chapter 24

.

[1691] _Evang. Inf. Arab._, caps. 33-34.

[1692] _Ibid._, caps. 10-11.

[1693] _Ibid._, caps. 27-32.

[1694] _Ibid._, cap. 30.

[1695] _Ibid._, cap. 24.

[1696] _Ibid._, caps. 42-43; _Ps. Matth._, 41; _Evang. Thom. Lat._, 14. Compare pp. 279-80 above.

[1697] _Evang. Inf. Arab._, cap. 37.

[1698] _Ibid._, 38-39; _Ps. Matth._, 37; _Evang. Thom. Lat._, 11.

[1699] _Evang. Inf. Arab._, cap. 36; _Ps. Matth._, 27; _Evang. Thom. Lat._, 4.

[1700] _Evang. Inf. Arab._, cap. 40. See Ad-Damîrî, translated by A. S. G. Jayakar, 1906, I, 703, for a Moslem tale of Jews who called Jesus “the enchanter the son of the enchantress,” and were transformed into pigs.

[1701] _Evang. Inf. Arab._, 46; _Evang. Thom. Lat._, 4; _Ps. Matth._, 26, where Mary afterwards induces Jesus to restore him to life, and 28.

[1702] _Evang. Inf. Arab._, cap. 47; _Evang. Thom. Lat._, 5; _Ps. Matth._, 29.

[1703] _Evang. Inf. Arab._, cap. 49; _Evang. Thom. Lat._, 12; _Ps. Matth._, 38.

[1704] _Ps. Matth._, caps. 35-36.

[1705] _Ibid._, cap. 29.

[1706] _Ibid._, cap. 40.

[1707] Later the same gospel (cap. 54) rather inconsistently represents Jesus as engaged in the study of law until his thirtieth year.

[1708] _Evang. Inf. Arab._, caps. 51-52.

[1709] Eusebius states that he discovered these letters written in Syriac in the public records of Edessa. Hone says that it used to be a common practice among English people to have the epistle ascribed to Christ framed and place a picture of the Saviour before it.

[1710] _Gospel of Nicodemus_, I, 1-2.

[1711] CE, _Apocrypha_, p. 611.

[1712] Greek text in Tischendorf, _Apocalypses Apocryph._, pp. 161-7; English translation, _The Ante-Nicene Fathers_, VIII, 526-7.

[1713] _Evang. Inf. Arab._, 7-8.

[1714] Cap. 19 (AN, I, 57).

[1715] _Ante-Nicene Fathers_, VIII, 494.

[1716] W. Anz, _Zur Frage nach dem Ursprung des Gnostizisnus_ (1897), pp. 36-41. Lipsius et Bonnet, _Acta apostolorum apocrypha_, 1891-.

[1717] Mâle (1913), 299. For the text of this apocryphal work see Migne, _Dictionnaire des Apocryphes_, II, 759, _et seq._, or more recently, Bonnet, _Acta apostolorum apocrypha_, 1898, II, 151-216.

[1718] Mâle (1913), 300. But one would think that they must needs be Byzantine alchemists, if the legend did not reach the west until the sixteenth century.

[1719] HL, XV, 42.

When the gems, all smashed to pieces, He had mended, then their prices To the poor he handed; Quite exhaustless was his treasure Who from sticks made gold at pleasure, Gems from stones commanded.

[1720] René Basset, _Les apocryphes Éthiopiens_, Paris, 1893-1894, vol. iv.

[1721] See Migne, PG, X (1857), for the old Latin version; the Greek text is extant only in fragments; the tradition, going back to Jerome, that there was a Syriac original is unfounded; the work is first cited by Cyril.

[1722] The Ethiopic version, made from the Greek between the fifth and seventh centuries, is translated by Basset (1894), vol. iii; and was printed before him by Dillmann, _Ascensio Isaiae aethiopice et latine_, Leipzig, 1877, and by Laurence, _Ascensio Isaiae vatis, opusculum pseudepigraphus_, Oxford, 1819. See also R. H. Charles, _Ascension of Isaiah_, 1900; reprinted 1917 in Oesterley and Box, _Translations of Early Documents_, Series I, vol. 7.

[1723] The fragments of the _Book of Baruch_ by Justin, preserved in the _Philosophumena_ of Hippolytus, are from an entirely different Gnostic work.

[1724] R. Basset, _Les apocryphes Éthiopiens_, Paris, 1893-1894, vol. i, _Le Livre de Baruch et la légende de Jérémie_.

[1725] Text of _The Recognitions_ in Migne, PG, I; of _The Homilies_ in PG, II, or P. de Lagarde, _Clementina_, 1865. E. C. Richardson had an edition of _The Recognitions_ in preparation in 1893, when a list of some seventy MSS communicated by him was published in A. Harnack’s _Gesch. d. altchr. Lit._, I, 229-30, but it has not yet appeared. In quoting _The Recognitions_ I often avail myself of the language of the English translation in the _Ante-Nicene Fathers_.

Since A. Hilgenfeld, _Die klement. Rekogn. u. Homilien_, 1848, the Pseudo-Clementines have provided a much frequented field of research and controversy, of which the articles in CE, EB, and _Realencyklopädie_ (1913), XXIII, 312-6, provide fairly recent summaries from varying ecclesiastical standpoints. For bibliography see pp. 4-5 in the recent monograph of W. Heintze, _Der Klemensroman und seine griechischen Quellen_, 1914, in TU, XL, 2. In the same series, TU, XXV, 4, H. Waitz, _Die Pseudo-Klementinen_, 1904.

Concerning Simon Magus may be mentioned: H. Schlurick, _De Simonis Magi fatis Romanis_; A. Hilgenfeld, _Der Magier Simon_, in _Zeitschr. f. wiss. Theol._, XII (1869), 353 ff.; G. Frommberger, _De Simone Mago_, Pars I, _De origine Pseudo-Clementinorum_, Diss. inaug., Warsaw, 1866; G. R. S. Mead (Fellow of the Theosophical Society), _Simon Magus_, 1892; H. Waitz, _Simon Magus in d. altchr. Lit._, in _Zeitschr. f. d. neutest. Wiss._, V (1904), 121-43.

[1726] BN, Greek, 930; Ottobon, 443.

[1727] Isidore, _De natura rerum_, caps. xxxi, xxxvi, xxxix-xli (PL, 83, 1003-12).

[1728] PL, 83, 1003, note, “Sunt haec lib. VIII Recognitionum sed apparet Isidorum alia interpretatione usum ac dubitare posse an ea quae circumfertur Rufini sit.”

[1729] See CU, Trinity 1041, 14th century, fols. 7-105, “Inc. prologus in librum quem moderni itinerarium beati Petri vocant.”

[1730] Valois (1880), p. 204.

[1731] PL, 59, 162, “Notitia librorum apocryphorum qui non recipiuntur.”

[1732] Vincent of Beauvais, _Speculum naturale_, 1485, I, 14.

[1733] PL, 176, 787-8, _Erudit. Didasc._, IV, 15.

[1734] “Itinerarium nomine Petri apostoli quod appellatur sancti Clementis libri octo apocryphum (or, apocryphi).”

[1735] _Speculum naturale_, XXXII, 129, concerning the morality of the Seres.

[1736] Compare _Recognitions_, I, 27 (PG, I, 122) with Rabanus, _Comment. in Genesim_, I, 2 (PL, 107, 450).

[1737] _Speculum naturale_, I, 7. Peter is represented as saying, “When anyone has derived from divine Scripture a sound and firm rule of truth, it will not be absurd if to the assertion of true dogma he joins something from the education and liberal studies which he may have pursued from boyhood. Yet so that in all points he teaches what is true and shuns what is false and pretense.” This corresponds to the close of the 42nd chapter of the tenth book of _The Recognitions_.

[1738] Since writing this I learn that Professor E. C. Richardson has examined most of the known MSS of _The Recognitions_ and has found them all to be the version by Rufinus, except for a few additional chapters which someone has added in the French group of MSS,—chapters which Rufinus seems to have omitted because they were difficult to translate.

[1739] Heintze (1914), 23, however, argues that the conclusion of _The Recognitions_ is dependent upon _The Homilies_.

[1740] Professor E. C. Richardson, after kindly reading this chapter in manuscript, writes me (Sept. 5, 1921) that he doubts if this Syriac MS is correctly described as three books of _The Recognitions_ and four books of _The Homilies_, and that he thinks it may represent an earlier form in the evolution than either of them. He writes further, “I have a strong notion that a study of Greek MSS of the Epitomes will reveal still more variant forms in Greek, and there are certainly other oriental compilations not yet brought into comparison with the Greek, Latin, and Syriac forms.”

[1741] In _The Homilies_ it is a trip only from Alexandria to Caesarea that consumes this number of days.

[1742] About 375 A. D. Epiphanius (Dindorf, II, 107-9) describes _The Circuits_ in such a way that he might have either _The Homilies_ or _The Recognitions_ in mind. On the other hand, the _Philocalia_, composed about 358 by Basil and Gregory, cites a passage on astrology from the fourteenth book of _The Circuits_ which is in the tenth book of _The Recognitions_ and not in _The Homilies_ at all.

[1743] Heintze (1914), p. 113.

[1744] Waitz (1904), pp. 151 and 243.

[1745] See E. C. Richardson in _Papers of the American Society of Church History_, VI (1894).

[1746] Neither Philostratus nor Apollonius of Tyana is mentioned, however, in the index of W. Heintze’s _Der Klemensroman und seine griechischen Quellen_ (1914), 144 pp.

[1747] _Recogs._, VII, 6.

[1748] _Recogs._, I, 29; not mentioned in the corresponding chapter of _The Homilies_, VIII, 15.

[1749] _Recogs._, IX, 19-29.

[1750] _Recogs._, VII, 12.

[1751] _Recogs._, X, 15, _et seq._

[1752] _Recogs._, I, 8; _Homilies_, I, 10.

[1753] Extraordinary, of course, only in that single animals instead of angels, as in the Enoch literature, are set over birds, beasts, serpents, etc.

[1754] _Recogs._, I, 27 and 45.

[1755] _Recogs._, VI, 8.

[1756] _Recogs._, VIII, 9, 20-22.

[1757] _Recogs._, VIII, 15-17.

[1758] _Recogs._, VIII, 21.

[1759] _Recogs._, VIII, 25-32.

[1760] On the other hand, in the apocryphal _Epistle of Barnabas_, IX, 9, it is stated that the weasel conceives with its mouth and hence typifies persons with unclean mouths.

[1761] _Recogs._, II, 7.

[1762] _Recogs._, VIII, 31.

[1763] _Recogs._, VIII, 30.

[1764] _Recogs._, VIII, 42.

[1765] _Recogs._, VIII, 34.

[1766] _Recogs._, VIII, 44.

[1767] _Recogs._, VIII, 45.

[1768] _Recogs._, VIII, 46.

[1769] _Recogs._, VIII, 47.

[1770] _Recogs._, V, 27.

[1771] _Recogs._, I, 28.

[1772] _Recogs._, VIII, 57, “frater meus Clemens tibi diligentius respondebit qui plenius scientiam mathesis attigit;” IX, 18, “quoniam quidem scientia mihi mathesis nota est.”

[1773] _Recogs._, X, 11-12.

[1774] _Recogs._, IX, 18.

[1775] _Recogs._, VIII, 2.

[1776] _Recogs._, I, 32.

[1777] _Recogs._, I, 21, 43, 72.

[1778] _Recogs._, IV, 35.

[1779] Irenaeus, I, 3.

[1780] _Recogs._, III, 68.

[1781] _Recogs._, VIII, 28, “qui est parvus in alio mundus.”

[1782] _Recogs._, VIII, 45.

[1783] _Recogs._, X, 12. In _Homilies_, XIV, 5, the existence of astrological medicine is implied when Peter promises to cure by prayer to God any bodily ill, even “if it is utterly incurable and entirely beyond the range of the medical profession—a case, indeed, which not even the astrologers profess to cure.”

[1784] _Recogs._, VIII, 2. In _The Homilies_, however, Peter argues that, even if Genesis prevails, which he does not admit, still he can “worship Him who is also Lord of the stars,” and that the doctrine of genesis is far more destructive to polytheism and pagan worship.

[1785] _Recogs._, IX, 16-17.

[1786] _Recogs._, IX, 6 and 12.

[1787] _Recogs._, IX, 30.

[1788] _Recogs._, X, 11.

[1789] _Recogs._, X, 12.

[1790] _Recogs._, IX, 32-7.

[1791] _Recogs._, IX, 19, and VIII, 48.

[1792] _Recogs._, X, 66.

[1793] _Recogs._, II, 42.

[1794] _Recogs._, IV, 7.

[1795] _Recogs._, IX, 38.

[1796] _Recogs._, IX, 6 and 12; IV, 21; V, 20 and 31.

[1797] _Recogs._, II, 71; IV, 16.

[1798] _Recogs._, IV, 30.

[1799] _Recogs._, IX, 9.

[1800] _Recogs._, IV, 32-33.

[1801] _Recogs._, IV, 21.

[1802] _Recogs._, IV, 26.

[1803] Reminding one of Benjamin Franklin’s more successful attempt to “snatch the thunderbolt from heaven.”

[1804] _Recogs._, IV, 27, and I, 30.

[1805] _Recogs._, IV, 29.

[1806] Dindorf, I, 282, 286-7.

[1807] _Recogs._, X, 55; III, 64.

[1808] _Recogs._, I, 70.

[1809] _Recogs._, I, 42 and 58; III, 12, 47, and 73; X, 54.

[1810] _Recogs._, I, 72.

[1811] _Recogs._, X, 22 and 25.

[1812] But by no means always in early Christian writings: thus Clement of Alexandria (c150-c220) in the _Stromata_, II, 1, asserts that the Greeks eulogize “astrology and mathematics and magic and sorcery” as the highest sciences.

[1813] In contrast to Lucian’s _Menippus_ or _Necromancy_, in which the Cynic philosopher Menippus resorts to a _Magus_ at Babylon in order to gain entrance to the lower world and question Teiresias.

Necromancy is given as a proof of the immortality of the soul in Justin’s _First Apology_, cap. 18, where we read, “For let even necromancy, and the divinations you practise by means of immaculate children, and the evoking of departed human souls ... let these persuade you that even after death souls are in a state of sensation.”

[1814] _Recogs._, I, 5.

[1815] _Recogs._, II, 9.

[1816] _Recogs._, II, 15.

[1817] _Recogs._, II, 6.

[1818] _Recogs._, III, 57.

[1819] _Recogs._, II, 11.

[1820] _Recogs._, II, 12.

[1821] _Recogs._, X, 53, _et seq._

[1822] _Recogs._, III, 57-60; X, 66.

[1823] _Recogs._, VIII, 53.

[1824] _Recogs._, VIII, 60.

[1825] _Recogs._, II, 5.

[1826] _Recogs._, II, 10.

[1827] _Recogs._, II, 16, and III, 49.

[1828] Similarly, in a passage contained only in _The Homilies_, V, 5, Appion, recommending to Clement a love incantation which he had learned from an Egyptian who was well versed in magic, explains that demons obey the magician when invoked by the names of superior angels, who in their turn may be adjured by the name of God.

[1829] Concerning this boy see _Recogs._, II, 13-15; III, 44-45;, _Homilies_, II, 25-30.

[1830] _Recogs._, II, 6; III, 13.

[1831] _Recogs._, III, 73; X, 54.

[1832] _Recogs._, X, 58.

[1833] _Recogs._, III, 63.

[1834] _Recogs._, II, 7.

[1835] _Recogs._, II, 5.

[1836] _Recogs._, II, 9, “Multa etenim iam mihi experimenti causa consummata sunt.“

[1837] _First Apology_, caps. 26 and 56; _Dialogue with Trypho_, 120.

[1838] _Adv. haer._, I, 23.

[1839] See above,