Early Church Fathers
2 Die Clementinischen Recognitionen and Homilien, nach ihrem Ursprung und Inhalt dargestellt, von Dr. Adolf Hilgenfeld, Jena, 1848, p. 1. [Despite the morbid taste of this school for heretical writings, and the now proven incorrectness of the "tendency-theory," due credit must be given to Baur and his followers for awakening a better critical discernment among the students of ecclesiastical history. Hilgenfeld's judgments, in the higher and lower criticism also, are frequently very incorrect; but he has done much to further a correct estimate of the Clementina. See Introductory Notice, supra.-R.]
3 [The title, which varies in different manuscripts, is derived from the "narrating, in the last books, of the re-union of the scattered members of the Clementine family, who all at last find themselves together in Christianity, and are baptized by Peter" (Schaff, History).-R.]
4 See Schliemann, Die Clementinen, Hamburg, 1844, p. 295.
5 [See a brief account of the discussion supra, p, 70.-R.]
6 Philocalia, cap. 22.
7 See Merx, Bardesanes von Edessa, Halle, 1863, p. 113.
8 Die Homilien and rekognitionen des Clemens Roman us, nach ihremn Ursprung und Inhalt dargestellt, von Gerhard Uhlhorn, Goltingen, 1854, p. 429. [Schaff thinks "the Homilies probably originated in East Syria, the Recognitons in Rome." But Rufinus gives no intimation of the Roman origin of the Greek work he translated. still,. the apparently more orthodox character of the Recognitions suggests an editor from the Western Church.-R.]
1 Var. readings: "magnanimous one," "my lord," "my friend."
2 [The reference is probably to the transformation of the father of Clement into the appearance of Simon Magus. This is narrated in both the Recognitions (book x. 53, etc.) and in the Homilies (xx. 12, etc.), though the latter book closes without any statement of the restoration. It would seem unlikely, then, that Rufinus refers to the Homilies as the "other" collection. The recovery of the closing portion of that work has given us its account of the transformation.-R.
3 [How far Rufinus has omitted portions which occured in Greek cannot known. It is is quite probable that the apparent heresy of some passages, rather than their incomprehensibility, led him to omit them. This may be urged in favour of the priority of the Homilies, but is not conclusive.-R.]
4 [There is no good reason for doubting that Rufinus refers to the extant epistle prefixed to the Homilies, and forming, with "the Episle of Peter to James," which precedes it, a preface and fictitious au. thentication of that collection.-R.]
5 1 [The of language of Rufinus confirms that of Irenaeus, Eusebius, and Jerome, as to the episcopal succession at Rome (assuming that Cletus and Anacletus, named by Irenaeus, is identical with Cletus). For other variations, see Church Histories and Encyclopaedias (under Clemens Romanus). The current opinion at Rome in the beginning of the fifth century is evident from this passage. Comp. Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. i. pp. 1, 2.-R.]
1 [The first six chapters closely resemble the corresponding chapters of Homily 1. The variations are no greater than might readily appear in a verson.-R.]
2 V. R. in the time of Tiberius Caesar.
3 [In Homily 1, a warning of future punishment is added.-R].]
4 [The narrative in the Homilies is fuller; the preacher at Rome is not named Clement attempts to go to Judaea, is driven to Alexandria, and meets Barnabas there: the occurrences here given in chaps. 8-11 are placed in Alexandria, whence Clement goes, after the departure of Barnabas, to Caesarea where he meets Peter (comp. chap. 12).-R.]
5 [The two accounts of the meeting with Peter at Caesarea are closely parallel.-R]
6 [This discourse is given somewhat more fully here than in the Homilies.-R.]
7 [Comp. Homily I. 20, where there is a curious inconsistency. Both accounts seem to insert this to tally with the fictitious relation to James, and both may be used to support the theory of a common documentary basis.-R.]
8 [In the Homilies this is not expressed, but implied. The whole passage suggests a separatism quite contrary to Pauline precept. Compare the more detailed statement of separatism in book ii 70, 72, vii. 29: Homily XIII. 4-R.]
9 [Identified in the Homilies with the publican of Jericho. Fifteen others are named in Homily 11. 1: some of them are introduced in Recognitions, ii. I.-R.]
10 Here we follow a marginal reading.