these Homilies. He does not say which is the first edition, though that may be reckoned a point of some moment, if we could determine it. I am apt to think the Clementine Homilies may be the original, or the first edition, and the Recognitions an improvement of them, because they appear more finished and artificial.

This work bids fair for being the same with that censured by Eusebius, under the title of Dialogues of Peter and Appion.' The whole work is prolix; and in the fourth, fifth, and sixth Homilies, is a history of Appion, and of a dispute with him. It is true, as Grabea well observes, this dispute with Appion is not managed by Peter himself, but by Clement in his absence. But I do not know whether that be sufficient to overthrow this supposition; since Clement is reckoned the disciple of Peter, and his most intimate friend. And afterwards, in the seventh Homily, Appion is joined with Simon of Samaria, and others, who publicly declaim against Peter to the multitude. Not to add, that Clement relates that whole disputation to Peter, and receives his applauses for it.

Nor do I perceive that Photius says any thing to the prejudice of this opinion; he rather confirms it. In his article of the genuine and supposititious writings of Clement of Rome, the books mentioned by him are these five: the Constitutions; the Recognitions, under several titles, which he says are full of blasphemies against the Son, according to the Arian doctrine; the epistle of Clement to the Corinthians; the second epistle, which he says is rejected as spurious; and the long disputation,' as it is entitled, of Peter and Appion,' which he likewise calls spurious. If hereby he does not mean the Clementine Homilies, they are quite omitted, which is not likely.

6

Nicephorus Callisti, in the fourteenth century, suspected the Clementines then in use in the church, to be the Dialogue of Peter and Appion. He had only one difficulty: that Dialogue was censured by Eusebius, as not agreeable to the right faith; whereas the book called the Clementines, in the time of Nicephorus, was highly approved in the church. But the reason of this I take to be very evident: his Clementines are the Clementine Epitome, as it is called, in which the Clementine Homilies are reformed and new

Spic. T. i. p. 273.

b Εγω δε ει μεν τα νυν παρ' ἡμῖν Κλημεντια ονομαζομενα λεγει, ου πειθομαι ταύτα γαρ τη εκκλησία και ευπαράδεκτα ει δε έτερα εισι παρα ταυτα, λέγειν εκ έχω. Nic. Call. Hist. E. 1. iii. c. 18. Vid. Testimonia de Clementinis, apud Patres Apost.

modelled. The most obnoxious or offensive things, as not orthodox, had been left out, and other sentiments were inserted, agreeable to the age of him who reformed them. But still Nicephorus suspected those Clementines might be the Dialogue of Peter and Appion. We have much more reason to think the Clementine Homilies are the work which was sometimes spoken of under that title.

If our conjecture is not approved of, we must suppose that Dialogue to be lost; which is the opinion of Fa

bricius.

1. In these Homilies are many passages of the gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke, and divers of them are different from those of the same gospels in the Recognitions. There is very little which can be certainly said to be taken from St. Mark's gospel, though Cotelerius has sometimes put it in the margin. We have these words mentioned as Christ's, after several other which are in Matthew and Luke: Hear, Israel, the Lord your God is one Lord :' which seems to be a reference to Mark xii. 29. He is supposed to refer, in several places, to Mark xii. 24; but 1 do not see why he may not as well intend Matt. xxii. 29. It is thought likewise that he refers to Mark i. 13, in what he says of our Lord's temptation in the wilderness. The small number of plain references to this gospel may be accounted for from its great agreement with the other two gospels just mentioned. There are several passages out of St. John's gospel: I shall mention some of them presently. But there is scarce any one passage which can be affirmed to be taken out of St. Paul's epistles, or any other book of the New Testament. However, in the before-mentioned letter of Clement to James, Peter is introduced speaking of his approaching death, which he had been taught by his Lord and Master, Jesus Christ,' much in the same manner as it is mentioned, 2 Pet. i. 14.

6

2. The words of Christ are mentioned and appealed to

Disputatio uberior Petri et Appionis Eusebio memorata et Hieronymo intercidit; falliturque Oudinus [de Script. Ex. Eccl. T. i. cap. 22.] qui eam a Cotelerio, sub nomine Clementinorum, editam esse sibi persuasit. J. A. Fabric. Cod. Apocr. N. T. Part iii. p. 603. Hamb. 8vo. 1719.

d Εφη, Ακεε, Ισραηλ, Κυριος ὁ Θεος ύμων Κυριος εἷς εσιν. Hom. iii. sect. 57. • Hom. ii. sect. 51. iii. sect. 50. xix. sect. 20.

f Qui misit nos, Dominus noster et propheta, narravit nobis, quemadmodum diabolus quadraginta diebus cum eo collocutus, nihilque contra valens, promiserit se ex suis sectatoribus apostolos ad fraudem faciendam missurum. Hom. xii. sect. 35. Jam ergo confitetur, per quadraginta dies collocutum tentavisse se. Hom. ix. sect. 2.

8 Vid. Coteler. Not. in Hom. xix. sect. 2. in part cited above, page 375. h Sect. 2.

66

here, as in the Recognitions; not as written but heard by Peter, or learned by others from apostles, or others who had heard our Lord. Thus, Peter says, Our Master declared the faithful poor blessed.' Wherefore he himself, being a true prophet, said, "I am the gate of life; he that enters in by me, enters into life," John x. 9.-And again: My sheep hear my voice," ch. x. 27.ch. x. 27. He said, moreover, "I am he of whom Moses prophesied," ch. v. 46. In another place: Form so the prophet swore to us, saying, "Verily I say unto you, except ye be born again of living water in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven."' This is supposed to be a reference to Johu iii. 3, 5. But he seems to have joined together several texts.

3. If this be the work of an Ebionite, as is generally" supposed, and seems not improbable, it may be argued, that, when the author wrote, the P four gospels were owned by that sect, or at least by some branch of it. For though there may be some interpolations in these Homilies, there is no reason to think that any texts have been added. If such a thing had been attempted, we should have had here some passages out of other books of the New Testament, and possibly out of St. Paul's epistles. It is very probable also that we should have met with some forms of quotation, different from those now used in these Homilies.

I see no way of evading this conclusion, but by supposing that all these texts of our several gospels were in

i Πλην ὁ διδασκαλος ήμων πιτες πένητας εμακαρισεν. Ηom. xv. sect. 10. * Δια τουτο αυτος αληθης ων προφητης ελεγεν, Εγω ειμι ἡ πυλη της ζωης ὁ δι' εμου εισερχομενος, εισέρχεται εις την ζωην.- -και παλιν, Τα εμα πρόβατα AKOVEL TNS Eμns pwvns. Hom. xiii. sect. 52.

1 Ετι μην έλεγεν, Εγω ειμι περὶ οὐ Μωϋσης προεφητευσεν. Ibid.

m

Ούτως γαρ ήμιν ωμοσεν ὁ προφητης, ειπων Αμην ύμιν λεγω, εαν μη αναγεννήθητε ύδατι ζωντι, εις όνομα Πατρός, Υιου, 'Αγιο Πνεύματος, ου μη εσέλθητε εις την βασιλειαν των ουρανών. Hom. xi. sect. 26.

"Vid. Præfat. Clerici, et judicium Cotelerii de Clementinis, apud Patres Apost. Mill. Proleg. 670.

Vid. Hom. iii. sect. 12. vii. sect. 8. xvi. sect. 15. et alibi.

It is generally said, that the Ebionites received the gospel according to St. Matthew only.' So Irenæus: Solo autem eo quod est secundum Matthæum evangelio utuntur, et apostolum Paulum recusant, apostatam eum legis dicentes. Iren. 1. i. cap. 26. al. 25. or, the gospel according to the 'Hebrews, making little account of the rest.' So Eusebius: Evayyeλw de μονῳ τῳ καθ' ̔Εβραιος λεγομενῳ χρωμενοι, των λοιπων σμικρον εποιέντο λόγον. H. E. 1. iii. cap. 27. The gospel according to Matthew alone, which they call according to the Hebrews; and that not entire, but corrupted and mutilated.' So Epiphanius, Hær. xxx. sect. 3. p. 127. C. sect. 13. p. 137. C. This account of their opinion may suffice for the present.

In this work are several things peculiar to St. Luke, which are not in any

some one gospel used by the Ebionites, called the gospel of Matthew, or according to the Hebrews, or by whatever other name it was distinguished. However, either way our evangelical history is confirmed.

This observation upon these Homilies may be reckoned applicable likewise to the Recognitions.

4. Though neither of these books be of any sacred authority, they may be both of some use; and may deserve a more particular examination than has been yet given them. I have said as much of them as is consistent with the nature of the present work, which does not allow me to stay too long upon any one piece. And yet I suppose enough has been said to render it probable, not only that the Clementine Homilies, but also that the book of Recognitions, which Mr. Whiston, in our time, has recommended to us, as certainly to be esteemed in the next degree to that of the really sacred books of the New Testament,' is the work of an Ebionite; and therefore, if there is in it any Arianism, it has been interpolated.

6

VI. After the Recognitions, and the Clementine Homilies, there follows, in the Patres Apostolici, a book entitled The Clementine Epitome; which had already been mentioned, and needs not to be now enlarged upon; it having plain marks of a later age than that we are concerned with at present. It seems to have been composed out of the Recognitions and Homilies, and perhaps some other works, leaving out some things, and adding others. Cotelerius, who published it, is much of this opinion. To this Clementine Epitome, or some such like piece, the author of the Synopsis, ascribed to St. Athanasius, refers, when, of our three other gospels. I shall put down references to them; not proposing this, however, as a complete collection of texts taken from the gospel of that evangelist. Words of Luke x. 7, are found in Homily iii. sect. 71. chap. x. 18. Hom. xix. sect. 2. ch. x. 20. Hom. ix. sect. 22. ch. xi. 52. Hom. iii. sect. 18. and Hom. xviii. sect. 16. The parable of the unjust judge, Luke xviii. 1-17. in Hom. xvii. sect. 5. Our Lord's visit to Zaccheus recorded, ch. xix. 1-10. Hom. iii. sect. 63. ch. xix. 43. Hom. iii. sect. 15. ch. xxiii. 34. Hom. xi. sect. 20. And it is reasonable to suppose, that the author used many more things of St. Luke's and St. John's gospel, as well as of St. Matthew's, than those which we find recited or referred to in this work. But we shall have another opportunity of speaking more distinctly and at large of these things; I mean, when we come to consider the testimony of those called heretics. For if this be indeed the work of an Ebionite, we shall be obliged to take some notice of it once more.

Ex Homiliis Clementinis, et Recognitionum libris, tum ex epistola Clementis ad Jacobum, Clementis martyrio, atque narratione Ephraimi, composita fuit ista Epitome, per eos homines, qui doctrinæ et pietatis suæ esse duxerunt, quicquid superfluum, falsum, et periculosum videbatur, id omne aut tollere, aut mutare et corrigere. Not. i. ad Epitom. Clement.

86

among the contradicted or apocryphal books of the New Testament, such as the Travels of Peter, the gospel according to Thomas, and some others, he mentious the Clementines, out of which,' he says, those things have been ' selected which are true and divinely inspired.' This is probably the book which Nicephorus likewise speaks of, as being in his time approved by the church.

6

V

But, in composing of it, not only those things were se lected which are true and right in the ancient Clementines, but divers other things were added. Thus, in the Clementine Homilies, Clement says, I give thanks to God;' in the" Recognitions, I give thanks to Almighty God.' But in the parallel place of this Clementine Epitome, Clement says, I give thanks to God, even the Father, and to his only-begotten Son, and to his Holy Spirit.' The preaching of Barnabas at Rome, which we before observed as it stands in the Recognitions, in this Epitome is thus represented: O Romans, hear! the Son of God is in Judea, promising eternal life to all that are willing;-be converted, therefore, and acknowledge one God in three persons.' In the Clementine Homilies Peter says to Clement, If you would know the things of God, you can learn them from him only [that is, from Christ, the true prophet]. And his doctrine and true preaching is, that there is one God, who made the world.' In the parallel place of the Clementine Epitome, Peter says to Clement: If you would know the things concerning God, you can learn them only from our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ.- And it is his doctrine, that there is one God in three persons, who made the whole world.' But we have no occasion to insist any longer on this book.

6

VII. I have spoken of these three pieces in the order in which they are placed by Cotelerius and Le Clerc, in their editions of them. But, as I before observed, I take the Clementine Homilies to be the original work upon which

• Εξ ών μετεφρασθησαν εκλέγεντα τα αληθέτερα και θεοπνευτα. Apud Athanas. Op. T. ii. p. 202.

u

* Hôn exaps rạp Đẹp. Hom. i. sect. 21.

Omnipotenti, inquam, Deo gratias ago. L. i. sect. 18.

Εγω μεν, εφη, ηδη ευχαρισω τῳ Θεῳ και Πατρι, και τῳ μονογενει αυτό Υιω, και τῳ Πνευματι αυτε τῳ 'Αγιῳ. sect. 19.

"See num. iv. note, p. 369, 370.

* Και γνωτε τον εν τρισιν ὑποτασεσιν ένα Θεον. * Επιν τε αυτό το τε βέλημα και το αληθες

κοσμος εργον. Hom. ii. sect. 12.

Clementin. Ep. sect. 7. κηρυγμα, ότι εἰς θεος, οὐ

* Παρα το Κυριο και Θεού και Σωτηρος ήμων Ιησε Χρισε,

Επι τε

αυτου το βουλημα, ότι είς Θεός εν τρισιν ὑποτάσεσιν, οὗ ὁ κόσμος εργον ὁ πας. Cl. Ep. sect. 22, 23.