Early Church Fathers
516 Censum dare.
517 Reading "sermonem, et ostendere ut intelligi dignum est." The Codex Bobiensis gives a mutilated version: "sermonem, ut intelligi, dignum est."
518 Reading "Moysi scientis," which is the emendation of Valesius. But Codex Casinensis gives "scientibus," and Codex Bobiensis has "scientes."
519 Ex. ii.
520 Matt. ii. 13.
521 Ex. xiv.
522 Mark viii. 15.
523 Ex. xvi.
524 Adopting "satiavit." The Codex Bobiensis gives "saturavit."
525 Matt. xiv.
526 Ex. xxxiv.
527 Matt. iv. 2.
528 Ex. xii.
529 Matt. ii. 16.
530 Ex. viii.
531 Luke xxiii. 34.
532 Ex. xxxiv. 35.
533 Matt. xvii. 2.
534 Ex. xxxii.
535 Matt. x. 34.
536 Ex. xxiv. 18.
537 Matt. xiv. 25.
538 Ex. xiv.
539 Reading "in mari." But the Codex Bobiensis has in navi = on a ship.
540 Matt. viii. 26.
541 Ex. xvii.
542 The text gives in justis. But the Codex Bobiensis has in istis = in those men. The true reading may be in injustis = in the unrighteous. See Eph. ii. 2.
543 But the Codex Casinensis gives "Deus omnium" = the God of all.
544 [See p. 215, supra]
545 Ex nominibus. The Codex Bobiensis offers the extraordinary reading, ex navibus.
547 We read, with the Codex Bobiensis, "dicat homini, Loca mihi," etc. The Codex Casinensis has the meaningless reading, "homini diviti," etc.
549 The text of this obscure passage runs thus: "Quia ex quo duo sunt, ingenitam habentes naturam, ex eo necesse est etiam habere unumquemque ipsorum vetus Testamentum. et fient duo vetera 'I'estamenta; si tamen ambos antiquos et sine initio esse dicis." The Codex Bobiensis gives a briefer but evidently corrupt reading. "ex quo duo sunt ingenita habentes naturam ipsorum Testamentum, et fient," etc.
550 Jamnem dico et Mambrem. [So in Vulg., except "Jannes."]
551 2 Tim. iii. 8, 9.
552 Gratiam gratia praestare et differre. John i. 16.
553 John v. 45-47.
554 The Codex Bobiensis gives, "exponere et a Patre ut convenit." For these meaningless words Valesius proposed to read, "exponere et aperire ut convenit." The Codex Casinensis, however, offers the satisfactory reading, "exponere et aptare convenit."
555 Here ends the section edited by Valesius.
556 Castellum. [Note, infra, the "holy kiss."]
557 The text runs: "tametsi prudentiam, gloriam etiam, nostrorum nonnulli assecuti sunt, tamen hoc vos deprecor ut eorum quae ante me dicta sunt, testimonium reservetis." Routh suggests prudentia = Although by their prudence some have gained glory, etc.
558 Pro ipsius impossibilitate. But Routh suggests that the impossibiIitate is just an inexact translation of the a0dunati/a = impotentia, incapacity, which may have stood in the Greek text.
559 Reading "Marcelli viri illustris gratia." The Codex Casinensis has, "viri in legis gratia."
560 Matt. vii. 24.
561 The text gives "similis facere astrologo," for which Routh proposes "similis factus est," etc.
562 Matt. x. 28.
563 The text is, "quibus utique repensari non possunt," etc. Routh proposes repensare.
564 Reading "sicut vox Jesu." The Codex Casinensis gives, "sicut vos Jesu." Routh suggests servator.
565 John i. 18, iii. 13.
566 Matt. x. 40.
567 John vi. 38.
568 Matt. xv. 24.
569 Matt. xii. 47.
570 The text gives, "Virgo castissima et immaculata ecclesia," = the most pure virgin and spotless church. But the word "ecclesia" is probably an erroneous addition by the hand of the scribe. Or, as Routh hints, there may be an allusion, in the word ecclesia, to the beginning of the twelfth chapter of the Apocalypse. [See Pearson, On the Creed, art. iii. p. 290.]
571 From this it may perhaps be gathered that Marcellus had now come along with Archelaus to the residence of Diodorus.
572 Scribere ausas est. Compare (note 1) p. 224, infra.
573 Matt. xxii. 42. We read Davidis esse for David Jesse.
574 Matt. xvi. 16.
575 The text gives, "Quod si prior fefellit, causa ad scriptorem rejicienda est." [i.e., to the copyist; in this case the corrupter.]
576 Consonantibus duntaxat.
577 Phil. ii. 9.
578 Sibi ipsi.
579 Secundum id quod scriptorem fefellit. [i.e. on that supposition.]
580 1 Cor. xiii. 11.
581 Phil. iii. 13.
582 Reading "debuitne etiam" for the bad version of the Codex Casinensis, "debuit et etiam."
583 The text gives, "se ipso judicante," for which "te ipso," etc., may be substituted.
584 In the Codex Casinensis the sentence stands in this evidently corrupt form: "cum enim peccatis bonus et gravatus ad discipulatum diligit." We adopt the emendation given in Migne: "cum enim peccatis onustos et gravatos ad discipulatum delegit."
585 Matt. x. 37.
586 I.uke ix. 59, 60.
587 Propitius esto, Domine.
588 Matt. xvi. 22. [Possibly the first words by which Satan fell.]
589 Matt. xvi. 21.
590 Matt. xvi. 23. [Satan seems to have rebelled against man's creation.]
591 Luke iv. 34, reading sanctus Deus [i e., not the received text.]
592 Reading silere. The Codex Casinensis gives sinire, which may be meant for sinere = give over.
593 Pro accidentium salute.
594 We have adopted Migne's arrangement of these clauses. Routh, however, puts them thus: And that it may be made more intelligible to you, etc.,... (for in forgetfulness, etc., you have turned off, etc.), listen to me now for a brief space.
595 Reading "pondus belli toleraverant," instead of the "pondus bellico tolerarant" of the Codex Casinensis.
596 1 Cor. xv. 32.
598 Gal. iv. 4. The reading is, "cum autem fuit Dei voluntas in nobis." The Vulgate, following the ordinary Greek text, gives, "at ubi venit plenitudo temporis." And so Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, etc. [This should have been in the margin of the Revised Version.]
599 1 Cor. v. 7.
600 1 Cor. vi. 14. The text here inserts the words cum illo, which are found neither in the Greek, nor in the Vulgate, nor in Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres., v. 6, 7 [vol. i. pp. 530, 532, this series], nor in Tertullian, Adv. Marc., v. 7, etc. [vol. iii. p. 443, this series]. According to Sabatier, however, they are found in Jerome, Ep. ad Amand.
601 Reading in vobis. But the Codex Casinensis seems to give in nobis, amongst us.
602 But the Codex Casinensis seems to make it fides nostra, our faith.
604 1 Cor. xv. 12-20.
606 Gal. iii. 1. The word in the text is rescriptus est. The Vulgate gives praescriptus est. The Vetus Itala proscriptus est.
608 Matt. xi. 11.
609 It would seem that Archelaus read the passage in Matthew as meaning, notwithstanding, he that is less, is, in the kingdom of heaven, greater than he. Thus, he that is less is understood to be Jesus in His natural relations. [A very lean and hungry proculdubio of the author.]
610 Routh appends a note here which may be given. It is to this effect: I am afraid that Archelaus has not expressed with sufficient correctness the mystery of the Divine Incarnation, in this passage as well as in what follows; although elsewhere he has taught that the Lord Jesus was conceived by divine power, and in ch. xxxiv. has called the Virgin Mary Dei genetrix, Qeoto/koj. For at the time of the Saviour's baptism the Holy Spirit was not given in His first communication with the Word of God (which Word, indeed, had been united with the human nature from the time of the conception itself), but was only received by the Christ a0nQrwpi/nwj and oi0konomikw=j, and for the sake of men. See Cyril of Alexandria, De Rectâ Fide, xxxiv. vol. v. 2, p. 153, editio Auberti. [Routh, R.S., vol. v. p. 178.]