should prefer ὑπ' αὐτοῦ, "by him", that is, by Christ.

(printed under page 625)

(40) ‹anchor: a Leontio› · call in col 1234

Dictum Irenaei a Leontio, etc. Hanc sententiam, ab Halloixio primum Graece editam in Vita Irenaei, pag. 507, citat Leontius sub τοῦ ἁγίου Εἰρηναίου, ἐπισκόπου Λουγδούνων, nomine. Sed incertum ex quo tractatu excerpserit. Eadem habetur cod. 2951 bibliothecae Regiae, cum hac inscriptione: Εἰρηναίου, ἐπισκόπου Λουγδούνων τῆς Γαλλίας, κατὰ Βαλεντίνου. At nisi sumpta fuerit ex libro De Ogdoade, quem ad impugnandam, ut videtur, famosam illam Valentini Ogdoada scripsit Irenaeus, nullum aliud adversus Valentinum opus ab eodem editum novimus, praeter illud Detectionis et eversionis, etc., in quo nihil simile jam occurrit. Quidquid sit, in laudato bibliothecae Reg. ms. pro τὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ, legitur ὁ Χριστός, et ἀποδειχθῇ pro παραδειχθῇ. Hoc etiam fragmentum contulit cl. Grabius cum antiquissimo Leontii codice laud. A, 33, in bibliotheca Bodleiana, idemque prorsus reperit, atque edidit Halloixius, excepto ultimo verbo ἐπιδειχθῇ, pro παραδειχθῇ.

"A saying of Irenaeus cited by Leontius," etc. This saying, first published in Greek by Halloix in his Life of Irenaeus, p. 507, Leontius cites under the name "of Saint Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons". But it is uncertain from which treatise he excerpted it. The same is found in codex 2951 of the Royal Library, with this title: "Of Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons in Gaul, against Valentinus." But unless it was taken from the book On the Ogdoad, which Irenaeus wrote, as it seems, to attack that famous Ogdoad of Valentinus, we know of no other work published by him against Valentinus besides the Detection and Overthrow, etc., in which nothing like it now occurs. However that may be, in the Royal Library manuscript cited, ὁ Χριστός is read for τὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ, and ἀποδειχθῇ for παραδειχθῇ. The distinguished Grabe also collated this fragment with a very ancient Laudian codex of Leontius, A, 33, in the Bodleian Library, and found it exactly the same as Halloix published it, except for the last word, ἐπιδειχθῇ for παραδειχθῇ.

(printed under page 625)

(41) ‹anchor: Εὖ μὲν λέγοντες› · call in col 1234

Εὖ μὲν λέγοντες. Haec ex ms. Parallelorum Damasceni cod. descripta publicavit Halloixius in Vita Irenaei, pag. 501.

"Speaking well." Halloix published these, copied from a manuscript codex of Damascene's Parallels, in his Life of Irenaeus, p. 501.

(printed under page 625)

(42) ‹anchor: Ἴδιον› · call in col 1234

Ἴδιον. Hoc etiam fragmentum Halloixii diligentiae debemus.

Ἴδιον ("proper"). This fragment too we owe to Halloix's diligence.

(printed under page 625)

(43) ‹anchor: Τὸ ἔργον› · call in col 1234

Τὸ ἔργον. Haec iterum edidit Halloixius in Vita Irenaei, pag. 504, eruta ex ms. Parallelorum Damasceni cod. Claromontano, ubi citata dicit sub nomine τοῦ ἁγίου Εἰρηναίου ἐκ τοῦ δ' ἐλέγχου. At in utroque Parallelorum Damasceni cod., Claromontano videlicet et Vaticano, cujus apographum quam accurate descriptum, pro sua singulari humanitate, mecum communicavit R. P. Michael Lequien, ordinis Praedicatorum, exaratum distincte legitur, τοῦ ἁγίου Εἰρηναίου ἐκ τῶν Δαλέξεων (sic scribitur), id est, ἐκ τῶν Διαλέξεων. Scripsit enim Irenaeus libellum Διαλέξεων διαφόρων, cujus meminere Euseb., l. V Hist., c. 26, et Hieronymus in Catalogo, ex quo desumi potuerunt quae hic referuntur; non certe ex lib. IV Detectionis, in quo non exstant. Consule Dissert. 2, § 60.

Τὸ ἔργον ("the work"). Halloix again published these in his Life of Irenaeus, p. 504, drawn from the Clermont manuscript codex of Damascene's Parallels, where he says they are cited under the name "of Saint Irenaeus, from the fourth book of the Refutation". But in both codices of Damascene's Parallels, the Clermont and the Vatican (a most carefully made copy of which the Rev. Fr. Michel Le Quien, of the Order of Preachers, with his singular kindness communicated to me), it is distinctly written "of Saint Irenaeus, from the Δαλέξεις" (so it is written), that is, from the Dialexeis ("Discourses"). For Irenaeus wrote a little book of Various Discourses, which Eusebius mentions, Book V of the History, ch. 26, and Jerome in the Catalogue, from which what is reported here could have been taken; certainly not from Book IV of the Detection, in which it does not occur. Consult Dissertation 2, § 60.

(printed under page 625)

(44) ‹anchor: Ἡμεῖς οὖν› · call in col 1234

Ἡμεῖς οὖν. Hoc fragmentum eruit Halloixius ex cit. Parallelorum cod. ediditque in Vita Irenaei pag. 496 seq. Haud recte tamen verba haec, ἀπολήψεται οὐκ ἀλλοιωθέντα, divisit a praecedentibus, quasi aliud Irenaei fragmentum esset; deceptus nimirum spatio, quod, una voce deleta, inter μετὰ πάσης et ἀπολήψεται vacuum remansit.

Ἡμεῖς οὖν ("We, then"). Halloix drew this fragment from the cited codex of the Parallels and published it in his Life of Irenaeus, p. 496 f. Not rightly, however, did he separate the words ἀπολήψεται οὐκ ἀλλοιωθέντα ("will receive them not altered") from what precedes, as if it were another fragment of Irenaeus; misled, no doubt, by the space that was left empty between μετὰ πάσης and ἀπολήψεται when one word was deleted.

(printed under page 625)

(59) ‹anchor: bonum et malum› · call in col 1235

Gen. III, 1 seqq.

Genesis 3:1 and following.

(printed under page 626)

(45) ‹anchor: Χριστιανῶν γὰρ› · call in col 1235

Χριστιανῶν γάρ. De his consule cit. Dissert. 2, § 60.

"For of Christians." On these consult the cited Dissertation 2, § 60.

(printed under page 626)

(46) ‹anchor: ὄφις τῇ γυναικί› · call in col 1235

Καὶ εἶπεν ὁ ὄφις τῇ γυναικί. Lege praeviam Admonitionem.

"And the serpent said to the woman." Read the preceding Admonition.

(printed under page 626)

(60) ‹anchor: in secessum abit› · call in col 1238

Matth. XV, 17.

Matthew 15:17.

(printed under page 627)

(61) ‹anchor: in terram reverteris› · call in col 1238

Gen. III, 19.

Genesis 3:19.

(printed under page 627)

(62) ‹anchor: morte moriemini› · call in col 1238

Gen. II, 17.

Genesis 2:17.

(printed under page 627)

(47) ‹anchor: Κἂν μὴ› · call in col 1238

Κἂν μή. Leg. κἄν μοι.

Κἂν μή ("even if not"). Read κἄν μοι ("even if to me").

(printed under page 627)

(48) ‹anchor: σὺν τῇ ἀθρηξίᾳ› · call in col 1238

Ἀθρηξία. Barbara vox, quam sola peperisse videtur scribarum imperitia. Legendum ἀθανασίᾳ. Quidpiam simile legisse videtur in suo codice is qui hos Anastasii libros in Latinum sermonem transtulit: vertit enim, cum eo quod morte carebunt.

Ἀθρηξία. A barbarous word, which the scribes' ignorance alone seems to have produced. Read ἀθανασίᾳ ("immortality"). The man who translated these books of Anastasius into Latin seems to have read something similar in his codex, for he renders "along with their being free of death".

(printed under page 627)

(63) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1239

Num. XXIV, 23.

Numbers 24:23.

(printed under page 628)

(64) ‹anchor: Terra Zabulon› · call in col 1239

Isa. IX, 1.

Isaiah 9:1.

(printed under page 628)

(65) ‹anchor: decem virorum› · call in col 1239

Judic. VI, 27.

Judges 6:27.

(printed under page 628)

(66) ‹anchor: filium Nave› · call in col 1239

Num. XXII, 18.

Numbers 22:18 (so the numeral reads on the scan; the verse quoted is Num. 27:18).

(printed under page 628)

(49) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1239

Ταῦτα πάλαι. Haec et sequentia, tam a Sirmondo, quam a Combefisio excerpta, exstant in tribus bibliothecae Regiae mss. Catenis in Pentateuchum, et libros Josue, Judicum, et Ruth, altera membranacea, antiqua et bonae notae, nu. 1825, aliis duabus recentioribus et chartaceis, nn. 1872 et 1888. Prius quidem hoc fragmentum legitur in priori Catena, pag. 429, et in 3 fol. 378.

Ταῦτα πάλαι ("These things of old"). These and the following, excerpted both by Sirmond and by Combefis, are found in three manuscript Catenae of the Royal Library on the Pentateuch and the books of Joshua, Judges and Ruth: one of parchment, old and of good repute, no. 1825; the two others more recent and of paper, nos. 1872 and 1888. This first fragment is read in the first Catena, p. 429, and in the third, fol. 378.

(printed under page 628)

(50) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1239

Ἄνωθεν. Prioris Cat. pag. 451, secundae fol. 246, tertiae fol. 409.

Ἄνωθεν ("From above"). First Catena p. 451, second fol. 246, third fol. 409.

(printed under page 628)

(51) ‹anchor: φοβηθῶσι τὸν Θεόν› · call in col 1239

Τὸν Θεόν. Sic 1 et 2 Catena; posterior, τὸν Κύριον.

"God." So the first and second Catena; the last reads "the Lord".

(printed under page 628)

(52) ‹anchor: Ἐξ ὧν ὁ Χριστὸς› · call in col 1239

Ἐξ ὧν ὁ Χριστός. Prioris Cat. pag. 502, secundae fol. 304, tertiae fol. 451.

"From whom Christ." First Catena p. 502, second fol. 304, third fol. 451.

(printed under page 628)

(53) ‹anchor: Καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἀργῶς› · call in col 1239

Καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἀργῶς. Primae Cat. p. 577, secundae fol. 385, tertiae fol. 516.

"And this not idly." First Catena p. 577, second fol. 385, third fol. 516.

(printed under page 628)

(54) ‹anchor: τῶν δέκα ἀνδρῶν› · call in col 1239

Quae relatio sit inter decem commilitones Gedeonis et Christum non video, nisi orta sit allegoria Irenaei ex prima nominis Iesu littera, apud Graecos numerum decennalem indicante. Ita quoque apud Justinum Martyrem e numero 318 servorum Abrahami elementa vocis σταυρός eliciuntur. MUNTER. l. l.

What relation there is between Gideon's ten fellow-soldiers and Christ I do not see, unless Irenaeus's allegory arose from the first letter of the name Jesus, which among the Greeks denotes the number ten. So too in Justin Martyr the letters of the word σταυρός ("cross") are drawn from the number 318 of Abraham's servants. MÜNTER, in the place cited.

(printed under page 628)

(55) ‹anchor: ἔχων φανῇ βοηθὸν› · call in col 1239

Huc usque D. Massuetus. Quae sequuntur addidimus ex Fragmentis Patrum Graecorum quae Fr. Münter edidit Hafniae 1788. Is quidem haec adnotavit: « Sunt haec ex commentario in Judices, ad c. VI, v. 27 seq. Verba enim sunt de Gedeone, cum decem servis templum Baali diruente. » EDIT. PATR.

Thus far Dom Massuet. What follows we have added from the Fragments of the Greek Fathers that Fr. Münter published at Copenhagen in 1788. He noted this: "These are from a commentary on Judges, at ch. 6, v. 27 f. For the words are about Gideon, pulling down the temple of Baal with ten servants." EDITORS OF THE PATROLOGY.

(printed under page 628)

(56) ‹anchor: Ἔδει γὰρ› · call in col 1239

Ἔδει γάρ. Primae Cat. pag. 135, et tertiae fol. 382.

"For it was fitting." First Catena p. 135, and third fol. 382.

(printed under page 628)

(67) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1242

Josue V, 12.

Joshua 5:12.

(printed under page 629)

(68) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1242

Num. XXVII, 23.

Numbers 27:23.

(printed under page 629)

(69) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1242

Ibid., 20.

The same, 27:20.

(printed under page 629)

(70) ‹anchor: maledices populo› · call in col 1242

Num. XXII, 12.

Numbers 22:12.

(printed under page 629)

(71) ‹anchor: super asinam suam› · call in col 1242

Ibid., 22.

The same, 22:22.

(printed under page 629)

(72) ‹anchor: Deus ut homo› · call in col 1242

Num. XXIII, 19.

Numbers 23:19.

(printed under page 629)

(73) ‹anchor: a Domino Madian› · call in col 1242

Num. XXI, 3.

Numbers 21:3 (so the numeral reads on the scan; the verse quoted is Num. 31:3).

(printed under page 629)

(57) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1242

Τὸν σῖτον. In priori Cat. scriptum videtur τὸν νέον: in tertia vero adeo deleti sunt characteres omnes, ut nihil omnino legi possit. Sed vera lectio videtur esse τὸν σῖτον.

Τὸν σῖτον ("the grain"). In the first Catena τὸν νέον ("the new") seems to be written; in the third all the letters are so effaced that nothing at all can be read. But the true reading seems to be τὸν σῖτον.

(printed under page 629)

(58) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1242

Ἄρτι. Hanc vocem addidi ex prima Catena.

Ἄρτι ("now"). I have added this word from the first Catena.

(printed under page 629)

(59) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1242

Τὸν σῖτον λαὸν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς. Sic prima et tertia Catena. Combefisius vero, τὸν λαὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ σίτου τῆς γῆς.

"The grain, the people, from the land." So the first and third Catena. Combefis, however, reads "the people from the grain of the land".

(printed under page 629)

(60) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1242

Διὰ τῆς ἐπιθέσεως. In tertia quidem Catena hoc fragmentum immediate sequitur illud quod modo descripsimus, cum hac epigraphe, τοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ αὐτό. At in prima et antiquiori, exscripto primum brevi quodam Ἀπολλιναρίου fragmento; quod omisit auctor tertiae Catenae, illud, de quo agimus, proxime subjungitur, cum hac inscriptione, τοῦ αὐτοῦ, quae Apollinarii, non Irenaei, verba esse denotat. Quare vereor, ut auctor posterioris Catenae, omisso per oscitantiam brevi illa Apollinarii pericope, alteram imprudens subjunxerit illi Irenaei, servata tamen veteri epigraphe, τοῦ αὐτοῦ, quam in suo codice legebat, quaeque ad Apollinarii, non Irenaei, verba pertinebat. Unde suspectum mihi est fragmentum istud, nec Irenaei esse videtur. Idem a fortiori dixerim de sequenti, Δίδωσι δέ, quod in priori Catena ad marginem exscribitur, e regione illius, Διὰ τῆς ἐπιθέσεως, in posteriori vero proxime sequitur, nullibi ascripto Irenaei nomine. Eodem jure potuisset Combefisius longius aliud fragmentum, quod hoc, Δίδωσι δέ, nullo novo apposito nomine immediate sequitur in utraque Catena, et Irenaeo tribuere. At nihil frequentius in iis Catenis, quam ejusmodi fragmenta ἀνεπίγραφα, quae perperam quis arbitraretur eorumdem esse auctorum, quorum sententiae proxime praecedunt.

"Through the laying on." In the third Catena this fragment immediately follows the one we have just copied, with this heading: "Of the same, on the same." But in the first and older one, after a short fragment of Apollinaris has first been copied (which the compiler of the third Catena omitted), the one we are dealing with is joined next, with this heading: "Of the same", which marks them as the words of Apollinaris, not of Irenaeus. So I fear that the compiler of the later Catena, having omitted through carelessness that short passage of Apollinaris, unwittingly joined the other to the Irenaeus fragment, while keeping the old heading "of the same" that he read in his codex and that belonged to the words of Apollinaris, not of Irenaeus. Hence this fragment is suspect to me and does not seem to be Irenaeus's. I would say the same a fortiori of the following one, Δίδωσι δέ, which in the first Catena is copied in the margin opposite Διὰ τῆς ἐπιθέσεως, and in the later one follows immediately, with Irenaeus's name nowhere attached. By the same right Combefis could also have ascribed to Irenaeus another, longer fragment that follows this Δίδωσι δέ immediately in both Catenae with no new name attached. But nothing is more frequent in these Catenae than such untitled fragments, which one would wrongly suppose to belong to the same authors whose sayings immediately precede them.

(printed under page 629)

(61) ‹anchor: περὶ τοῦ λαοῦ› · call in col 1242

Οὐ περὶ τοῦ λαοῦ. In prima Catena pag. 421, in secunda fol. 212, in tertia fol. 388.

"Not about the people." In the first Catena p. 421, in the second fol. 212, in the third fol. 388.

(printed under page 629)

(62) ‹anchor: μὲν ὄνος› · call in col 1242

Ἡ μὲν ὄνος. Primae Catenae pag. 425, secundae fol. 217, tertiae fol. 391.

"The ass." First Catena p. 425, second fol. 217, third fol. 391.

(printed under page 629)

(63) ‹anchor: ἐκ καυμάτων› · call in col 1242

Ἐκ καυμάτων. Mallem ἐκ καμάτων.

Ἐκ καυμάτων ("from the heats"). I should prefer ἐκ καμάτων ("from labours").

(printed under page 629)

(64) ‹anchor: Δείκνυσιν› · call in col 1242

Δείκνυσιν. Prioris Cat. pag. 425, secundae fol. 391, tertiae fol. 217.

Δείκνυσιν ("He shows"). First Catena p. 425, second fol. 391, third fol. 217.

(printed under page 629)

(65) ‹anchor: Ὁ γὰρ μηκέτι› · call in col 1242

Ὁ γὰρ μηκέτι. In prima Cat. pag. 440, in secunda fol. 395.

"For he who no longer." In the first Catena p. 440, in the second fol. 395.

(printed under page 629)

(74) ‹anchor: ero illis Deus› · call in col 1243

Levit. XXVI, 12.

Leviticus 26:12.

(printed under page 630)

(75) ‹anchor: natavitque ferrum› · call in col 1243

IV Reg. VI, 6.

4 Kings (2 Kings) 6:6.

(printed under page 630)

(66) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1243

Νόμου. Sic prima Catena melius quam secunda et Combefisius, νόμων.

Νόμου ("of the law"). So the first Catena, better than the second and Combefis, which read νόμων ("of the laws").

(printed under page 630)

(67) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1243

Ἴσθι, ὅτι πᾶς. Hoc fragmentum in nulla ex citatis Catenis occurrit mihi. Unde sumpserit Combefisius non novi.

"Know that every." This fragment does not occur to me in any of the Catenae cited. Where Combefis took it from I do not know.

(printed under page 630)

(76) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1246

Matth. III, 10.

Matthew 3:10.

(printed under page 631)

(77) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1246

Luc. XIII, 19.

Luke 13:19.

(printed under page 631)

(78) ‹anchor: justos constitui multos› · call in col 1246

Rom. V, 19.

Romans 5:19.

(printed under page 631)

(79) ‹anchor: Josephus ait› · call in col 1246

Lib. II Antiq., cap. 5.

Antiquities, Book II, ch. 5.

(printed under page 631)

(80) ‹anchor: haec sola poenas dedit› · call in col 1246

Num. XII, 1 seqq.

Numbers 12:1 and following.

(printed under page 631)

(68) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1246

Ἴδε κόκκος. Hoc fragmentum jam Latine ediderat Corderius in Catena.

"Behold, a grain." Corderius had already published this fragment in Latin in his Catena.

(printed under page 631)

(81) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1247

Num. XII, 14 seqq.

Numbers 12:14 and following.

(printed under page 632)

(82) ‹anchor: in Jordane septies› · call in col 1247

IV Reg. V, 14.

4 Kings (2 Kings) 5:14.

(printed under page 632)

(69) ‹anchor: ἐπὶ τὴν κρίσιν› · call in col 1247

Huc usque fragmenta quae D. Renatus Massuetus edidit. Quatuor sequentia (37-40) ex Catenis mss. in bibliotheca Taurinensi asservatis eruit et evulgavit Christophorus Matthaeus Pfaffius, Tubingensis. Cf. S. Irenaei episcopi Lugdunensis Fragmenta anecdota quae ex bibliotheca Taurinensi eruit, Latina versione notisque donavit, duabus dissertationibus de oblatione et consecratione Eucharistiae illustravit, denique Liturgia Graeca Joan. Ernesti Grabii et dissertatione de praejudiciis theologicis auxit Christ. Matth. Pfaffius. Hagae Comitum, 1715. Editio altera, Lugduni Batav., Hagae Comitum, 1743. EDIT. PATR.

Thus far the fragments that Dom René Massuet published. The four following (37–40) Christoph Matthäus Pfaff of Tübingen drew from manuscript Catenae preserved in the library at Turin and made public. See: Unpublished Fragments of St Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, drawn from the Turin library, furnished with a Latin version and notes, illustrated with two dissertations on the oblation and consecration of the Eucharist, and finally enlarged with the Greek Liturgy of John Ernest Grabe and a dissertation on theological prejudices, by Christ. Matth. Pfaff. The Hague, 1715. Second edition, Leiden and The Hague, 1743. EDITORS OF THE PATROLOGY.

(printed under page 632)

(70) ‹anchor: Εἰρηναίου› · call in col 1247

Εἰρηναίου. Cum plures S. Irenaeus libros scripserit, qui injuria temporum periere, quaeritur, cuinam hoc fragmentum sit ascribendum. Quod sane determinatu admodum difficile est, siquidem quae ex titulis depromi possunt, conjecturae, demonstrationis loco esse nequeunt. Non enim cum Henrico Dodwello viro alioquin doctissimo facimus, qui confidenter nimis de iis pronuntiat quae non ἑώρακε, dignusque adeo visus est cl. Massueto, quem gravi, ut solet, stylo reprehendat. Ita enim in Diss. 2 in Irenaeum, artic. 3, § 60, disserit doctissimus S. Benedicti sequax: Quis vero esset auctoris in his omnibus opusculis seu libris scopus, quodve consilium, tacentibus veteribus dici non potest: soli sagacissimo Dodwello dicere licet, qui plura de iis (continues)

"Of Irenaeus." Since St Irenaeus wrote many books that have perished through the injury of time, the question is to which of them this fragment should be ascribed. That is indeed very hard to determine, since the conjectures that can be drawn from titles cannot stand in place of proof. For we do not side with Henry Dodwell, a man otherwise most learned, who pronounces too confidently on things he has not seen, and so seemed to the distinguished Massuet to deserve his reproof in his usual weighty style. For thus the most learned follower of St Benedict argues in Dissertation 2 on Irenaeus, art. 3, § 60: "What the author's aim or purpose was in all these little works or books cannot be said, since the ancients are silent: only the most sagacious Dodwell may say it, who more about them (continues)

(printed under page 632)

(71) ‹anchor: ἡ γνῶσις› · call in col 1247

Ἡ γνῶσις. Γνῶσιν alio modo describit S. Irenaeus (continues)

"Knowledge." St Irenaeus describes knowledge in another way (continues)

(printed under page 632)

(70) (continued) · call in col 1249

[… the opening lines of this page's part of the note lie above the rendered foot …] codex ms. ex quo ista deprompsimus, titulum libelli non indicet, sed saltem nomen auctoris τοῦ Εἰρηναίου, probabile nobis esse videtur fragmentum hoc ex libro διαλέξεων διαφόρων, variorum tractatuum, ut vertit Hieronymus, vel disputationum potius, quas nomine ποικίλων ὁμιλιῶν Sophronius insignivit, aut ex λόγῳ εἰς ἐπίδειξιν τοῦ ἀποστολικοῦ κηρύγματος, de apostolica praedicatione, eodem […] uti et caetera quae mox dabo, sed irrito plane conatu. Unde confidenter pronuntiare audeo, ea et Grabio et Massueto fuisse incognita, digna eapropter, quae, ne pereant, luci exponantur. Librorum autem deperditorum Irenaei catalogum nobis dedere Henricus Dodwellus in Dissertationibus in Irenaeum, itemque Jo. Ern. Grabe et R. Massuetus, uterque in nova Operum S. Irenaei editione.

(continued) [… lines above the rendered foot …] the manuscript codex from which we drew these does not give the title of the little book, but at least the author's name, "of Irenaeus", it seems probable to us that this fragment comes from the book of Various Discourses (διαλέξεων διαφόρων, "of various treatises", as Jerome translates, or rather "of disputations", which Sophronius titled "various homilies"), or from the discourse For the Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching, "on the apostolic preaching", the same [… a gap where the columns join …] as also the rest that I shall give shortly, but with an effort plainly in vain. Hence I venture to declare confidently that these things were unknown both to Grabe and to Massuet, and are therefore worthy to be brought to light lest they perish. A catalogue of Irenaeus's lost books has been given us by Henry Dodwell in his Dissertations on Irenaeus, and likewise by J. E. Grabe and R. Massuet, each in his new edition of the works of St Irenaeus.

(printed under page 633)

(71) (continued) · call in col 1249

S. Irenaeus Adv. haereses lib. IV, cap. 33, § 8, ubi: Γνῶσις ἀληθὴς ἡ τῶν ἀποστόλων διδαχή, καὶ τὸ ἀρχαῖον τῆς Ἐκκλησίας σύστημα κατὰ παντὸς τοῦ κόσμου. Sed haec quidem, uti arbitror, non contraria sunt iis, quae in fragmento nostro ponuntur. Caeterum veteres haeretici vocabulo γνώσεως eam insignivere scientiam, quae abstrusa de Deo ipsiusque essentia mysteria tradit, ab iis ipsis haud credo intellecta, qui eorum systema confecere. Quid enim, quaeso, abstrusius est illo Aeonum systemate, quod Valentiniani composuerunt? Hi sane qui talia effingunt, ut gloriam divinioris cujusdam sibi acquirant scientiae, γνωστικῶν nomen omnino haud merentur, religionemque Christianam incredulis prostituunt. Mysteria etenim mysteriis non addenda sunt nec veritati mendacium. Unde arbitror, ipsa haec verba Gnosticis opposuisse Irenaeum.

(continued) St Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book IV, ch. 33, § 8, where: "True knowledge is the teaching of the apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout the whole world." But these things, as I judge, are not contrary to what is set down in our fragment. The ancient heretics, however, marked with the word γνῶσις ("knowledge") that science which hands down abstruse mysteries about God and his very essence, not understood, I believe, even by those who built their system. For what, I ask, is more abstruse than that system of Aeons which the Valentinians composed? Those who invent such things, to win for themselves the glory of some more divine science, in no way deserve the name of "gnostics", and they expose the Christian religion to the mockery of unbelievers. For mysteries are not to be added to mysteries, nor falsehood to truth. Hence I judge that Irenaeus set these very words against the Gnostics.

(printed under page 633)

(72) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1249

Σοφίαν Θεοῦ. Hanc sapientiam alibi prophetis attribuit Irenaeus, linguis quas non didicerant, iisque variis loquentibus. Vide lib. V, cap. 6, § 1. — Irenaeus hic Paulum apostolum citat, cujus haec verba sunt. Vide I Cor. II, 7. Dicitur haec σοφία consistere ἐν μυστηρίῳ, qua voce non semper ea significantur quae rationi sunt impervia, sed quae ex naturali lumine non cognoscuntur. Est autem ἀποκεκρυμμένη, quia Judaei eam non noverant. Conf. l. c. comma 8. Plures in sequentibus rationes addit Irenaeus.

"The wisdom of God." Elsewhere Irenaeus attributes this wisdom to the prophets speaking in various tongues they had not learned. See Book V, ch. 6, § 1. — Irenaeus here cites the apostle Paul, whose words these are. See 1 Cor. 2:7. This σοφία is said to consist "in a mystery", a word that does not always signify things impervious to reason, but things not known by the natural light. And it is "hidden", because the Jews did not know it. Compare the place cited, verse 8. Irenaeus adds more reasons in what follows.

(printed under page 633)

(73) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1249

Οὐ δέχεται. Sunt verba Pauli I Cor. II, 14.

"Does not receive." These are Paul's words, 1 Cor. 2:14.

(printed under page 633)

(74) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1249

Ὁ λόγος τοῦ σταυροῦ. Vide I Cor. I, 18.

"The word of the cross." See 1 Cor. 1:18.

(printed under page 633)

(75) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1249

Γεύσηται. Forsan ad loca Heb. VI, 4; I Pet. II, 3, hic respicit Irenaeus. Quidquid autem sit, requirere videtur vir sanctus non saltem, ut de veritate divina simus convicti, sed et dulcedinem ipsius vimque supernaturalem, quam cordibus infundit, in intimis animorum visceribus gustemus. Hic certe gustus internus fuit, qui homines tempore Christi et apostolorum ad fidem convertit. Vis enim in sermonibus eorum peculiaris quaedam erat, non tam animos quam corda vertens. Inde est quod ὑπηρέται de Christo aiunt: Οὐδέποτε οὕτως ἐλάλησεν ἄνθρωπος ὡς οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος. Joan. VII, 46. Inde de eodem Petrus: Κύριε, πρὸς τίνα ἀπελευσόμεθα; ῥήματα ζωῆς αἰωνίου ἔχεις. Joan. VI, 68. Inde tanta vis in oratione protomartyris Stephani, quae corda dissecabat, Act. VII, 54. Atque haec est illa ἀπόδειξις πνεύματος καὶ δυνάμεως, quam πειθοῖς ἀνθρωπίνης σοφίας λόγοις opponit Paulus I Cor. II, 4; IV, 20.

"Should taste." Perhaps Irenaeus is looking here to the places Heb. 6:4 and 1 Pet. 2:3. However that may be, the holy man seems to require not only that we be convinced of the divine truth, but also that we taste in the inmost depths of our souls its sweetness and the supernatural power it pours into hearts. This inner taste it certainly was that converted men to the faith in the time of Christ and the apostles. For there was a certain peculiar power in their words, turning not so much minds as hearts. Hence the officers say of Christ: "Never did man speak like this man," John 7:46. Hence Peter of him: "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life," John 6:68. Hence the great power in the speech of the protomartyr Stephen, which cut men to the heart, Acts 7:54. And this is that "demonstration of the Spirit and of power" which Paul sets against "persuasive words of human wisdom", 1 Cor. 2:4; 4:20.

(printed under page 633)

(76) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1249

Προσελεύσεται…. φυσιουμένων. Haec desumpta sunt ab Irenaeo ex I Tim. VI, 3, 4, 5, ubi: Εἴ τις ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖ καὶ μὴ προσέρχεται ὑγιαίνουσι λόγοις….. τετύφωται, et quae sequuntur. Celeberrimus vir, Richardus Bentleius, felicissimus locorum corruptorum restitutor, haec verba in mendo cubare arbitratur. Ita enim ille: Quamvis sensus vocis προσέρχεται ita determinetur a verbis adjacentibus, ut nulla hic versio erraverit, omnes enim habent: non consentit vel non acquiescit in verbis sanis Domini nostri, attamen non apparet propria vocis significatio in origine, nec hujus φράσεως exemplum hactenus datum fuit. Si itaque inveniretur in codice quodam ms. προσέχεται, vel προσίσχεται, adhaeret sanis verbis, quis, quaeso, male ferret hanc variationem? Ast exspectaverim potius verbum προσέχει, quia προσέχειν λόγοις est notissima φράσις sacrorum profanorumque auctorum. Vide celeberrimi viri observationes in nuperum libellum de libertate cogitandi, Anglica lingua scriptas, p. 72, 73. Erudita haec sunt tantoque viro dignissima. Ast receptam tamen lectionem, quam penitus haud rejicit vir summus, defendi posse arbitramur, maxime cum, quod desideravit, exemplum ejus, imo allegatio hic in S. Irenaei fragmento exstet, et in secundo quoque, quod dabimus, occurrat. Caeterum phrases Novi Testamenti ad puritatem Graecae linguae, quae in profanis conspicitur auctoribus, exigendas esse nec ego existimaverim, nec quivis alius, licet fuerint tum ex veteribus tum ex recentioribus, quid id sibi operae sumpsere, Seb. Pfochenius praecipue, Jo. Vorstius, Lamb. Bos, Horatius Vitringa, alii. Ea etenim scribendi ratio, quae in libris Novi Testamenti observatur, ad Hebraicae affiniumque linguarum genium examinanda est, quo et haec phrasis pertinet. Quinimo et in sententiam alicujus ire Latine dicitur et vox προσέρχεσθαι hac ratione idem exprimit quod consentire. Id tamen certissimum, vocem προσέχει contextui omnino congruam fore, si in ms. codice exstaret. Est enim ea sacris scriptoribus usitatissima. Exempla allegavit ipse cl. Bentleius, II Pet. I, 19; Prov. I, 24; Jerem. VI, 19; Act. VIII, 6, XVII, 14; Hebr. II, 1; Tit. I, 14; I Tim. I, 4. Quod autem sub finem dissertationis nostrae criticae de variis Nov. Test. lectionibus p. 243, 244, exoptavimus, ut vir hic doctissimus ad interpretationem librorum Novi Testamenti et corruptarum lectionum emendationem ex amplissimo quem possidet eruditionis thesauro sua conferat, id hic repetitum omnino volumus.

"Will draw near… of those puffed up." Irenaeus took these from 1 Tim. 6:3–5, where: "If anyone teaches otherwise and does not draw near to sound words… he is puffed up," and what follows. The most celebrated Richard Bentley, a most happy restorer of corrupt passages, thinks these words are corrupt. For he says: "Although the sense of the word προσέρχεται is so fixed by the adjoining words that no version has erred here (for all have 'does not consent' or 'does not rest in the sound words of our Lord'), yet the proper meaning of the word does not appear in its origin, nor has any example of this phrase been given so far. If, then, προσέχεται or προσίσχεται, 'adheres to sound words', were found in some manuscript codex, who, I ask, would object to this variant? But I should rather expect the verb προσέχει, because προσέχειν λόγοις ('to attend to words') is a very well-known phrase of sacred and profane authors." See the most celebrated man's Remarks on a late Discourse of Free-Thinking, written in English, pp. 72, 73. These things are learned and most worthy of so great a man. Yet we judge that the received reading, which the great man does not wholly reject, can be defended, especially since an example of it, which he wanted, indeed a citation, exists here in St Irenaeus's fragment, and also occurs in the second one, which we shall give. For the rest, neither I nor anyone else would think that the phrases of the New Testament are to be measured against the purity of the Greek language seen in profane authors, though there have been, among both ancients and moderns, those who took that labour on themselves: Seb. Pfochen especially, J. Vorst, Lamb. Bos, Campegius Vitringa, and others. For the manner of writing observed in the books of the New Testament is to be examined according to the genius of Hebrew and the kindred languages, to which this phrase too belongs. Indeed in Latin one says "to go into someone's opinion", and the word προσέρχεσθαι in this way expresses the same as "to consent". Yet this is quite certain: the word προσέχει would fit the context entirely, if it stood in a manuscript codex. For it is very common in the sacred writers. The distinguished Bentley himself has cited examples: 2 Pet. 1:19; Prov. 1:24; Jer. 6:19; Acts 8:6, 17:14; Heb. 2:1; Titus 1:14; 1 Tim. 1:4. And what we wished, near the end of our critical dissertation on the various readings of the New Testament, pp. 243, 244, that this most learned man should bring from the vast treasury of learning he possesses to the interpretation of the books of the New Testament and the emendation of corrupt readings, we wish entirely to repeat here.

(printed under page 633)

(77) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1249

Ἐμβατευόντων. Haec ex Coloss. II, 18, petita sunt. Carpit S. Paulus, quem hic Irenaeus imitatur, eos, qui cultum religiosum deferebant angelis atque (continues)

"Of those intruding." These are drawn from Col. 2:18. St Paul, whom Irenaeus here imitates, censures those who offered religious worship to angels and (continues)

(printed under page 633)

(77) (continued) · call in col 1251

de nescio quibus mysteriis loquebantur, quae non intelligebant, ad speciem sanctitatis conciliandam conflictis.

(continued) spoke of I know not what mysteries, which they did not understand, made up to win an appearance of holiness.

(printed under page 634)

(78) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1251

Ἐγγύς σου τὸ ῥῆμά ἐστιν. Haec Rom. X, 8, leguntur, petita ex Deut. XXX, 14.

"The word is near you." These are read in Rom. 10:8, taken from Deut. 30:14.

(printed under page 634)

(79) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1251

Εὐμ… Ultimae litterae in codice litura absorptae sunt. Caeterum εὐμαθές legendum censemus.

Εὐμ… The last letters are swallowed by an erasure in the codex. We judge, however, that εὐμαθές ("easy to learn") should be read.

(printed under page 634)

(80) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1251

Δύναμιν τῆς… γνῶμεν. Vide Phil. III, 10.

"The power of… that we may know." See Phil. 3:10.

(printed under page 634)

(81) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1251

Ἐπιλογή. Ita male librarius, ut arbitror. Ἐπιτομή enim legendum est, aut si mavis, ἐκλογή huc quadrat.

Ἐπιλογή. So the copyist, wrongly as I judge. For ἐπιτομή ("summary") should be read, or, if you prefer, ἐκλογή ("selection") fits here.

(printed under page 634)

(82) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1251

Ἁγιωτάτης πίστεως. Eodem epitheto fidem insignit Judas apostolus epistolae commate 20, ubi: Τῇ ἁγιωτάτῃ ὑμῶν πίστει ἐποικοδομοῦντες ἑαυτούς.

"Of the most holy faith." The apostle Jude marks the faith with the same epithet in verse 20 of his letter, where: "Building yourselves up on your most holy faith."

(printed under page 634)

(83) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1251

Ἰδιῶται. Hoc nomine insigniuntur indocti, illitterati, rudes. Ipse sane apostolus Paulus se ἰδιώτην esse fatetur, non quidem quoad scientiam; erat enim vir doctus et in Judaica litteratura versatissimus, Act. XXII, 3, sed potius quoad artificiosum verborum ornatum, quem ignorabat. Ita enim de seipso: Εἰ δὲ καὶ ἰδιώτης τῷ λόγῳ, ἀλλ' οὐ τῇ γνώσει. II Cor. XI, 6. Adde Act. IV, 13; I Cor. I, 17; II, 1, 13, 14, 16; II Cor. X, 10. Unde et ipsi Patres saepius fatentur, apostolos fuisse idiotas, quia concinne scribere haud didicerant. Unus instar omnium nobis sit Eusebius, qui hunc in modum de iis scribit: Τὸν βίον ἄκρως κεκαθαρμένοι, καὶ ἀρετῇ πάσῃ τὰς ψυχὰς κεκοσμημένοι, τὴν δὲ γλῶτταν ἰδιωτεύοντες, τῇ γε μὴν πρὸς τοῦ Σωτῆρος αὐτοῖς δεδωρημένῃ θείᾳ καὶ παραδοξοποιῷ δυνάμει θαρσοῦντες, τὸ μὲν ἐν περινοίᾳ καὶ τέχνῃ λόγων τὰ τοῦ διδασκάλου μαθήματα πρεσβεύειν οὔτε ᾔδεσαν οὔτε ἐνεχείρουν. Quae hoc modo interpretatur Henr. Valesius: Cum essent vita quidem ac moribus castigatissimi et omnibus virtutibus ornati, sermone autem ipso rudes essent atque inculti, freti divina et mirifica virtute ipsis a Servatore concessa, artificioso verborum ornatu magistri sui praecepta exponere neque noverant, neque item conabantur. Hist. Eccles. l. III, c. 24. Non itaque hic ἰδιώτης ea in significatione sumitur, quae hodie popularis est, nec eruditionis solum sed et judicii defectum denotat.

Ἰδιῶται ("unlettered"). By this name the untaught, the illiterate, the unpolished are marked. The apostle Paul himself admits that he is an ἰδιώτης, not indeed as to knowledge (for he was a learned man and most versed in Jewish learning, Acts 22:3), but rather as to artful ornament of words, which he did not know. For so he says of himself: "Even if I am unskilled in speech, yet not in knowledge," 2 Cor. 11:6. Add Acts 4:13; 1 Cor. 1:17; 2:1, 13, 14, 16; 2 Cor. 10:10. Hence the Fathers themselves quite often admit that the apostles were "idiotae", because they had not learned to write elegantly. Let Eusebius stand for all, who writes of them in this way: "Utterly pure in their life and adorned in their souls with every virtue, but unschooled in their tongue, and trusting in the divine and wonder-working power given them by the Saviour, they neither knew how nor attempted to set forth the teachings of their master with subtlety and art of words." Which Henri Valois translates thus: "Though they were most disciplined in life and morals and adorned with all virtues, yet in speech they were rough and unpolished; relying on the divine and wonderful power granted them by the Saviour, they neither knew how, nor even tried, to set forth their master's precepts with artful ornament of words." Eccl. Hist., Book III, ch. 24. Here, then, ἰδιώτης is not taken in the sense that is popular today, denoting a defect not only of learning but of judgement.

(printed under page 634)

(84) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1251

Ὀλιγομαθεῖς. Haec in ruborem convertere debent ex doctis multos, qui eruditione sua elati atque scientia tumentes omnia ad rationis suae modulum exigere, et quae futuro reservantur saeculo, comprehendere cupiunt, ignorantes, eos, qui perspecta intellectus humani imbecillitate ingredi in mysteria non audent, et qua par est animi humilitate ea admirantur atque ignorantiam suam profitentur, divinae fidei longe propiores esse. Atque his commendandum est praecipue caput 28, l. II Adv. haer., ubi § 3, ita Irenaeus: Εἰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν τῆς κτίσεως ἔνια μὲν ἀνάκειται τῷ Θεῷ, ἔνια δὲ καὶ εἰς γνῶσιν ἐλήλυθε τὴν ἡμετέραν, τί χαλεπόν, εἰ καὶ τῶν ἐν ταῖς γραφαῖς ζητουμένων, ὅλων τῶν Γραφῶν πνευματικῶν οὐσῶν, ἔνια μὲν ἐπιλύομεν κατὰ χάριν Θεοῦ, ἔνια δὲ ἀνακείσεται τῷ Θεῷ, καὶ οὐ μόνον ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τῷ νυνί, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι, ἵνα ἀεὶ μὲν ὁ Θεὸς διδάσκῃ, ἄνθρωπος δὲ διὰ παντὸς μανθάνῃ παρὰ Θεοῦ.

"Of little learning." These words ought to bring a blush to many of the learned, who, lifted up by their erudition and swollen with knowledge, want to measure everything by the rule of their own reason and to grasp what is reserved for the age to come, not knowing that those who, having seen the weakness of human understanding, do not dare to enter into the mysteries, but with due humility of mind marvel at them and confess their ignorance, are far nearer to the divine faith. To such, chapter 28 of Book II Against Heresies is especially to be commended, where in § 3 Irenaeus says: "If even among the things of creation some are reserved to God, and some have come within our knowledge, what is hard if, of the things sought in the Scriptures (the Scriptures being wholly spiritual), we solve some by the grace of God, while some will be reserved to God, and not only in the present age but also in the age to come, so that God may always teach, and man may always learn from God?"

(printed under page 634)

(85) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1251

Γενεαλογίαις ταῖς ἀπεράντοις. Respicit Irenaeus ad I Tim. I, 4. Sunt qui putent, rejici hic ab Apostolo inanes disputationes Judaeorum de genealogiis in Vet. Test. occurrentibus. Alii ad systema Αἰώνων Valentinianum putant digitum intendi, cujus prima jam fundamenta tempore apostolorum jecisse potuerant haeretici. Conf. cl. Vitringae Observ. sacr. l. I, c. 2, p. 129 seqq. Nec dubito, huc saltem Irenaeum respexisse. Quod si ita est, non ad Valentinianos solum accommodari possunt γενεαλογίαι illae ἀπέραντοι, sed et ad ipsam Judaeorum Caballam, antiquiorem omnino quam vulgo creditur. Hinc enim sua hausisse Gnosticos et a Gnosticis Valentinum arbitratur vir doctissimus Jo. Franciscus Buddeus in diss. De haeresi Valentiniana, § 15 seqq., cujus quidem hypothesin refutandam sibi sumpsit clariss. Massuetus diss. 1 in Iren., art. 1, n. 5, § 21, qui e Pythagoricis praesertim et Platonicis fontibus Valentini Αἰῶνας derivat § 25, ubi et Aegyptios simul philosophos nominat, e quorum lacunis Valentinianum prodiisse systema censet reverendissimus Georgius Hooperus, episcopus Bathoniensis in conjecturis de Valentinianorum haeresi Londini ante triennium excusis. Caeterum nos haud latet, viros doctissimos magna in theologia caballistica mysteria quaerere, maxime in isto Sephirotarum systemate. Ingeniosa etenim oppido sunt, quae post Henricum Morum et Christianum Knorrium hanc in rem inter recentiores nobis dedere viri clarissimi, Campegius Vitringa et Jo. Franc. Buddeus, ille in Observationibus sacris, hic in elegantissima ad philosophiam Hebraeorum Introductione. Sed hac maxima difficultate laborant ipsorum explicationes, quod Judaeos non habent consentientes, qui in alia omnia abeunt. Caeterum haec Caballae mysteria naso adunco suspendit Thomas Burnetus in Archaeol. philosoph. l. I, c. 6.

"Endless genealogies." Irenaeus looks to 1 Tim. 1:4. Some think the Apostle here rejects the empty disputes of the Jews about the genealogies occurring in the Old Testament. Others think the finger is pointed at the Valentinian system of Aeons, whose first foundations the heretics could have laid already in the apostles' time. Compare the distinguished Vitringa, Sacred Observations, Book I, ch. 2, p. 129 ff. Nor do I doubt that Irenaeus at least looked to this. If so, those "endless genealogies" can be applied not only to the Valentinians but also to the Cabbala of the Jews itself, which is much older than is commonly believed. For the most learned J. Franz Buddeus, in his dissertation On the Valentinian Heresy, § 15 ff., judges that the Gnostics drew their notions from it, and Valentinus from the Gnostics; a hypothesis which the most distinguished Massuet undertook to refute in Dissertation 1 on Irenaeus, art. 1, n. 5, § 21, deriving Valentinus's Aeons chiefly from Pythagorean and Platonic sources, § 25, where he also names the Egyptian philosophers, from whose pools the Most Reverend George Hooper, bishop of Bath, in his conjectures on the Valentinian heresy printed in London three years ago, judges the Valentinian system to have come. We are well aware, however, that most learned men seek great mysteries in cabbalistic theology, above all in that system of the Sephiroth. For very ingenious indeed are the things on this subject which, after Henry More and Christian Knorr, the most distinguished Campegius Vitringa and J. Franz Buddeus have given us among the moderns, the one in his Sacred Observations, the other in his most elegant Introduction to the Philosophy of the Hebrews. But their explanations labour under this very great difficulty: they do not have the Jews agreeing with them, who go off in quite other directions. Thomas Burnet, moreover, turned up his nose at these mysteries of the Cabbala in his Archaeologiae philosophicae, Book I, ch. 6.

(printed under page 634)

(86) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1251

Ἀποτύχωσι τῆς βασιλείας τῶν οὐρανῶν. Eumdem fere in modum Irenaeus alibi scribit: Ἐπεὶ ἄνευ πνεύματος Θεοῦ σωθῆναι οὐ δυνάμεθα, προτρεπόμενος ἡμᾶς ὁ ἀπόστολος διὰ τῆς πίστεως καὶ τῆς ἁγνῆς ἀναστροφῆς συντηρεῖν τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἵνα μὴ ἄμοιροι τοῦ Θεοῦ πνεύματος γενόμενοι ἀποτύχωμεν τῆς βασιλείας τῶν οὐρανῶν, ἐβόησε, μὴ δύνασθαι τὴν σάρκα καθ' ἑαυτὴν ἐν τῷ αἵματι βασιλείαν κληρονομῆσαι Θεοῦ. Cont. haeres. l. V, c. 9, § 3. Graeca haec ex Jo. Damasceni Parallelis exscripta Halloixius in Vita Irenaei edidit et Basilius quoque habet De Spiritu sancto c. 29, monente Massueto p. 303, nisi quod Basilius ponat θείου Πνεύματος, quod et in nostris exstat.

"Should fail of the kingdom of heaven." Irenaeus writes in almost the same way elsewhere: "Since we cannot be saved without the Spirit of God, the apostle, exhorting us to keep the Spirit of God through faith and chaste conduct, lest, becoming without share in the Spirit of God, we fail of the kingdom of heaven, cried out that the flesh by itself, in its blood, cannot inherit the kingdom of God." Against Heresies, Book V, ch. 9, § 3. Halloix published this Greek, copied from John Damascene's Parallels, in his Life of Irenaeus, and Basil too has it, On the Holy Spirit, ch. 29, as Massuet points out, p. 303, except that Basil puts θείου Πνεύματος ("of the divine Spirit"), which stands in ours also.

(printed under page 634)

(83) ‹anchor: munda› · call in col 1254

Malac. I, 11.

Malachi 1:11.

(printed under page 635)

(84) ‹anchor: preces sanctorum› · call in col 1254

Apoc. V, 8.

Revelation 5:8.

(printed under page 635)

(85) ‹anchor: rationalem cultum nostrum› · call in col 1254

Rom. XII, 1.

Romans 12:1.

(printed under page 635)

(86) ‹anchor: fructum labiorum› · call in col 1254

Heb. XIII, 15.

Hebrews 13:15.

(printed under page 635)

(87) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1254

Ἀκολουθῆσαι τῷ Χριστῷ. Haec sane lex Christianismi fundamentalis est, quam nisi observaverimus, dignitate Christianorum praemioque excidimus. Exstat in Pandectis sacris passim. Vide Matth. XVI, 24.

"To follow Christ." This indeed is the fundamental law of Christianity; unless we keep it, we fall from the dignity and reward of Christians. It occurs throughout the sacred Pandects. See Matt. 16:24.

(printed under page 635)

(88) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1254

Εἰς τελειότητα φέρονται. Conf. Hebr. VI, 1.

"Are borne on to perfection." Compare Heb. 6:1.

(printed under page 635)

(89) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1254

Πρῶτον ζητοῦντες. Vide Matth. VI, 33.

"Seeking first." See Matt. 6:33.

(printed under page 635)

(90) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1254

Οὐκ ἀφεθήσονται. Forsan alludit hic Irenaeus ad Luc. XVII, 34 seqq.

"Will not be left." Perhaps Irenaeus alludes here to Luke 17:34 ff.

(printed under page 635)

(91) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1254

Εἰρηναίου. Hoc fragmentum quo pertineat, et quonam in libro S. Irenaei exstiterit, determinare non ausim. Certe in libris Contra haereses non exstat. Unde idem hic repeto, quod de priore fragmento pronuntiavi.

"Of Irenaeus." Where this fragment belongs, and in which book of St Irenaeus it stood, I would not dare to determine. Certainly it does not occur in the books Against Heresies. Hence I repeat here what I declared of the previous fragment.

(printed under page 635)

(92) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1254

Παρηκολουθηκότες. Ubique Irenaeus, ubi hactenus vidimus, φράσιν in Novi Testamenti libris usitatam imitatur. Quod et hic fit. Ita enim Lucas initio Evangelii: Ἔδοξε κἀμοὶ παρηκολουθηκότι ἄνωθεν πᾶσιν ἀκριβῶς. Luc. I, 3.

"Having followed closely." Everywhere, as far as we have seen, Irenaeus imitates a phrase usual in the books of the New Testament. Which he does here too. For so Luke at the beginning of his Gospel: "It seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely from the first." Luke 1:3.

(printed under page 635)

(93) ‹anchor: καὶ ἐνταῦθα› · call in col 1254

Καὶ ἐνταῦθα. Ita omnino in codice ms., sed contextus docet, μετὰ ταῦτα legendum esse, aut si τὸ καὶ abjicias, εἶτα vel ἔπειτα.

"And here." So it stands precisely in the manuscript codex, but the context shows that μετὰ ταῦτα ("after these things") should be read, or, if you drop the καί, εἶτα or ἔπειτα ("then").

(printed under page 635)

(94) ‹anchor: Εἰρηναίου› · call in col 1254

Εἰρηναίου. Hoc fragmentum ex epistola Irenaei De schismate contra Blastum petitum esse videtur. Orta etenim tum temporis erat quaestio de paschate inter Asianos et Romanos, in concilio Nicaeno postmodum decisa atque ab Irenaeo ita tractata, ut propter ritum externum pacis ecclesiasticae vinculum scindi haud debere egregie demonstrarit. Aut, si mavis, hoc fragmentum pertinet ad libellum Irenaei Περὶ τοῦ Πάσχα, De Paschate, quem allegavit Justinus quidam in Resp. ad quaest. 115 ad orthodoxos. Nota est, quam hanc in rem Irenaeus ad Victorem episcopum Romanum scripsit, epistola, cujus fragmentum Eusebius, Nicephorus et Maximus nobis tradidere, ubi sanctissimus vir nihil urget magis quam concordiam ecclesiasticam ab omni schismate alienam, ubi non de fide quidem sed de ritibus agitur. Quinimo addit: Ἡ διαφωνία τῆς νηστείας τὴν ὁμόνοιαν τῆς πίστεως συνίστησι, diversitatem jejunii consensionem fidei commendare. Egregia plane sunt, quae de schismate fugiendo lib. IV contr. haeres. cap. 33, § 7, scribit noster: Ἀνακρινεῖ δὲ (sc. ὁ Θεός) τοὺς τὰ σχίσματα ἐργαζομένους, κενοὺς ὄντας τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀγάπης καὶ τὸ ἴδιον λυσιτελὲς σκοποῦντας, ἀλλὰ μὴ τὴν (continues)

"Of Irenaeus." This fragment seems to be taken from Irenaeus's letter On Schism, against Blastus. For at that time the question of Easter had arisen between the Asians and the Romans, later decided at the Council of Nicaea, and handled by Irenaeus in such a way that he finely showed that the bond of the Church's peace ought not to be torn for the sake of an outward rite. Or, if you prefer, this fragment belongs to Irenaeus's little book On Easter (Περὶ τοῦ Πάσχα), which a certain Justin cited in the Answer to Question 115 to the Orthodox. Well known is the letter that Irenaeus wrote on this matter to Victor, bishop of Rome, a fragment of which Eusebius, Nicephorus and Maximus have handed down to us, where the most holy man urges nothing more than the Church's concord, free of all schism, where the question is not of faith but of rites. Indeed he adds: "The disagreement about the fast commends the agreement of faith." Excellent indeed is what our author writes on shunning schism in Book IV Against Heresies, ch. 33, § 7: "He (that is, God) will judge those who make schisms, being empty of the love of God and looking to their own advantage, but not the (continues)

(printed under page 635)

(94) (continued) · call in col 1255

ἕνωσιν τῆς Ἐκκλησίας, καὶ διὰ μικρὰς καὶ τὰς τυχούσας αἰτίας τὸ μέγα καὶ ἔνδοξον σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ τέμνοντας καὶ διαιροῦντας καὶ ὅσον τὸ ἐπ' αὐτοῖς ἀναιροῦντας. Quae verba conservavit nobis Joannes Damascenus in Parallelis sacris titul. 76, περὶ αἱρετικῶν, translata inde in Vitam Irenaei ab Halloixio descriptam pag. 497 et 481. Dignus est hic, quem allegamus, Damasceni Parallelorum titulus, qui saepius legatur atque relegatur, ut, quae priscae Ecclesiae circa doctrinam de schismate fuerit fides, clarius noscamus. Adeo enim Christiani hodie in partes discissi sunt, ut quaevis opinio novum schisma novamque sectam gignat. Felices eos, qui unitatem fidei spiritusque sectantur! Ephes. IV, 3, 4, 5.

(continued) unity of the Church, and for small and chance causes cut and divide the great and glorious body of Christ and, as far as in them lies, destroy it." John Damascene preserved these words for us in the Sacred Parallels, title 76, "On heretics", and from there they were carried into the Life of Irenaeus written by Halloix, pp. 497 and 481. This title of Damascene's Parallels which we cite deserves to be read and reread often, so that we may know more clearly what the faith of the early Church was concerning the doctrine of schism. For Christians today are so torn into parties that every opinion begets a new schism and a new sect. Happy those who pursue the unity of faith and of the Spirit! Eph. 4:3–5.

(printed under page 636)

(95) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1255

Μὴ δεῖναι…. σαββάτων. Locus, quem hic allegat Irenaeus, Pauli est in litteris ad Colossenses cap. II, 16.

"That we must not… of sabbaths." The passage Irenaeus cites here is Paul's, in the letter to the Colossians, ch. 2:16.

(printed under page 636)

(96) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1255

Ἑορτάζομεν….. πονηρίας. Alludit, ut arbitror, vir sanctus ad I Cor. V, 8.

"We keep the feast… of wickedness." The holy man alludes, I think, to 1 Cor. 5:8.

(printed under page 636)

(97) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1255

Εἰρηναίου. Haec forsan ad διαλέξεις διαφόρους aut ad ἐπίδειξιν ἀποστολικοῦ κηρύγματος ab Irenaeo scriptam pertinuere.

"Of Irenaeus." These perhaps belonged to the Various Discourses, or to the Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching written by Irenaeus.

(printed under page 636)

(98) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1255

Ὁ πρὸ αἰώνων κληθεὶς Θεοῦ Υἱός. Doctrinam Irenaei de divinitate Filii Dei post Georgium Bullum et Nicolaum Nourrium egregie explicavit R. Massuetus in diss. 3, art. 5, cui non opus est ut plura addamus.

"He who before the ages was called Son of God." Irenaeus's doctrine of the divinity of the Son of God has been excellently explained, after George Bull and Nicolas Le Nourry, by R. Massuet in Dissertation 3, art. 5, to which there is no need for us to add more.

(printed under page 636)

(99) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1255

Ἐν τῷ πληρώματι τοῦ καιροῦ. Vide Galat. IV, 4, ubi πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου. Plenitudo temporis habetur in Latinis Irenaei.

"In the fullness of the season." See Gal. 4:4, where "the fullness of time". "Plenitudo temporis" stands in the Latin Irenaeus.

(printed under page 636)

(1) ‹anchor: τῇ παιδείᾳ› · call in col 1255

Παιδείᾳ. Vide Tit. II, 12.

"Discipline." See Titus 2:12.

(printed under page 636)

(2) ‹anchor: μέλλει› · call in col 1255

Μέλλει ἔρχ. εἰς τὸ καταργ. πᾶν τὸ κακὸν … ἀποκαταλλάξαι τὰ πάντα. Digna sunt haec Irenaei verba, quae penitius considerentur. Duo enim sunt, quae dicit. Primum, destructum iri omne malum; secundum reconciliatum iri universa. Itane ergo credit ille, quod Origenes post ipsum credidit, poenas quoque damnatorum finem habituras, quod ex eo omnino consequi videtur, si dixeris, omne malum sublatum iri? Itane porro juxta Irenaeum reconciliatio universalis per Christum nondum facta est, reservanda demum ad diem judicii? Haec qui aequa judicii lance dijudicare velit, inspiciat prius quae Irenaeus de aeternis damnatorum poenis in libris Advers. haereses memorat. Lib. III, cap. 23, § 3, haec leguntur: Hoc idem autem et Dominus in Evangelio his, qui a sinistris inveniuntur, ait: Abite, maledicti, in ignem aeternum, quem praeparavit Pater meus diabolo et angelis ejus; significans, quoniam non homini principaliter praeparatus est aeternus ignis, sed ei, qui seduxit et offendere fecit hominem, et inquam qui princeps apostasiae est, principi abscessionis, et his angelis, qui apostatae facti sunt cum eo: quem quidem juste percipient etiam hi, qui similiter ut illi sine poenitentia et sine regressu in malitiae perseverant operibus. Lib. IV, cap. 27, § 4, ex variis Scripturae locis probat, aeternum ignem impiis destinatum esse. Id autem qua ratione intelligat, explicat luculentius loc. cit. cap. 28, § 1. Ibi enim: Cum ergo hic et illic eadem sit in vindicando Deo justitia Dei et illic quidem typice et temporaliter et mediocrius; hic vero vere et semper et austerius….. Addit rationem, ob quam damnatio impiorum aeterna statui debeat, quoniam expediebat eis juxta Scripturam, si non essent nati. Pergit § 2: Poena eorum, qui non credunt Verbo Dei et contemnunt ejus adventum et convertuntur retrorsum, adampliata est; non solum temporalis sed et aeterna facta. Quibuscunque enim dixerit Dominus: Discedite a me, maledicti, in ignem perpetuum; isti erunt semper damnati; et quibuscunque dixerit: Venite, benedicti, etc., hi semper percipiunt regnum et proficiunt. Add. lib. IV, cap. 33, § 11; cap. 39, § 4, ubi: Aeternum qui fugiunt lumen, quod continet in se omnia bona, ipsi sibi causa sunt, ut aeternas inhabitent tenebras, quae ipsa repetuntur cap. 40, § 1, 2. Nec nos hic morantur, quae Irenaeus alibi habet de perseverantia vitae solis electis bonisque data lib. II, cap. 24, § 3. Non enim ex nobis, ait, neque ex nostra natura vita est, sed secundum gratiam Dei datur. Et ideo qui servaverit datum vitae et gratias egerit ei qui praestitit, accipiet et in saeculum saeculi longitudinem dierum. Qui autem abjecerit eam et ingratus exstiterit factori ob hoc quod factus est, et non cognoverit eum qui praestat, ipse se privat in saeculum saeculi perseverantia. Sunt haec quae in suas partes traxit Henricus Dodwellus, naturalem animae mortalitatem statuens, nisi per baptismum facta fuerit immortalis. Sed egregia sunt, quae reponit doctissimus Massuetus: Unum observasse sufficiat, scilicet duplex immortalitatis genus, quod Dodwellus nusquam distinxit, sed potius ita confudit, ut alterum pro altero habuerit, fontem errorum omnium illius esse. Immortalitas quippe animarum, alia naturalis, alia supernaturalis. Prior substantiis sua natura simplicibus et ab omni materia segregatis propria est; qua nullius omnino creatae rei vi et efficientia dissolvi et exstingui possunt. Posterior animabus beatis peculiaris est; qua Deo et cum Deo aeternum viventes, felicitate nunquam desitura fruuntur in coelis. Dissertatio 3, artic. 9, § 104. Idem et accurate demonstrat, Irenaeum, cum aeternas damnatorum poenas dixit, nunquam desituras intellexisse. Ita enim loco citato § 105: Hic damnatorum poenam opponit Irenaeus beatorum felicitati; et quemadmodum haec sempiterna est, sic et alteram sempiternam esse statuit. Ubi qui has voces, aeterni ignis, aeterna poena, semper damnati, detorserit ad longissima duntaxat supplicia, sed damnatorum interitu tandem aliquando desitura; advertat, nec Ire- (continues)

"He is to come to destroy all evil… to reconcile all things." These words of Irenaeus deserve deeper consideration. For he says two things: first, that all evil will be destroyed; second, that all things will be reconciled. Does he then believe what Origen believed after him, that the punishments of the damned too will have an end, which seems wholly to follow if you say that all evil will be taken away? And further, according to Irenaeus, has universal reconciliation through Christ not yet been made, but is to be reserved at last to the day of judgement? Whoever would weigh these things in a fair balance of judgement should first look at what Irenaeus records about the eternal punishments of the damned in the books Against Heresies. In Book III, ch. 23, § 3, we read: "The Lord also says this same thing in the Gospel to those found on the left: 'Depart, you cursed, into the eternal fire, which my Father has prepared for the devil and his angels'; signifying that the eternal fire was not prepared principally for man, but for him who seduced man and made him offend, him, I say, who is the prince of apostasy, the chief of the revolt, and for those angels who became apostates with him; which those too will justly receive who, like them, persevere without repentance and without turning back in the works of wickedness." In Book IV, ch. 27, § 4, he proves from various places of Scripture that eternal fire is destined for the wicked. And in what sense he understands this he explains more clearly in the place cited, ch. 28, § 1. For there: "Since, then, here and there the justice of God is the same in God's punishing, and there indeed typically, temporarily and more moderately, but here truly, always and more severely…" He adds the reason why the damnation of the wicked must be held to be eternal: "since it would have been better for them, according to Scripture, had they not been born." He continues in § 2: "The punishment of those who do not believe the Word of God, and despise his coming, and turn back, has been increased; made not only temporal but also eternal. For to whomsoever the Lord shall say, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire,' these will be damned for ever; and to whomsoever he shall say, 'Come, you blessed,' etc., these receive the kingdom for ever and advance in it." Add Book IV, ch. 33, § 11; ch. 39, § 4, where: "Those who flee the eternal light, which contains in itself all good things, are themselves the cause of their dwelling in eternal darkness," which is repeated in ch. 40, §§ 1, 2. Nor are we detained here by what Irenaeus says elsewhere of perseverance in life being given only to the elect and the good, Book II, ch. 24, § 3: "For life is not from us," he says, "nor from our nature, but is given according to the grace of God. And therefore he who keeps the gift of life and gives thanks to him who bestowed it will receive also length of days for ever and ever. But he who casts it away and proves ungrateful to his Maker for having been made, and does not know him who bestows it, deprives himself of perseverance for ever and ever." These are the things that Henry Dodwell drew to his side, holding the natural mortality of the soul unless it has been made immortal through baptism. But excellent is the reply of the most learned Massuet: "Let it suffice to have observed one thing: that a twofold kind of immortality, which Dodwell nowhere distinguished but rather so confused that he took the one for the other, is the source of all his errors. For the immortality of souls is either natural or supernatural. The former is proper to substances simple by their nature and separated from all matter, by which they cannot be dissolved and extinguished by the force and agency of any created thing at all. The latter is peculiar to blessed souls, by which, living eternally to God and with God, they enjoy in heaven a happiness that will never end." Dissertation 3, art. 9, § 104. He also shows accurately that Irenaeus, when he spoke of the eternal punishments of the damned, understood them as never to end. For so in the place cited, § 105: "Here Irenaeus sets the punishment of the damned against the happiness of the blessed; and as the one is everlasting, so he holds the other to be everlasting too. Whoever would twist these words, 'eternal fire', 'eternal punishment', 'damned for ever', to mean only very long torments that will at last some day end with the destruction of the damned, let him note that neither Ire- (continues)

(printed under page 636)

(2) (continued) · call in col 1258

naeum caeterosque Patres, imo nec ipsam Scripturam aliis vocibus designare sempiternam beatorum felicitatem; quas proinde impii, arrepta hinc occasione, similiter detorquere possent ad longam duntaxat felicitatem, aliquando tamen finiendam. Legesis quae eo de argumento scripsit eruditissimus D. Matthaeus Petitdidier tom. II Adnotationum in Bibliothecam auctorum ecclesiasticorum pag. 403 et seqq. edit. Paris. 1692.

(continued) naeus nor the other Fathers, nay not even Scripture itself, describe the everlasting happiness of the blessed in other words; which the wicked, seizing the occasion, could likewise twist to mean a happiness only long, yet some day to end." Read what the most learned Dom Matthieu Petitdidier wrote on this subject, vol. II of the Remarks on the Library of Ecclesiastical Authors, p. 403 ff., Paris edition, 1692.

(printed under page 637)

(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1258

Καὶ εἰς τὸ ἀποκαταλλάξαι τὰ πάντα. Respicit noster sine dubio ad Colossenses I, 20, ubi: Καὶ δι' αὐτοῦ ἀποκαταλλάξαι τὰ πάντα εἰς αὐτόν. Etenim reconciliationem universalem per mortem Christi jam factam esse haud negat Irenaeus. Conf. lib. V, cap. 14, § 3. Est autem universalis illa, per quam totus mundus cum Deo fuit reconciliatus, ita ut salus acquisita omnibus fuerit, particularis vero poenitentiam fidemque hominis cum obedientia Evangelio praestita praeviam habet bonaque a Christo acquisita applicat. II Cor. V, 19, 20. De hac itaque loquitur in fragmento nostro Irenaeus aut potius de ejus plenaria manifestatione ultimoque effectu, qui nonnisi in novissimo die apparebit. Caeterum cum loco, qui exstat ad Colossenses cap. I, 21, 22, vir sanctus confert alterum παράλληλον Ephes. I, 10, ubi: Ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι τὰ πάντα ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ, τά τε ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. Hanc recapitulationem, quam vocat, rerum coelestium et terrestrium, ait Irenaeus esse conjunctionem naturae divinae cum humana. Vide loc. cit. § 2. Alibi hanc recapitulationem de anima hominis cum corpore conjuncta explicat loco citato cap. 20, § 2. Tam obscura tamen atque intricata sunt haec omnia, ut quae mens Irenaei sit, liquido vix dignosci possit.

"And to reconcile all things." Our author no doubt looks to Col. 1:20, where: "And through him to reconcile all things to himself." For Irenaeus by no means denies that a universal reconciliation has already been made through the death of Christ. Compare Book V, ch. 14, § 3. That reconciliation is universal by which the whole world was reconciled with God, so that salvation was acquired for all; but the particular one presupposes man's repentance and faith, with obedience rendered to the Gospel, and applies the goods acquired by Christ. 2 Cor. 5:19, 20. Of this, then, Irenaeus speaks in our fragment, or rather of its full manifestation and final effect, which will appear only on the last day. Moreover, with the passage in Colossians 1:21, 22, the holy man compares another parallel one, Eph. 1:10, where: "To sum up all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on earth." This "recapitulation", as he calls it, of things heavenly and earthly, Irenaeus says, is the joining of the divine nature with the human. See the place cited, § 2. Elsewhere he explains this recapitulation of the soul of man joined with the body, in the place cited, ch. 20, § 2. Yet all these things are so obscure and intricate that what Irenaeus's mind is can scarcely be clearly discerned.

(printed under page 637)

(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1258

Quae hinc sequuntur fragmenta XLI-XLV Muenterus e mss. in bibliotheca Vaticana asservatis eruit, atque in libro inscripto: Fragmenta Patrum Graecorum, fasc. I, Hafniae 1788, publici juris fecit. Vir doctus haec contextui Graeco praemisit: Allegoricam interpretationem, non modo a Graecorum philosophis, Stoicis nimirum et Platonicis, in exponendis poetis principibus, verum etiam a Judaeorum Hellenistarum doctoribus, liberaliori Graecarum litterarum doctrina institutis, adoptatam, in Ecclesiam quoque Christianam transiisse, ex plurimis et prope omnibus antiquissimorum Patrum in sacram Scripturam commentariis efficitur. Quibus equidem, cum notissima sit res, ulterius demonstrandis haud immorabor; locos saltem de phoenice, resurrectionis typo, de salute fidelium per sanguinem Christi in filo rubro meretricis Rahab praesignificata, ex epist. Clementis Romani, et de nomine Christi in voce ἰχθὺς exhibito, in Justino M. in memoriam revocans. Ipsum vero, cujus fragmenta exhibeo, Irenaeum eamdem dilexisse allegoricam S. Scripturae exponendae rationem, ex editis ipsius libris, quo major authentiae ineditorum nostrorum fragmentorum habeatur fides, paucis exponendum mihi erit. Scilicet ipse, qui per totum volumen contra Gnosticorum, ut verbo utar, theogonias, mysticos allegoricosque sensus, quos in S. Scriptura repositos occultosque esse docuerunt, evertere et confutare omni studio allaboravit: ex quadriformi tamen Cherubinorum facie Apoc. IV, 7, quibus Deus vehebatur, efficit, necessario etiam quatuor esse debere Evangelia, quibus insideat Christus Jesus, quatuorque testamenta, Adami nimirum, Noe, Moysis et Christi, humano generi a Deo data (III, 11). Moysen porro docet virgam in terram coram Pharaone projecisse, ut ea incarnata omnem Aegyptiorum praevaricationem, quae insurgebat adversus Dei dispositionem, argueret et absolveret (III, 21). Matrimonio Moysis cum muliere Aethiopica spirituales Christi cum Ecclesia nuptias; IV, 20, sub Rahaba et duobus speculatoribus Trinitatem; in eodem capite Thamaris denique duplici partu utrumque testamentum typice significari (IV, 25). In reliquum videant, quibus plura ejusmodi Irenaei exegetico-allegorica placent, III, 10, 18; IV, 38; V, 29, et alia passim. — De libro, ex quo hausta sunt omnia haec commentariorum Irenaei in V. T. fragmenta, quorum nonnulla ab Halloixio et ex eo a Massueto edita fuere, nihil certo asseri potest. Videntur tamen omnia ejusmodi fragmenta reliquiae esse homiliarum deperditarum, quibus, uti mos erat priscae Ecclesiae episcopis presbyterisque, sacrae Scripturae selectos libros exposuerat; habentur enim in editione Massueti fragmenta commentariorum in varia Pentateuchi, Judicum, Evangeliorumque effata. Ad idem quoque genus Pfaffii primum quartumque fragmentum referendum videtur. Caeterum, num istae homiliae partem librorum, qui διδαχαί vel διαλέξεις dicebantur, constituerint, an vero seorsim editae sint, ea non nisi conjecturis, quibus tamen ne hic indulgeamus, loci et temporis ratio vetat, committenda sunt. — Hoc fragmentum est commentarii in librum Judicum; habetur enim locus hic in historia Simsonis, Jud. XV, 15. MUENTERUS.

The fragments that follow from here, XLI–XLV, Münter drew from manuscripts preserved in the Vatican Library and made public in the book entitled Fragments of the Greek Fathers, fasc. I, Copenhagen 1788. The learned man set this before the Greek text: "That allegorical interpretation, adopted not only by the philosophers of the Greeks (the Stoics, namely, and Platonists) in expounding the chief poets, but also by the teachers of the Hellenist Jews, trained in the more liberal learning of Greek letters, passed into the Christian Church as well, is shown by very many, indeed almost all, of the commentaries of the most ancient Fathers on sacred Scripture. Since the matter is very well known, I shall not dwell on proving it further; I merely recall the passages on the phoenix as a type of the resurrection, and on the salvation of the faithful through the blood of Christ foreshadowed in the scarlet thread of the harlot Rahab, from the letter of Clement of Rome, and on the name of Christ shown in the word ἰχθύς ('fish'), in Justin Martyr. But that Irenaeus himself, whose fragments I present, loved the same allegorical manner of expounding sacred Scripture, I must briefly set out from his published books, so that greater credit may be given to the authenticity of our unpublished fragments. Namely, he who through his whole volume laboured with every effort to overturn and refute the theogonies, so to speak, of the Gnostics, and the mystical and allegorical senses which they taught were stored and hidden in sacred Scripture, nevertheless concludes from the fourfold face of the Cherubim, Rev. 4:7, on whom God was borne, that there must necessarily also be four Gospels on which Christ Jesus is seated, and four covenants given by God to the human race, namely those of Adam, Noah, Moses and Christ (III, 11). He further teaches that Moses threw his rod on the ground before Pharaoh so that, become flesh, it might convict and do away with all the transgression of the Egyptians that rose up against God's dispensation (III, 21). That by Moses' marriage with the Ethiopian woman the spiritual marriage of Christ with the Church is signified; IV, 20, by Rahab and the two spies, the Trinity; in the same chapter, finally, by Tamar's twin birth, both covenants typically (IV, 25). For the rest, those who like more of such exegetical-allegorical things of Irenaeus may see III, 10, 18; IV, 38; V, 29, and others passim. — Of the book from which all these fragments of Irenaeus's commentaries on the Old Testament were drawn (some of which were published by Halloix, and from him by Massuet), nothing certain can be asserted. Yet all such fragments seem to be remains of lost homilies in which, as was the custom of the bishops and presbyters of the early Church, he had expounded selected books of sacred Scripture; for in Massuet's edition there are fragments of commentaries on various sayings of the Pentateuch, of Judges and of the Gospels. To the same kind, too, Pfaff's first and fourth fragments seem to belong. Whether, however, these homilies formed part of the books called διδαχαί or διαλέξεις, or were published separately, can be left only to conjecture, in which the limits of place and time forbid us to indulge here. — This fragment is from a commentary on the book of Judges; for the passage occurs in the story of Samson, Judg. 15:15." MÜNTER.

(printed under page 637)

(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1258

Μετὰ τὴν πορνείαν. Respicit ad amores Simsonis et Delilae, Jud. XVI, 4. Ubi enim alibi de Simsone narratur, eum edidisse fortitudinis novum quoddam specimen, addit auctor libri: Ἥλατο πνεῦμα Κυρίου ἐπ' αὐτόν — ita Jud. XIV, 6, 19; XV, 14. Deinde vero violato, quo erga Deum obstrictus tenebatur voto, simpliciter additur causa virium auctarum, καὶ ἤρξατο θρὶξ τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ βλαστάνειν, Jud. XVI, 22 (sec. LXX), nulla amplius de spiritu Domini mentione facta. ID.

"After the fornication." He looks to the loves of Samson and Delilah, Judg. 16:4. For where elsewhere it is told of Samson that he gave some new proof of strength, the author of the book adds: "The Spirit of the Lord leapt upon him" (so Judg. 14:6, 19; 15:14). But afterwards, once the vow by which he was bound to God had been broken, the cause of his increased strength is simply given as "and the hair of his head began to grow", Judg. 16:22 (according to the Septuagint), with no further mention of the Spirit of the Lord. THE SAME.

(printed under page 637)

(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1258

Κατωρθωμένοις. Sensus vocis: res praeclare et feliciter in commodum populi gestae. Ita usurpatur Actor. XXIV, 2, ubi Tertullus de κατορθώμασιν, provida nempe Felicis cura, Judaeis impetratis, verba facit. Apud Plutarchum vero eodem sensu bellico, quod Jud. XV habetur, ubi ὡς μέγα κατόρθωμα ποιήσων, ait. Idem enim est hic, quod ἀνδραγάθημα. In Ciceronis denique Officiis perfectum officium audit, officio, quod Graeci καθῆκον vocant, oppositum. ID.

Κατωρθωμένοις ("things achieved"). The sense of the word: things done gloriously and successfully for the people's benefit. So it is used in Acts 24:2, where Tertullus speaks of κατορθώματα, namely benefits won for the Jews by Felix's provident care. In Plutarch it has the same military sense as in Judg. 15, where he says "as one about to do a great exploit". For here it is the same as ἀνδραγάθημα ("a deed of valour"). In Cicero's De officiis, finally, it is called "perfect duty", opposed to the duty that the Greeks call καθῆκον. THE SAME.

(printed under page 637)

(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1258

Ὡς περὶ Θεοῦ ναόν. Respicit ad I Cor. III, 16, 17. ID.

"As about the temple of God." He looks to 1 Cor. 3:16, 17. THE SAME.

(printed under page 637)

(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1259

[… the opening of this note lies above the rendered foot …] fragm. XLI. Hoc fragm. ex eodem, ex quo antecedens, commentario in Judices haustum videtur. Referendum est ad Jud. XV, ubi Simson a popularibus suis Philistaeis traditur, propria dein fortitudine liberatus, vindictam de hostibus patriae sumit. MUENT.

[… opening above the rendered foot …] fragment XLI. This fragment seems drawn from the same commentary on Judges as the preceding one. It refers to Judg. 15, where Samson is handed over by his own people to the Philistines and then, freed by his own strength, takes vengeance on the enemies of his country. MÜNTER.

(printed under page 638)

(9) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1259

Τὸν διωγμὸν … ἐθνῶν. Non equidem, Irenaeum certam Christianorum vexationem quamdam ob oculos hic habuisse, crediderim; licet ipse anno CLXXVII persecutione in Gallia, inprimis Viennae et Lugduni flagrante, ecclesiae Lugdunensis fuerit presbyter: ex additis tamen verbis ἔτι μενόντων cernitur, illum haud ad priores, quae Neronis et Domitiani temporibus Ecclesiam oppresserunt, calamitates respexisse; quo quidem tempore nullae adhuc editae erant Christianorum apologiae, ex quibus saltem id Imperatoribus praefectisque provinciarum constaret, religionem Christianorum haud esse exitiabilem superstitionem, odii humani generis convictam. Verba porro ἔτι μένειν pertinaciam in idolorum cultu, non obstantibus Christianorum pro propaganda inter eos fide laboribus, indicare mihi videntur; cujus tamen pertinaciae haud ante saeculum II, quo, ipso Irenaeo teste, ecclesiae per universum orbem Romanum, in Gallia nimirum, Britannia, Hispania, imo etiam in Germania exstitere, a quibus gentiles in meliori cultu institui potuissent, taxandi erant. Cum vero, licet edictis imperatorum praesidumve provinciarum, novae vel persecutiones vel inquisitiones jussae haud essent, flamina tamen semper et pontifices, omnesque, quibus templorum sacra curae essent, populares ad violentias in illos, qui pro Christianis haberentur, committendas incitarent (quae Plinius ipse, ut alios taceam, in epistola ad Trajanum Augustum docet) continuis prope vexationibus, ex universo populi in eos odio oriundis, Christianos, maxime vero sacrorum antistites, obnoxios fuisse, quisquis facile concedet. Ex quo deinde consequitur, ad interpretationem fragmenti hujus certam aliquam, de qua apud historicos sermo sit, persecutionem non quaerendam esse. ID.

"The persecution … of the Gentiles." I would not believe that Irenaeus had some particular harassment of the Christians before his eyes here, although he himself was a presbyter of the church of Lyons in the year 177, when persecution was raging in Gaul, especially at Vienne and Lyons. Yet from the added words ἔτι μενόντων ("still remaining") it is seen that he was not looking back to the earlier calamities that oppressed the Church in the times of Nero and Domitian, a time when no apologies of the Christians had yet been published from which it might at least be clear to the emperors and the governors of the provinces that the religion of the Christians was not a "destructive superstition, convicted of hatred of the human race". The words ἔτι μένειν, further, seem to me to indicate obstinacy in the worship of idols despite the labours of the Christians to spread the faith among them; an obstinacy, however, not to be censured before the second century, when, on Irenaeus's own testimony, churches existed throughout the Roman world (in Gaul, that is, in Britain, in Spain, even in Germany) by which the Gentiles could have been instructed in a better worship. But anyone will readily grant that, although no new persecutions or inquisitions had been ordered by edicts of emperors or provincial governors, the flamens and pontiffs, and all who had charge of the temple rites, always incited the people to commit violence against those held to be Christians (as Pliny himself, to say nothing of others, shows in his letter to the Emperor Trajan), and that the Christians, and above all the leaders of the sacred rites, were exposed to almost continual harassment arising from the hatred of the whole people against them. From which it follows that, for the interpretation of this fragment, no particular persecution spoken of by the historians is to be sought. THE SAME.

(printed under page 638)

(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1259

Ἀλλ' ἤλπισεν. Scilicet Simson, qui ab ipsis civibus suis tradebatur Philistaeis. Caeterum ipsum Simsonem Irenaeo quoque typum fuisse Christi, ex fragmento ejusdem commentarii in Judices apud Massuetum p. 346 [hujus novae editionis fragm. XXVII] conjicio; in quo puer Simsonem manu ducens cum Joanne Baptista comparatur, et ex Simsone columnis innixo doctrina elicitur, populum de religione edoctum agnovisse Christi mysterium. Ita enim loquitur: Τὸ οὖν ἐπαναπαυθῆναι τὸν Σαμψὼν ἐπὶ τοὺς στύλους, τὸ τὸν διδαχθέντα λαὸν (Judaeorum) ἐπιγνῶναι τὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ μυστήριον. Columnas enim, jam in antecedentibus, utrumque Testamentum significare docuerat. ID.

"But he hoped." Namely Samson, who was being handed over to the Philistines by his own fellow citizens. Moreover, that Samson himself was for Irenaeus too a type of Christ I infer from a fragment of the same commentary on Judges in Massuet, p. 346 [fragment XXVII of this new edition], in which the boy leading Samson by the hand is compared with John the Baptist, and from Samson leaning on the pillars the teaching is drawn that "the people, instructed in religion, recognized the mystery of Christ". For he says: "Samson's resting upon the pillars, then, is the instructed people (of the Jews) recognizing the mystery of Christ." For he had already taught in what precedes that the pillars signify the two Testaments. THE SAME.

(printed under page 638)

(11) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1259

Ἐπὶ τὴν νοητὴν πέτραν. Petra, de qua quidem sermo est in historia Simsonis, est rupes Etam, Jud. XIV. Integer vero locus, typice de Christo expositus, alludere videtur ad Matth. XXI, 42. Quod ex epitheto νοητή, quae sensibus capi nequit, magis elucere videtur. ID.

"Upon the spiritual rock." The rock spoken of in the story of Samson is the rock of Etam, Judg. 14. But the whole passage, expounded typically of Christ, seems to allude to Matt. 21:42. This seems to show more clearly from the epithet νοητή ("spiritual"), meaning what cannot be grasped by the senses. THE SAME.

(printed under page 638)

(12) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1259

Τύποι δὲ τῆς σιαγ., κ. τ. λ. Typus sane […] tractus, cujus comparationis medium terminum frustra quaeres. Ipse vero Irenaeus nobis doctor. In alio enim fragmento apud Mass. p. 346 [hujus novae editionis fragm. XXIII] ad Numer. XXII, 22, asinam Bileami figuram esse corporis Christi tradit, ita verba faciens: Ἐφ' ὃν πάντες οἱ ἄνθρωποι ἐκ καυμάτων ἀναπαυόμενοι, ὡς ὑπὸ ὀχήματος βαστάζονται. Τὸ γὰρ φορτίον τῶν ἡμετέρων ἁμαρτημάτων ὁ Σωτὴρ ἀνεδέξατο. Saltum vero a corpore asinae ad maxillam, a toto ad partem, haud adeo mortalem esse vident omnes. ID.

"Types of the jaw," etc. A type indeed [… a gap where the columns join …] drawn, of which comparison you will look in vain for the middle term. But Irenaeus himself is our teacher. For in another fragment in Massuet, p. 346 [fragment XXIII of this new edition], on Num. 22:22, he teaches that Balaam's ass is a figure of the body of Christ, speaking thus: "On which all men, resting from their heats, are carried as by a vehicle. For the Saviour took up the burden of our sins." But all can see that the leap from the body of the ass to the jawbone, from the whole to a part, is not so very fatal. THE SAME.

(printed under page 638)

(13) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1259

Εὖ μὲν λέγοντες, κ. τ. λ. Hoc fragmentum, quod Muenterus primus e mss. Vaticanis edidit, ipso editore teste his inscribitur verbis: Τοῦ ἁγίου Εἰρηναίου ἐκ τῶν διατάξεων. Muenterus ad haec ita scribit: Morem fuisse antiquissimorum Ecclesiae Patrum constat, ut ea, quae sive ab apostolis sive a discipulis apostolorum, τῆς πρώτης διαδοχῆς, acceperant, quo se melius falsis, quae saeculo jam secundo circumferebantur, institutionibus opponerent, in opusculis, διδαχαί vel διδασκαλίαι dictis, discipulis posteritatique traderent. Tales quidem διδαχάς a plurimis Patribus conscriptas, dein Epiphanii tempore in Constitutiones apostolorum, ex iis conflatas transiisse, censuerunt viri in antiquitatibus ecclesiasticis facile principes, inter quos Dodwellum, Pearsonium, Grabiumque nominasse sat erit. Ejusmodi porro διδασκαλίαν in secunda, quae vulgo dicitur, Clementis Romani epistola ad Corinthios superstitem esse asseritur. Hippolyti similiter in bibliotheca Caesarea Vindobonensi ineditam exstare, docuit Lambecius Comment. VIII, 429. De aliorum Patrum διδαχαῖς, Ignatii nimirum, Polycarpi, Hermae et Barnabae testantur nonnulla verba Stichometriae Nicephori patriarchae, a Dodwello in Diss. 1 Irenaica laudata. Ipsum autem Irenaeum, cum falsis διδαχαῖς probabiliter ab Heracleone, gnostico homine, qui κήρυγμα Πέτρου, teste Origene, pro genuino venditaverat, aliisque strenue contradixisset (de iis enim verba faciens, ipse lib. I, 17, Ἀμύθητον, ait, πλῆθος ἀποκρύφων καὶ νόθων γραφῶν, ἃς αὐτοὶ ἔπλασαν, προσφέρουσι εἰς κατάπληξιν τῶν ἀνοήτων, καὶ τὰ τῆς ἀληθείας μὴ ἐπισταμένων γράμματα), suam quoque διδαχήν, morem apostolicorum Patrum imitatus, conscripsisse ecclesiaeque Lugdunensi reliquisse, ex Eusebio (Hist. eccl. V, 26) et Hieronymo patere videtur (Catal. script. c. 35). Verba enim sunt Eusebii: Καὶ ἄλλος (φέρεται) ὃν ἀνατέθεικεν ἀδελφῷ Μαρκιανῷ τοὔνομα εἰς ἐπίδειξιν (legendum forte ex emendatione Valesii et Dodwelli ἀπόδειξιν) τοῦ ἀποστολικοῦ κηρύγματος. Quam apostolicae et fidei et disciplinae ulteriorem fuisse expositionem, quae falsa haereticorum κηρύγματα confutaverit, Dodwello facile concedendum esse censeo. Quod vero, id quod mira doctrina ex auctoribus Graecis evincere allaborat, alter quidam Irenaei liber deperditus, ab Eusebio et Hieronymo quoque laudatus, cui titulus Διαλέξεων διαφόρων, homilias quoque ad populum exhibuerit, equidem contra tanti viri auctoritatem negare non ausim; nisi cho- (continues)

"Speaking well," etc. This fragment, which Münter first published from Vatican manuscripts, is headed, on the editor's own testimony, with these words: "Of Saint Irenaeus, from the Ordinances." Münter writes on this as follows: "It is established that it was the custom of the most ancient Fathers of the Church to hand down to their disciples and to posterity, in little works called διδαχαί or διδασκαλίαι ('teachings'), what they had received either from the apostles or from the disciples of the apostles, 'of the first succession', so as better to oppose the false teachings that were already circulating in the second century. Men who are easily the foremost in ecclesiastical antiquities (among whom it will be enough to name Dodwell, Pearson and Grabe) have judged that such διδαχαί, written by very many Fathers, later, in the time of Epiphanius, passed into the Apostolic Constitutions, which were put together from them. Such a διδασκαλία, further, is asserted to survive in the so-called second letter of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians. Lambeck, Commentaries VIII, 429, showed that one of Hippolytus likewise exists unpublished in the imperial library at Vienna. Of the διδαχαί of other Fathers, namely Ignatius, Polycarp, Hermas and Barnabas, some words of the Stichometry of the patriarch Nicephorus testify, cited by Dodwell in his first Irenaean Dissertation. And that Irenaeus himself, having vigorously contradicted the false διδαχαί, probably of Heracleon, a gnostic who, on Origen's testimony, had passed off a Preaching of Peter as genuine, and of others (for speaking of them he says, Book I, 17: 'They bring forward an untold multitude of apocryphal and spurious writings, which they themselves have forged, to amaze the foolish and those who do not know the writings of the truth'), also wrote his own διδαχή, imitating the custom of the apostolic Fathers, and left it to the church of Lyons, appears from Eusebius (Eccl. Hist. V, 26) and Jerome (Catalogue of Writers, ch. 35). For Eusebius's words are: 'And another (is current), which he dedicated to a brother named Marcianus, For the Demonstration (perhaps to be read, following the emendation of Valesius and Dodwell, ἀπόδειξιν) of the Apostolic Preaching.' That this was a fuller exposition of the apostolic faith and discipline, refuting the false 'preachings' of the heretics, should, I think, readily be granted to Dodwell. But that another lost book of Irenaeus, also praised by Eusebius and Jerome, titled Various Discourses, also contained homilies to the people, which he labours to prove from Greek authors with wonderful learning, I would not dare to deny against the authority of so great a man; unless cho- (continues)

(printed under page 638)

(87) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1262

Num. XXXI, 8.

Numbers 31:8.

(printed under page 639)

(13) (continued) · call in col 1262

ci potuerit, utrumque Irenaei librum, et ἐπίδειξιν et διαλέξεις, partem ejusdem operis fuisse, ab Eusebio dein et Hieronymo male distincti. Duos enim ejusdem argumenti diversos ab Irenaeo confectos fuisse libros, etsi non negaverim, haud tamen crediderim. Accedit praeterea, quod διδασκαλία, διδαχή, διατάξεις, διαλέξεις, διαταγαί, παραδόσεις, caeteraque ejusmodi nomina apud veteres idem fere scriptionum genus indicasse videantur; quod denique novus jam titulus operis Irenaici, quo fragmentum nostrum inscriptum est, διατάξεις, habeatur. Tria igitur Irenaei forent opera ejusdem fere argumenti; quis vero credat? Διατάξεις quidem esse idem opus quod ἐπίδειξιν, dubium mihi non est. De altero autem opere, cui διαλέξεις titulus, eoque magis desiderando, quod in eo Epistolae ad Hebraeos mentionem fecerat Irenaeus sententiasque inde excerpserat, peritioribus sententiam ferre relinquo. Caeterum ex inscriptione fragmenti simplici admodum, notum id quoddam opus eo tempore, quo Catenae conficiebantur, fuisse videtur. Eam una cum fragmento a Massueto, sed sine inscriptione edito ex Vaticano Cod. 1553 damus. Nulla praeterea verborum fragmenti ad benedictionem Bileami Num. XXII forte spectantis, expositione opus est, cum sententiam locis Matth. V, 44; Luc. VI, 27, aliisque Pauli et Petri maxime consonam disertis verbis exhibeant.

(continued) …it could be shown that both books of Irenaeus, the Demonstration and the Discourses, were part of the same work, wrongly distinguished afterwards by Eusebius and Jerome. For though I would not deny that two different books on the same subject were composed by Irenaeus, yet I should hardly believe it. There is the further point that διδασκαλία, διδαχή, διατάξεις, διαλέξεις, διαταγαί, παραδόσεις and other names of that kind seem among the ancients to have denoted almost the same kind of writing; and finally that we now have a new title of an Irenaean work, διατάξεις ("Ordinances"), with which our fragment is headed. There would then be three works of Irenaeus on almost the same subject; but who would believe it? That the Ordinances are the same work as the Demonstration I have no doubt. As for the other work, titled Discourses, which is the more to be regretted because in it Irenaeus had mentioned the Letter to the Hebrews and taken sayings from it, I leave it to those more expert to judge. Moreover, from the very simple heading of the fragment, it seems that the work was known at the time when the Catenae were compiled. We give the fragment together with its heading, which Massuet published from Vatican Codex 1553, but without the heading. No exposition is needed, further, of the words of the fragment, which perhaps look to Balaam's blessing, Num. 22, since they express in plain words a meaning entirely in accord with Matt. 5:44, Luke 6:27, and other passages of Paul and Peter."

(printed under page 639)

(14) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1262

Προφητεία, κ. τ. λ. Fragmentum hoc partem exhibet commentarii in Ezechielem; referri enim videtur ad cap. III et IV, quo propheta manibus ligatis aliisque symbolis vaticinium de futura Hierosolymorum obsidione edere jubetur. MUENT.

"Prophecy," etc. This fragment presents part of a commentary on Ezekiel; for it seems to refer to chs. 3 and 4, where the prophet, with his hands bound and by other symbols, is bidden to utter a prophecy of the coming siege of Jerusalem. MÜNTER.

(printed under page 639)

(15) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1262

Οὐκ εὐχερές, κ. τ. λ. V. primam adnotationem ad fragm. XLI.

"Not easy," etc. See the first note on fragment XLI.

(printed under page 639)

(16) ‹anchor: XLVII› · call in col 1262

Hoc et sequentia duo fragmenta typis expressa leguntur in libro qui inscribitur: Σειρὰ ἑνὸς καὶ πεντήκοντα ὑπομνηματιστῶν εἰς τὴν Ὀκτάτευχον καὶ τὰ τῶν Βασιλειῶν κ. τ. λ. Τόμος πρῶτος καὶ δεύτερος. Ἐν Λειψίᾳ ἔτει ‚αψοβ΄. Tom. I, p. 1381 et 1382; tom. II, p. 219, 220. STIEREN, Opp. Irenaei, tomi I, pars II, p. 895, Lipsiae 1853, in 8°. Interpretationem addidit doctissimus editor.

This and the two following fragments are read in print in the book entitled: "A Catena of Fifty-one Commentators on the Octateuch and the books of Kingdoms, etc. Volumes one and two. Leipzig, in the year 1772." Vol. I, pp. 1381 and 1382; vol. II, pp. 219, 220. STIEREN, Works of Irenaeus, vol. I, part II, p. 895, Leipzig 1853, octavo. The most learned editor added the translation.

(printed under page 639)

(17) ‹anchor: Τοῦτο σημαίνει› · call in col 1262

Τοῦτο σημαίνει, κ. τ. λ. Leguntur haec Graeca ad locum Scripturae S. Judic. XV, 7. In Catena haec adnotata leguntur: Οὐδὲ τοῦτο, οὐδὲ τὸ ἑξῆς τοῦ Εἰρηναίου ἐν τοῖς τοῦ Λουγδούνων ἐκδεδομ. εὕρηται.

"This signifies," etc. These Greek words are read at the passage of Holy Scripture Judg. 15:7. In the Catena this note is read: "Neither this nor the following has been found in the published works of Irenaeus of Lyons."

(printed under page 639)

(18) ‹anchor: νοητὴν πέτραν› · call in col 1262

Ἐπὶ τὴν νοητὴν πέτραν. Ita corrupte legitur in Catena. Referenda enim sunt verba fragmenti ad Judic. XV, 8; ubi interpretatio LXX ita legitur: Καὶ κατέβη καὶ ἐκάθισεν ἐν τρυμαλιᾷ τῆς πέτρας Ἠτάμ. Inde Irenaeum scripsisse conjicio: Ἐπὶ τὴν Ἠτὰμ πέτραν.

"Upon the spiritual rock." So it reads, corruptly, in the Catena. For the words of the fragment are to be referred to Judg. 15:8, where the Septuagint version reads: "And he went down and sat in the cleft of the rock of Etam." Hence I conjecture that Irenaeus wrote: "Upon the rock of Etam."

(printed under page 639)

(19) ‹anchor: Τύπος δὲ› · call in col 1262

Τύπος δέ, κ. τ. λ. In Catena haec sunt adnotata: Οὐκ ὀρθὸν δὲ τὸ ἐν τῷ τέλει, εἰ μὴ ἐκγραφθείη οὕτω· τύπος δὲ ἡ σιαγὼν τοῦ σώματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ.

"And a type," etc. In the Catena this note is written: "The ending is not correct, unless it is written thus: 'and the jawbone is a type of the body of Christ.'"

(printed under page 639)

(20) ‹anchor: Προφητεία› · call in col 1262

Haec, quae fragmentum supra citatum sub n. XLIV, praeter unum iota subscriptum, ad verbum referunt, in Catena leguntur ad Judic. XV, 13.

These words, which reproduce word for word the fragment cited above under no. XLIV, apart from one iota subscript, are read in the Catena at Judg. 15:13.

(printed under page 639)

(21) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1263

Θεός, κ. τ. λ. Haec Graeca exstant in Catenis in S. Pauli Epistolas ad Cor., quas edidit J. A. Cramer. Oxon. 1841, tom. V, pag. 373.

"God," etc. This Greek is found in the Catenae on St Paul's Letters to the Corinthians, published by J. A. Cramer, Oxford 1841, vol. V, p. 373.

(printed under page 640)

(22) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1263

Ex editione Ad. Stieren (Opp. Irenaei, l. l.), cujus adnotationem exscribimus: « Hoc fragmentum et quod sequitur ex codice theol. Gr. qui in bibliotheca Vindobonensi asservatur et n. LXXI et folia 24 habet, exscripta mecum communicavit Henr. Ernest. Poeschl, cui maximas gratias ago. »

From the edition of Ad. Stieren (Works of Irenaeus, in the place cited), whose note we copy: "This fragment and the one that follows, copied from the Greek theological codex preserved in the Vienna library, which bears no. 71 and has 24 leaves, were communicated to me by Henr. Ernest Pöschl, to whom I give the greatest thanks."

(printed under page 640)

(23) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 1263

Καὶ γάρ, κ. τ. λ. Hujus commatis textus est corruptus. Patet, pro φανερωθεῖσαν, quae vox opposita est verbo ἀπιστηθεῖσα, scribendum esse φανερωθεῖσα, et pro δοῦναι legendum tempus finitum, ἔδωκεν aut simile quid. Loci sensum, quantum fieri potuit, interpretatione mea Latina exprimere studui.

"For indeed," etc. The text of this clause is corrupt. It is plain that for φανερωθεῖσαν, a word set against the verb ἀπιστηθεῖσα ("disbelieved"), φανερωθεῖσα ("made manifest") should be written, and that for δοῦναι ("to give") a finite tense should be read, ἔδωκεν ("he gave") or something similar. I have tried, as far as could be done, to express the sense of the passage in my Latin translation.

(printed under page 640)

(24) ‹anchor: Εἰς τί› · call in col 1263

Εἰς τί, κ. τ. λ. Etiam hoc fragmentum Henr. Ernest. Poeschl v. cl. ex eodem codice, quem adnotatione priori ad fragm. antecedens laudavi, exscriptum mecum communicavit. Dictum procul dubio referendum est ad Luc. II, 11. STIEREN.

"To what end," etc. This fragment too the distinguished Henr. Ernest Pöschl communicated to me, copied from the same codex that I cited in the previous note on the preceding fragment. The saying is without doubt to be referred to Luke 2:11. STIEREN.

(printed under page 640)